Does social capital matter more when health status is poor? Labour market attachment among long-term recipients of social assistance in Norway

Long-term social assistance recipients are a disadvantaged group with loose labour market attachment, and they are therefore in dire need of an 'alternative route' into employment. Differing types of social capital (bonding, bridging, and trust) could improve job opportunities, and perhaps especially so for social assistance recipients with poor health. The current paper uses a linked survey-register data material on a cohort of Norwegian long-term social assistance recipients, which holds rich information on both health status and social capital at baseline (2005). Linear probability models are estimated, with differing operationalisations of wage income (2005-2013) as the outcome. Three main empirical findings appear. First, both mental and somatic health status is highly consequential for labour market attachment among social assistance recipients in Norway. Second, rather few social capital indicators are associated with employment probability, with three noticeable exceptions: loneliness, active organisational membership, and social trust all show a statistical relationship with employment. Third, there is some indication that people with ill health profit less from both bridging social capital and social trust, compared to people with good health status. In conclusion, health status matters a lot and social capital matters a little for labour market attachment among long-term social assistance recipients.