Civility and Different Forms of Civic Engagement

While civility is generally perceived positively, certain forms may demand forms of reciprocity, potentially leading to forms of exclusion or other negative consequences. The research seeks to define civility within civil society and understand its implications. This is done by exploring the nuances of the role of civic actions in shaping social networks, focusing on how these actions can foster inclusivity as well as exclusivity. The study examines conditions under which civility becomes inclusive or exclusive.
In Denmark, there is a growing call for civil society to play a more significant role in societal development, with the government aiming to liberalise the public sector, encouraging local freedom and engagement (Statsministeriet, 2022). This development indicates a shift from a welfare state to a welfare society (Greve et al., 2024).
Studies indicate that citizens involved in civic activities and social networks exhibit higher societal trust (Espersen et al., 2021). Therefore, ensuring all citizens can participate in local communities and networks regardless of their social circumstances is crucial.
Previous research has explored the theoretical aspects of civility (Carter, 1998; Eliasoph, 2012; Evers, 2009; Lynggaard & Boje, forthcoming; Shils, 1997), with a consensus that civility is vital for a thriving democracy. However, empirical analyses of civility's practical manifestations are scarce. Dekker's (2009, 2022) work on global perceptions of good citizenship and Lichterman's studies (2021; Lichterman & Eliasoph, 2014) on US civic engagement provide valuable insights but highlight the need for more empirical research focused on civility.
This study contributes to filling this gap through two contrasting case studies: a small provincial town with about 4000 citizens and a former working-class neighbourhood in Copenhagen. These cases were selected for their high levels of civic activity and diverse engagement opportunities. Despite fewer activities, the rural area draws from a larger surrounding region, while the urban area benefits from more overlapping activities. These cases were examined through twenty-two interviews and a focus group.
The case study explores the extent to which the geographical context influences civility practices as well as how this influences civic engagement to become inclusive or exclusive. The findings indicate that the character of civility—whether inclusive or exclusive—depends on the engagement form, whether individual or collective. Both cases reveal different forms of engagement, with varying experiences among social groups.
In conclusion, the study highlights that civility's inclusivity is contingent upon the nature of engagement, illustrating diverse experiences across different social groups.