Although there are some important reasons for caution, one possible explanation of these relationships is that—to some extent—having stronger civic health helps states weather recessions better. There is research that supports the plausibility of this hypothesis:

• Participation in civil society can develop skills, confidence, and habits that make individuals employable and strengthen the networks that help them to find jobs. (10) Fifty-nine percent of volunteers in national service programs believe their service will improve their chance of finding jobs. National service participation has also been found to boost “basic work skills, including gathering and analyzing information, motivating coworkers, and managing time.” (11) Middle school and high school students who participate in service-learning during class or who serve in school government succeed much better academically than peers with similar backgrounds. (12) Many individuals owe their employment to fellow members of social or civic groups or have learned their most marketable skills in national and volunteer service. National service itself can engage the unemployed in productive work at low-cost through existing networks of community-based nonprofits.

• People get jobs through social networks. Job opportunities are often found through friends, family, professional connections. Multi-billion-dollar online social networks have been created to facilitate these connections for hiring. This suggests the need for those seeking employment to maintain strong relationships with neighbors and members of their service and civic organizations. As noted above, belonging to groups and serving on committees were correlated with unemployment change at the state level from 2006-10.

• Participation in civil society spreads information. Attending meetings, working with neighbors on community problems, volunteering, and receiving newsletters from nonprofit organizations are examples of valuable ways of learning about local issues and opportunities. In communities with better flows of information, it is easier for individuals to find jobs or educational programs, for businesses to find partners and employees, and for citizens to hold government accountable.

• Participation in civil society is strongly correlated with trust in other people. Although measures of trust are not included in this analysis, most studies find that trusting other people encourages individuals to join groups, and participating in groups builds trust. (13) In turn, trust is a powerful predictor of economic success because people who trust are more likely to enter contracts and business partnerships, and confidence in others is a precondition for investing and hiring. (14)

• Communities and political jurisdictions with stronger civil societies are more likely to have good governments. Rates of voting (in 2006), registering to vote (in 2006 and 2008), and contacting public officials (in 2008) predict states’ resilience against unemployment from 2006-10. Those are measures of citizens’ engagement with government. Active and organized citizens can demand and promote good governance and serve as partners to government in addressing public problems. States with more civic engagement have much higher performing public schools (regardless of the states’ demographics, spending, and class sizes). (15) American cities with stronger civic organizations are better able to make wise but difficult policy decisions. (16) Even internationally, regions with stronger civil societies handled an increase in responsibilities much better than those with weaker civil societies. (17) In the current economic crisis, governments that benefit from better civic engagement may be able to reduce the scale of unemployment through more efficient and equitable policies.

• Civic engagement can encourage people to feel attached to their communities. The proportion of people who report being attached to their communities predicts economic growth. Perhaps liking and caring about where one lives increases the odds that one will invest, spend, and hire there. (18)

Cautions: Despite the significant correlations with which we began this report and the research cited above, a reader should not conclude, per se, that civic engagement alone boosts employment. The following cautions are important:

• There are other plausible hypotheses that we have not been able to test, because civic engagement was not included in the Current Population Supplement or other federal surveys until recently. For example, perhaps the housing bubble, which tripled housing prices in some states between 1991 and 2006, eroded civic health in those states by drawing in many new residents who had not had time to put down roots. When the bubble burst after 2005, those states were especially badly hurt by the recession, but their civic health had already declined. In that case, the relationship between civic engagement and employment that we found during 2006-10 would be misleading. (19)

• Other unknown events may have lowered both civic health and employment between 2006 and 2010. An example would be a specific economic policy that was implemented in some states but not in others.

• Although the hypothesis is that civic health in 2006 affected unemployment change from 2006-10, the inverse is also entirely possible—that unemployment has affected civic engagement. In fact, by most measures, the civic health of the nation has declined since 2006, and a leading explanation of that decline is the economic recession and its aftermath. Thus, even if the relationship between civic engagement and unemployment is meaningful, the causal arrow could point either way, or could point both ways at once. Reciprocal relationships are very common in the social sciences and still important to examine in more detail.