Is the family really an outdated institution in Italy as well as in Europe? Findings from the European Values Study

The concept of institution, one of the main issues in the social sciences, has been developed in a number of anthropological, economical, juridical, political, and sociological institutional theories. There is no overarching theory, however, to explain what institutions are for, how they are formed and why they change. This contribution takes into account, in particular, the institution of the family as a fundamental institution of society, not only because it ensures reproduction over time but because it shapes the personal and social identity through socialization of new generations, and will verify whether the family is still considered valid as an institution. In particular, the research questions to be addressed are: is the (marriage-based) family still considered a valid institution by Italians and Europeans? Is it possible to identify specific elements linked to a strong idea of the family? Which elements? Using data from the European Values Study (EVS) 2008–2009, an index was devised to measure the (high, medium, low) importance attributed to the family as a social institution, and its structural and cultural characteristics in both Italy and Europe (with a total of 28 countries considered), as well as with clusters correlated to it.


Family and Institution: a complex relationship
Institutions are the focal points of social organisations that are common to all societies; they address the basic problems of an ordered social life, to which the differentiation of the major institutional spheres or activities corresponds: family and kinship, education, economy, politics, cultural institutions, social stratification.The concept of institution, a main issue in the social sciences, has been developed in a number of anthropological, economical, juridical, political, and sociological institutional theories (Bumpass 1990).There is no overarching theory, however, to explain what institutions are for, how they are formed and why they change 1 (Colozzi 2009, Maccarini and Bortolini 2005).
Here we take into account, in particular, the institution of the family as a fundamental institution of society, not only because it ensures reproduction over time but because it shapes personal and social identity through socialization (Colozzi 2009).Lévi-Strauss (1967) observed that the lasting, socially approved union of a man and a woman and their children is a phenomenon present in every society.As a fully reciprocal relationship between man, woman and generations, the family is thus an evolutionary universal, i.e., it is present in any society that is both capable of evolving and bound to last (Donati 2006, Blankenhorn et al. 1990, Coontz 2000).
In the last decades, however, some of the greatest sociologists have highlighted, in a variety of ways (Giddens 1991, 1992, 1999, Beck 1997, Beck and Beck-Gernsheim 1996, 2001, Bauman 2001, 2005, 2006), the fact that with the disappearance of a shared values reference system the individual can only turn to him/herself as the sole choice criterion; family bonds too lose any reference to tradition and the forms they assume are only justified by the individual's reasons; self-fulfilment becomes the individual's primary goal and any bonds that may be established are instrumental to that goal.This weakens the value of family bonds, as these are considered out-dated.
Recent sociological literature presents diverse perspectives on the couple relationship and the extent of its formalisation as relating to the two different levels of structure and agency 2 .Structural research has concentrated on the resilience of marriage, defined as a clear way to sanction and institutionalise the couple relationship within society.US literature, in particular, connects existing theories to two macro-perspectives (Amato et al. 2007): the Marital-Decline Perspective (Waite and Gallagher 2000, Whitehead 1996, Wilson 2002) on the progressive weakening of marriage, due to growing individualism 3 , and the Marital-Resilience Perspective (Bengtson et al. 2002, Coontz 2000, Hackstaff 1999, Scanzoni 2001), on the actual transformations undergone by the marriage institution 4 .Agency theories differ as to the importance they attribute to the institutional and relational aspects of the actual couple relationship (Table 1).

2
This term is always used by Archer (2000Archer ( , 2003) ) in connection with structure.Archer views the history of sociology and the querelle between holists and individualists as the opposition between, respectively, structural and agency theories.

3
The progressive weakening of marriage due to increasingly widespread individualism (Glenn 1996) has negative consequences on adults, children, and society in general, namely: poverty, crime, violence, substance abuse, erosion of the sense of community and neighbourliness; the permanence of marriage, on the contrary, has positive effects, such as: a higher standard of living compared with that of the singles (Hirschl et al. 2003); physical and psychological health, (Williams 2003), financial security for adults (Williams 2003) and children (Amato and Booth 1997); the institution of marriage must, therefore, be strengthened by means of special paths, such as public education programs focused on promoting awareness of the value of marriage, the development of relational and conflict-management skills, pre-marriage education and marriage counselling.

4
This perspective acknowledges a change in the institution of marriage (Coontz 2000, Bengtson et al. 2002) that carries few negative consequences on adults, children and society in general.According to these scholars, it is necessary to support all family types, not just married heterosexual couples with children.Amato et al. (2007) have found no satisfactory empirical support to these theories, which, on the contrary, present complex, contradictory factors; thus they propose the integration of the above theoretical strands in: The Marital Decline and Marital Resilience Perspectives Revisited.
Following this theorisation, Western culture has today come to affirm that the family no longer exists but also that there are as many and as different families as there are forms of living arrangements with or without marriage, between different genders or between individuals of the same gender (Donati 2006).So the family may change its form and identity, implying that the individuals involved, bound by relationships, may choose the type they prefer (Donati 2013).
Following the deep changes in the family, it is logical to wonder whether the family is an institution of the past or one which still has a future (Bengtson et al. 2002, Bramlet and Mosher 2002, Casper and Bianchi 2002, Donati 2010, 2013, 2014).
In the attempt to answer this question, some scholars who reject individualisation as an interpretative criterion have tried to sketch a more thorough and sophisticated way of conceptualising and representing family life and, at the same time, find new ways to capture the multidimensionality of relationships by valuing the concept of relationality as opposed to the dominant individualistic interpretation (Smart 2007, Morgan 1996, Finch and Mason 1993, 2000, Carsten 2000, 2004, Gillis 1996, 2004, Chapman and Hockey 1999, Miller 1998, Donati 2011a).
From a sociological viewpoint, in fact, the family's development and dynamics can be fully grasped with reference to social morphogenesis theories.These illustrate the ongoing differentiation processes in contemporary societies, such as the attempt to set one's living arrangements (morphostasis), though these must always be examined in the light of criteria confirming that a morphogenesis is taking place (Donati 2006(Donati , 2011a(Donati , 2011b(Donati , 2013(Donati , 2014)).The relational hypothesis is that the family has a pattern, a latent structure consisting of fathermother-child, an unchanging nucleus without which it would lose its identity.This pattern is what Donati calls "the family genome", as its unique characteristics (like, broadly speaking, those of the biological genome) connect genders, generations and ancestries.The multiplication of living arrangements does not reveal a morphogenesis of the original structural pattern (family genome) or, in fact, a disappearance of the family as an institution; rather, it can be said that the new different lifestyles recall, more or less directly, the same family pattern.
Relational Sociology considers the family as a relationship with its own identity and able to connect and articulate, according to the different forms assumed by the couple bond (marriage, cohabitation, LAT), a number of factors, such as sexuality, generative tension, reciprocity in the exchanges, and a spirit of donation5 (Donati 2013).The family relationship is therefore, inseparable from the intergenerational relationship, as it creates a network of horizontal bonds, vertical bonds and generative factors.Wherever a bond is formed, in fact, the persons' histories are modified and something new is created.This becomes visible when considering not just the individuals but also their relationship.
The term "relationship" derives from the Latin re-ligo ("to set a link between"), referring to an interactive bond between two or more subjects, with the dual connotation of tie and resource.It also echoes the term re-latum ("referred to"), indicating that an interactive bond carries a shared symbolical baggage, i.e., a sort of memory connecting it with history and with other bonds that make it meaningful (Rossi and Bramanti 2012).In other words, there is an exchange between subjects carrying a cultural heritage which they represent from within the bond.The family is the encounter between two inevitable histories, as each subject constitutes a node in a generational fabric (Cigoli andScabini 2006, Prandini 2013).To conclude, the family can be defined as a social mediation relationship, as the mediations between the sexes, between the generations and between individual and society take place in it.Within the family, each individual is defined by both gender and position in the generational sequence (parent and/or child) and lifecycle (age).

Research questions and hypotheses
Within this theoretical and sociological context, this contribution intends to verify whether the family could still be considered valid as an institution.Even though this topic is no novelty in the scientific and public debate, it is still quite relevant for tackling some related trends in the current discourse, such as homosexual couples, single-parent families, stepfamilies, and childless couples, among others.
In particular, this paper is aimed to verify the relevance and persistence of the family as an institution based on marriage and consisting of both spouses in the orientation of Italians and Europeans.This idea of the family, as said above, is founded on its definition given by Relational Sociology (Donati 2006).
The research questions to be addressed are: 1.Is the (marriage-based) family still considered important by Italians and Europeans?2. Is it possible to identify specific factors linked to a strong idea of the family?Which factors?The research hypotheses prompted by these questions are the following: 1. We expect the (marriage-based) family to be still considered a valid institution by Italians and Europeans; 2. In the light of Relational Sociology, specific structural and cultural factors associated with a strong idea of the family can be identified.In particular, and consistently with a number of earlier findings (Glenn 1996, Bengtson et al. 2002, Coontz 2000, Hackstaff 1999, Scanzoni 2001, Stacey 1990), we expect the presence of children and the stability of the marriage bond experienced in the family of origin to be the decisive structural factors, with strong religiosity and value attributed to the couple relationship (as opposed to individual satisfaction) as the crucial cultural factors.

Data
To The EVS' fourth wave ( 2008) considered here covers 47 European Countries/Regions.It is based on representative multi-stage or stratified random samples of the population of over 18 year olds of each country, totalling 67,492 interviewees.The Italian sample includes 1,519 people: this is a probabilistic, stratified, proportional, two-stage sample, based on the Italian 18+ population as emerging from the electoral rolls.

Methodology and data analysis
To measure the (high, medium, low) importance attributed to the family as a social institution, and its structural and cultural characteristics in both Italy and Europe, an index (Table 2) was devised, as well as clusters correlated to it.The index was based on the following variables: -How important is the Family?(mode: very important) -Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "marriage is an outdated institution?"(mode: disagree) -Do you agree or disagree with those who say that, in order to grow into a happy adult, a child needs a family with both parents?(mode: tend to agree)6 .The factors discriminating between the groups have been analysed by bounded cluster analysis7 according to just the HIGH and LOW modes in the index, for both Italy and Europe.
Concerning Italy, factors describing those with a high index and those with a low index are clearly evident (see appendix, for extended tables).• The LOW level of importance attributed to the family as an institution was given by: the unmarried, the divorced, the cohabiters; the males; usually without children; the 35+ with medium level of education and currently employed.These people also tend to justify divorce and cohabitation.They are usually non-religious persons or devoted atheists.They believe that for a marriage to be successful it is especially important to have time for friends and hobbies, as well as good sexual chemistry and, to a lesser degree, fidelity; conversely, children or shared religious ideas are considered irrelevant.
according to the answers given, then the score is re-coded on three levels.The analysis shows low correlation between the importance attributed to the family and the presence of both parents (Pearson's correlation EU = .056and Ita = .058,yet a significant one: sig..000).An analysis of the main components confirms that the three variables considered are correlated with the same factor.
These people display an over-average tendency not to be satisfied with their work and their life in general (in their current situation they say they are not happy at all).
• people expressing a HIGH index level are especially the married, the women, the 66+, with a low education level and currently not employed (they are, in fact, pensioners or housewives), with grown-up children.This cluster tends not to agree with divorce and cohabitation.These people are strongly religious and consider marriage important.They think a good marriage is based on: shared religious ideas, the presence of children, fidelity; whilst having time for friends or for oneself is definitely less relevant.The satisfaction reported by this cluster is definitely high.
The two groups are clearly connoted and distinguished by structural (age, gender and stability of marriage bond) as well as cultural elements (religiosity and the importance attributed to the marriage and stable relationship).The emerging differences concerning important factors for a good marriage are particularly interesting: if those with a high index highlight the relevance of religious faith, procreative dimension and fidelity -so valuing the relational, generational and cultural dimension, those with a low index prioritize individual and immediately fulfilling elements.Moreover, our initial hypothesis concerning the impact of family origin marriage stability can not be confirmed from our data.In Europe the Index was calculated for all the 28 countries considered.
Table 4 shows the high and low indices of the importance of the family as a social institution, in the different EU countries, in percentage order.As far as Europe is concerned (28 countries), in bounded cluster analysis there are no significant differences compared with Italy (see extended tables in appendix).Listed are the factors describing the 2 groups in Europe (Table 5): also in this case clusters are clearly distinguished by both structural (age, gender, stable marriage bond, presence of children, educational level and working condition), and cultural factors (religiosity and the importance attributed to the marriage and stable relationship).Compared to the Italians, the Europeans attributing a high index value to the family as a social institution are younger and have younger children.Unlike their Italian counterparts, the Europeans consider relevant to a successful marriage also discussing problems with their respective partners

Which factors impact on high/low family as institution index? Logistic regression
To find out whether there exists a significant association between the importance attributed to the family as a social institution and the above presented group characteristics, we have used a Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE), a logistic regression showing all other attributes controlled for in the model being equal, the odds ratio that a certain result (dependent variable) may take place, depending on the independent variables.The high and low indices were used as dependent variables; conversely, age (in 4 brackets), gender, presence of employment, selfdefinition as to being (or not being) religious, and couple paths 9 were used as independent variables.
The logistic regression thus calculates the possibility of a high/low index as to the importance of the family as a social institution 10 .9 Paths considered are: married, cohabiting, divorced, unmarried, LAT -i.e., Living Apart Together. 10The data shown here are relative to Italy, where differences are numerically more marked; the EU, however, shows similar results.
The results highlight that perceiving family as an institution tends to be the view of people who regard themselves as religious, those who are married and those aged over 66.
The regression confirms the results of the cluster analysis, showing that other things being equal, the most significant independent variable appears to be religiosity.
Data from Europe show a similar trend.How can the results be interpreted?Considering the importance of being married as a predictor of judgment about the family as an institution we can see how behaviour has a strong impact on the value judgment.This leads us to the complex relationship between value orientations and behaviours already highlighted by relevant scholars (Allport 1961, Halman 1995).
Regarding the favourable influence of religiosity on the view of the family being an institution, the expectation we formulated is confirmed.This relationship, however, is more complex and could be better highlighted by different studies underlining the importance of religiosity for the couple bonds in terms of increased marital satisfaction (Hünler and Genc¸öz 2005, Margaret et al. 1990, Orathinkal and Vansteewegen 2006) commitment (Sullivan 2001) and stability (Call and Heaton 1997).In addition, as highlighted by Fincham, the sharing of religious faith enforces marital relationships: praying together is a potentially important vehicle for enhancing relationship outcomes (Fincham, and Beach 2014), increasing forgiveness and relationship satisfaction (Braithwaite, Selby and Fincham 2011).
These results broaden this perspective by highlighting the relevance of religion not only on couple satisfaction or functioning but also on the personal judgment regarding the importance of the family for the society.

Conclusions
The original hypotheses have been confirmed for both Italy and Europe: the family as an institution (based on marriage and including both partners) is highly relevant to the majority of the interviewees (H1).
The data concerning people's perception about the family as an institution seem thus to confirm ISTAT findings (2014a, 2014b) about the presence of a progressive de-institutionalisation of the family in favour of a growing individualism, as claimed by several authors (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim 1990, 1993, Giddens 1991, 1992, 1999, Baumann 2000, 2003).
Beside these trends, moreover, a generative orientation valuing the family as the foundation of society can be found; it is also possible to identify some structural and cultural factors significantly affecting the importance attributed to the family as an institution (Hp2): particularly religiosity, marital status and age.
The clusters analysis with high and low index, in fact, suggest that the differences are linked to these different variables.As confirmed by logistic regressions, other things being equal, the most significant independent variable appears to be religiosity.
Such interesting results, however, demand further reflection.
Will the family become more uncommon and less appealing as a life choice?Why?What (pushing or pulling) personal, family and social factors will affect this trend?
Wondering about continuity and change of perception about the family as an institution in Italy, where relevant structural transformations are present, we can see that the family as an institution persists at least with a strong link to religiosity and marriage.This raises questions about the process of secularization outcomes in Italy: data here presented seem to suggest to us that with a decrease in religiosity also the importance of the family as an institution could fall.
These processes also need to be examined by longitudinal survey research as well as by qualitative and narrative methodologies; these would encompass the subject's decisional and reflexive processes demanded by the family choice, to view it within personal/family history and in the self-construction process (Archer 2007).

APPENDIX: cluster analysis tables
answer this question, we have used data from European Values Study fourth wave 2008-2009.The European Values Study (EVS) is a large-scale, cross-national, and longitudinal survey research program started in 1981 on basic human values, i.e., deep-set criteria for individual and collective actions referring to what is ultimately considered true and fair, good or bad, desirable or undesirable, rather than considering prejudices, stereotypes and unconscious beliefs.Values coincide with cultural judgements expressing what is worth believing, thinking and acting by, according to the reflexivity distinguishing the human subject as such.It is a unique research project on life, family, work, religion, politics and society; it provides insights into the ideas, beliefs, preferences, attitudes, values and opinions of citizens all over Europe.