Social Capital and Human Capital

Social Capital

Current interest in social capital originates in the work of the scholars James Coleman, Francis Fukuyama, Robert Putnam, and Pierre Bourdieu. Although these four differ in disciplinary base and emphasis, they share a focus on aspects of social relations, namely, norms, values, and networks—or social capital—and the role they play in social cohesion. Community is central to theories of social capital in that norms, values, and networks produce and reproduce communities, be they geographical, face-to-face neighborhood communities, informational communities and networks, or civic communities of social or political engagement. Social capital is concerned with specific types of social bonds that sustain a sense of connection among individuals. Popular anxieties about a loss of community have entered social scientific discourse through the concept of social capital.

While there may be broad agreement about the specific elements of the social that are collectively called social capital, there are very important differences among these key theorists. Coleman's theory developed from his research on educational outcomes of students in public and private Catholic high schools. The finding that minority students who attended private Catholic schools had better educational outcomes than their peers in public high schools led Coleman to hypothesize that the powerful constellation of mutually reinforcing networks of parent-child relations, home-school ties, and a strong faith community resulted in a strong community of shared norms and values that encouraged concern for, and commitment to, educational achievement.

Fukuyama was primarily concerned with economic development and the nature of the values and culture underpinning economically successful societies. He identified trust as the key social norm. Cultures characterized by high levels of trust between people who are not kin, Fukuyama argued, are more likely to develop when strong parent-child bonds are embedded in family-community networks that share similar values.

Putnam's interest in social capital developed out of his longitudinal study of regional government in Italy. He argued that the success of social institutions depends on social capital, which he defined as social norms of trust and reciprocity, networks, and civic engagement. Thus regions with many social networks, whether sports clubs or political parties, tended to have more successful institutions and better social outcomes. Putnam pursued these ideas in Bowling Alone (2000), in which he identified social networks as the key component of social capital, arguing that the social malaise caused by community breakdown, lack of trust in politicians and bureaucratic officials, high levels of crime and disorder, and so on, was linked to lower rates of involvement in social networks. Declining participation in social networks, he suggested, results in a fragmented, insecure society.

...