Social Capital, Types of

As a varied social resource that facilitates action, social capital (an intangible analogue to economic, or financial, capital) has been defined and characterized in many ways. This variety reflects the concept's multiple meanings in relation to social structure and community. For example, researchers and critics have distinguished types of social capital by sources, uses (or functions), and consequences (effects). These broad distinctions bring into play related distinctions. For example, there is the question of individuals' or groups' possession or capacity to use social capital, which emphasizes social capital's properties as either an individual good (usable by a particular person) or a collective good (usable by all and benefiting an entire social system). There are also the differing levels at which social capital functions, from the micro level of everyday interactions among individuals, through the meso (intermediate) levels of formal associations, towns, and cities, to the [Page 1278]macro level of nations or regions. Social capital can also be characterized in terms of function: It can be instrumental in nature or more emotional and expressive. One can also look at the orientation of social capital. To what degree is it stored in networks or other ties among socially similar individuals or institutions (“bonding” social capital) and to what degree in ties among dissimilar actors (“bridging” social capital)? As for the uses to which people put social capital, researchers have distinguished social capital that is used merely for getting by (or coping) from social capital that helps the user get ahead (gain status). Finally, social capital can be classified in terms of the normative judgments made about its use or the impact of its use on the wider community (society), with some uses characterized as pro-civic and others as anti-civic. All these distinctions are closely interrelated.