Social Capital

Key Aspects

One of the core ideas of sociology is that individuals' values, attitudes, and actions are influenced by their social environment. On the other hand, their actions influence their social context. The term social capital emphasizes the common notion that involvement and participation in groups can have positive consequences for the individual and the community. Embeddedness in social networks allows for certain types of actions, such as transactions or cooperation.

Lyda J. Hanifan described the societal relevance of community service and volunteering for a stable social development as social capital in the 1950s; John R. Seely described the relevance of membership in clubs and associations; Jane Jacobs later pointed at webs of human relationships that provide mutual support in times of need, ensure the safety of the streets, and foster a sense of civic responsibility in great American cities. Pierre Bourdieu, James Coleman, and Robert Putnam finally helped the concept to obtain academic and public acceptance. Reasons for the attractiveness of the concept might be that social capital focuses attention on the positive consequences of sociability while putting aside its less attractive features. It also calls attention to how nonmonetary forms of capital can be important sources of power and influence. Thereby it combines economic and sociological perspectives. The various definitions mention at least four aspects of social capital: resources, networks, norms and values, and trust. Common definitions highlight those aspects:

• Resources are friends, colleagues, and more general contacts that provide opportunities to use your financial and human capital, or, according to Bourdieu, the sum of “actual and potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance or recognition” (Bourdieu, 1986, p. 248). Both access to resources and the amount and quality of those resources are mentioned.
• Networks refer to the structure of relations between persons and among persons (Coleman), as well as the ability of actors to secure benefits by virtue of membership in social networks (Portes).
• Norms and values refer to a set of informal norms or values shared among members of a group that permits cooperation among group members (Fukuyama).
• Trust encompasses norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise in social networks (Putnam). Social capital is defined by the willingness of individuals to trust others, including members of their own family, fellow citizens, and people in general. From a utilitarian perspective, trust reduces risks in human interactions and consequently reduces transaction costs. A distinction is made between thick, particularized trust and thin, generalized trust. The former is based on personal, firsthand knowledge, the latter on more abstract, general information. In this latter context, we trust people who are not like us not because we know them personally but because we have firsthand knowledge about how society works in general. Mark Granovetter relates this thin trust to weak ties in broader social networks. The “strengths of weak ties” become more important as societies grow, become increasingly mobile, and more impersonal. Thin trust is created within weak ties across and in between various networks of voluntary associations. These ties create long-lasting social relationships, contribute to social cohesion, and develop norms of reciprocity.

Interesting questions related to the concept are which processes generate social capital, what the consequences (benefits) are of its possession, and what the appropriate social contexts are in which both generation and benefits occur. Generally speaking, social capital occurs in relationships to others. Motivations to make resources available to others differ. They can be the result of internalized values and norms, like giving to charity or lending to community members without fear of nonpayment. Another motivation might be more instrumental, such as accumulating obligations from others under the norm of reciprocity. Consequences of being a member in a social network that provides resources are higher social control, family support, network-mediated benefits as well as restrictions (individual freedom, access to opportunities).

...