Social Capital

The Meanings of Social Capital

The meaning of social capital varies depending on the approach of authors using the term in their work. Just recently via a thorough review of sociological research, Gregory M. Fulkerson and Gretchen H. Thompson identified two overarching positions in the conceptual debate: (1) normative social capitalists and (2) resource social capitalists. Normative social capitalists fall in alignment with the works of Coleman, who conceptualized social capital with strong regard to social organization at the macrolevels of community and civil society. Strongly influenced by Coleman, this position on social capital is thought to underscore community development, engagement, and action. In essence, by having a shared stake in social capital, community members and communities work together for mutual benefit. In 1988, Coleman described social capital as a means for actors (individuals or corporations) to control certain resources and share a vested interest in those resources. In this context, social capital is considered a valuable and productive entity. Coleman also described social capital as depending on trust and obligations held among actors; for Coleman forms of social capital include but are not limited to information that facilitates potential action, cultural norms, and joint obligations and expectations.

Expanding Coleman's conceptualization, Robert Putnam, Robert Leonardi, and Raffaella Y. Nanetti highlight elements of social capital that play an exceptionally strong role in civically engaged communities, including trust, values, norms of reciprocity, and networks. Operating from this perspective, social bonds (i.e., social capital) are instrumental in any given community movement to achieve particular goals or overcome specific struggles. For example, if a community wants to take action against local crime, the presence of social capital is thought to make the process and the outcome of taking action far more productive. In this sense, social capital is likely to influence community livelihood and, by subsequent relation, individual life opportunity as well. Given the focus on macrocon-texts espoused by normative social capitalists, social capital in this sense can also be extended to understanding how states, regions, and even nations collectively operate. In the global sense, these authors also note how the lack of social capital can inhibit a region's ability to effectively contribute to and draw from a dynamic economy.

...