Understanding of the Concept Social Capital - Coursework Example

Student Name: Professor: Course: Semester: Date: What do you understand by the concept 'social capital'? Social capital Social network according to Woolcock (1998,) can be defined as encompassing the norms of networks facilitating collective action of mutual benefit. When it comes to social capital it is more about who you know and not what you know as a person. The ability to create beneficial networks is very important for individuals and communities at large. Networks help people gain access to important information that they wouldn’t have come across by their own. We also get ideas, influences and resources that can enable us reach our objectives and goals as individuals and communities. Woolwock and Narayan (2000) note that when things are tough on us economically, we turn to our friends and neighbors. When we want to have a quality time and feel rewarded we achieve it by talking with friends, sharing meals and engaging in community development projects together. This is what social capital is all about; building networks that are mutually beneficial. Portes (1998,) further reiterates that whereas economic capital is in banks and human capital in the heads, social capital is in the structures of the relationships that people keep. Social capital can then be defined as a product of the social interaction processes that people engage in. a clear distinction between social interaction processes and the social capital maybe the starting point of understanding the concept of social capital as a product. Social capital can only exist if it produced from a defined process. Kilpatrick (2000) contends that social capital is the accumulation of the knowledge and the identity resources drawn on by communities of common purpose. In light of these understanding it is clear that social capital is built through networks within communities of common purpose (Woolcock, 1998). These social capital networks are: Bonding networks Bridging networks Linking networks Bonding networks These are closely knit networks that help people get along watch other smoothly. These are the type of connections kept with family, friends and close neighbors. Bonding networks are strong and effective when communities of people with common background develop trust in each other though personal experiences of each other and frequent interaction. They are also stronger when people with common social background interact frequently with each other. These strong bonds help people out of a problem whenever they are caught in one. The bonds may also be very strong to result in gangs and elitist clubs that can cause harm to people who don’t belong to the group (Woolcock, 1998). Bridging network These are composed of ties that are not so strong as compared to the bonding networks. These networks give people more opportunities that they were exposed to. These networks are initiated when people from different social background trust each other. Here the trust is based on generally accepted community norms other than personal experience and close connections. These network also gains strength when people from different background engage with each other irrespective of political affiliation religious belief or cultures. People usually come together to solve problems affecting them all. Bridging networks are very beneficial as they expose you to more opportunities than you could be exposed to if you did not create the network in the first place (Woolcock, 1998). Linking networks Linking networks facilitate the access to organizations and systems that are capable of helping people gain access top resources and solve their problems. These networks are initiated and strengthened when people trust leaders in public and private organizations. It is a trust that these leaders will solve the people’s problems and respond to their interests. The residents also engage with the leaders of the public and private institutions to help address a problem they have. Strong linking networks help communities get solutions for their problems through access to resources that can create the much needed change (Woolcock, 1998). From the above networks it can be seen then that social capital contributes into making better communities by bringing in benefits such as: Stronger communities where people spend more time in community based activities, there are more volunteers to community causes, and the people are more likely to participate to national obligations such as voting. Education is enhanced as kids drop out of school less and people have an improved perception towards education. There is safety within the community as the levels of crime lower and the rate of suicide may also reduce as people get a sense of belonging. Families have avenues of solving problems too other than resulting to violent means of solving family problems. There is economic gain as people get connected to jobs, loans can be accessed through credit associations, and common business problems such as regulations can be addressed better. Better leadership emerges as communities get to understand what it means to engage in leadership agendas for the community. Community members get a chance to lead and get the meaning of leadership through solving problems for their communities. What are the different methodologies which have been developed to measure 'social capital'? Measuring social capital Social capital has been the subject of debate in many quarters from as regards the concept itself. Some see it from a community perspective while others view it from an economic perspective. The definitions are varying depending on the perspective one is defining social capital from. It is these different perceptions that also bring about different ways of measuring social capital. Social capital is not tangible and as such provides a difficulty to quantitatively measure the level of social capital in a community even though one is totally aware of a legal of social capital within a community. Perhaps the understandings of how social capital is build and sustained provides a simpler way of measuring the social capital in a community. Kilpatrick 2000) relies on this approach to do a whole community case study using ethnographic techniques. Data was collected from several participants from the community, analyzed using detailed conversations drawing on ethno-methodological principles and procedures to bring out the desired information. Thematic techniques were then utilized to analyze the content manually. Kilpatrick (2000) believes that social capital is produced by micro interactions which are in turn embedded in a meso and macro social order. If these processes can be observable, then it will be simple to measure their effect on social capital accumulation and consequently the level of social capital; in a community. Collier (2002) argues that measuring social capital is one difficult task if not impossible all together. By this, collier (2002) argues that social capital can not be measured directly but rather through indicators. Social capital according to Collier (2002) has inherently abstract characteristics and requires subjective interpretation in order to achieve measurement of social capital. So heated is the debate that Fukuyama (2001) state that one of the greatest weaknesses of social capital concept is the lack of consensus on how to measure it. Collier (2002) then adds that the choice of indicators which are indirect surrogates of their associated constructs (Narayan and Cassidy, 2001), is guided by the scope of the concept and the breadth of the unit of observation used. Falk and Lesley, (1998)note that, due to the abstract nature of social capital and varying definitions of the concept itself, it is often measure inconsistently between studies. There exist no empirical tools for measurement of social capital necessitating the need for a consensus on a common definition of the social capital concept and tools to measure social capital. Measurement of social capital as noted by Stone (2001) is often done using ‘questionable measures’ often designed for other purposes and not the measurement of social capital. By this Stone (2001) argues that measurement of social capital is a self fulfillment endeavor as one tends to look for and find what he/she is looking for and doesn’t give much attention to the means used to get the results. Social capital as a concept so far has been measured using proxy indicators since the concept is too abstract and relatively new to have defined methodology and tools to measure it (Falk and Lesley, 1998 Adams, & Hess, 2001). Some of the indicators include. Horizontal associations This indicator includes number and type of local associations. It looks at the extent of membership, participation and kin homogeneity in local associations. The indicator also looks at the extent of income and occupation homogeneity within the association and the level of trust members have in fellow members and the government. The horizontal indicator also looks at the extent of trust in trade unions and community cooperation and appreciation through percentage of expenditure households make for gifts and transfers. Civil and political society This indicator looks at the extent of political liberties and economic freedom too. Some key indicators here may also include; the percentage of the general [population involved in separatist movement, corruption index and measure of political stability. Voter turnout and the strength of democratic institution is a good measure of the social capital indicated by the awareness of civil and political aspects of a community. Degree of decentralization and governments respect tom constitutional documents may also give an indication of the social capital in a society. Social integration This is as an indicator of social capital which is evidenced in such things as social mobility and the degree of ethnic tensions within a society. Some key areas to observe in this indicator include; strikes, demonstrations, suicides, homicides, family violence and single parenting tendencies, and also unemployment in the youths. Attitudes towards family life and responsibilities can also be a good observation point concerning social integration. Legal and governance This indicator looks at how the government is able tor each out to their subjects and also the independence of constitutional bodies such as the courts. The degree of to what extent the government can bend the laws gives an indication of the social capital in a community from a legal and governance point of view. Another methodology of measuring social capital advanced by Putman(2000) for united States has the following set of indicators: Organizational life This indicator measures aspects such as the Percentage of people who served or participated in local organizations in a year The average number of club and organizational meetings attended by members at any particular year Measures of engagement in public affairs This indicator is concerned with the turn out during presidential elections, and the percentage of people who attend public meetings. Measures of community volunteerism This indicator considers aspects such as number of NGOs in a population of 1000 people. The number of times a volunteer offered services in a community for the year. Measures of informal sociability The percentage of who people agree that they spend a lot of time visiting friends and also entertaining friends and neighbors during the year Measures of social trust This is concerned with knowing how people rate the level of individual honesty within the community they live in. These two methodologies enable us to distinguish empirically between social capital and its outcomes. The methodologies also bring out the understanding that by linking social capital measurement and the theoretical understanding, we can conclude that social capital is a multidimensional concept comprising of social networks, norms of trust, and norms of reciprocity Stone (2002). Discuss how this concept is being used to address a social issue of your choice. Social capital application in informal education Social capital can only be accumulated when people build networks that will benefit them and benefit others. Of particular interest in the social capital is the emphasis that social capital is enhanced when people join group and organizations within a community. It is this understanding that is most importance to informal educators who have a more than ever powerful reason to explain the end outcome or the benefits of their activities. Putman (2000) contends that the simple act of joining an organized community based organization and getting regularly involved in its activities has a profound impact on the health and wellbeing of a person and actually helps people to develop and get to self actualization. Working in groups regardless of the reason for the participation in the group’s activities always has a significant experience gained through association with different communities. Perhaps this explains why extra-curricular activities have a profound effect on the development of an individual apart from the formal class environment which is mainly geared towards personal development to gain human capital and not social capital which is gained through building trusts and relationships with the people near and around you. It is therefore right to contend that educational achievement at the end of the day will be greater and more meaningful if the quality of the day to day interactions is enhanced through greater emphasis on the extra curricular activities involving teams and groups (Adams & Hess, 2001). Informal educators and the informal education in extension have a great interest in associations and the quality of life in associations. This most evident concern with informal education is capable of developing social networks and the strengthening of democratic awareness within a community. This is a direct application of the social capital concept which seeks to develop peoples understanding that the community is interconnected and people can only solve their problems even at the national politics level if they come together. Informal educationists have a strong emphasis on the importance of dialogue and conversation (Putman 2000). By applying this social capital concept whereby social capital is accumulated through the micro level interaction processes, the informal educators are able to reach the root of what it requires for the civic society to be strong and also to get people to reason together and face their problems in a more proactive manner. Through, bridging, bonding and linking concepts of asocial capital. The informal educators are able to achieve tolerance and beneficial relationships within a community in which they are working. It provides a way for the community to be self sufficient and also full exploitation of the opportunities available for the community (Putman 2000). The concept of social capital has also been used raise awareness on asocial evils facing communities. Some of the major benefits that social capital may achieve are lowering crime rates within a community. This is achieved through sustained efforts to educate the communities on the need to flush out criminal elements; amongst them. When the communities are close knit, the possibilities of criminal operating within the same community they belong to is lower than when community members are highly individualistic with everyone concerned with their own business. Community groups also utilize the social capital in the community to provide assistance in times of bigger problems such as raising medical bill for individuals this way people share problems and make the burden lighter for those affected (Putman 2000). The groups are also capable of addressing social problems like violence against women and family violence through raising awareness on how family problems can be approached. The family members feel a par t of the community and don’t want to let the community down by behaving badly (Putman, 2000). So it indirectly ensures that community members behave in a manner that is in consistence with the norms of the community. The great sense of belonging also reduces instances where community members may result to suicide and other violent conducts associated with personal problems and lack of appreciation within families. The communities are an extended family and this is what informal educators place much emphasis on to develop individuals and communities in their programs. References Adams, D. & Hess, M. (2001). Community in public policy: Fad or foundation. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 60(2), 13–23. Collier, P. (2002). Social capital and poverty: a microeconomic perspective, Cambridge University Press Falk, I., and Lesley, H. (1998) Indicators of Social Capital: social capital as the product of local interactive learning processes: Centre for Research and Leaning in Regional Australia Fukuyama, F. (2001). Social capital and the modern capitalist economy: Creating a high trust workplace. Stern Business Magazine 4 Kilpatrick, S. (2000) What is social Capital? A stdy of interaction in a rural community, Sociologia ruralis, Vol 40 # 1 pp.87-110 Narayan, D., and Cassidy, M. (2001). A dimensional approach to measuring social capital: development and validation of a social capital inventory. Current Sociology , Vol 49: pp.59-102 Portes, A. (1998) Social Capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual review of Sociology, vol 24 #1 pp. 1-24 Putnam, R. (1995). Bowling alone: America's declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 5–78. Stone, W. (2001) Measuring social capital: Towards a theoretically informed measurement framework fro researching social apital in family and community life, [PDF] available online at http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/RP24.pdf. Woolcock, m. (1998) Social capital and economic development: Towards a theoretical synthesis and policy framework, Theory and society, Vol 27, pp. 151-208 Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000). Social Capital: Implications for Development Theory, Research, and Policy, World Bank Research Observer, 15(2): 225-249. Read More