Social Networks: Social Capital

Social capital is a broad and somewhat elastic term that has become familiar to many disciplines and professional vocabularies. On the one hand, the concept of social capital is used to examine the resources required to build up human capital (Coleman, 1988), while on the other, it is viewed as a major mechanism of social reproduction and is used in a critical way to highlight class inequalities and unequal access to institutional and other resources and opportunities that help develop cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1985). Thus, while social capital may be used to identify negative social processes, in general it is seen as a positive effect of interaction among participants in a social network (Helliwell & Putnam, 2004). The value and function of social capital is linked to trust, social networks, and tolerance. However, many commentators agree that while it is possible to identify the function of social capital, it is harder to identify the mechanisms through which it operates and to define precisely what it is.

Keywords Cultural Reproduction; Cultural Capital; Human Capital; Networks; Physical Capital; Social Capital; Social Reproduction; Stratification

Social Networks: Social Capital

Overview

Social capital is a broad and somewhat elastic term that has become familiar to many disciplines and professional vocabularies. On the one hand, the concept of social capital is used to examine the resources required to build up human capital (Coleman, 1988), while on the other, it is viewed as a major mechanism of social reproduction and is used in a critical way to highlight class inequalities and unequal access to institutional and other resources and opportunities that help develop cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1985). Thus, while social capital may be used to identify negative social processes, in general it is seen as a positive effect of interaction among participants in a social network (Helliwell & Putnam, 2004). The value and function of social capital is linked to trust, social networks, and tolerance. However, many commentators agree that while it is possible to identify the function of social capital, it is harder to identify the mechanisms through which it operates and to define precisely what it is.

Defining Social Capital: Putnam, Coleman, Bourdieu

The founding fathers of social capital theory are Robert Putnam, James Coleman, and Pierre Bourdieu. While they have all focused on social capital as a key component of group and organizational behavior, these social scientists differ in their emphasis and approach. First, Bourdieu provided a typology of different forms of capital—economic, cultural, social, and symbolic—examined how these are accumulated, exchanged, and utilized, and explained their role in the reproduction and maintenance of class position or advantage (McGonigal et al., 2007). In particular, Bourdieu focused on how social inequalities (stratification) are perpetuated through education and the system of cultural reproduction that underpins it. Cultural reproduction—the various ways that education systems shape the values, attitudes, and habits of students through informal processes—is linked to social capital, which Bourdieu observes is "the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to a durable network of more or less institutionalised relationships of mutual acquaintance or recognition" (Bourdieu, 1986, p.51).

Where Bourdieu was interested in how elite groups use social capital to maintain social divisions, James Coleman was interested in how non-elite or marginalized groups could use social capital to their benefit (Smith, 2007). He was interested in explaining stratification and educational outcomes, and in particular the role of the relation between home, school, and local communities to the development of human capital. For Coleman, human capital refers to the development of skills and capabilities that enable people to do things that they were previously unable to do (e.g., work in certain occupations). He argued that some institutions are better at generating social capital than others (e.g., the family), and his work has contributed to understandings of how educational attainment (getting good grades, acquiring qualifications) is more likely among people who have grown up in families/households that have educational aspirations and thus have access to knowledge about educational opportunity (Schuller, 2007) through connections between families and communities. Access to community services and assistance from family members, friends, neighbors, and teachers are all forms of social capital outside families that may also contribute to good educational outcomes (Offer & Schneider, 2007). Social capital for Coleman is defined by its function and is "a variety of different entities, having two characteristics in common: they all consist of some aspect of a social structure, and they facilitate certain actions of individuals who are within the structure" (Coleman, 1988, p. 98).

Robert Putnam is probably the best-known popularizer of the concept of social capital. He focused on the civic sphere: the health and vitality of civil society as measured by aspects such as participation and voting behavior. He defined social capital as "features of social organization such as networks, norms and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit" (Putnam, 1995, p. 67). In his book Bowling Alone, he argues that social capital contributes to the development and sustainability of community by fostering connectedness, which, he notes, contributes to better health and education outcomes, lower crime, and a "good society."

Putnam observed that "the more integrated we are with our community, the less likely we are to experience colds, heart attacks, strokes, cancer, depression, and premature death of all sorts" (Putnam, 2000, p. 326), but he argued that social capital in contemporary America has been declining steadily. When social capital declines, a community experiences increased social disorder and potentially more distrust among community members. Conversely, greater social capital increases commitment to a community and the ability to mobilize collective actions. Putnam linked the decline in social capital to trends in worsening health (depression, mental illness, suicide, and general personal malaise), especially for Generation X, members of which bear an unusually high burden of these trends and are, Putnam argues, less likely to be involved in civic engagement and more likely to engage in what he refers to as sociopathic conduct, such as road rage.

Social Capital as a Resource

It would be easy to view social capital as either people's human capital (individual skills, attributes, competencies, and know-how) or their economic capacities (money and the things that money buys). However, social capital is neither of these, though it is connected to the development of human capital and can be converted into economic capital. Rather, it is generally agreed that social capital resides in the quality and structure of relationships between people and refers to resources stored in human relationships, whether casual or close. It is the knowledge that people have, how this knowledge has the potential to circulate among the relationships that connect them, and how it potentially contributes to people doing things for one another.

These resources are used by individuals to get by (by leveraging practical, emotional, and financial support from others) and to get on—that is, to achieve social mobility (by leveraging who one knows in order to gain access to employment, a social circle, or organization) (de Souza Briggs, 1997). Developing the core features of the concept, McGonigal, Doherty, Allan et al. (2007) observe that social capital is intrinsically relational, that is, built on patterns of relationships that may vary in duration, density, distance, and interconnectedness. Further, the oxygen of social capital is interpersonal conduct and its attendant affective dimensions—in other words, how we get on with others and how they make us feel. Finally, the metaphor of capital is a useful way of examining the forms of power, resource, and currency for which social capital can be traded or exchanged (p. 79).

Social capital, then, is the value that is derived from belonging to networks, based on the idea that access to resources is cultivated through connections among and between people. The social connections that develop networks are built up over time through repeated exchanges (of information, emotion, or favors) and are linked to other forms of capital. In contrast, reductions in levels of social capital may contribute to feelings of disconnectedness and loss of trust, control, autonomy, and belonging. Social capital is, at least for Coleman and Putnam, a good thing: it can be transformed into all kinds of resources, from jobs to information to better health (but not if, as Putnam believes, people "bowl alone").

Putnam provides a number of reasons to explain why social capital has a positive impact on health. First, people who are connected to others in social networks provide social and practical support that may reduce stress and suffering. Second, social networks help to reinforce social norms that are perceived to have health-inducing or -promoting effects, and therefore they minimize the potential for damaging conduct. Third, connected communities are more likely to be well organized and therefore capable of challenging issues around health-related services or issues. And finally, social capital may actually have a biochemical impact by enhancing resistance to disease and illness (Law, 2008).

Further Insights

Social Capital & Networks

Given the emphasis on relationships, it is not hard to see how social networks are important to an understanding of how social capital functions. Access to social capital is determined by opportunities to interact with others, the characteristics of the individuals who compose the social network, and the configuration of the network itself (Offer & Schneider, 2007, p. 1127). Social networks matter because they create and sustain relationships that can be cultivated into social support, itself a form of social capital (Offer & Schneider, 2007). Moreover, social networks depend on relationships between interconnected individuals and are built up through multiple social interactions with others to gain material, financial, emotional, or other benefits. Some people are more connected than others, as Gladwell (2000) observes in his book The Tipping Point. Gladwell refers to these as "connectors"—people who connect a person or a social group to another person or group through a short chain of social links and, in doing so, spread information widely, thus increasing the value of network membership for everyone.

The benefits derived from membership in social networks can be purposively used for productive ends, such as balancing work and family demands, coping with illness, or procuring information about jobs. The idea is that people invest in the relationships that hold out the promise of benefits. As Bourdieu (1985) argues, social networks are purposefully created and institutionalized in order to "produce and reproduce lasting, useful relationships that can secure material and symbolic profits" (p. 249).

Networks need not be geographically proximate, though face-to-face interaction can enhance well-being and contentment. They have benefits not only for individuals but also for organizations when ties among its members are strong, dense, and overlapping. These kinds of ties help develop trust, cooperation, and risk taking in ways that may enhance the development of organization economic capital. For instance, Cohen and Prusak (2001) argue that organizational social capital can contribute to more effective and wider knowledge sharing and common goals in an organizational life that is characterized by increasing complexity and virtuality.

Belonging to social networks may make life richer and happier; such networks facilitate transactions and cooperative ventures by building trust, and they can serve as conduits for the flow of information. They can also serve as a type of informal insurance, insofar as one may fall back on one's personal connections in the case of certain emergencies. Of course, social networks need not always play a benign role; they can also be used to oppress those outside the network and to promote factionalism (Pattanaik & Xu, 2007). Putnam (2000) acknowledges this in his distinction between inward-looking social capital and outward–looking social capital. Social networks differ in character (porous or relatively closed) and in what they provide (information about network members or access to knowledge outside the network)—that is, whether the social capital they supply is bonding, bridging, or linking.

Applications

Bonding Social Capital

Although there is broad agreement about the function of social capital, there are different forms (Putnam, 2000; Woolcock, 2001). Bonding social capital refers to shared activities that promote connections with close ties—others already within people's social networks, such as family, friends, and neighbors—who provide a sense of identity, affiliation, shared purpose, practical support, and information. Examples of bonding social capital might include neighborhood-watch programs or the various ways in which women in particular reach out to each other and offer or provide practical, emotional, and material support. Bonding social capital relies on norms of reciprocity based on trust and trustworthiness: I help out my neighbor, not only expecting that she will help me out when I am in need but trusting her to provide this help.

Bridging and Linking Social Capital

Bridging social capital refers to activities or practices through which people reach out to those beyond their immediate network or professional boundaries and is useful for accessing new ideas, information, and knowledge sharing. Linking social capital refers to networks with vertical ties with people, institutions, and situations that are unfamiliar or with people in positions of authority. These weak or loose connections allow people to tap into information flows, broker useful resources (such as learning about jobs, gathering information about candidates running for office, or exchanging ideas at college) across a range of networks, and leverage new resources from more distant networks into their existing network (Granovetter, 1973).

As de Souza Briggs (1997) notes, bonding capital is important for "getting by" and bridging capital is useful for "getting ahead." These two dimensions of social capital do not exist independently; they interact with each other, and though bonding social capital can exist without bridging, the latter cannot exist without the former (Schuller, 2007).

Virtual Networks as Bridging Capital

Although Putnam lamented the decline of social capital in his study of civic participation in America, some research has suggested that information technology may enhance social capital in general and bridging social capital in particular. The expansion of virtual social networks, as manifest in networking sites such as Linked In, Facebook, and Twitter, provides opportunities for people to make connections with others who share interests in particular ideas, activities, or values. In particular, people use these sites to establish and maintain creative and professional connections. Daniel Pink (2001), in his book Free Agent Nation , observes how important such networks are for individuals who work independently, because they provide access to information and knowledge resources in ways that make people who are working outside of organized employment feel connected and a part of something.

It is not just working professionals who use virtual networks to create social capital. For instance, Ellison, Steinfield, and Lampe (2007) examined how students use Facebook to make what they refer to as "offline to online" connections. Facebook enables its users to present themselves in an online profile, accumulate "friends" who can post comments on each other's pages, and view each other's status updates. Members can also join virtual groups based on common interests, see what classes they have in common, and learn each others' hobbies, interests, musical tastes, and romantic relationship statuses through their profiles. While some research on information technologies suggests that they have the potential to reduce social capital by reducing face-to-face interaction, Ellison, Steinfield, and Lampe suggest that participating in this form of online networking creates bridging capital that can support students in their offline transitions from school to college to work by enabling them to not only make new connections across their networks but also strengthen bonds within their existing networks (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007).

Viewpoints

Social Capital & the Body

Social capital in general refers to activities, Relationships, and practices that allow people access to prized material and social goods and services. But it does not work on its own, and indeed, it is typically tied to, or converted into, other forms of capital, such as economic or physical capital. Physical capital refers to bodily appearance, gestures, and conduct and the social value that is conferred on these by particular social groups. Bourdieu (1984) argued that the human body is a bearer of status, power, and distinctive symbolic forms that are important to the acquisition of resources. For instance, in contemporary Western society, the body that conforms to aesthetic ideals about fitness, health, and beauty can be used as a means to earn a living.

Waquant (1995) conducted research among boxers in Chicago, studying how boys from poor, urban areas often develop a toned, fit physique through boxing or other kinds of sport as a way of earning income, respect, and status from the communities of which they are a part. To achieve upper-body strength, agility, and endurance, boxers have to invest in practical work, often in the form of drills and exercises that involve skipping, calisthenics, and sparring (p. 71). Since the boxer has to work on his body in order to transform it into physical capital and subsequently labors with his body, body capital and bodily labor depend on each other. The same might be said for actors in the Hollywood system, who invest in clearly defined ideals about appearance and beauty and consequently transform their bodies in ways that can be converted into social capital, through workouts, dietary control, cosmetic surgery, and other modifications. Athletes and musicians are often seen accompanying models or actors to social events; in doing so, they gain increased access to such events, as well as media exposure, which enlarges their public visibility. The possession of social capital built up through strategic relationships can provide access to wider forms of capital.

Conclusion

While social capital has become a concept that is used to explain civic problems, disengagement, and negative trends in social patterns of health, education, and employment, its widespread use may be undermining its explanatory strength. Its decline has become what Law (2008, p.177) refers to as a deus ex machina that is used to explain anything that seems to no longer work. While Putnam (2000) pointed out the decline in what might be called traditional forms of civic engagement, new forms of social connection have emerged. For instance, while political parties and established churches may be losing members, looser affiliations such as grassroots politics may be rising.

The existence of social capital does not necessarily reduce or eliminate social divisions; in fact, as de Souza Briggs (1997) notes, social capital can actually exacerbate social fault lines based on class, ethnicity, or gender (as Bourdieu claimed). Social groups can be internally cohesive, and thus develop strong social capital, without necessarily being connected to other social groups. Moreover, putative links between social capital and health outcomes need to be balanced by more sensitive measures of social capital (Ziersch et al., 2005). Nonetheless, social capital is increasingly important in how national and global institutions measure and track human development and growth. For instance,

• The World Bank has studied social capital and its impact on governance in its attempts to address global poverty;

• The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has discussed how social capital might be used to develop economic growth; and

• The European Union now tracks trends in social capital by measuring trust and civic participation.

Clearly, the concept of social capital has helped to broaden the policy frameworks of issues such as health and human development (Schuller, 2007).

While social capital is a ubiquitous term, it is also somewhat intangible—as Schuller (2007) puts it, a piece of "vague liberal softheadedness" (p. 12)—and although researchers view it as a useful intermediary concept that links micro (relationships) with macro (structure) (Fine, 2001), it has also been criticized for being both ethnocentric and gender blind (e.g., Holland, Reynolds, & Weller, 2007). Yet despite differences in what social capital represents, how it functions, and what its outcomes are, critics seem to agree that overall the concept points to the importance of social interaction and the way this "enables people to build communities, to commit themselves to each other, and to knit the social fabric" (Smith, 2007, par. 3).

Terms & Concepts

Cultural Capital: The cultural assets, such as habits and beliefs, associated with a particular social class.

Cultural Reproduction: Reproduction of cultural norms, attitudes, and values from one generation to the next.

Human Capital: The skills, knowledge, and training that people invest in to improve and increase their access to employment and income opportunities.

Networks: Relationships that develop between interconnected individuals and are built up through multiple social interactions with others in order to gain material, financial, emotional, or other benefits.

Physical Capital: The social value conferred on bodily appearance, gestures, and conduct by particular social groups.

Social Capital: Broadly, the resources required to build up human capital, residing in the quality and structure of the relationships that enable people to gain access to social and material goods.

Social Reproduction: The social processes that create and sustain the seemingly durable characteristics of social structure across time.

Stratification: The development of systematic inequalities between groups of people as an unintended consequence of social processes and relationships.

Bibliography

Bassett, E., & Moore, S. (2013). Social capital and depressive symptoms: The association of psychosocial and network dimensions of social capital with depressive symptoms in Montreal, Canada. Social Science & Medicine, 86, 96–102. Retrieved October 30, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=89215813&site=ehost-live

Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. London: Routledge.

Bourdieu, P. (1985). The forms of capital. 241-58. In J. G. Richardson (Ed). Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education. Westport: Greenwood.

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital in Richardson, J. Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education. New York: Macmillan

Cohen, D. & Prusak, L. (2001). In good company. How social capital makes organizations work. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Coleman. J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology. 94: 95-S120.

Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Harvard University Press.

Conrad, D. (2007). Defining social capital. Electronic Journal of Sociology. 1-5. Retrieved June 5, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=24818422&site=ehost-live

De Souza Briggs, X. (1997). Social capital and the cities: Advice to change agents. National Civic Review 86, . 111-118. Retrieved June 5, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=80321&site=ehost-live

Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook "friends:" Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 12, article 1. Retrieved June 6, 2008 http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue4/ellison.html

Fine, B. (2001). Social capital theory versus social theory: Political economy and social science at the turn of the millennium. London: Routledge.

Forsman, A. K., Herberts, C., Nyqvist, F., Wahlbeck, K., & Schierenbeck, I. (2013). Understanding the role of social capital for mental wellbeing among older adults. Ageing & Society, 33, 804–825. Retrieved October 30, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=87927986&site=ehost-live

Fukuyama, F. (1999). Social capital and civil society. Retrieved online 6th June, 2008 from International Monetary Fund website. http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/seminar/1999/reforms/fukuyama.htm

Gladwell, M. (1999). Six degrees of Lois Weisberg. The New Yorker 74 . 52. Retrieved June 6, 2008 from gladwell.com. http://www.gladwell.com/1999/1999_01_11_a_weisberg.htm

Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 78 . 1360-1380. Retrieved June 5, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=15526778&site=ehost-live

Harman, V. (2013). Social capital and the informal support networks of lone white mothers of mixed-parentage children. Ethnic & Racial Studies, 36, 1323–1341. Retrieved October 30, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=89152426&site=ehost-live

Hawkins, R. L., & Maurer, K. (2012). Unravelling social capital: Disentangling a concept for social work. British Journal of Social Work, 42, 353–370. Retrieved October 30, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=73764963&site=ehost-live

Helliwell, J. F., & Putnam, R. D. (2004). The social context of well-being. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 359 (1449). 1435-1446.

Holland, J., Reynolds, T. & Weller, S. (2007). Transitions, networks and communities: The significance of social capital in the lives of children and young people. Journal of Youth Studies 10 : 97-116. Retrieved June 5, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=24153521&site=ehost-live

McGonigal J., Doherty R., Allan, J. et al. (2007). Social capital, social inclusion and changing school contexts: A Scottish perspective. British Journal of Educational Studies. 55: 77-94. Retrieved June 5, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=24090312&site=ehost-live

Law, A. (2008). The elixir of social trust: Social capital and cultures of challenge in health movements. In Julie Brownlie, Alexandra Greene and Alexandra Howson (eds). Researching Trust and Health. New York: Routledge. 175-193.

Neves, B. (2013). Social capital and Internet use: The irrelevant, the bad, and the good. Sociology Compass, 7, 599–611. Retrieved October 30, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=89598981&site=ehost-live

Offer, S. & Schneider, B. (2007). Children's role in generating social capital. Social Forces. 85 : 1125-1142. Retreived June 5, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=24391186&site=ehost-live

Pattanaik, P.K. & Xu, Y. (2003). On measuring personal connections and the extent of social networks. Andrew Young School of Policy Studies Working Paper. Accessed 5th June, 2008. www.socialcapitalgateway.org/NV-eng-measurement.htm

Pink, D. (2001). Free Agent nation: How America's new independent workers are transforming the way we live. Victoria: Warner Books.

Putnam, R. (1995) Bowling Alone: America's declining social capital. Journal of Democracy 6 : 65-78.

Putnam, R. (2000) Bowling aAlone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Schuller, T. (2007). Reflections on the use of social capital. Review of Social Economy. 65 :11-28. Retrieved June 5, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=24280842&site=ehost-live

Smith, M. K. (2007). Social capital, the encyclopedia of informal education. Retrieved online June 10, 2008. www.infed.org/biblio/social_capital.htm

Wacquant, L. (1995). Pugs at work: bodily capital and bodily labor among professional boxers. Body and Society 1. 65-93.

Woolcock, M. (2001). The place of social capital in understanding social and economic outcomes. ISUMA, Canadian Journal of Policy Research 2. 11-17.

Ziersch, A. M., Baum, F.E., MacDougall, C. and Putland, C. (2005). Neighbourhood life and social capital: The implications for health. Social Science and Medicine 60 , 71-86. Retrieved June 5, 2008 from EBSCO online database, Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=14715300&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Edwards, R., Franklin, J and Holland, J. (eds.) (2006). Assessing social capital: Concept, policy and practice. London: Taylor and Francis.

Field, J. (2004). Social capital. London: Routledge.

Halpern, D. (2004). Social capital. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Putnam, R. D. (2003). Better together: Restoring the American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Song, L. (2011). Social capital and psychological distress. Journal of Health & Social Behavior, 52, 478–492. Retrieved October 30, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=69671895&site=ehost-live