Social Capital
“Such things as trust, the willingness and capacity to cooperate and coordinate,
the habit of contributing to a common effort even when noone is watching […].”1
1. Introduction
The idea of social capital that developed in sociology has in recent years spread all
over the disciplines and become more influential in politics and economics as well. It
is known to make economy flourish and increase the democratic performance of a
state. Social bonds lower the costs of working together, social capital facilitates cooperation.
People have the confidence to invest in collective activities, knowing that
others will also do so. With the rising interest in social capital, the concept has almost
been canonised. Social capital and the idea of civil society emerging from it often
appear as the cure-all to every single one of our problems.
The “features of social organisation, such as trust, norms, and networks, that can
improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions”2 is how Putnam
defines social capital; and indeed, those factors seem very appealing. But a dense
concept of relations and trust, connectedness, networks and groups, the belief in
reciprocity and exchanges, common rules, norms and sanctions3 is not entirely
positive and harmless and therefore should not be embraced unquestioned. As every
other concept, social capital as well is a two edged sword. “Relationships matter”4, is
how Field summarizes the central thesis of the theory. And she is right. This essay
tries to show that in fact a whole range of different kinds of relationships do exist in
society, and that not all of them have a positive impact on the ‘common good’.
1 Solow, 2000, 7
2 Putnam, 1993, 169
3 central aspects of social capital as identified by Pretty/Ward, 2001
4 Field, 1996, 1
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The rules of the game – Trust and networks
2.1 Trust
2.2 Networks
3. The vicious cycle of exclusion – Social capital’s dark side for individuals
3.1 Networks
3.2 Trust
3.3 Rules and norms
4. Blind trust and perverse networks – Social capital’s negative impacts on the state
4.1 Trust
4.2 Networks
4.3 Rules and norms
5. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Core Themes
The primary objective of this work is to critically examine the concept of social capital, challenging the widespread notion that it is an inherently positive force for society. By investigating the "dark side" of social capital, the paper explores how dense networks, trust, and norms can lead to exclusion, reinforce inequality, and create perverse incentives that hinder democratic performance and economic innovation.
- The dual nature of trust and its potential for fostering exclusion.
- The role of networks in creating barriers for out-group members.
- The impact of internal norms on individual agency and innovation.
- Social capital as a mechanism for reinforcing social and economic inequality.
- The state’s necessary role in mediating between rival groups and fostering external linkages.
Excerpt from the Book
1. Introduction
The idea of social capital that developed in sociology has in recent years spread all over the disciplines and become more influential in politics and economics as well. It is known to make economy flourish and increase the democratic performance of a state. Social bonds lower the costs of working together, social capital facilitates co-operation. People have the confidence to invest in collective activities, knowing that others will also do so. With the rising interest in social capital, the concept has almost been canonised. Social capital and the idea of civil society emerging from it often appear as the cure-all to every single one of our problems.
The “features of social organisation, such as trust, norms, and networks, that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions” is how Putnam defines social capital; and indeed, those factors seem very appealing. But a dense concept of relations and trust, connectedness, networks and groups, the belief in reciprocity and exchanges, common rules, norms and sanctions is not entirely positive and harmless and therefore should not be embraced unquestioned. As every other concept, social capital as well is a two edged sword. “Relationships matter”, is how Field summarizes the central thesis of the theory. And she is right. This essay tries to show that in fact a whole range of different kinds of relationships do exist in society, and that not all of them have a positive impact on the ‘common good’.
Chapter Summaries
1. Introduction: This chapter introduces the concept of social capital as a widely acclaimed but often unquestioned factor in sociology, politics, and economics, setting the stage for a critical analysis of its potential negative consequences.
2. The rules of the game – Trust and networks: This section establishes the theoretical foundation by defining trust and networks as the primary mechanisms through which social capital functions to facilitate cooperation.
3. The vicious cycle of exclusion – Social capital’s dark side for individuals: This chapter investigates how strong social capital can negatively affect individuals by creating barriers to entry for outsiders, reinforcing inequality, and imposing restrictive social norms.
4. Blind trust and perverse networks – Social capital’s negative impacts on the state: This part analyzes how social capital can become detrimental at the state level, discussing how trust can be misused, networks can foster rent-seeking, and norms can stifle innovation.
5. Conclusion: The final chapter synthesizes the findings, arguing that while social capital has benefits, it should not be viewed as a panacea and requires state-led mediation to mitigate its inherent dangers.
Keywords
Social capital, trust, social networks, exclusion, inequality, norms, civil society, democratic performance, perverse networks, collective action, state intervention, social cohesion, reciprocity, transaction costs, rent-seeking.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this publication?
The paper focuses on the critical reassessment of social capital, arguing that it is not universally beneficial and possesses a significant "dark side" that can harm both individuals and the state.
What are the central thematic areas?
The central themes include the role of trust, the function of social networks, the enforcement of norms, and how these elements can lead to exclusion, rivalry, and restricted economic development.
What is the primary objective of this study?
The primary objective is to demonstrate that social capital is a "two-edged sword" and that its positive reputation as a cure-all for societal problems is overstated and potentially dangerous if not managed by state mediation.
Which scientific method is applied?
The study utilizes a qualitative literature analysis, synthesizing theories from authors such as Putnam, Coleman, and Levi to construct a critical argument regarding the negative externalities of social capital.
What topics are discussed in the main body?
The main body examines the mechanisms of trust and networks, explores how they cause individual exclusion and reinforce inequality, and analyzes how they negatively impact the state's ability to innovate and maintain order.
Which keywords characterize this work?
Key terms include social capital, trust, networks, exclusion, inequality, norms, civil society, and perverse networks.
How does social capital affect individual development?
The study argues that social capital can restrict individuals by enforcing conformity and creating strong, exclusive boundaries that prevent marginalized groups from accessing new resources.
What does the author suggest regarding the state's role?
The author concludes that the state must act as an essential mediator to manage rivalry between groups, foster external linkages, and prevent the negative impacts of unevenly distributed social capital.
- Citation du texte
- Birte Müller-Heidelberg (Auteur), 2003, The "dark side" of social capital, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/19652
