Editing Social capital (section)

== Negative social capital ==
Whereas some scholars, most prominently [[Robert D. Putnam]], posit that social capital has positive ends,<ref>{{cite journal|last=Putnam|first=Robert D.|date=January 1995|title=Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital|url=http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/assoc/bowling.html|url-status=dead|journal=Journal of Democracy|volume=6|issue=1|pages=65–78|doi=10.1353/jod.1995.0002|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100201190211/http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper/DETOC/assoc/bowling.html|archive-date=1 February 2010|access-date=22 February 2010|s2cid=154350113}}</ref> a sizable body of literature finds that social capital can have adverse effects. Research by [[Sheri Berman]] and Dylan Riley, as well as economists Shanker Satyanath, Nico Voigtländer, and Hans-Joachim Voth, have linked civic associations to the rise of fascist movements.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Berman|first=Sheri|date=1997|title=Civil Society and the Collapse of the Weimar Republic|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/25054008|journal=World Politics|volume=49|issue=3|pages=401–429|doi=10.1353/wp.1997.0008|jstor=25054008|s2cid=145285276|issn=0043-8871|access-date=7 June 2021|archive-date=7 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210607171209/https://www.jstor.org/stable/25054008|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Riley|first=Dylan|date=2005|title=Civic Associations and Authoritarian Regimes in Interwar Europe: Italy and Spain in Comparative Perspective|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240507000205|journal=American Sociological Review|language=en|volume=70|issue=2|pages=288–310|doi=10.1177/000312240507000205|s2cid=2338744 |issn=0003-1224}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Satyanath|first1=Shanker|last2=Voigtländer|first2=Nico|last3=Voth|first3=Hans-Joachim|date=2017|title=Bowling for Fascism: Social Capital and the Rise of the Nazi Party|url=https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/690949|journal=Journal of Political Economy|volume=125|issue=2|pages=478–526|doi=10.1086/690949|s2cid=3827369 |issn=0022-3808|hdl=10419/111204|hdl-access=free}}</ref> [[Pierre Bourdieu]]'s work tends to show how social capital can be used practically to produce or reproduce inequality, demonstrating for instance how people gain access to powerful positions through the direct and indirect employment of social connections.

An example of the complexities of the effects of negative social capital is violence or criminal [[gang]] activity that is encouraged through the strengthening of intra-group relationships (bonding social capital).<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Ilan|first=Johnathan|date=Spring 2012|title=Street Social Capital in the Liquid City|url=http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/16759/1/StreetCulturalLives_deposit%20copy.pdf|journal=Ethnography|volume=14|pages=3–24|doi=10.1177/1466138112440983|s2cid=145599567|access-date=1 February 2019|archive-date=13 July 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190713071638/http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/16759/1/StreetCulturalLives_deposit%20copy.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> The negative consequences of social capital are more often associated with ''bonding'' vis-à-vis ''bridging''.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Perkins|first1=Douglas D.|last2=Hughey|first2=Joseph|last3=Speer|first3=Paul W.|year=2002|title=Community Psychology Perspectives on Social Capital Theory and Community Development Practice|url=https://my.vanderbilt.edu/perkins/files/2011/09/Perkins_Hughey_Speer-JCDS-33-no1-2002.pdf|journal=Journal of the Community Development Society|volume=33|pages=33–52|doi=10.1080/15575330209490141|s2cid=397277|access-date=21 December 2011|archive-date=25 April 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120425112207/https://my.vanderbilt.edu/perkins/files/2011/09/Perkins_Hughey_Speer-JCDS-33-no1-2002.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>

Without "bridging" social capital, "bonding" groups can become isolated and [[Disenfranchised grief|disenfranchised]] from the rest of society and, most importantly, from groups with which bridging must occur in order to denote an "increase" in social capital. Bonding social capital is a necessary antecedent for the development of the more powerful form of bridging social capital.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Bolin|first1=B.|last2=Hackett|first2=E.J.|last3=Harlan|first3=S.L.|last4=Kirby|first4=A.|last5=Larsen|first5=L.|last6=Nelson|first6=A.|last7=Rex|first7=T.R.|last8=Wolf|year=2004|title=Bonding and Bridging: Understanding the Relationship between Social Capital and Civic Action|journal=Journal of Planning Education and Research|volume=24|pages=64–77|doi=10.1177/0739456X04267181|s2cid=1704325}}</ref> Bonding and bridging social capital can work together productively if in balance, or they may work against each other. As social capital bonds and stronger homogeneous groups form, the likelihood of bridging social capital is attenuated. Bonding social capital can also perpetuate sentiments of a certain group, allowing for the bonding of certain individuals together upon a common radical ideal. The strengthening of insular ties can lead to a variety of effects such as ethnic marginalization or social isolation. In extreme cases ethnic cleansing may result if the relationship between different groups is so strongly negative. In mild cases, it  isolates certain communities such as suburbs of cities because of the bonding social capital and the fact that people in these communities spend so much time away from places that build bridging social capital.

=== Accessibility ===
Edwards and Foley, as editors of a special edition of the ''[[American Behavioral Scientist]]'' on "Social Capital, Civil Society and Contemporary Democracy", raised two key issues in the study of social capital. First, social capital is not equally available to all, in much the same way that other forms of capital are differently available. Geographic and [[social isolation]] limit access to this resource. Second, not all social capital is created equally. The value of a specific source of social capital depends in no small part on the socio-economic position of the source with society.

On top of this, Portes (1998) has identified four negative consequences of social capital:<ref name="Portes 1998" />

# exclusion of outsiders;
# excess claims on group members;
# restrictions on individual freedom; and
# downward levelling norms.

=== In political institutions ===
Social capital (in the institutional [[Robert Putnam]] sense) may also lead to bad outcomes if the [[Political system|political institution]] and [[democracy]] in a specific country is not strong enough and is therefore overpowered by the social capital groups. "Civil society and the collapse of the [[Weimar Republic]]" suggests that "it was weak political institutionalization rather than a weak civil society that was Germany's main problem during the [[Wilhelminism|Wihelmine]] and Weimar eras."<ref>[[Sheri Berman]],''World Politics'' 49, 3, April 1997)</ref> Because the political institutions were so weak people looked to other outlets. "Germans threw themselves into their clubs, voluntary associations, and professional organizations out of frustration with the failures of the national government and political parties, thereby helping to undermine the Weimar Republic and facilitate [[Adolf Hitler's rise to power|Hitler's rise to power]]." In this article about the fall of the [[Weimar Republic]], the author makes the claim that Hitler rose to power so quickly because he was able to mobilize the groups towards one common goal. Even though German society was, at the time, a "joining" society these groups were fragmented and their members did not use the skills they learned in their club associations to better their society, but to encourage their values across all cultures to provide a better society for people. They were very introverted in the Weimar Republic. Hitler was able to capitalize on this by uniting these highly bonded groups under the common cause of bringing Germany to the top of world politics. The former world order had been destroyed during [[World War I]], and Hitler believed that Germany had the right and the will to become a dominant global power.

Additionally, in his essay "A Criticism of Putnam's Theory of Social Capital",<ref>{{cite web|last=Shindler|first=Michael|title=A Criticism of Putnam's Theory of Social Capital|url=http://theapollonianrevolt.com/analysis-social-capital-approach/|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150419030009/http://theapollonianrevolt.com/analysis-social-capital-approach/|archive-date=19 April 2015|access-date=6 April 2015}}</ref> Michael Shindler expands upon Berman's argument that Weimar social clubs and similar associations in countries that did not develop democracy, were organized in such a way that they fostered a "we" instead of an "I" mentality among their members, by arguing that groups which possess cultures that stress solidarity over individuality, even ones that are "horizontally" structured and which were also common to pre-[[Soviet]] [[Eastern Europe]], will not engender democracy if they are politically aligned with non-democratic ideologies.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Shindler|first1=Michael|title=A Criticism of Putnam's Theory of Social Capital|url=http://theapollonianrevolt.com/analysis-social-capital-approach/|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150419030009/http://theapollonianrevolt.com/analysis-social-capital-approach/|archive-date=19 April 2015|access-date=6 April 2015|website=The Apollonian Revolt}}</ref>

=== In race and ethnicity ===
{{POV section|date=October 2021}}
Using a network-based conception for characterizing the social capital of collectivities (such as organizations or business clusters),<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Huber|first1=Franz|year=2009|title=Social Capital of Economic Clusters: Towards a Network-Based Conception of Social Resources|url=https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/201627/1/Franz_Huber_TESG_final.doc|journal=Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie|volume=100|issue=2|pages=160–170|doi=10.1111/j.1467-9663.2009.00526.x|access-date=31 October 2019|archive-date=7 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200807170330/https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/201627/1/Franz_Huber_TESG_final.doc|url-status=live}}</ref> Lester, Maheshwari, and McLain (2013) note that negative social capital may be the cause for disadvantageous differences among minority firms versus majority firms. While studying norms among [[African Americans|African-American]] family firms and [[European Americans|Euro-American]] family firms, Lester et al. noted that negative social capital was created when the owner of the company was pressured to engage in social behavior not conducive to firm profits.<ref name=":7">{{Cite journal|last1=Lester|first1=Monica|last2=Maheshwari|first2=Sharad K.|last3=McLain|first3=Michael|date=2013|title=Family Firms and Negative Social Capital: A Property Rights Theory Approach|url=http://www.ibam.com/pubs/jbam/articles/vol15/No1/article%203%20Lester%20et%20al%20after%20assistant%20ed.pdf|url-status=dead|journal=Journal of Behavioral & Applied Management|volume=15|issue=11|pages=11–24|doi=10.21818/001c.17934 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151208133824/http://www.ibam.com/pubs/jbam/articles/vol15/No1/article%203%20Lester%20et%20al%20after%20assistant%20ed.pdf|archive-date=8 December 2015|access-date=25 October 2015}}</ref>

[[Robert Putnam]], in his later work, also suggests that social capital, and the associated growth of [[public trust]] are inhibited by immigration and rising racial [[Multiculturalism|diversity]] in communities.<ref>[[Robert D. Putnam|Putnam, Robert D.]] 2006. ''E Pluribus Unim: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-First Century,'' Nordic Political Science Association</ref> Putnam's study regarding the issue argued that in American areas with a lack of homogeneity, some individuals neither participated in bonding nor bridging social capital. In societies where immigration is high (US) or where ethnic heterogeneity is high ([[Eastern Europe]]), it was found that citizens lacked in both kinds of social capital and were overall far less trusting of others than members of homogenous communities were found to be.  Lack of homogeneity led to people withdrawing from even their closest groups and relationships, creating an atomized society as opposed to a cohesive community. These findings challenge previous beliefs that exposure to diversity strengthens social capital, either through bridging social gaps between ethnicities or strengthening in-group bonds. It is very important for policy makers to monitor the level of perceived socio-economic threat from immigrants because negative attitudes towards immigrants make integration difficult and affect social capital.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Marozzi|first1=Marco|date=2015|title=Construction, Robustness Assessment and Application of an Index of Perceived Level of Socio-economic Threat from Immigrants: A Study of 47 European Countries and Regions|journal=Social Indicators Research|volume=128|pages=413–437|doi=10.1007/s11205-015-1037-z|s2cid=152888964}}</ref>

Varshney (2001) studied the correlation between the presence of interethnic networks (''bridging'') versus intra-ethnic ones (''bonding'') on [[ethnic violence]] in [[India]].<ref name="Varshney">{{Cite journal|last1=Varshney|first1=Ashutosh|year=2001|title=Ethnic Conflict and Civil Society: India and Beyond|journal=World Politics|volume=53|issue=3|pages=362–398|doi=10.1353/wp.2001.0012|jstor=25054154|s2cid=73642565}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Ashutosh Varshney: Home|url=http://sitemaker.umich.edu/varshney/home|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151016072429/http://sitemaker.umich.edu/varshney/home|archive-date=16 October 2015|access-date=10 October 2012|website=umich.edu}}</ref>
He argues that interethnic networks are agents of peace because they build bridges and manage tensions, by noting that if communities are organized only along intra-ethnic lines and the interconnections with other communities are very weak or even nonexistent, then ethnic violence is quite likely.
Three main implications of intercommunal ties explain their worth:<ref name="Varshney" />
# Facilitate communication in the community across ethnic lines
# Squelch false rumors
# Help the administration carry out its job and in particular peace, security and justice

This is a useful distinction; nevertheless, its implication on social capital can only be accepted if one espouses the [[Structural functionalism|functionalist]] understanding of the latter concept. Indeed, it can be argued that interethnic, as well as intra-ethnic networks can serve various purposes, either increasing or diminishing social capital. In fact, Varshney himself notes that intra-ethnic policing (equivalent to the "[[Self-governance|self-policing"]] mechanism proposed by Fearon and Laitin, 1996)<ref name="Fearon">{{cite journal|last1=Fearon|first1=James|last2=Laitin|first2=David|year=1996|title=Explaining Inter-Ethnic Cooperation|journal=American Political Science Review|volume=90|issue=4|pages=715–735|doi=10.2307/2945838|jstor=2945838|s2cid=55500292}}</ref> may lead to the same result as interethnic engagement.

=== Social inequality ===
[[James Samuel Coleman|James Coleman]] (1988) has indicated that social capital eventually led to the creation of [[human capital]] for the future generation.<ref name="auto" /> '''Human capital''', a private resource, could be accessed through what the previous generation accumulated through social capital. John Field (2003) suggested that such a process could lead to the very inequality social capital attempts to resolve.<ref>John Field, 2003. ''Social Capital''</ref> While Coleman viewed social capital as a relatively neutral resource, he did not deny the class reproduction that could result from accessing such capital, given that individuals worked toward their own benefit.

Even though Coleman never truly addresses [[Pierre Bourdieu]] in his discussion, this coincides with Bourdieu's argument set forth in ''Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture''. Bourdieu and Coleman were fundamentally different at the theoretical level (as Bourdieu believed the actions of individuals were rarely ever conscious, but more so only a result of their ''[[Habitus (sociology)|habitus]]'' being enacted within a particular field, but this realization by both seems to undeniably connect their understanding of the more latent aspects of social capital.

According to Bourdieu, '''habitus''' refers to the social context within which a social actor is socialized. Thus, it is the social platform, itself, that equips one with the social reality they become accustomed to. Out of habitus comes field, the manner in which one integrates and displays their habitus. To this end, it is the social exchange and interaction between two or more [[Agency (sociology)|social actors]]. To illustrate this, we assume that an individual wishes to better his place in society. He therefore accumulates social capital by involving himself in a social network, adhering to the norms of that group, allowing him to later access the resources (e.g. social relationships) gained over time. If, in the case of education, he uses these resources to better his educational outcomes, thereby enabling him to become [[Social mobility|socially mobile]], he effectively has worked to reiterate and reproduce the stratification of society, as social capital has done little to alleviate the system as a whole. This may be one negative aspect of social capital, but seems to be an inevitable one in and of itself, as are all forms of capital.{{Citation needed|date=August 2011}}