Editing Social capital

{{Short description|Networks of relationships among people who live and work in a particular society}}
{{For|the investment firm|Social Capital (venture capital)}}
{{Technical|date=June 2020}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=May 2020}}
{{Community}}
{{Communitarianism sidebar|expanded=Central concepts}}
'''Social capital''' is a concept used in [[sociology]] and [[economics]] to define networks of relationships which are productive towards advancing the goals of individuals and groups.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Social Capital {{!}} Definition of Social Capital by Oxford Dictionary on Lexico.com also meaning of Social Capital|url=https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/social_capital|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200411204827/https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/social_capital|url-status=dead|archive-date=11 April 2020|access-date=2021-01-17|website=Lexico Dictionaries {{!}} English|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Social Capital {{!}} Definition of Social Capital by Investopedia|url=https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/socialcapital.asp|access-date=2024-12-13|website=Investopedia|language=en}}</ref>
It involves the effective functioning of [[social group]]s through [[interpersonal relationship]]s, a shared sense of [[Identity (social science)|identity]], a shared understanding, shared [[Social norm|norms]], shared [[Value (ethics)|values]], [[Trust (social sciences)|trust]], [[cooperation]], and [[Reciprocity (social psychology)|reciprocity]]. Some have described it as a form of capital that produces [[Public good (economics)|public good]]s for a [[common purpose]], although this does not align with how it has been measured.

Social capital has been used to explain the improved performance of diverse groups, the growth of entrepreneurial firms, superior managerial performance, enhanced supply chain relations, the value derived from [[strategic alliance]]s, and the evolution of [[Community|communities]]. <ref>Bhandari, Humnath & Yasunobu, Kumi (2009). "What Is Social Capital? A Comprehensive Review of the Concept." *Asian Journal of Social Science*, **37**: 480–510. doi:[10.1163/156853109X436847](https://doi.org/10.1163/156853109X436847).</ref>

== History ==
While it has been suggested that the term ''social capital'' was in intermittent use from about 1890, before becoming widely used in the late 1990s,<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=social+capital&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=0&smoothing=0 |title=Google Ngram Viewer |access-date=2014-04-20}}</ref> the earliest credited use is by [[L. J. Hanifan|Lyda Hanifan]] in 1916 (see 20th century below).

The debate of community versus [[Modernization theory|modernization]] of society and [[individualism]] has been the most discussed topic among the founders of [[sociology]]: such theorists as [[Ferdinand Tönnies|Tönnies]] (1887),<ref name=":1">Tonnies, F. (1955) [1887]. ''Community and Association''. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul</ref> [[Émile Durkheim|Durkheim]] (1893),<ref>Durkheim, E. (1893) "De la Division du Travail". Les Classiques de Science Sociale.</ref> [[Georg Simmel|Simmel]] (1905),<ref>Simmel, G. (1969) [1905] "The Metropolis and Mental Life", in Richard Sennet (eds) ''Classic Essays on the Culture of Cities''. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.</ref> [[Max Weber|Weber]] (1946)<ref name=":2">Weber, M. (1946) "The Protestant Sects and the Spirit of Capitalism". In Hans H. Gert and Mills C. Wright (eds) ''From Max Weber''. New York: Oxford University Press.</ref> were convinced that [[industrialisation]] and [[urbanization]] were transforming social relationships in an irreversible way. They observed a breakdown of traditional bonds and the progressive development of [[anomie]] and [[social alienation|alienation]] in society.<ref name=":3">Wilmott, P. 1986. ''Social Networks, Informal Care and Public Policy''. London: [[Policy Studies Institute]]. {{Page?|date=November 2022}}</ref>

=== 18th–19th century ===
The power of ''[[community governance]]'' has been stressed by many philosophers from antiquity to the 18th century, from [[Aristotle]] to [[Thomas Aquinas]], and [[Edmund Burke]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Bowles|first1=S.|last2=Gintis|first2=S.|year=2002|title=Social Capital and Community Governance|journal=The Economic Journal|volume=112|issue=483|pages=419–436|citeseerx=10.1.1.508.4110|doi=10.1111/1468-0297.00077|s2cid=12530827}}</ref> This vision was strongly criticised at the end of the 18th century, with the development of the idea of ''[[Homo economicus|Homo Economicus]]'' and subsequently with ''[[rational choice theory]]''. Such a set of theories became dominant in the last centuries, but many thinkers questioned the complicated relationship between ''modern society'' and the importance of ''old institutions'', in particular family and traditional communities.<ref name=":3" />

The concept that underlies social capital has a much longer history; thinkers exploring the relation between associational life and democracy were using similar concepts regularly by the 19th century, drawing on the work of earlier writers such as [[James Madison]] (''[[The Federalist Papers]]'') and [[Alexis de Tocqueville]] (''[[Democracy in America]]'') to integrate concepts of social cohesion and [[connectedness]] into the [[Pluralism (political theory)|pluralist]] tradition in [[American politics (political science)|American political science]]. [[John Dewey]] may have made the first direct mainstream use of ''social capital'' in ''[[The School and Society]]'' in 1899, though he did not offer a definition.

In the first half of the 19th century, de Tocqueville had observations about American life that seemed to outline and define social capital. He observed that Americans were prone to meeting at as many gatherings as possible to discuss all possible issues of state, economics, or the world that could be witnessed. The high levels of transparency caused greater participation from the people and thus allowed for democracy to work better.

=== 20th century ===
[[L. J. Hanifan]]'s 1916 article regarding local support for rural schools is one of the first occurrences of the term ''social capital'' in reference to social cohesion and personal investment in the community.<ref name=":4">[[L. J. Hanifan|Hanifan, L. J.]] 1916. "The rural school community center." ''[[Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science]]'' 67:130–138.</ref><ref>See also [[L. J. Hanifan|Hanifan, L. J.]] 1920. ''The Community Center''. Boston: [[Silver Burdett]].</ref> In defining the concept, Hanifan contrasts social capital with material goods by defining it as:<ref name=":4" />{{Rp|130–131}}<blockquote>I do not refer to real estate, or to personal property or to cold cash, but rather to that in life which tends to make these tangible substances count for most in the daily lives of people, namely, goodwill, fellowship, mutual sympathy and social intercourse among a group of individuals and families who make up a social unit.… If he may come into contact with his neighbour, and they with other neighbours, there will be an accumulation of social capital, which may immediately satisfy his social needs and which may bear a social potentiality sufficient to the substantial improvement of living conditions in the whole community. The community as a whole will benefit by the cooperation of all its parts, while the individual will find in his associations the advantages of the help, the sympathy, and the fellowship of his neighbours.
</blockquote>Following the works of [[Ferdinand Tönnies|Tönnies]] (1887)<ref name=":1" /> and [[Max Weber|Weber]] (1946),<ref name=":2" /> reflection on social links in modern society continued with interesting contributions in the 1950s and in the 1960s. In particular, ''[[Social movement#Mass society theory|mass society theory]]''{{snd}}as developed by [[Daniel Bell]] (1962),<ref>[[Daniel Bell|Bell, Daniel]]. 1962. "America as a Mass Society." In ''[[The End of Ideology]]'', edited by D. Bell. New York: [[Collier Books]]</ref> [[Robert Nisbet]] (1969),<ref>[[Robert Nisbet|Nisbet, Robert A.]] 1969. ''The Quest for Community''. New York: [[Oxford University Press]]</ref> [[Maurice R. Stein]] (1960),<ref>[[Maurice R. Stein|Stein, Maurice R.]] 1960. ''The Eclipse of Community: an Interpretation of American Studies''. Princeton: [[Princeton University Press]].</ref> [[William H. Whyte]] (1956)<ref>[[William H. Whyte|Whyte, William H.]] 1956. ''[[The Organization Man]]''. New York: [[Simon & Schuster]].</ref>{{snd}}proposed themes similar to those of the founders, with a more pessimistic emphasis on the development of society. In the words of Stein (1960:1): "The price for maintaining a society that encourages cultural differentiation and experimentation is unquestionably the acceptance of a certain amount of disorganization on both the individual and social level."

[[Jane Jacobs]] used the term early in the 1960s. Although she did not explicitly define the term ''social capital'', her usage referred to the value of networks.<ref>{{cite book|last=Jacobs|first=Jane|url=https://archive.org/details/deathlifeofgre00jaco|title=The Death and Life of Great American Cities|publisher=Random House|year=1961|page=[https://archive.org/details/deathlifeofgre00jaco/page/138 138]|quote="If self-government in the place is to work, underlying any float of population must be a continuity of people who have forged neighborhood networks. These networks are a city's irreplaceable social capital. Whenever the capital is lost, from whatever cause, the income from it disappears, never to return until and unless new capital is slowly and chancily accumulated."|url-access=registration}}</ref> [[Political science|Political scientist]] Robert Salisbury advanced the term as a critical component of interest group formation in his 1969 article "An Exchange Theory of Interest Groups" in the ''[[Midwest Journal of Political Science]]''.

Sociologist [[Pierre Bourdieu]] used the term in 1972 in his ''Outline of a Theory of Practice'',<ref name="Bourdieu 1972">Bourdieu, Pierre. (1972) ''Outline of a Theory of Practice''</ref> and clarified the term some years later in contrast to [[cultural capital|cultural]], [[economic capital|economic]], administrative capital, [[physical capital]], [[political capital]], social capital and [[symbolic capital]].<ref>{{Cite book |title=Bourdieu, Pierre. (1986): [[Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste]] (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul).}}</ref> Sociologists [[James Samuel Coleman|James Coleman]] (1988),<ref name="auto" /> as well as [[Barry Wellman]] & Scot Wortley (1990),<ref>Wellman, Barry, and Scot Wortley. 1990. "Different Strokes from Different Folks: Community Ties and Social Support." ''[[American Journal of Sociology]]'' 96:558–588.</ref> adopted [[Glenn Loury]]'s 1977 definition in developing and popularising the concept.<ref>[[Glenn Loury|Loury, Glenn]]. 1977. "A Dynamic Theory of Racial Income Differences." Ch. 8 in ''Women, Minorities, and Employment Discrimination'', edited by P. A. Wallace and A. Le Mund.  Lexington, MA: [[Lexington Books]].</ref> In the late 1990s, the concept gained popularity, serving as the focus of a [[World Bank]] research programme {{Citation needed|reason=Nothing in the wiki pages of the following 2 books substantiates this apparent 'research program' as does anything from within either of their physical covers, this World Bank research program is unaccounted for|date=February 2025}} and the subject of several mainstream books, including [[Robert Putnam]]'s ''[[Bowling Alone]]'',<ref name="Putnam 2000">[[Robert Putnam|Putnam, Robert]]. 2000. ''[[Bowling Alone|Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community]]''. [[Simon & Schuster]].</ref> and Putnam & [[Lewis Feldstein]]'s ''[[Better Together (book)|Better Together]]''.

All of these reflections contributed remarkably to the development of the social capital concept in the following decades. The appearance of the modern social capital conceptualization is a new way to look at this debate, keeping together the importance of community to build generalized trust and the same time, the importance of individual free choice, in order to create a more cohesive society. It is for this reason that social capital generated so much interest in the academic and political world.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Rose|first1=N|year=2000|title=Community Citizenship and the Third Way|journal=American Behavioral Scientist|volume=43|issue=9|pages=1395–1411|doi=10.1177/00027640021955955|s2cid=145219829}}</ref>

== Definitions and forms ==

Social capital has multiple definitions, interpretations, and uses. David Halpern argues that the popularity of social capital for [[policymakers]] is linked to the concept's duality, coming because "it has a hard nosed economic feel while restating the importance of the social." For researchers, the term is popular partly due to the broad range of outcomes it can explain;<ref>Halpern, D (2005) ''Social Capital'' Cambridge: Polity Press. pp. 1–2</ref> the multiplicity of uses for social capital has led to a multiplicity of definitions.

Social capital has been used at various times to explain superior managerial performance,<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Moran|first1=Peter|year=2005|title=Structural vs. Relational embeddedness: Social capital and managerial performance|journal=Strategic Management Journal|volume=26|issue=12|pages=1129–1151|doi=10.1002/smj.486|s2cid=18339573}}</ref> the growth of entrepreneurial firms,<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Stam|display-authors=etal|year=2014|title=Social capital of entrepreneurs and small firm performance: A meta-analysis of contextual and methodological moderators|journal=Journal of Business Venturing|volume=29|issue=1|pages=152–173|doi=10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.01.002}}</ref> improved performance of functionally diverse groups,<ref>Evans and Carson 2005</ref> the value derived from strategic alliances,<ref>Koka and Prescott 2002</ref> and enhanced supply-chain relations.<ref>McGrath and Sparks 2005</ref> "A resource that actors derive from specific social structures and then use to pursue their interests; it is created by changes in the relationship among actors" (Baker 1990, p.&nbsp;619).

Early attempts to define social capital focused on the degree to which social capital serves as a resource – be it for public good or private benefit. [[Robert D. Putnam]] (1993) suggested that social capital would facilitate co-operation and mutually supportive relations in communities and nations and would therefore be a valuable means of combating many of the social disorders inherent in modern societies, for example crime. In contrast, others focus on the private benefits derived from the web of social relationships in which individual actors find themselves.<ref>Uzzi and Dunlap 2005</ref> This is reflected in [[Nan Lin]]'s concept of social capital as "Investment in social relations with expected returns in the marketplace." This may subsume the concepts of some others such as Bourdieu, Flap and Eriksson.<ref>as noted in Lin, Nan (2001). ''Social Capital'', Cambridge University Press</ref> Newton (1997)<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Newton|first1=Kenneth|year=1997|title=Social Capital and Democracy|journal=American Behavioral Scientist|volume=40|issue=5|pages=575–586|doi=10.1177/0002764297040005004|s2cid=144889486}}</ref> treats social capital as a subjective phenomenon formed by values and attitudes that influence interactions. Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998), in their examination of the role of social capital in the creation of [[intellectual capital]], suggest that social capital should be considered in terms of three clusters: structural, relational, and cognitive.<ref name="Nahapiet 1998"/>

=== Definitional issues ===

A number of scholars have raised concerns about the imprecision in defining social capital. Portes (2000), for example, notes that the term has become so widely used, including in [[mainstream media]], that "the point is approaching at which social capital comes to be applied to so many events and in so many different contexts as to lose any distinct meaning."<ref name="Lesser2000">{{cite book|author=Alejandro Portes|title=Knowledge and Social Capital: Foundations and Applications|year=2000|publisher=Elsevier|isbn=978-0750772228|editor=Eric L. Lesser|pages=33|chapter=Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kQdKAf8-_yUC&pg=PA44}}</ref> The term ''[[capital (economics)|capital]]'' is used by [[analogy]] with other forms of [[economic capital]], as social capital is argued to have similar (although less measurable) benefits. However, the analogy may be misleading in that, unlike financial forms of capital, social capital is not depleted by use;<ref>[[David Bollier]]: ''The Cornucopia of the Commons'' ([http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/reclaiming-the-commons/the-cornucopia-of-the-commons link] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120211145454/http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/reclaiming-the-commons/the-cornucopia-of-the-commons |date=11 February 2012 }}), [[Yes! (U.S. magazine)|''yes!'' magazine]], 30 June 2001</ref> instead, it is depleted by non-use (''use it or lose it''). In this respect, it is similar to the economic concept of [[human capital]].

Robison, Schmid, and Siles (2002) review various definitions of social capital and conclude that many do not satisfy the formal requirements of a definition.<ref name=":5">{{cite journal|last1=Robison|first1=L.J.|last2=Schmid|first2=A.A.|last3=Siles|first3=M.E.|year=2002|title=Is Social Capital Really Capital?|journal=Review of Social Economy|volume=60|pages=1–21|citeseerx=10.1.1.195.8949|doi=10.1080/00346760110127074|s2cid=219717736}}</ref> They assert that definitions must be of the form A=B, while many explanations of social capital describe what it can be used to achieve, where it resides, how it can be created, or what it can transform. In addition, they argue that many proposed definitions of social capital fail to satisfy the requirements of capital. They propose that social capital be defined as ''[[sympathy]]'': the object of another's sympathy has social capital; those who have sympathy for others provide social capital.<ref name=":5"/> This proposition appears to follow [[Adam Smith]], [[The Theory of Moral Sentiments|''Theory of Moral Sentiments'']] to some degree, but Smith's conceptualization of sympathy (particularly in the first two chapters of this work) appear more concerned with the roles of acceptance or congruence – in ethics or virtue – in evaluating an individual's 'propriety of action'.

''Social capital'' is different from the economic theory of [[social capitalism]], which challenges the idea that [[socialism]] and [[capitalism]] are mutually exclusive.

=== Forms of capital (Bourdieu) ===
In ''The Forms of Capital'', [[Pierre Bourdieu]] distinguishes between three forms of capital: [[capital (economics)|economic capital]], [[cultural capital]] and social capital.<ref>{{cite web|last=Bourdieu|first=Pierre|author-link=Pierre Bourdieu|year=198|title=The Forms of Capital|url=http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/bourdieu-forms-capital.htm|access-date=2014-04-20|publisher=Marxists.org|archive-date=14 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201114001302/http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/bourdieu-forms-capital.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> He defines ''social capital'' as "the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition."<ref name="Bourdieu 1983">Bourdieu, Pierre. (1983). "Ökonomisches Kapital, kulturelles Kapital, soziales Kapital" in Soziale Ungleichheiten (Soziale Welt, Sonderheft 2), edited by Reinhard Kreckel. Goettingen: Otto Schartz & Co. pp. 249</ref> His treatment of the concept is instrumental, focusing on the advantages to possessors of social capital and the ''"deliberate construction of sociability for the purpose of creating this resource''."<ref name="Portes 1998">{{Cite journal|last1=Portes|first1=Alejandro|year=1998|title=Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology|journal=Annual Review of Sociology|volume=24|pages=1–24|doi=10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1|s2cid=145736021}}</ref> Quite contrary to Putnam's positive view of social capital, Bourdieu employs the concept to demonstrate a mechanism for the generational reproduction of inequality. Bourdieu thus points out that the wealthy and powerful use their "old boys network" or other social capital to maintain advantages for themselves, their social class, and their children.

=== Norms of trust and reciprocity (Sander, Putnam, Coleman) ===
Thomas Sander<ref>{{Cite web|title=Tom Sander|url=http://www.hks.harvard.edu/programs/saguaro/about/who-we-are/tom-sander |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151208100744/http://www.hks.harvard.edu/programs/saguaro/about/who-we-are/tom-sander |archive-date=2015-12-08 |access-date=2015-12-02|website=harvard Kennedy School}}</ref> defines it as "the collective [[Value theory|value]] of all [[social network]]s (who people know), and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each other ([[Norm (social)|norms]] of [[Reciprocity (social psychology)|reciprocity]])."<ref name=":6">{{Cite web|last=Sander|first=Thomas|title=About Social Capital|url=http://www.hks.harvard.edu/programs/saguaro/about-social-capital|access-date=2 December 2015|website=Saguaro Seminar: Civic Engagement in America|publisher=John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University|archive-date=8 December 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151208152700/http://www.hks.harvard.edu/programs/saguaro/about-social-capital|url-status=live}}</ref> Social capital, in this view, emphasizes "specific [[Goodness and value theory|benefits]] that flow from the [[Trust (social sciences)|trust]], [[Reciprocity (social psychology)|reciprocity]], [[information]], and [[cooperation]] associated with social networks." It "creates value for the people who are connected, and for [[Free rider problem|bystanders]] as well."<ref name=":6" /> Meanwhile, negative norms of reciprocity serve as disincentives for detrimental and violent behaviors.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Chen|first1=Ya-Ru|last2=Chen|first2=Xiao-Ping|last3=Portnoy|first3=Rebecca|date=January 2009|title=To whom do positive norm and negative norm of reciprocity apply? Effects of inequitable offer, relationship, and relational-self orientation|journal=Journal of Experimental Social Psychology|volume=45|issue=1|pages=24–34|doi=10.1016/j.jesp.2008.07.024}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last1=A.|first1=Jeff|title=What is Social Capital?|url=http://www.reputationtrojan.com/what-is-social-capital-network-value/|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018173124/http://www.reputationtrojan.com/what-is-social-capital-network-value/|archive-date=18 October 2017|access-date=6 February 2016|publisher=Reputation Trojan}}</ref>

[[James Samuel Coleman|James Coleman]] defined social capital functionally as "a variety of entities with two elements in common: they all consist of some aspect of social structure, and they facilitate certain actions of actors...within the structure"<ref name="auto">{{Cite journal|last=Coleman|first=James|date=1988|title=Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital|journal=American Journal of Sociology|volume=94|issue=1 |pages=95–120|citeseerx=10.1.1.208.1462|doi=10.1086/228943|jstor=2780243|s2cid=51859022}}</ref>{{snd}}that is, social capital is anything that facilitates individual or [[collective action]], generated by networks of relationships, reciprocity, trust, and social norms.<ref name="Portes 1998" /> In Coleman's conception, social capital is a neutral resource that facilitates any manner of action, but whether society is better off as a result depends entirely on the individual uses to which it is put.<ref name="Edwards 1997">Foley, M. W. & Edwards, B. (1997). ''Escape from politics?'' {{ISBN?}}{{page?|date=November 2022}}</ref>

According to [[Robert D. Putnam]], ''social capital'' refers to "connections among individuals – social networks and the norms of [[Reciprocity (social psychology)|reciprocity]] and [[Trust (social science)|trustworthiness]] that arise from them."<ref name="Putnam2001">{{cite book|author=Robert D. Putnam|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rd2ibodep7UC&pg=PA19|title=Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community|year=2001|publisher=Simon and Schuster|isbn=978-0743203043|page=19}}</ref> In the view of Putnam and his followers, social capital is a key component to building and maintaining [[democracy]]. Putnam says that social capital is declining in the United States. This is seen in lower levels of trust in government and lower levels of civic participation. Putnam also suggests that a root cause of the decline in social capital is [[Women in the workforce|women's entry into the workforce]], which could correlate with time restraints that inhibit civic organizational involvement like [[Parent–teacher association|parent-teacher associations]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Putnam|first1=R. D.|year=1995|title=Bowling alone: America's declining social capital|url=http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/RGID/article/view/60809|journal=Journal of Democracy|volume=6|issue=1|pages=65–78|doi=10.1353/jod.1995.0002|s2cid=154350113|access-date=18 September 2018|archive-date=28 October 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181028074116/http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/RGID/article/view/60809|url-status=live}}</ref> Technological transformation of [[leisure]] (e.g., television) is another cause of declining social capital, as stated by Putnam. This offered a reference point from which several studies assessed social capital measurements by how media is engaged strategically to build social capital.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Williams|first1=D|year=2006|title=On and off the 'Net: Scales for Social Capital in an Online Era|journal=Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication|volume=11|issue=2|pages=593–628|doi=10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00029.x|doi-access=free}}</ref>

=== Civic association (Fukuyama) ===
In "Social Capital, Civil Society, and Development", political economist [[Francis Fukuyama]] defines social capital as generally understood rules that enable people to cooperate such as the norm of [[Reciprocity (social psychology)|reciprocity]] or [[religious doctrine]] like [[Christianity]]. Social capital is formed by repeated interactions over time and, he argues, is critical for development and difficult to generate through public policy. The importance of social capital for economic development is that these norms of behavior reduce [[transaction cost]] of exchange such as legal contracts and government regulations. Fukuyama suggests that while social capital is beneficial for development, it also imposes cost on non-group members with unintended consequences for general welfare.

Referencing [[Alexis de Tocqueville]] in ''[[Democracy in America]],'' and what he described as the '''art of association''' of the American propensity for [[Civic association|civil association]], Fukuyama argues social capital is what produces a [[civil society]]. While civic engagement is an important part of democracy and development, Fukuyama states that, "one person's civic engagement is another's [[rent-seeking]]." Therefore, while social capital can facilitate economic development by reducing transaction cost and increasing productivity, social capital can also distort democracy if civic association enables special interest to gain special favors. However, Fukuyama argues despite the risk of society having too much social capital, it is nonetheless worse to have too little and be unable to organize for public goods and welfare enhancing activity.

=== Social ties ===
[[Carlos García Timón]] describes that the structural dimensions of social capital relate to an individual ability to make weak and strong ties to others within a system. This dimension focuses on the advantages derived from the configuration of an actor's, either individual or collective, network.{{Citation needed|date=April 2010}} The differences between ''weak'' and ''strong'' ties are explained by Granovetter (1973).<ref name="Granovetter 1973">{{cite journal|last1=Granovetter|first1=M. S.|year=1973|title=The Strength of Weak Ties|journal=American Journal of Sociology|volume=78|issue=6|pages=1360–1380|doi=10.1086/225469|s2cid=59578641}}</ref> Bridging social capital refers to the weak ties that individuals with heterogeneous limited interactions form. Bridging social capital is more likely to provide valuable new information (Moshkovitz and Hayat, 2021). Some others describes the weak and strong ties relationship as bonding and bridging social capital. Bonding social capital refers to strong ties: the intimate relationships people feel close to and trust. The relational dimension focuses on the character of the connection between individuals. This is best characterized through trust of others and their cooperation and the identification an individual has within a network.<ref> Yao et al (2022) Carbon neutrality vs. neutralité carbone: A comparative study on French and English users’ perceptions and social capital on Twitter, Frontiers in Environmental Sciences 10:969039, doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.969039</ref> Hazleton and Kennan (2000)<ref>Hazleton V., and W. Kennan. 2000. "Social capital: reconceptualizing the bottom line." ''Corporate Communications: An International Journal'' 5(2):81–86.</ref> added a third angle, that of communication. Communication is needed to access and use social capital through exchanging information, identifying problems and solutions, and managing conflict.

According to [[Max Boisot|Boisot]] (1995),<ref>[[Max Boisot|Boisot, Max.]] 1995. ''Information Space: A framework for learning in organizations, institutions and culture''. London, Routledge</ref> and Boland & Tenkasi (1995),<ref>Boland and Tenkasi (1995)</ref> meaningful communication requires at least some sharing context between the parties to such exchange. The cognitive dimension focuses on the shared meaning, representations and interpretations that individuals or groups have with one another.<ref name="Nahapiet 1998">{{cite journal|last1=Nahapiet|first1=J.|last2=Ghoshal|first2=S.|year=1998|title=Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage|journal=Academy of Management Review|volume=23|issue=2|pages=242–266|citeseerx=10.1.1.598.8940|doi=10.5465/amr.1998.533225|jstor=259373|s2cid=44308473 }}</ref>

== 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}}

== Positive consequences of social capital ==
Compared to Bourdieu, [[Robert D. Putnam]] has used the concept in a much more positive light: though he was at first careful to argue that social capital was a neutral term, stating "whether or not [the] shared are praiseworthy is, of course, entirely another matter,"<ref name="Edwards 1997" /> his work on American society tends to frame social capital as a producer of "[[civic engagement]]" and also a broad societal measure of communal health.<ref name="Alessandrini 2002">Alessandrini, M. (2002). ''Is Civil Society an Adequate Theory?''</ref> He also transforms social capital from a resource possessed by individuals to an attribute of collectives, focusing on norms and trust as producers of social capital to the exclusion of networks.

Mahyar Arefi (2003) identifies consensus-building as a direct positive indicator of social capital.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Arefi|first1=M|year=2003|title=Revisiting the Los Angeles Neighborhood Initiative (LANI): Lessons for Planners|journal=Journal of Planning Education and Research|volume=22|issue=4|page=384|doi=10.1177/0739456x03022004005|s2cid=144987586}}</ref> Consensus implies "shared interest" and agreement among various actors and stakeholders to induce collective action. ''[[Collective action]]'' is thus an indicator of increased social capital.

== Subtypes ==

=== Bonding, bridging, linking ===
In ''[[Bowling Alone|Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community]]'' (2000), Harvard political scientist [[Robert D. Putnam]] writes:<ref name="Putnam 2000" /><blockquote>[[Henry Ward Beecher]]'s advice a century ago to 'multiply picnics' is not entirely ridiculous today. We should do this, ironically, not because it will be good for America – though it will be – but because it will be good for us.</blockquote>Putnam speaks of two main components of the concept, the creation of which Putnam credits to Ross Gittell and Avis Vidal:

# '''Bonding social capital''': the value assigned to social networks between homogeneous groups of people.
# '''Bridging social capital''': the value assigned to social networks between socially heterogeneous groups.

Typical examples are that criminal gangs create bonding social capital, while [[choir]]s and bowling clubs (hence the title, as Putnam lamented their decline) create bridging social capital.<ref name="KaidHoltz-Bacha2007">{{cite book|author1=Lynda Lee Kaid|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bCd1AwAAQBAJ&pg=PT106|title=Encyclopedia of Political Communication|author2=Christina Holtz-Bacha|date= 2007|publisher=Sage Publications|isbn=978-1452265629|page=106}}</ref> The distinction is useful in highlighting how social capital may not always be beneficial for society as a whole (though it is always an asset for those individuals and groups involved). Horizontal networks of individual citizens and groups that enhance community productivity and cohesion are said to be positive social capital assets whereas self-serving exclusive gangs and hierarchical patronage systems that operate at cross purposes to [[societal]] interests can be thought of as negative social capital burdens on society.

Similar to Putnam, [[Daniel P. Aldrich]] describes three mechanisms of social capital:

# '''Bonding capital''': the relationships a person has with friends and family, making it also the strongest form of social capital. 
# '''Bridging capital''': the relationship between friends of friends, making its strength secondary to bonding capital.
# '''Linking capital''': the relationship between a person and a government official or other elected leader.

Aldrich also applies the ideas of social capital to the fundamental principles of [[Emergency management#Recovery|disaster recovery]], and discusses factors that either aid or impede recovery, such as extent of damage, population density, quality of government and aid. In his book ''Building Resilience: Social Capital in Post-Disaster Recovery'', he primarily examines Japanese recovery following the [[Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster|2011 Fukushima nuclear meltdown]].<ref>[[Daniel P. Aldrich|Aldrich, Daniel P.]]  2012. ''Building resilience: Social capital in post-disaster recovery''. [[University of Chicago Press]].</ref>

Social capital development on the internet via social networking websites such as [[Facebook]] or [[Myspace]] tends to be bridging capital according to one study, though "virtual" social capital is a new area of research.<ref>Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007)</ref>

=== Consummatory, instrumental ===
There are two other sub-sources of social capital:<ref name="Portes p. 7-8">Portes pp. 7–8</ref>

# '''Consummatory capital''': a behavior that is made up of actions that fulfill a basis of doing what is inherent. 
#* Examples include value interjection and solidarity.
# '''Instrumental capital''': behavior that is taught through ones surroundings over time.

==== Consummatory capital ====
Consummatory capital a behavior that is made up of actions that fulfill a basis of doing what is inherent. Two examples of consummatory social capital are value interjection and solidarity.<ref name="Portes p. 7-8" />

'''Value interjection:''' refers to the behavior of individuals or groups adhering to [[Social norm|societal norms]] by meeting expected obligations, such as following established rules, timely bill payments, and punctuality. Diligent adherence contributes personal advantages like financial stability and improved relationships, as well as broader societal gains, including enhanced market confidence and perceived reliability.

Coleman goes on to say that when people live in this way and benefit from this type of social capital, individuals in the society are able to rest assured that their belongings and family will be safe.<ref>Portes p. 7</ref> This understanding of '''solidarity''' may be traced to 19th century [[socialism|socialist]] thinkers, whose main focus was the urban working class of the [[Industrial Revolution]]. They analyzed the reasons these workers supported each other for the benefit of the group and held that this support was an adaptation to the immediate social environment, as opposed to a trait that had been taught to the workers in their youth.<ref name="Portes p. 7-8" /> As another example, Coleman states that possessing this type of social capital individuals to stand up for what they believe in, and even die for it, in the face of adversity.<ref name="Portes p. 8">Portes p. 8</ref>

While the notion of ''solidarity as social capital'' is sometimes attributed to [[Karl Marx]], in particular, the term ''social capital'' had a quite different meaning for Marx. All forms of "capital" were, for Marx, possessed only by capitalists and he emphasized the basis of labour in capitalist society, as a class constituted by individuals obliged to sell their [[labour power]], because they lacked sufficient capital, in any sense of the word, to do otherwise. Marx saw "social capital" as a theoretical total amount of capital, purely in the sense of accumulated wealth or property, that existed in a particular society. He thereby contrasted it with specific and discrete "individual capital."<ref>[https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1885-c2/ch18.htm Karl Marx, 1885, ''Capital Volume II, Part III: The Reproduction and Circulation of the Aggregate Social Capital, Chapter 18: Introduction I. The Subject Investigated''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230204150311/https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1885-c2/ch18.htm |date=4 February 2023 }}, (24 March 2017).</ref>

==== Instrumental capital ====
Instrumental capital is behavior that is taught through one's surroundings over time. Individuals donating their resources are not seeking direct repayment from the recipient, but motivated by membership in the same social structure. Donors might not see a direct repayment, but, most commonly, they will be held by the society in greater honor.<ref name="Portes p. 8" />

Portes mentions the donation of a scholarship to a member of the same ethnic group as an example of this. The donor is not giving up resources to be directly repaid by the recipient, but, as stated above, the honor of the community. With this in mind, recipients might not know the benefactor personally, but prospers as a member of the same social group.<ref>Portes pp. 8–9</ref>

Social capital is also linked with religious communities. Religion represents an important aspect of social capital ([[religious social capital]]).<ref>Wojciech Sadłoń, ''Religijny kapitał społeczny. Saabrucken'', Bezkresy Wiedzy, 2014, p.&nbsp;297. {{ISBN|978-3639891119}}.</ref>

== Measurement ==

There is no widely held consensus on how to measure social capital, which has become a debate in itself.<ref name=":0" /> While usually one can intuitively sense the level/amount of social capital present in a given relationship (regardless of type or scale), [[Quantitative research|quantitative measuring]] has proven somewhat complicated, resulting in different metrics for different functions.{{citation needed|date=November 2016}}

[[Sociology|Sociologists]] [[Carl L. Bankston]] and [[Min Zhou]] have argued that one of the reasons social capital is so difficult to measure is that it is neither an individual-level nor a group-level phenomenon, but one that emerges across [[Level of analysis|levels of analysis]] as individuals participate in groups. They argue that the metaphor of "capital" may be misleading because, unlike [[financial capital]], which is a resource held by an individual, the benefits of forms of [[social organization]] are not held by actors, but are results of the participation of actors in advantageously organized groups.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Bankston|first1=Carl L.|last2=Zhou|first2=Min|year=2002|title=Social Capital as Process: The Meanings and Problems of a Theoretical Metaphor?|journal=Sociological Inquiry|volume=72|issue=2|pages=285–317|doi=10.1111/1475-682x.00017|s2cid=29333176}}</ref>

=== Name generators ===
One type of quantitative social capital measure uses name generators to construct social networks and to measure the level of social capital.<ref name=":8" /> These networks are constructed by asking participants to name people that they interact with, such as "Name all the people you've discussed important matters with in the past six months."<ref name=":8">{{Cite journal|last=Marsden|first=Peter V.|date=1987-01-01|title=Core Discussion Networks of Americans|jstor=2095397|journal=American Sociological Review|volume=52|issue=1|pages=122–131|doi=10.2307/2095397|s2cid=143815557 }}</ref> Name generators are often useful to construct core discussion networks of close ties, rather than weaker ties.

=== Social capital scales ===
Many studies measure social capital by asking the question: "do you trust the others?" Other researches analyse the participation in voluntary associations or civic activities.

To expand upon the [[Methodology|methodological]] potential of measuring [[online and offline]] social bonding, as it relates to social capital, Williams (2006), offers a matrix of social capital measures that distinguishes social bridging as a form of less emotionally-tethered relationships compared to bonding. Bonding and bridging sub-scales are proposed, which have been adopted by over 300 scholarly articles.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=8554118995697847065&as_sdt=205&sciodt=0,1&hl=en|title=Google Scholar|website=google.com|access-date=28 February 2015|archive-date=4 February 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230204150302/https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=8554118995697847065&as_sdt=205&sciodt=0,1&hl=en|url-status=live}}</ref>

Lin, Peng, Kim, Kim & LaRose (2012) offer a noteworthy application of the scale by measuring international residents originating from locations outside of the United States. The study found that social media platforms like [[Facebook]] provide an opportunity for increased social capital, but mostly for extroverts. However, less introverted social media users could engage social media and build social capital by connecting with Americans before arriving and then maintaining old relationships from home upon arriving to the states. The ultimate outcome of the study indicates that social capital is measurable and is a concept that may be [[Operationalization|operationalized]] to understand strategies for coping with [[cross-cultural]] immersion through online engagement.

=== Cohesion measures ===
The level of [[Group cohesiveness|cohesion]] of a group also affects its social capital and vice versa.<ref>{{Cite book|chapter-url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320656629|title=Public Brainpower: Civil Society and Natural Resource Management|last=Overland|first=Indra|date=2018-01-01|pages=1–22|doi=10.1007/978-3-319-60627-9_1|chapter=Introduction: Civil Society, Public Debate and Natural Resource Management|isbn=978-3319606262|access-date=5 April 2018|archive-date=12 June 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180612140013/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320656629|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://my.vanderbilt.edu/perkins/files/2011/09/PerkinsLong.2002.Neighborhood_sense_of_communitysocial_capital.pdf|title=Perkins, D.D., & Long, D.A. (2002). Neighborhood sense of community and social capital: A multi-level analysis. In A. Fisher, C. Sonn, & B. Bishop (Eds.), Psychological sense of community: Research, applications, and implications (pp. 291–318). New York: Plenum|access-date=2014-04-20|archive-date=25 April 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120425112158/https://my.vanderbilt.edu/perkins/files/2011/09/PerkinsLong.2002.Neighborhood_sense_of_communitysocial_capital.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> However, there is no one quantitative way of determining the level of cohesiveness, but rather a collection of social network models that researchers have used over the decades to operationalize social capital. One of the dominant methods is Ronald Burt's constraint measure, which taps into the role of tie strength and group cohesion. Another network-based model is network transitivity.

=== Economic measures ===
Knack and Keefer (1996) measured [[Econometrics|econometric]] correlations between confidence and civic cooperation norms, with [[economic growth]] in a large group of countries. They found that confidence and civic cooperation have a great impact in economic growth, and that in less [[Social polarization|polarized]] societies in terms of inequality and ethnic differences, social capital is bigger.

Narayan and Pritchet (1997) researched the [[associativity]] degree and economic performance in rural homes of [[Tanzania]]. They observed that even in [[Poverty index|high poverty indexes]], families with higher levels of incomes had more participation in collective organizations. The social capital they accumulated because of this participation had individual benefits for them, and created collective benefits through different routes, for example: their agricultural practices were better than those of the families without participation (they had more information about agrochemicals, fertilizers and seeds); they had more information about the market; they were prepared to take more risks, because being part of a social network made them feel more protected; they had an influence on the improvement of public services, showing a bigger level of participation in schools; they cooperated more in the municipality level.

=== Group membership-based ===
In measuring political social capital, it is common to take the sum of society's membership of its groups. Groups with higher membership (such as [[political parties]]) contribute more to the amount of capital than groups with lower membership, although many groups with low membership (such as communities) still add up to be significant.  While it may seem that this is limited by population, this need not be the case as people join multiple groups. In a study done by [[Yankee City]],<ref>W. Lloyd Warner, J.O. Low, Paul S. Lunt, & Leo Srole (1963). ''Yankee City''.  New Haven, CT: Yale University Press</ref> a community of 17,000 people was found to have over 22,000 different groups.

How a group relates to the rest of society also affects social capital, but in a different manner. Strong internal ties can in some cases weaken the group's perceived capital in the eyes of the general public, as in cases where the group is geared towards crime, distrust, intolerance, violence or hatred towards others. The [[Ku Klux Klan]] is an example of this kind of organizations.

=== Social behaviour-based ===
Foschi and Lauriola have presented a measure of [[sociability]] as a proxy of social capital. The authors demonstrated that facets of sociability can mediate between general personality traits and measures of civic involvement and [[political participation]], as predictors of social capital, in a [[Holism|holistic]] model of [[political behavior]].<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Foschi | first1 = R. | last2 = Lauriola | first2 = M. | year = 2014 | title = Does sociability predict civic involvement and political participation? | journal = Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | volume = 106 | issue = 2| pages = 339–357 | doi=10.1037/a0035331| pmid = 24467426 }}</ref>

The [[World Social Capital Monitor]] is an instrument for measuring [[social goods]] and social capital created by the [[United Nations Sustainable Development Group]] in partnership with civil society actors. The project identifies social values such as [[Trust (social science)|trust]], [[solidarity]], [[helpfulness]], [[friendliness]], [[hospitality]] and the willingness to finance public goods with the help of anonymous [[Survey sampling|surveys]]. The surveys started in 2016.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/partnership/?p=11706#updates|title=World Social Capital Monitor – United Nations Partnerships for SDGs platform|website=sustainabledevelopment.un.org|access-date=2019-10-16|archive-date=4 February 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230204150302/https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/partnership/?p=11706#updates|url-status=live}}</ref>

== Integrating history and socio-economic analysis ==

=== Beyond Putnam ===
While influential, some have identified areas of concern or improvement within the work of [[Robert D. Putnam]]. This includes:
* the lack of awareness of the structural socio-economic conditions of society.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Skocpol | first1 = T | year = 1996 | title = Unravelling from Above | journal = The American Prospect | volume = 25 | pages = 20–25 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Skocpol | first1 = T. | last2 = Ganz | first2 = M. | last3 = Munson | first3 = Z. | year = 2000 | title = A Nation of Organisers: The institutional Origins of Civic Voluntarism in the United States | url = http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:12641806 | journal = American Political Science Review | volume = 94 | issue = 3 | pages = 527–546 | doi = 10.2307/2585829 | jstor = 2585829 | s2cid = 145598414 | access-date = 18 September 2018 | archive-date = 4 February 2023 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20230204150308/https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/12641806 | url-status = live }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Thomson | first1 = I.T. | year = 2005 | title = The Theory that Won't Die: From Mass Society to the Decline of Social Capital | journal = Sociological Forum | volume = 20 | issue = 3| pages = 421–448 | doi=10.1007/s11206-005-6596-3| s2cid = 145318885 }}</ref> For example, the level of income inequality.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Knack | first1 = S. | last2 = Keefer | first2 = P. | year = 1997 | title = Does Social Capital Have an Economic Pay-Off ? A Cross Country Investigation | doi = 10.1162/003355300555475 | journal = Quarterly Journal of Economics | volume = 112 | issue = 4| pages = 1251–1288 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.184.8776 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Costa | first1 = D.E. | last2 = Kahn | first2 = M.E. | year = 2003 | title = Understanding the American Decline in Social Capital, 1952–1998 | journal =   Kyklos| volume = 56 | pages = 17–46 | doi=10.1111/1467-6435.00208| s2cid = 153793912 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = O'Connel | first1 = M | year = 2003 | title = Anti 'Social Capital': Civic Values versus Economic Equality in the EU | journal = European Sociological Review | volume = 19 | issue = 3| pages = 241–248 | doi=10.1093/esr/19.3.241| hdl = 10197/2473 | hdl-access = free }}</ref>
* the excessive [[determinism]] of the [[historical analysis]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lupo|first1=S|year=1993|title=Usi e Abusi del Passato. Le Radici dell'Italia di Putnam|journal=Meridiana|volume=18|pages=151–168}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lemann|first1=N|year=1996|title=Kicking in Groups|journal=Atlantic Monthly|volume=277|pages=22–26}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Tarrow|first1=S|year=1996|title=Making Social Science Work across Space and Time: A Critical Reflection on Robert Putnam's Making Democracy Work|journal=American Political Science Review|volume=90|issue=2|pages=389–397|doi=10.2307/2082892|jstor=2082892|s2cid=142551563}}</ref>
* Putnam's social capital index does not consider [[Race (human categorization)|racial diversity]] which links to worse outcomes.<ref>{{Cite book|title = Racial Diversity and Social Capital: Equality and Community in America|last = Hero|first = Rodney|publisher = Cambridge University Press|year = 2007|isbn = 978-0521698610|url-access = registration|url = https://archive.org/details/racialdiversitys0000hero}}</ref> Nor does Putnam consider [[ethnic diversity]], which often creates barriers to [[cooperation]] and [[democratization]].<ref>Dowley, Kathleen M., and Brian D. Silver. 2002. "Social Capital, Ethnicity and Support for Democracy in the Post-Communist States." ''[[Europe-Asia Studies]]'' 54(4):505–527.</ref>
* the conflation of social capital with [[civil society]], the lack of empirical evidence connecting social capital's promotion of economic growth and substantiating the decline of social capital in the United States in the last 35 years, and the assumption that social networks produce win-win relationships.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=DeFilippis|first=James|date=2001-01-01|title=The myth of social capital in community development|journal=Housing Policy Debate|volume=12|issue=4|pages=781–806|doi=10.1080/10511482.2001.9521429|s2cid=40713738|issn=1051-1482}}</ref>

=== Social capital motives ===
Robison and colleagues (2012) measured the relative importance of selfishness and four social capital motives using resource allocation data collected in hypothetical surveys and non-hypothetical experiments.<ref name=":9">{{cite journal|last1=Robison|first1=Lindon J.|last2=Shupp|first2=Robert S.|last3=Jin|first3=Songqing|last4=Siles|first4=Marcelo E.|last5=Ferrarini|first5=Tawni H.|year=2012|title=The relative importance of selfishness and social capital motives|journal=The Journal of Socio-Economics|volume=41|pages=118–127|doi=10.1016/j.socec.2011.10.008}}</ref>

The '''selfishness motive''' assumes that an agent's allocation of a scarce resource is independent of his relationships with others. This motive is sometimes referred to as the ''selfishness of preference assumption'' in [[neoclassical economics]].

'''Social capital motives''' assume that agents' allocation of a scarce resource may be influenced by their social capital or sympathetic relationships with others which may produce socio-emotional goods that satisfy socio-emotional needs for validation and belonging:<ref name=":9" />

# The first social capital motive seeks for validation by acting consistently with the values of one's [[ideal self]].
# The second social capital motive seeks to be validated by others by winning their [[Social approval|approval]].
# The third social capital motive seeks to [[Belongingness|belong]]. Recognizing that one may not be able to influence the sympathy of others, persons seeking to belong may act to increase their own sympathy for others and the organizations or institutions they represent.
# The fourth social capital motive recognizes that our sympathy or social capital for another person will motivate us to act in their interest. In doing so we satisfy our own needs for validation and belonging. Empirical results reject the hypothesis often implied in economics that we are 95% selfish.

== Relation with civil society ==
Various authors give definitions of ''[[civil society]]'' that refer to voluntary associations and organisations outside the market and state.<ref name="Alessandrini 2002" /><ref>Cox in Alessandrini (2002)</ref><ref>Schmidt in Alessandrini (2002)</ref><ref>Walzer (1992)</ref> This definition is very close to that of the ''third sector'', which consists of "private organisations that are formed and sustained by groups of people acting voluntarily and without seeking personal profit to provide benefits for themselves or for others."{{citation needed|date=July 2012}}

According to such authors as Walzer (1992), Alessandrini (2002),<ref name="Alessandrini 2002" /> Newtown, Stolle & Rochon, Foley & Edwards (1997),<ref name="Edwards 1997" /> and Walters, it is through civil society, or more accurately, the ''third sector'', that individuals are able to establish and maintain relational networks. These [[voluntary association]]s also connect people with each other, build trust and reciprocity through informal, loosely structured associations, and consolidate society through altruism without obligation. It is "this range of activities, services and associations produced by... civil society" that constitutes the sources of social capital.<ref name="Alessandrini 2002" />

Not only has civil society been documented to produce sources of social capital, according to Lyons' ''Third Sector'' (2001),<ref>{{cite book|title=Third Sector| year=2001| last=Lyons}}</ref> social capital does not appear in any guise under either the factors that enable or those that stimulate the growth of the third sector. Likewise, Onyx (2000) describes how social capital depends on an already functioning community.<ref>Onyx (2000)</ref> The idea that creating social capital (i.e., creating networks) will strengthen civil society underlies current Australian social policy aimed at bridging deepening social divisions. The goal is to reintegrate those marginalised from the rewards of the economic system into "the community." However, according to Onyx (2000), while the explicit aim of this policy is inclusion, its effects are exclusionary.

Foley and Edwards (1997) believe that "political systems...are important determinants of both the character of civil society and of the uses to which whatever social capital exists might be put."<ref name="Edwards 1997" /> Alessandrini agrees, saying that, "in Australia in particular, [[Neoliberalism|neo-liberalism]] has been recast as [[economic rationalism]] and identified by several theorists and commentators as a danger to society at large because of the use to which they are putting social capital to work."<ref name="Alessandrini 2002" />

The resurgence of interest in social capital as a remedy for the cause of today's social problems draws directly on the assumption that these problems lie in the weakening of civil society. However this ignores the arguments of many theorists who believe that social capital leads to exclusion rather than to a stronger civil society.{{Citation needed|date=February 2007}} In [[international development]], [[Ben Fine]] (2001) and [[John Harriss]] (2001) have been heavily critical of the inappropriate adoption of social capital as a supposed panacea (promoting civil society organisations and NGOs, for example, as agents of development) for the inequalities generated by neoliberal economic development.<ref>[[Ben Fine|Fine, Ben]]. 2001. ''Social Capital versus Social Theory: Political Economy and Social Science at the Turn of the Millennium''. London: Routledge. {{ISBN|0415241790}}.</ref><ref>[[John Harriss|Harriss, John]]. 2001. ''Depoliticizing Development: The World Bank and Social Capital''. [[LeftWord Books|Leftword]] / Anthem / Stylus.</ref> This leads to controversy as to the role of state institutions in the promotion of social capital.
An abundance of social capital is seen as being almost a necessary condition for modern [[liberal democracy]]. A low level of social capital leads to an excessively rigid and unresponsive political system and high levels of corruption, in the political system and in the region as a whole. Formal public institutions require social capital in order to function properly, and while it is possible to have too much social capital (resulting in rapid changes and excessive regulation), it is decidedly worse to have too little.

=== Sample societies ===
'''Post-Communist''': Kathleen Dowley and Brian Silver published an article entitled "Social Capital, Ethnicity and Support for Democracy in the Post-Communist States", in which they find that in [[Post-communist countries|post-communist states]], higher levels of social capital did not equate to higher levels of democracy. However, higher levels of social capital led to higher support for democracy.<ref>{{Cite journal |jstor = 826422|title = Social Capital, Ethnicity and Support for Democracy in the Post-Communist States|journal = Europe-Asia Studies|volume = 54|issue = 4|pages = 505–527|last1 = Dowley|first1 = Kathleen M.|last2 = Silver|first2 = Brian D.|year = 2002|doi = 10.1080/09668130220139145|s2cid = 154303219}}</ref>

'''Third-world''': A number of intellectuals in [[Developing country|developing countries]] have argued that the idea of social capital, particularly when connected to certain ideas about civil society, is deeply implicated in contemporary modes of donor and [[Non-governmental organization|NGO]]-driven [[imperialism]] and that it functions, primarily, to blame the poor for their condition.<ref>see Moore, David, ed. 2007. ''The World Bank''. [[University of KwaZulu-Natal Press]].</ref>

'''Chinese''': The concept of social capital in a Chinese [[social context]] has been closely linked with the concept of ''[[guanxi]]''.

'''American''': One attempt to measure social capital, involving the quantity, quality and strength of an individual social capital, was spearheaded by Corporate Alliance in the English-speaking market segment of the US,<ref>{{cite web|title=corporatealliance.net|url=http://www.corporatealliance.net/|access-date=2014-04-20|publisher=corporatealliance.net|archive-date=20 June 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080620112321/http://www.corporatealliance.net/|url-status=live}}</ref> and Xentrum through the Latin American Chamber of Commerce in Utah on the Spanish-speaking population of the same country.<ref>{{cite web|title=xentrum.org|url=http://www.xentrum.org/|access-date=2014-04-20|publisher=xentrum.org|archive-date=31 October 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081031064137/http://www.xentrum.org/|url-status=usurped}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Camara Latinoamericana > Home|url=http://www.camaralatinoamericana.com/|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110128191333/http://camaralatinoamericana.com/|archive-date=28 January 2011|access-date=2014-04-20}}</ref> With the assistance of software applications and web-based relationship-oriented systems such as [[LinkedIn]], these kinds of organizations are expected to provide its members with a way to keep track of the ''number'' of their relationships, meetings designed to boost the ''strength'' of each relationship using group dynamics, executive retreats and networking events as well as training in how to reach out to higher circles of ''influential'' people.

== Effects on women's engagement with politics ==
{{See also|Sex differences in social capital}}

There are many factors that drive volume towards the [[ballot box]], including education, employment, civil skills, and time. Careful evaluation of these fundamental factors often suggests that women do not vote at similar levels as men. However the gap between women and men [[voter turnout]] is diminishing and in some cases women are becoming more prevalent at the ballot box than their male counterparts. Recent research on social capital is now serving as an explanation for this change.<ref name="Harell 2009">Harell, A. 2009. ''Equal Participation but Separate Paths?: Women's Social Capital and Turnout''.</ref>

Social capital offers a wealth of resources and networks that facilitate political engagement. Since social capital is readily available no matter the type of community, it is able to override more traditional queues for political engagement; e.g.: education, employment, civil skills, etc.

There are unique ways in which women organize. These differences from men make social capital more personable and impressionable to women audiences thus creating a stronger presence in regards to political engagement. A few examples of these characteristics are:
* Women's informal and formal networks tend toward care work that is often considered apolitical.<ref name="Eliasoph 1998">Eliasoph, N. 1998. ''Avoiding Politics''. Cambridge, UK: [[Cambridge University Press]].</ref>
* Women are also more likely to engage in local politics and social movement activities than in traditional forums focused on national politics.<ref name="Vickers 1997">Vickers, J. 1997. ''Reinventing Political Science: A Feminist Approach.'' Halifax: Fernwood.</ref>
* Women are more likely to organize themselves in less hierarchical ways and to focus on creating consensus.<ref name="Eliasoph 1998" />

The often informal nature of female social capital allows women to politicize [[Apoliticism|apolitical]] environments without conforming to masculine standards, thus keeping this activity at a low public profile. These differences are hard to recognize within the discourse of political engagement and may explain why social capital has not been considered as a tool for female political engagement until as of late.<ref name="Harell 2009" />

== Effects on health ==
A growing body of research has found that the presence of social capital through social networks and communities has a protective quality on health. Social capital affects health risk behavior in the sense that individuals who are embedded in a network or community rich in support, social trust, information, and norms, have resources that help achieve health goals.<ref name="Lin 2001">Lin, N. "Building a network theory of social capital." pp. 3–29 in ''Social capital: Theory and Research'', edited by N. Lin, K. Cook, & R .S. Burt. New York: [[Aldine de Gruyter]].</ref> For example, a person who is sick with cancer may receive the information, money, or moral support needed to endure treatment and recover. Social capital also encourages social trust and membership. These factors can discourage individuals from engaging in risky health behaviors such as smoking and binge drinking.<ref name="Bolin 2003">Bolin, K., B. Lindgren, M. Lindstrom, and P. Nystedt. 2003. ''Investments in social capital implications of social interactions for the production of health.''</ref>

Furthermore, neighbourhood social capital may also aid in buffering health inequities amongst children and adolescents.<ref>{{cite journal|title=BMC Public Health – Full text – Does neighbourhood social capital aid in levelling the social gradient in the health and well-being of children and adolescents? A literature review|journal=BMC Public Health|volume=13|pages=65|doi=10.1186/1471-2458-13-65|pmid=23339776|pmc=3574053|year=2013|last1=Vyncke|first1=Veerle|last2=De Clercq|first2=Bart|last3=Stevens|first3=Veerle|last4=Costongs|first4=Caroline|last5=Barbareschi|first5=Giorgio|last6=Jónsson|first6=Stefán Hrafn|last7=Curvo|first7=Sara Darias|last8=Kebza|first8=Vladimir|last9=Currie|first9=Candace|last10=Maes|first10=Lea |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Petrikova Ivica|first=Chadha Dhruv|date=2013|title=The Role of Social Capital in Risk-Sharing: Lessons from Andhra Pradesh|journal=Journal of South Asian Development|volume=8|issue=3|pages=359–383|doi=10.1177/0973174113504848|s2cid=154652075}}</ref> Social capital indicators such as neighbourhood cohesion, [[social support]], and ties providing a bond between members of the same religion, have been found to be associated with better health despite financial or socioeconomic hardship.<ref name="Uphoff 2013">{{cite journal |last1=Uphoff |first1=E |title=A systematic review of the relationships between social capital and socioeconomic inequalities in health: a contribution to understanding the psychosocial pathway of health inequalities |journal=International Journal for Equity in Health |volume=12 |date=2013 |issue=12 |pages=54 |doi=10.1186/1475-9276-12-54 |pmid=23870068 |pmc=3726325 |doi-access=free }}</ref> The function of social capital as a health buffer in circumstances of social disadvantage has also received attention in research on the health of minority ethnic populations. The relationships and networks that are maintained by an ethnic minority population in a geographical area where a high percentage of residents belong to the same ethnic group may lead to better health outcomes than would be expected based on other individual and neighbourhood characteristics. Such effects have been investigated in England,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Uphoff |first1=E |title=Is ethnic density associated with health in a context of social disadvantage? Findings from the Born in Bradford cohort |journal=Ethnicity & Health |date=2015 |volume=21 |issue=2 |pages=196–213 |doi=10.1080/13557858.2015.1047742 |pmid=26169185 |hdl=10454/10076 |s2cid=21513221 |url=https://bradscholars.brad.ac.uk/bitstream/10454/10076/3/uphoff_et_al_2015.pdf |hdl-access=free |access-date=24 September 2019 |archive-date=4 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230204150325/https://bradscholars.brad.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/10454/10076/uphoff_et_al_2015.pdf;jsessionid=22EEAF539CDCE207F5574B2844160310?sequence=3 |url-status=live }}</ref> New Zealand,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Becares |first1=L |title=Ethnic density and area deprivation: Neighbourhood effects on Māori health and racial discrimination in Aotearoa/New Zealand |journal=Social Science & Medicine |date=2013 |volume=88 |pages=76–82|doi=10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.04.007 |pmid=23702212 |pmc=3725420 }}</ref> and the United States.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Becares |first1=L |title=Ethnic density effects on physical morbidity, mortality, and health behaviors: a systematic review of the literature |journal=American Journal of Public Health |date=2012 |volume=102 |issue=12 |pages=e33–66 |doi=10.2105/AJPH.2012.300832 |pmid=23078507 |pmc=3519331 }}</ref>

Inversely, a lack of social capital can impair health. For example, results from a survey given to 13- to 18-year-old students in Sweden showed that low social capital and low social trust are associated with higher rates of psychosomatic symptoms, musculoskeletal pain, and depression.<ref name="Aslund 2010">{{cite journal | last1 = Aslund | first1 = C. | last2 = Starrin | first2 = B. | last3 = Nilsson | first3 = K. | year = 2010 | title = Social capital in relation to depression, musculoskeletal pain, and psychosomatic symptoms: a cross-sectional study of a large population-based cohort of Swedish adolescents | journal = BMC Public Health | volume = 10 | page = 715 | doi=10.1186/1471-2458-10-715| pmid = 21092130 | pmc = 3091587 | doi-access = free }}</ref> Additionally, negative social capital can detract from health. Although there are only a few studies that assess social capital in criminalized populations, there is information that suggests that social capital does have a negative effect in broken communities. Deviant behavior is encouraged by deviant peers via favorable definitions and learning opportunities provided by network-based norms.<ref name="Sutherland & Cressey, 1978">[[Edwin H. Sutherland|Sutherland, Edwin H.]], and [[Donald R. Cressey]]. 1978. ''Criminology''. Philadelphia: [[J. B. Lippincott & Co.]]</ref> However, in these same communities, an adjustment of norms (i.e. deviant peers being replaced by positive role models) can pose a positive effect.
Researchers have also investigated the hypothesis that the health benefits of social capital depend on the socioeconomic resources an individual or community has available to them. For example, social capital may boost health only for those with higher levels of education, or more so for those with a higher rather than a lower income.<ref name="Uphoff 2013" /> This research is based on Bourdieu's notion that social, economic, and cultural capital are dependent on each other.<ref name="Bourdieu 1972" />

== Influence of the Internet ==
Similar to watching the news and keeping abreast of current events, the use of the Internet can relate to an individual's level of social capital. In one study, informational uses of the Internet correlated positively with an individual's production of social capital, and social-recreational uses were negatively correlated (higher levels of these uses correlated with lower levels of social capital).<ref name="Shah, Kwak, & Holbert, 2001">{{cite journal | last1 = Shah | first1 = D. V. | last2 = Kwak | first2 = N. | last3 = Holbert | first3 = R. L. | year = 2001 | title = "Connecting" and "disconnecting" with civic life: Patterns of Internet use and the production of social capital | journal = Political Communication | volume = 18 | issue = 2 | pages = 141–162 | doi = 10.1080/105846001750322952 | s2cid = 6490403 }}</ref> An example supporting the former argument is the contribution of Peter Maranci's blog (''Charlie on the Commuter Line'') to address the train problems in Massachusetts. He created it after an incident where a lady passed out during a train ride due to the congestion in the train and help was delayed because of the congestion in the train and the inefficiency of the train conductor. His blog exposed the poor conditions of train stations, overcrowding train rides and inefficiency of the train conductor which eventually influenced changes within the transit system.{{clarify|reason=The reader has to speculate about what is supposed to be social capital: if Maranci gained in social capital according to the reference, then state that; if the "changes within the transit system" were an increase in social capital according to the reference, then state that; don't force the reader to guess.|date=January 2023}}<ref name="Rainie & Wellman, 2012">Rainie, Lee, and [[Barry Wellman]]. 2012. "Networked Creators." Ch. 8 in ''Networked: The New Social Operating System.'' Massachusetts: [[MIT Press]].</ref>

Another perspective holds that the rapid growth of social networking sites such as [[Facebook]] and [[Myspace]] suggests that individuals are creating a virtual-network consisting of both bonding and bridging social capital. Unlike face to face interaction, people can instantly connect with others in a targeted fashion by placing specific parameters with Internet use. This means that individuals can selectively connect with others based on ascertained interests, and backgrounds. Facebook is currently the most popular social networking site and touts many advantages to its users including serving as a ''[[social lubricant (disambiguation)|social lubricant]]'' for individuals who otherwise have difficulties forming and maintaining both strong and weak ties with others.<ref name="Steinfield et al., 2006">Steinfield, C., J. M. DiMicco, N. B. Ellison, and C. Lampe. 2009. "Bowling Online: Social Networking and Social Capital within the Organization." ''Proceedings of the Fourth Communities and Technologies Conference''.</ref><ref name=":12">{{Cite book|last1=Koley|first1=Gaurav|last2=Deshmukh|first2=Jayati|last3=Srinivasa|first3=Srinath|title=Social Informatics |chapter=Social Capital as Engagement and Belief Revision |date=2020|editor-last=Aref|editor-first=Samin|editor2-last=Bontcheva|editor2-first=Kalina|editor3-last=Braghieri|editor3-first=Marco|editor4-last=Dignum|editor4-first=Frank|editor5-last=Giannotti|editor5-first=Fosca|editor6-last=Grisolia|editor6-first=Francesco|editor7-last=Pedreschi|editor7-first=Dino|chapter-url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-030-60975-7_11|series=Lecture Notes in Computer Science|volume=12467|language=en|location=Cham|publisher=Springer International Publishing|pages=137–151|doi=10.1007/978-3-030-60975-7_11|isbn=978-3-030-60975-7|s2cid=222233101|access-date=22 November 2020|archive-date=27 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210127233156/https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-030-60975-7_11|url-status=live}}</ref>

This argument continues, although the preponderance of evidence shows a positive association between social capital and the Internet. Critics of virtual communities believe that the Internet replaces our strong bonds with online "weak-ties"<ref name="Cummings, Butler, & Kraut, 2002">{{cite journal | last1 = Cummings | first1 = J. | last2 = Butler | first2 = B. | last3 = Kraut | first3 = R. | year = 2002 | title = The quality of online social relationships | journal = Communications of the ACM | volume = 45 | issue = 7| pages = 103–108 | doi=10.1145/514236.514242| s2cid = 207682266 }}</ref> or with socially empty interactions with the technology itself.<ref name="Nie, 2001">{{cite journal | last1 = Nie | first1 = N. H. | year = 2001 | title = Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the Internet: Reconciling conflicting findings | journal = American Behavioral Scientist | volume = 45 | issue = 3| pages = 420–435 | doi=10.1177/00027640121957277| s2cid = 144011627 }}</ref> Others fear that the Internet can create a world of "[[narcissism]] of similarity," where sociability is reduced to interactions between those that are similar in terms of ideology, race, or gender.<ref name="Fernback, 1997">Fernback, J. 1997. "The individual within the collective: Virtual ideology and the realization of collective principles." pp. 36–54 in ''Virtual Culture'', edited by S. Jones. Thousand Oaks, CA: [[SAGE Publishing|Sage]].</ref> A few articles suggest that technologically based interactions has a negative relationship with social capital by displacing time spent engaging in geographical/ in-person social activities.<ref name="Cummings, Butler, & Kraut, 2002" /> However, the consensus of research shows that the more time people spend online the more in-person contact they have, thus positively enhancing social capital.<ref name=":12" /><ref>Boase, Jeffrey and [[Barry Wellman]]. 2005. "Personal Relationships: On and Off the Internet." In ''Handbook of Personal Relationships'', edited by A. L. Vangelisti and D. Perlman. Cambridge: [[Cambridge University Press]].</ref><ref name=":10">Boase, Jeffrey, John Horrigan, [[Barry Wellman]], and Lee Rainie. 2006. "The Strength of Internet Ties." ''[[Pew Internet and American Life Project]]''. Washington.</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Wang | first1 = Hua | last2 = Wellman | first2 = Barry | year = 2010 | title = Social Connectivity in America: Changes in Adult Friendship Network Size from 2002 to 2007 | journal = American Behavioral Scientist | volume = 53 | issue = 8 | pages = 1148–1169 | doi = 10.1177/0002764209356247 | s2cid = 144525876 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Haythornthwaite | first1 = Caroline | author-link = Caroline Haythornthwaite | last2 = Kendall | first2 = Lori | year = 2010 | title = Internet and Community | journal = American Behavioral Scientist | volume = 53 | issue = 8| pages = 1083–1094 | doi=10.1177/0002764209356242| s2cid = 146635311 }}</ref>

Recent research, conducted in 2006, also shows that Internet users often have wider networks than those who access the Internet irregularly or not at all. When not considering family and work contacts, Internet users actually tend to have contact with a higher number of friends and relatives.<ref>{{Cite journal |doi = 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00038.x|title = Do Internet Users Have More Social Ties? A Call for Differentiated Analyses of Internet Use|journal = Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication|volume = 11|issue = 3|pages = 844–862|year = 2006|last1 = Zhao|first1 = Shanyang|doi-access = free}}</ref> This is supported by another study that shows that Internet users and non-Internet users do feel equally close to the same number of people; also the Internet users maintain relationships with 20% more people whom they "feel somewhat close" to.<ref name=":10" />

Other research shows that younger people use the Internet as a supplemental medium for communication, rather than letting the Internet communication replace face-to-face contact.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = McPherson | first1 = M. | last2 = Smith-Lovin | first2 = L. | last3 = Brashears | first3 = M. E. | year = 2006 | title = Social isolation in America: Changes in core discussion networks over two decades | journal = American Sociological Review | volume = 71 | issue = 3| pages = 353–375 | doi=10.1177/000312240607100301| citeseerx = 10.1.1.101.6700 | s2cid = 8164074 }}</ref> This supports the view that Internet communication does not hinder development of social capital and does not make people feel lonelier than before.

Ellison, Steinfield & Lampe (2007) suggest social capital exercised online is a result of relationships formed offline; whereby, bridging capital is enabled through a "maintenance" of relationships. Among respondents of this study, social capital built exclusively online creates weaker ties.<ref>Ellison, N.B., Steinfield, C. & Lampe, C (2007)</ref> A distinction of social bonding is offered by Ellison et al., 2007, suggesting bonds, or strong ties, are possible through social media, but less likely.

== Effects on educational achievement ==

=== Catholic schools (Coleman and Hoffer) ===
Coleman and Hoffer collected [[Quantitative research|quantitative data]] of 28,000 students in total 1,015 public, Catholic and other private high schools in America from the 7 years' period from 1980 to 1987.<ref name=":11">Coleman and Hoffer (1987) "High School and Beyond"</ref> It was found from this [[Longitudinal study|longitudinal research]] that social capital in students' families and communities attributed to the much lower dropout rates in [[Catholic school]]s compared with the higher rates in public.

Teachman et al. (1996) further develop the family structure indicator suggested by Coleman. They criticise Coleman, who used only the number of parents present in the family, neglected the unseen effect of more discrete dimensions such as stepparents' and different types of single-parent families. They take into account of a detailed counting of family structure, not only with two biological parents or stepparent families, but also with types of single-parent families with each other (mother-only, father-only, never-married, and other). They also contribute to the literature by measuring parent-child interaction by the indicators of how often parents and children discuss school-related activities.<ref>Teachman et al. (1996)</ref>

Morgan and Sorensen (1999) directly challenge Coleman for his lacking of an explicit mechanism to explain why Catholic schools students perform better than public school students on standardised tests of achievement.<ref>Chen (2002)</ref> Researching students in Catholic schools and public schools again, they propose two comparable models of social capital effect on mathematic learning.  One is on Catholic schools as norm-enforcing schools whereas another is on public schools as horizon-expanding schools. It is found that while social capital can bring about positive effect of maintaining an encompassing functional community in norm-enforcing schools, it also brings about the negative consequence of excessive monitoring. Creativity and exceptional achievement would be repressed as a result. Whereas in horizon expanding school, social closure is found to be negative for student's mathematic achievement. These schools explore a different type of social capital, such as information about opportunities in the extended social networks of parents and other adults.  The consequence is that more learning is fostered than norm-enforcing Catholic school students. In sum, Morgan and Sorensen study implies that social capital is contextualised, one kind of social capital may be positive in this setting but is not necessarily still positive in another setting.<ref name="Morgan 1999">Morgan and Sorensen (1999)</ref>

=== Community development ===
In the setting of education through Kilpatrick, Johns, and Mulford (2010) state that "social capital is a useful lens for analysing [[lifelong learning]] and its relationship to community development."<ref>Kilpatrick, S., S. Johns, and B. Mulford. 2010. "Social capital, educational institutions and leadership." In ''The International Encyclopedia of Education'' (3rd ed.), edited by E. Baker, B. McGraw & P. Peterson. [[Elsevier Science]].</ref> Social capital is particularly important in terms of education. Also the importance of education with "schools being designed to create 'functioning community' - forging tighter links between parents and the school" linking that without this interaction, the social capital in this area is disadvantaged and demonstrates that social capital plays a major role in education.<ref name=":11" />

=== Parental involvement ===
Putnam (2000) mentions in his book ''[[Bowling Alone]]'', "[[Child development]] is powerfully shaped by social capital" and continues "presence of social capital has been linked to various positive outcomes, particularly in education."<ref name="Putnam 2000" />{{Rp|296}} According to his book, these positive outcomes are the result of parents' social capital in a community. In states where there is a high social capital, there is also a high education performance.<ref name="Putnam 2000" />{{Rp|300}} The similarity of these states is that parents were more associated with their children's education. Teachers have reported that when the parents participate more in their children's education and school life, it lowers levels of misbehavior, such as bringing weapons to school, engaging in physical violence, unauthorized absence, and being generally apathetic about education.<ref name="Putnam 2000" />{{Rp|301}} Borrowing Coleman's quotation from Putnam's book, Coleman once mentioned we cannot understate "the importance of the embeddedness of young persons in the enclaves of adults most proximate to them, first and most prominent the family and second, a surrounding community of adults."<ref name="Putnam 2000" />{{Rp|303}}

Without social capital in the area of education, teachers and parents who play a responsibility in a students learning, the significant impacts on their child's academic learning can rely on these factors. With focus on parents contributing to their child's academic progress as well as being influenced by social capital in education. Without the contribution by the parent in their child's education, gives parents less opportunity and participation in the student's life. As Tedin and Weiher (2010)<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Tedin | first1 = Kent L. | last2 = Weiher | first2 = Gregory R. | year = 2011 | title = General Social Capital, Education-Related Social Capital, and Choosing Charter Schools | journal = The Policy Studies Journal | volume = 39 | issue = 4| pages = 609–629 | doi=10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00424.x}}</ref> state, "one of the most important factors in promoting student success is the active involvement of parents in a child's education." With parents also involved in activities and meetings the school conducts, the more involved parents are with other parents and the staff members. Thus parent involvement contributes to social capital with becoming more involved in the school community and participating makes the school a sustainable and easy to run community.

Sampson et al. (1999) stress the [[normative]] or goal-directed dimension of social capital,<ref>{{cite journal |author=Robert J. Sampson |author2=Jeffrey D. Morenoff |author3=Felton Earls |title=Beyond social capital: Spatial dynamics of collective efficacy for children |journal=American Sociological Review |volume=64 |issue=5 |date=October 1999 |pages=633–660 |doi=10.2307/2657367 |jstor=2657367}}</ref> claiming that "resources or networks alone (e.g. voluntary associations, friendship ties, organisational density) are neutral---they may or may not be effective mechanism for achieving intended effect."<ref>Sampson et al., 1999, p. 635, quoted by Chen, 2002</ref>

=== Difference in male and female ===
Marjoribanks and Kwok (1998) conducted a survey in [[Hong Kong]] secondary schools with 387 fourteen-year-old students with an aim to analyse female and male adolescents differential educational achievement by using social capital as the main analytic tool. In that research, social capital is approved of its different effects upon different genders.<ref>Marjoribanks and Kwok (1998)</ref>

=== Adaption and ethnic values ===
In his thesis "New Arrival Students in Hong Kong: Adaptation and School Performance", Hei Hang Hayes Tang (2002) argues that adaptation is a process of activation and accumulation of (cultural and social) capitals. The research findings show that supportive networks is the key determinant differentiating the divergent adaptation pathways. Supportive networks, as a form of social capital, is necessary for activating the cultural capital the newly arrived students possessed. The amount of accumulated capital is also relevant to further advancement in the ongoing adaptation process.<ref>Hei Hang Hayes Tang (2002) "New Arrival Students in Hong Kong: Adaptation and School Performance"</ref>

[[Min Zhou]] and [[Carl L. Bankston]] (1998), in their study of a [[Vietnamese people|Vietnamese]] community in [[New Orleans]], found that preserving traditional ethnic values enable [[immigrant]]s to integrate socially and to maintain [[social solidarity|solidarity]] in an ethnic community.<ref>[[Min Zhou|Zhou, Min]], and [[Carl L. Bankston]]. 1998. ''[[Growing Up American|Growing Up American: How Vietnamese Children Adapt to Life in the United States]]''. New York: [[Russell Sage Foundation]].</ref> Ethnic solidarity is especially important in the context where immigrants just arrive in the host society.  In her article "Social Capital in Chinatown", Zhou examines how the process of adaptation of young [[Chinese American]]s is affected by tangible forms of social relations between the community, immigrant families, and the younger generations.<ref>Zhou (2000)</ref> Chinatown serves as the basis of social capital that facilitates the accommodation of immigrant children in the expected directions. Ethnic support provides impetus to academic success.  Furthermore, maintenance of literacy in native language also provides a form of social capital that contributes positively to academic achievement. Stanton-Salazar and Dornbusch<ref>Stanton-Salazar (1995) (quoted by Wong, 2002)</ref> found that bilingual students were more likely to obtain the necessary forms of institutional support to advance their school performance and their life chances.

== In fields of study ==
=== Geography ===
In order to understand social capital as a subject in [[geography]], one must look at it in a sense of space, place, and territory. In its relationship, the tenets{{Who|date=February 2013}} of geography relate to the ideas of social capital in the family, community, and in the use of social networks. The biggest advocate for seeing social capital as a geographical subject was American economist and political scientist [[Robert D. Putnam|Robert Putnam]]. His main argument for classifying social capital as a geographical concept is that the relationships of people is shaped and molded by the areas in which they live.<ref>Mohan, p. 193</ref>

There are many areas in which social capital can be defined by the theories and practices. In 1984, [[Anthony Giddens]] developed a theory in which he relates social structures and the actions that they produce. In his studies, he does not look at the individual participants of these structures, but how the structures and the social connections that stem from them are diffused over space.<ref>Mohan, pp. 196–198</ref> If this is the case, the continuous change in social structures could bring about a change in social capital, which can cause changes in community atmosphere. If an area is plagued by social organizations whose goals are to revolt against social norms, such as gangs, it can cause a negative social capital for the area causing those who disagreed with these organizations to relocate thus taking their positive social capital to a different space than the negative.

Another area where social capital can be seen as an area of study in geography is through the analysis of participation in volunteerism and its support of different governments. One area to look into with this is through those who participate in social organizations. People that participate are of different races, ages, and economic status.<ref name="Mohan, p. 197">Mohan, p. 197</ref> With these in mind, variances of the space in which these different demographics may vary, causing a difference in involvement among areas. Secondly, there are different social programs for different areas based on economic situation.<ref name="Mohan, p. 197" /> A governmental organization would not place a welfare center in a wealthier neighborhood where it would have very limited support to the community, as it is not needed. Thirdly, social capital can be affected by the participation of individuals of a certain area based on the type of institutions that are placed there.<ref name="Mohan, p. 197" /> Mohan supports this with the argument of J. Fox in his paper "Decentralization and Rural Development in Mexico", which states "structures of local governance in turn influence the capacity of grassroots communities to influence social investments."<ref>Mohan, p. 198</ref> With this theory, if the involvement of a government in specific areas raises the involvement of individuals in social organizations and/or communities, this will in turn raise the social capital for that area. Since every area is different, the government takes that into consideration and will provide different areas with different institutions to fit their needs thus there will be different changes in social capital in different areas.

=== Leisure studies ===
In the context of [[leisure studies]], social capital is seen as the consequence of investment in and cultivation of social relationships allowing an individual access to resources that would otherwise be unavailable to him or her.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Glover | first1 = T. D. | last2 = Shinew | first2 = K.J. | last3 = Perry | first3 = D. | year = 2005 | title = Association, sociability, and civic culture: The democratic effect of community gardening | journal = Leisure Sciences | volume = 27 | issue = 1| pages = 75–92 | doi=10.1080/01490400590886060| s2cid = 145159227 }}</ref> The concept of social capital in relation to [[leisure]] is grounded in a perspective that emphasizes the interconnectedness rather than the separateness of human activity and human goals. There is a significant connection between leisure and democratic social capital.<ref name="Hemingway">{{cite journal | last1 = Hemingway | first1 = J. L. | year = 1999 | title = Leisure, social capital, and democratic citizenship | url = http://www.jhemingway.net/Academics/Publications/Hemingway__Leisure_Social_Capital_Democratic_Citizeship.pdf | journal = Journal of Leisure Research | volume = 31 | issue = 2 | pages = 150–165 | doi = 10.1080/00222216.1999.11949855 | bibcode = 1999JLeiR..31..150H | access-date = 25 September 2019 | archive-date = 7 August 2020 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20200807154131/http://www.jhemingway.net/Academics/Publications/Hemingway__Leisure_Social_Capital_Democratic_Citizeship.pdf | url-status = live }}</ref> Specific forms of leisure activity contribute to the development of the social capital central to [[democracy]] and democratic citizenship. The more an individual participates in social activities, the more [[autonomy]] the individual experiences, which will help her or his individual abilities and skills to develop. The greater the accumulation of social capital a person experiences, may transfer to other leisure activities as well as personal social roles, relationships and in other roles within a [[social structure]].<ref name="Hemingway" />

=== Social capital, marriage, and romantic relationships ===
Kislev (2019) shows that following vast changes to the status of marriage in modern society singles present higher social capital. They also derive greater happiness from equal levels of social capital compared with married people.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Kislev|first=Elyakim|title=Social Capital, Happiness, and the Unmarried: a Multilevel Analysis of 32 European Countries|journal=Applied Research in Quality of Life|year=2020|volume=15|issue=5|pages=1475–1492|doi=10.1007/s11482-019-09751-y|s2cid=198601943|url=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11482-019-09751-y|access-date=31 October 2020|archive-date=8 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201108145031/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11482-019-09751-y|url-status=live}}</ref> In a later study, Kislev (2020) shows the relation between romantic relationships desire and singleness. He shows that a lower degree of relationship desire has a significant effect on the relative importance of friends. Furthermore, both higher levels of the relative importance of friends and social satisfaction are negatively correlated with relationship desire.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Kislev|first=Elyakim|date=2020-06-24|title=How do relationship desire and sociability relate to each other among singles? Longitudinal analysis of the Pairfam survey|journal=Journal of Social and Personal Relationships|volume=37|issue=8–9|pages=2634–2650|doi=10.1177/0265407520933000|s2cid=220672728|url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0265407520933000?icid=int.sj-full-text.citing-articles.1|access-date=31 October 2020|archive-date=8 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201108015334/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0265407520933000?icid=int.sj-full-text.citing-articles.1|url-status=live}}</ref>

== Effects on informal economies ==
Social capital has been associated with the reduction in access to informal credit in informal economies (especially in developing countries).{{citation needed|date=March 2021}} Social capital in rural communities bring business-related knowledge and skills, entrepreneurial wellbeing, and economic benefits for individuals within communities, while for the community as a whole, strong social capital also brings extra shared economic benefits, and it can also foster socio-cultural change within the community.<ref name=":13">{{Cite journal |last1=Trivedi |first1=Smita K. |last2=Petkova |first2=Antoaneta P. |last3=Willems |first3=Jurgen |title=Building social capital to escape poverty: an intersectionality perspective on women's entrepreneurship at the base of the pyramid |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08985626.2025.2473099 |journal=Entrepreneurship & Regional Development |date=2025 |volume=0 |pages=1–28 |doi=10.1080/08985626.2025.2473099 |issn=0898-5626}}</ref> 

Mwangi and Ouma (2012) ran a [[Bivariate analysis|bivariate]] [[Profit model|probit model]] on financial access national survey data to the impact of social capital on financial inclusion in [[Kenya]].{{cn|date=February 2025}} They determined that membership to groups increased one's probability of getting an informal loan by 1.45% and also the more group memberships one held, the more likely they were to access an informal loan.

Similar results were revealed in a [[cross-sectional study]] run by Sarker in [[Bangladesh]].<ref>{{cite web |last1=Sarker |first1=Md. Masud |title=Social Capital and Access to Microcredit: Evidence from Rural Bangladesh |url=https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Social-Capital-and-Access-to-Microcredit%3A-Evidence-Sarker/72d6864ff437f21b64a2d3658bb40f8dbb91b8d9?navId=paper-header |website=Semantic Scholar |access-date=27 February 2019 |archive-date=27 February 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190227182019/https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Social-Capital-and-Access-to-Microcredit%3A-Evidence-Sarker/72d6864ff437f21b64a2d3658bb40f8dbb91b8d9?navId=paper-header |url-status=live }}</ref> Some other authors also note the importance of social capital among female entrepreneurship. Epo (2013) presented the case that social capital and micro loans increase the likelihood of female entrepreneurship in [[Cameroon]].<ref>{{cite web |last1=Epo |first1=Boniface Ngah |title=Implications of Access to Microcredit and Social Capital for Female Entrepreneurship in Cameroon |url=https://www.africaportal.org/publications/implications-of-access-to-microcredit-and-social-capital-for-female-entrepreneurship-in-cameroon/ |website=Africa Portal |access-date=27 February 2019 |date=August 2013 |archive-date=27 February 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190227120838/https://www.africaportal.org/publications/implications-of-access-to-microcredit-and-social-capital-for-female-entrepreneurship-in-cameroon/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Epo did this by comparing the welfare outcomes of the entrepreneurs who both had access and no access. Other authors, however, disagree about the positive correlation between social capital and [[microfinance]], Kanak and Iiguni argue that formation of social capital is largely dependent on strategies implemented by Microfinance Institutions.{{Citation needed|date=December 2019|reason=removed citation to predatory publisher content}} Kanak and Iiguni determined this while investigating social capital formation in a rural village in Bangladesh.

For their study in [[India|Indian]] rural communities, Trivedi and colleagues make a distinction between internal social capital, i.e. within a rural community, and external social capital, i.e., between people from the community with people outside the community. They argue that both internal and external social capital need to be in place for a rural community to create entrepreneurial and economic benefits, which in turn can reduce poverty.<ref name=":13" /> 

== See also ==
* [[Cultural economics]]
* [[Diplomatic capital]]
* [[Intellectual capital management]]
* [[Organization Workshop|Organization workshop]]
* [[Organisational capital]]
* [[Political capital]]
* [[Reed's law]]
* [[Reputation]]
* [[Relational capital]]
*[[Social currency]]
* [[Soft power]]
* [[Structural capital]]
* [[Sexual capital]]
* [[True cost accounting]]
* [[Trust capital]]

==References==
{{Reflist|30em}}

==Further reading==
* Adler, Paul S., and Seok-Woo Kwon. 2002. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20161013082008/http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/library/papers/social/social_capital.pdf Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept]." ''[[Academy of Management Review]]'' 27(1)1:17–40. {{JSTOR|4134367}}.
* {{cite book |author=Becker, Gary S. |year=1996 |title=Accounting for Tastes |url=https://archive.org/details/accountingfortas00beck |url-access=registration |publisher=Part I: Personal Capital; Part II: Social Capital. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press |isbn=978-0674543577 |author-link=Gary Becker}} [http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/BECACC.html Lay summary].
* [[Pierre Bourdieu|Bourdieu, Pierre]]. 1983. "Ökonomisches Kapital, kulturelles Kapital, soziales Kapital." pp.&nbsp;183–198 in ''Soziale Ungleichheiten'', (''Soziale Welt, Sonderheft'' 2), edited by R. Kreckel. Goettingen: Otto Schartz & Co.{{ISBN?}}
* {{cite journal |jstor=2780243 |title=Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital |journal=American Journal of Sociology |volume=94 |pages=S95–S120 |last1=Coleman |first1=James S. |year=1988 |issue=1 |doi=10.1086/228943 |citeseerx=10.1.1.208.1462|s2cid=51859022 }}
* [[Partha Dasgupta|Dasgupta, Partha]], and [[Ismail Serageldin]], eds. 2000. ''Social Capital: A Multifaceted Perspective''. Washington, DC: World Bank. [https://books.google.com/books?id=6PZ8bvQQmxEC&dq=%22social+capital+a+multifaceted+perspective%22+%22world+bank+publications%22&pg=PP1 Google Books].
* Edwards, B., and M. W. Foley. 1998. ''Civil society and social capital beyond Putnam''. {{ISBN?}}
* {{cite journal |doi=10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x |title=The Benefits of Facebook "Friends:" Social Capital and College Students' Use of Online Social Network Sites |journal=Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication |volume=12 |issue=4 |pages=1143–1168 |year=2007 |last1=Ellison |first1=Nicole B. |last2=Steinfield |first2=Charles |last3=Lampe |first3=Cliff|doi-access=free }}
* Everingham, C. 2001. ''Reconstituting Community''{{ISBN?}}
* {{cite book |editor=Folland, Sherman |editor2=Rocco, Lorenzo |title=The Economics of Social Capital and Health: A Conceptual and Empirical Roadmap |volume=2 |series=World Scientific Series in Global Healthcare Economics and Public Policy |year=2014 |publisher=World Scientific |location=Hackensack, New Jersey |isbn=978-9814293396 |page=236 |doi=10.1142/7593 }}
* {{cite journal |last1=Kay |first1=A |year=2006 |title=Social capital, the social economy and community development |journal=Community Development Journal |volume=41 |issue=2 |pages=160–173 |doi=10.1093/cdj/bsi045 |s2cid=6506888 }}
*{{Cite conference <!-- Citation bot no -->|last1=Koley|first1=Gaurav|last2=Deshmukh|first2=Jayati|last3=Srinivasa|first3=Srinath|chapter=Social Capital as Engagement and Belief Revision |title=SocInfo 2020: Social Informatics|series=Lecture Notes in Computer Science|year=2020|volume=12467|pages=137–151|doi=10.1007/978-3-030-60975-7_11|isbn=978-3-030-60974-0|s2cid=222233101 |      editor1= Samin Aref | editor2= Kalina Bontcheva | editor3= Marco Braghieri | editor4= Frank Dignum | editor5= Fosca Giannotti | editor6= Francesco Grisolia | editor7= Dino Pedreschi  }}
* {{cite journal |jstor=2951271 |url=http://www.ppge.ufrgs.br/giacomo/arquivos/econ-cultura/knack-keefer-1997.pdf |archive-url=http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20160517230610/http%3A//www.ppge.ufrgs.br/giacomo/arquivos/econ%2Dcultura/knack%2Dkeefer%2D1997.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-date=2016-05-17 |title=Does Social Capital Have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation |journal=The Quarterly Journal of Economics |volume=112 |issue=4 |pages=1251–1288 |last1=Knack |first1=Stephen |last2=Keefer |first2=Philip |year=1997 |doi=10.1162/003355300555475}}
* {{cite journal |last1=Leyden |first1=Kevin M |year=2003 |title=Social Capital and the Built Environment: The Importance of Walkable Neighborhoods |url=http://www.minority.unc.edu/sph/minconf/2004/materials/leyden.k.pdf |journal=American Journal of Public Health |volume=93 |issue=9 |pages=1546–1551 |doi=10.2105/ajph.93.9.1546 |pmc=1448008 |pmid=12948978 |access-date=26 February 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018173922/http://www.minority.unc.edu/sph/minconf/2004/materials/leyden.k.pdf |archive-date=18 October 2017 |url-status=dead}}
*Lin, Nan. 1999. "[http://www.analytictech.com/mb874/Papers/lin-socialcapital.htm Building a Network Theory of Social Capital]." ''[[Connections journal|Connections]]'' 22(1):28–51.
**Reprint: Lin, Nan. 2017. "Building a Network Theory of Social Capital." pp.&nbsp;3–28 in ''Social Capital'', edited by N. Lin, K. Cook, and R. S. Burt. {{doi|10.4324/9781315129457-1}}. {{ISBN|978-1315129457}}.
* Lin, Jih-Hsuan, Wei Peng, Mijung Kim, Sung Yeun Kim, and Robert LaRose. 2011. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20200228094249/https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f983/b8ca0e2ccb7fdfaec3a440e4978801e8bd99.pdf Social networking and adjustments among international students]." ''[[New Media & Society]]'' 14(3):421–440. {{doi|10.1177/1461444811418627}}. {{S2CID|10571675}}.
* [[Robert D. Putnam|Putnam, Robert D.]] 1995. "[http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/RGID/article/view/60809 Bowling alone: Americas's declining social capital]." ''[[Journal of Democracy]]'' 6(1):65–78. {{doi|10.1353/jod.1995.0002}}.
* —— 2006. ''E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-First Century''. Nordic Political Science Association {{ISBN?}}
* [[Steven Durlauf|Durlauf, Steven N.]], and [[Lawrence E. Blume]], eds. 2008. ''[[The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics]]'' (2nd ed.)
** [[Partha Dasgupta|Dasgupta, Partha]]. "[http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_S000451&q=(abstract) social capital]."
** [[Laurence R. Iannaccone|Iannaccone, Laurence R.]], and [[Eli Berman]]. "[http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_E000231&q=(abstract) religion, economics of]."
** [[H. Peyton Young|Young, H. Peyton]]. "[http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_S000466&q=(abstract) social norms]" 
** Moody, James, and Martina Morris, "[http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_S000511&q=(abstract) social networks, economic relevance of]"
* Mohan, Giles, and John Mohan. 2002. "Placing social capital." ''[[Progress in Human Geography]]'' 26(2):191–210. {{doi|10.1191/0309132502ph364ra}}
* Portes, A. 1998. "Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology." ''[[Annual Review of Sociology]]'' 24:1–24. {{doi|10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1}}
* Silverman, R. M. 2004. [https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20171018174031/http://www.wsupress.wayne.edu/about/our-community ''Community-based organizations: The intersection of social capital and local context in contemporary urban society'']. Detroit: [[Wayne State University Press]].
* Williams, D. 2006. "On and Off the 'Net: Scales for Social Capital in an Online Era." ''[[Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication]]'' 11(2):593–628. {{doi|10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00029.x}}.
* [[Min Zhou|Zhou, Min]], and [[Carl L. Bankston]]. 1998. ''[[Growing Up American|Growing Up American: How Vietnamese Children Adapt to Life in the United States]]''. New York: [[Russell Sage Foundation]]. {{ISBN |978-0871549952}}.

== External links ==
{{wikiversity}}
*[https://trustyourplace.com/ The World Social Capital Monitor, Survey in 35 languages] within the United Nations [[Sustainable Development Goals]]
*[http://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/forgotten-dimension-sdg-indicators-social-capital Social Capital as the social dimension of the UN SDG, Jos Verbeek of the Worldbank, August 2017]

{{Types of capital}}
{{Social networking}}
{{authority control}}

[[Category:Capital (economics)]]
[[Category:Comparative politics]]
[[Category:Community building]]
[[Category:Community development]]
[[Category:Cultural economics]]
[[Category:Economic sociology]]
[[Category:Social economy]]
[[Category:Social influence]]
[[Category:Social networks]]
[[Category:Sociological terminology]]
[[Category:Socioeconomics]]