Social Capital definitions – Flashcards
Unlock all answers in this set
Unlock answersquestion
Bourdieu, P. 1986.
answer
defined social capital as aggregate of actual/potential resources linked to possession of a durable network of essentially institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition. This group membership proves members with backing of collectively owned capital, relations may exist as material or symbolic exchanges. Social capital is made of social obligations or connections and it is convertible (in certain conditions) into economic capital. Proposed that the volume of social capital processed by a person depends on size of networks or connections he can mobilize and volume of capital (all three kinds) possessed by people he is connected with. Social capital is composed of two elements: 1. The social relationship that allows that individuals to claim resources possessed by collectivity. 2. Quantity and quality of those resources. He sees social capital as investment of dominant class to maintain and reproduce group solidarity and preserve group's dominant position. (power relations)
question
Coleman. 1988.
answer
social capital - supportive relationships among adults and children that promote sharing of norms and values, a fluid process of exchange relations in which intimate bonds of trust are formed. Operates on two levels: level of community (relations between adults and children, especially in schools) and in intimate sphere of family (implies parental attention). For children, this implies networks of interaction and resource exchange that facilitate the transfer of other better known forms of capital: physical, cultural, human. Without social capital, human capital is negligible for academic success. Summary: Coleman's analysis of the role of social capital in the creation of human capital. Three forms of social capital are examined: obligations and expectations, information channels, and social norms. The role of closure in the social structure in facilitating the first and third of these forms of social capital is described.
question
Portes. 1998.
answer
According to Durlauf, he focuses on network social capital - a useful definition of this form of social capital as "the ability of actors to secure benefits by virtue of their membership in social networks or other social structures," stressing that whereas "economic capital is in people's bank accounts and human capital is inside their heads, social capital inheres in the structure of their relationships" (p. 7). The key concept here is that social capital is not an individual characteristic or a personality trait but a resource that resides in the networks and groups to which people belong.
question
Sampson et al. 1999.
answer
Social capital - social capital for children refers to the resource potential of personal and organizational networks, whereas collective efficacy (expectation that neighborhood residents can and will intervene on the behalf of children depends on more than shared values among neighbors; we argue that collective efficacy for children is produced by the shared beliefs of a collectivity in its conjoint capability for action. The notion of collective efficacy emphasizes residents' sense of active engagement that is not well captured by the term social capital) is a task-specific construct that relates to the shared expectations and mutual engagement by adults in the active support and social control of children (Sampson et al. 1997). Although these two concepts have much in common, our distinction differentiates the process of activating or converting social ties to achieve desired outcomes from the ties themselves (Portes 1998). From this perspective, resources or networks alone (e.g., voluntary associations, friendship ties, organizational density) are neutral - they may or may not be effective mechanisms for achieving an intended effect.
question
Bankston et al. 1997
answer
"ethnicity as capital" - the family and community relations that are investments that may yield pay-offs in school are seen as specific to immigrant groups. But Bankston, 2004 replies here that although this ethnicity-as-social-capital approach is valuable, it runs the risk of overlooking the complex and contradictory nature of association between immigrant social relations and the adaptation of immigrant children and children of immigrants