The Role of Social Capital in Development - Example

SOCIAL CAPITAL Name: Institution: Date: Understanding the concept of social capital Social capital is understood as the actual aggregate or the resources which are associated with possession of a twofold network which is potential or relationships between and within firms which are rarely institutionalized of reciprocated recognition and acquaintance (Field, Social Capital, 2012, p. 23). However, the social capital position does not mandatorily run as the economic capital does but for the elite people it is an attribute for holding power through specific networks of which it turns out to be an advantage. In general, the social capital main function is to camouflage those who are looking for pure profits through it therefore being unfair to the open democratic society. In addition, through the social capital development contribution, it is theorized in a way that the experiences and processes for the less elite people is exposed. In most cases the working class people are also able to benefit from the possession of the social capital since it is a social structure nature to be explored widely (Lesser, 2000, p. 45). Therefore the social structure can further be described as many different entities which share at least two characteristics. These entities contain social structure aspects which make individuals in the structure undertake certain actions. The social structure has enhanced achievement of certain things which would not be attained in its absence hence it is productive like any other types of capital. However, there are many social relations networks with reciprocity and trust norms as characteristics. The civil society is sustained by these elements combination hence enabling people for the purpose of getting the mutual benefit. Therefore, the social relationship between people is what determines how problems they face among themselves would be solved. In other words, social capital can be expressed as a collective action resource which can facilitate a large number of outcomes (Coleman, 1994, p. 64). The social capital studies have a disadvantage of laggard but also the studies enhance certain advantage. The long neglected or excluded arbitraries are now given attention hence the new perspectives developed are expanded which shows the advantage. The latecomer is preempted largely and this serves as the disadvantage. The economic analysis attention was not only focused on the material capital but also on physical capital despite the thought of the economic science father Adam Smith that the peoples’ productive abilities in any country include the capital. Social capital concept The social capital concept is economically new but old in other social fields. The difference between economist and a socialist is that the socialists interpret diversely while the economists do very little in interpretation. The analysis in social capital is done in three levels that is; meso-level, macro level and micro level (Lin, 2002, p. 96). Social capital in the micro level consists of norms and networks whereby they govern the communities’ households’ and individuals’ interaction. In the other two levels (macro and meso) the social capital constitutes functions of the government, institutions and the rule of law etc. However, problems arise when aggregation is proposed. Moreover, the social interaction is further divided in two sections namely the cognitive dimension which suggests for social benefit act and the structural dimension which assists in social interaction. They reinforce each other as they work interactively (Christiaan Grootaert, 2002, p. 87). The social capital analysis is approached in three different ways; social psychological approach, culture theory and situational theories. Social Psychological Approach- There is an argument from the people who support this approach on the reasons which cause emergence of trust as a consequence hence they say it is voluntary organizations. However, social capital has an equal meaning to that of trust (FINE, 2001). Although the social capital is situational consistent, it changes from one person to another. Culture Theories- Culture can be defined as a trust source and cooperation and in a society the social capital is the same and it is reliable in all types of situations. It is a good implication that it can be easily identified in a certain country (Field, Social Capital And Lifelong Learning, 2005). Situational Theories- Through this approach it is solved through the variation it has on situations i.e. varies from situation to situation and person to person. Moreover, the capital cannot be abridged from an account single unit. Social capital features There is a problem in deciding what should be part of the social capital because of some disagreements. According to several definitions of social capital they include features like networks, trust or norms, in another definition they talk of the relationship between and within firms and it is also termed as the ability of someone to command scarce resources after attaining the requirement for becoming a member in networks (Partha Dasgupta, 2000). Through combination of these descriptions of the social capital we are able to get its defined features. Importance of social capital There are several social capital importances in human life such as: - at first, the citizens are easily able to solve many problems among them through this social capital. Life becomes better for people if they are able to cooperate and solve their problems in peace. Secondly, the social capital enhances support in the communities thus enabling them to advance smoothly. Everyday activities are cheap where there are trustworthy and trusting people and where interaction is a repetition among them (Sorenson, 2008, p. 105). The third importance is the improvement of awareness especially on the areas where our fate is linked on. In most cases if we don’t interact with others we might end up not knowing what is happening within and also fail knowing the reality of the views we are having. When people lack such opportunities like the evaluation of their views they might end up going astray because of their desires. The networks serves as medium for a helpful flow of information since it contains the social capital hence enhance the achieving of goals set. In addition, social capital works through biological and social processes which help in improving the human lives. Connection to the community means the interaction and cooperation among the people in the community in order to help each other but not just meeting to tale stories of community accomplishment. Furthermore, the social capital has been realized to have made grate changes in our lives. Social Capital measurement methodologies There has been a considerable controversy and debate over the practicability, desirability and possibility of social capital measurement. Measurement attempts have been flawed by difficulties in separating consequences, source and form. For example, ‘trust’ has normally been seen as a constituent of social capital while others see it as equal to social capital. In addition, others refer trust to be a social capital source. The direct measurement of social capital has been proved impossible and difficult but for empirical purposes, proxy indicators have been used conveniently (Field, Social Capital, 2012). It contains constructs which require subjective interpretation when they are translated into operational measures which are indirect invariable surrogates of constructs they are associated because of their inherently abstracts. Though it’s hard to measure, its powerful effects can be inferred. Indicators used in measuring social capital are chosen in line with the concept scope and unit breadth to be observed. It’s so complex such that no single figure or measure can be used to represent it. The following are the methodologies used in measuring social capital: - Social capital indicators: They are classified into distal and proximal groupings. Proximal indicators are the social capital outcomes. Civic engagement indicators of social networks are some of the examples of proximal indicators. Here proximal indicators are measured through observing actions related to displaying confidence in others, norm of trust outcomes in addition to exchanges or reciprocal acts (Grootaert, 2004). Social distal indicators: they are social capital outcomes which are indirectly related to social capital’s key components. In the health sector, these indicators include; health status, suicide rates, life expectancy; crime rates; marital relationships dissolutions and formations; family income; growth in GDP; trade balance; employment and unemployment rates. There is a theoretically informed measurement approach of social capital when building proper investigation and overcoming empirical confusion of social capital in relation to the range of outcomes. It involves linking direct measurement of social capital with understanding concepts theoretically whereby: first, recognizing social capital as a multidimensional concept constituting norms of reciprocity, norms of trust and social networks; second, properly understanding that social capital is a resource action; and thirdly, empirically distinguishing social capital outcomes and social capital. Immediately after the outcomes are distinguished from social capital, the concept is then conceptualized. Understanding social capital to be networks attributed by norms of reciprocity and trust, identifying social relations structure between actors, in addition to quality measurement becomes apparent. Speculating social relations to be networks enables identification of the social relations structure e.g. if people know each other and the nature of relationship in addition to social relations content e.g. the flow of services and goods between people and exchange governing norms (García, 2012). Analyzing networks is appropriate when studying social network methodologies and relational data in social capital. Focus is put on meetings, group attachments, connections, ties and contacts relating within actors which are unreduced to individual agents’ attributes or properties. Analysis of classical social network in anthropology and sociology is usually concerned with some network aspects necessary in understanding social capital forming a strong reference in network study when performing social capital research. Therefore, networks are understood as social capital ‘structural’ elements (Lesser, 2000, p. 72). The measurement of norms involves studying cultures underlying particular networks, but not the individual properties within these networks. It depends on the theoretical orientation where varied weights are put to particular elements of any network. When striving to develop single number indexes in comparison to Gross Domestic Product, a summarized social capital grand total of a group of people in a nation or community is normally analyzed. Analyzing numerical indicators encompasses examining the percentage of the population with a peoples trust though these data is always subject to manipulation and distortion. Dubious extant numerical indicators are argued that most important aspects of population are normally non-quantitative (Narayan-Parker, 2005). There is a controversy between the numerical representation of the essential qualitative and the purely quantitative phenomenon e.g. per capita income. This converts the very essential qualitative, subtle and complex judgment into a simple number set. Generally, the commonly used example concerning this type of measurement is Freedom House rating performed annually where nations offer political rights to their population like freedom of assembly, civil liberties and fair elections. In the case of Freedom House ratings, experts in a country or government consult more considerations or dozen standard checklists then basing on qualitative judgment, they allocate a number between 1 and 8 to show their assessment on how governments respect civil liberties and assure citizens their political rights (Partha Dasgupta, 2000). Qualities are then transformed into numbers. Though these numbers may not absolutely be meaningful requirements for classification, a non-quantitative or non-numerical political regime classification such as totalitarian, authoritarian or democratic is needed for a meaningful social capital analysis. A self-justifying measurement of intrinsically appealing social capital outcome can be produced in the milieu of world national development. The possession of human capital, net of material and social capital insures a government’s prevailing chances in international war or international economic competition. Looking deeply, enquiring the presence of less or more social capital helps in analyzing community’s protection against communal violence and riot or may promise it a more effective and faster response towards natural disasters like cataclysmic floods or great earthquakes. In a different perspective, having a large amount of social capital, human capital or net of material may insure a stronger logic in the general well being and greater happiness among a population (Partha Dasgupta, 2000). Generally, social capital entails different aspects and its level of measurement in a community or nation can be quite complex. In many cases, questions are asked to respondents which focus on the following issues:- Trust level - e.g. whether there exist trust among neighbors and whether the neighborhood is considered a place where inhabitants are free to help one another. Membership – e.g. individual association in social groups, societies or clubs. Number of individual social contacts and networks – e.g. how frequent do individuals meet with friends and family members (Lin, 2002, p. 206). Addressing social issues using social capital Family household In the family household, social relations are characterized by reciprocity and trust. Social capital examines its impact on a particular family outcome like well being and child development. In this examination, social capital touches on the human capital creation in which parent to child relations are measured by scrutinizing the adults’ physical presence in the household and the attention adults give to children hence providing empirical indicators in this relationship (Ackerman, 1997, p. 56). Family relation ‘strength’ is measured through building a child to parent ratio. This ratio approach is used to measure the family network makeup and where it’s situated. Although this method does not put into account relationship qualities and nonresident parents, it measures social capital including parent-figures or two parents in a household; not exceeding two children in a family; and social support to the maternal caregiver. Focus is also expressed around exchanges in a parent to child relationship to ensure it’s within the scale of family social capital (Coleman, 1994). Measurement of parent to child relationship is done using retrospective data which include issues like: getting help concerning personal problems, homework; showing affection; having talks; and feeling loved. Marital discord can also be established to examine partners’ ability to trust and cooperate with one another. Social capital can be extended to include non-resident parents, hence increasing the family network far from household limitation walls (Coleman, 1994). To understand the actual social capital participation of parent to family household, parents should construct a culture in which children are inculcated and given the right attention. This culture will include norms, rituals, practices, habits and values. Generally, family based household measurement of social capital remains limited and narrowed. Adoption of an inclusive social relations measurement approach in households by including nonresident parents and sibling relationships where relevant will appear essential in understanding social relation qualities (Coleman, 1994). Measuring family household networks ought to be used hand in hand with social relation cultures and quality measures to ensure it enlighten the actual social capital based on the family. Unlike the families contained by the household, the kin or family members’ network s existing outside the household are being educated less on the social capital. However, there has been an establishment of an investigation which specifically targets at social capital between diverse kinship households which are indicated in money and time transfer (Sorenson, 2008, p. 104). The measurement and identification of kinship networks is indirectly done through asking ‘investment in’ and ‘stock of’ social capital of a family in these ways:- Time investment- There are some emergencies which arise among the people whereby they require some help of money or time from others. The help of money can be on a certain agreement on when to be returned and the time it will take the borrower to return it. In terms of time, you will realize that someone has to volunteer himself and sacrifice his time to help the needy person (White, 2008, p. 83). Money investment- when investing in money there must be an agreement on the amount you should get after a certain agreed period of time. For example if there is a friend who seriously needs your help through money and is not a family member, as you lent him or her the money the agreements made should be kept such that if it is a return with a certain percentage profit that should be observed (Coleman, 1994). Time stock- in case in your household there is a serious emergency need. The only people who should help you out are the friends living nearby or even any other relative. In most cases we will find that it is not only the relatives who would spend more time helping out bet also some of the good friends we have (Sorenson, 2008). Money stock- when experiencing the difficulties of money such as having an emergency need of some money after getting all that you had, gone further to borrow from an institution yet it is not enough, the other step to be taken is to ask it from the close family members and then later to the close friends you have in case you are not helped within the kinship household (Coleman, 1994). All these four items explain how the relationship beyond the household can be applied in the real life situation. In some situations the relative is much more needed while in other situations the people surrounding the household are of more use than the relatives (Ackerman, 1997, p. 159). The characteristics used to measure these households’ networks are proximity, density and network size hence they offer the best way to recognize the family beyond the network of household. References Ackerman, F. (1997). Human Well-Being and Economic Goals. USA: Island Press. Christiaan Grootaert, T. v. (2002). The Role of Social Capital in Development: An Empirical Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Coleman, J. S. (1994). Foundations of social theory. Havard: Harvard University Press. Field, J. (2005). Social Capital And Lifelong Learning. UK: The Policy Press. Field, J. (2012). Social Capital. UK: Routledge. FINE, B. (2001). Social Capital Versus Social Theory. UK: Routledge. García, F. P. (2012). Measurement of Social Capital and Growth. Spain: Fundacion BBVA. Grootaert, C. (2004). Measuring social capital: an integrated questionnaire. Washington DC: World Bank Publications. Lesser, E. L. (2000). Knowledge And Social Capital. Armsterdam: Elsevier. Lin, N. (2002). Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Masciarelli, F. (2011). The Strategic Value of Social Capital. UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. Narayan-Parker, D. (2005). Measuring Empowerment: Cross Disciplinary Perspectives. Wshington DC: World Bank Publications. Partha Dasgupta, I. S. (2000). Social capital: a multifaceted perspective. Washington Dc: World Bank Publications. Sorenson, R. L. (2008). Family Business and Social Capital. UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. White, A. M. (2008). Reframing Family Social Capital Theory from a Developmental Perspective. Kansas: ProQuest. Read More