The Interconnection between Globalization, Social Issues and Public Policy - Essay Example

Globalization, Social Issues and Public Policy Name Course Name Institution’s Name Date Introduction According to Narayan (1999), more focus and attention is being given by the World Bank among other international organizations and institutions to the social element of development. According to Narayan, the economic growth and development of a state is entrenched in its social structures and addressing structural imbalance and inequality needs not only economic adjustments but also societal changes. Nevertheless, social experiences are all encompassing and more often than not loosely defined that considering them in an efficient way is particularly hard (Adam & Borut, 2003). One way of unravelling and assessing, some of social variables operating in development are through the concept of social capital. Primarily, the basic notion of social capital is that a person’s friends, family and contacts make up an important asset, which can be depended on in case of a problem and leveraged for material benefits. According to Narayan (1997), a community gifted with loaded stock of social networks and civic associations are in better and stronger positions to counter social issues such as social vulnerabilities and poverty. Schafft and Brown (2000) notes that such a community is able to resolve disputes effectively and efficiently hence minimizing cases where disputes escalate to civil conflicts. According to Isham (1999), a community gifted with loaded stock of social networks and civic associations are in better and stronger positions to capitalize on new opportunities. On the other hand, a community that lacks social ties can have severe consequences (UNIDO, 2012). For instance, employees are often anxious of being left out of the loop especially concerning critical decisions and ambitious employees recognize that climbing the corporate ladder or getting ahead in life basically requires an active dedication to networking by developing new and more social connections, which they may presently lack. This informs this report, which seeks to analyze the concept of social capital, and the different methodologies, which have been developed to measure social capital. In addition, to discuss how social capital is being used to address poverty. The concept "social capital" According to Adam and Roncevic (2003), social capital characterize a fundamental conceptual innovation for trans and inter disciplinary theoretical incorporation particular between sociology and economics since social capital are seen as an effective solutions to social difficulties such as crime, urban poverty and unemployment among others. In addition, social capital is perceived as a solution to diverse economic underdevelopment and inefficiencies of public service sectors as highlighted by Boix and Posner (1998). To demonstrate the importance of social capital to the society, is the essential feature of poverty where an individual, is not a member of and is excluded from particular social institutions and social networks which can be utilized to secure one work and decent living as discussed by Wilson (1997). For instance, lacking accessibility to information networks, people living in urban slums are limited to low wage jobs as noted by Loury (1977). Varshney (2000) notes that where cross cutting connections to link varied groups exists, social conflicts such as differences in religious beliefs are addressed constructively and hardly ever do they spiral to violence. However, where such connections lack, there are insufficient developed systems for dealing with the differences. Social capital is a concept although new in terms of the phrase, its traditions are older and entrenched in literatures in sociology, economics, political science and anthropology. Generally, Szreter, (2000) defines social capital as the stocks of social trust, norms and networks, which individuals can draw upon to make decisions and solve basic problems. The United Nations Industrial Development Organization also referred to as UNIDO defines social capital as “the institutions, relationships, and norms that shape the quality and quantity of a society's social interactions’. According to UNIDO, the social capital of a society entails institutions, the associations, the attitudes and the ideals, which govern interactions among society members and generate social and economic growth and development (UNIDO, 2012). Other than being the total of institutions that underpin society, social capital is the cement that grounds them together and encompasses elements such as shared ideals and laws for social behaviour expressed in personal relations, civic accountability and trust, which makes society more than just a group of people (Adam & Borut, 2003). According to Woolcock (1998), other than three basic factors of economic growth, which includes land, labour and physical capital, there are two more factors to economic development, which includes human and social capital with the former representing human resources and the latter the gains generated by social relations at an individual, community, regional and national levels. Social capital is broadly utilized by scholars, government agencies and international organizations such as World Bank to elucidate and fuel social and economic development processes (UNIDO, 2012). World Bank, (2011) indicates that the core construct of social capital is that social connections and relations among people and between groups in formal and informal systems with their norms, ideals and social merits have value and as earlier mentioned have the capacity to motivate social economic growth and development processes. Coleman (1988) argues that social capital should be defined by its function. Coleman argues that social capital is not a single variable but an array of varied entities, which have social structures, and they aid in particular actions of the actors. According to Coleman, social capital is similar to other types of capital in that it is dynamic, productive and it facilitate the attainment of particular ends which in its absence are unachievable. However, the author notes that unlike human and physical capitals, social capital exist in the system of associations among actors and between them and are not situated within actors or in physical elements of production (Coleman, 1988) According to Grootaert & Bastelaer (2002), the rate and value of social capital in the society is an essential resource for those living in the society as it play important roles in the capacity of the community/ society members making sound decisions, solving problems, responding for the future and engaging in activities that influence their lives. In addition, social capital has a fundamental impact on the quality of life of community members in the view of the fact that it has a close interconnectedness to issues such as community cohesion, mutual goals, transparency, antisocial conduct, the reflections of places and accessibility to support and services to local community members (UNIDO, 2012). In regards to corrective initiatives, social capital develops a conducive social environment promoting active engagement by the public in making decisions. Be it as it may, social capital has its limitations just as it has its benefits. At an institutional level, varied states and organizations have nepotism laws and policies in overt acknowledgement that personal ties can be utilized unfairly to corrupt, discriminate and distort (Grootaert & Bastelaer, 2002). So what constitutes the concept of social capital? One may ask According to UNIDO, there are essential features that characterize social capital, which is a resource that can effectively and efficiently be directed to help generate varied socioeconomic gains. The first element of social capital is trust, which is an outcome of social relations, which is described as the degree of confidence that a person has that the other will do as they say, that is, they are reliable and that they will conduct themselves as they say or as expected of them. Social trust therefore entails the degree of trust in a community and its systems (UNIDO, 2012). Varied institutions, agencies and people who make the society cannot collaborate and interact productively without trust among them where each of the stakeholders trust themselves and others to be accountable to what they are in charge or responsible for. Social trust is improved through the aspect of reciprocity and engagement in social relations and connections (Szreter, 2000). The other feature that characterizes the concept of social capital is social norms, which are defined as informal rules, which guide behaviour of people in varied situations, and they offer some sort of informal social order and control, which eliminates the need for formal legal sanctions (World Bank, 2011). Social norms establish what patterns of conduct are anticipated in various social contexts and they determine what types of behaviour are socially acceptable (UNIDO, 2012). Among notable informal social norms, include tolerance for differences of opinions, giving a helping hand for those in need and showing respect for the elderly or those in authority among others. Just like the element of social trust, social norms are influenced by the aspect of reciprocity where one does unto others, as they would have done to them. On the other hand, there are social networks, which are the primary form of social capital, which is defined as a group of persons who are interconnected with a mutual characteristic and produces valid norms of reciprocity (UNIDO, 2012). Varied group of people have individual set of social norms and degree of shared responsibility among group members (World Bank, 2011). The element of mutual assistance and reciprocity allows group efforts among individuals and groups and they assist in accommodating individual interests with public interest (UNIDO, 2012). All these key elements constitute social capital and they help structure the cooperative quantity and quality of social relations and connections in a society. The different methodologies, which have been developed to measure "social capital According to Woolcock (1998), in order to use social capital as a reliable, relevant and valid indicator of local and national wellbeing, measures of social capital need to be drawn from extensive representative samples, utilizing indicators which have been pre-tested and improved for their usability. Social capital as a concept is complex to measure owing to the innately ambiguous concepts associated with it such as trust, community, involvement and network among others, which are problematic to compute (UNIDO, 2012). Social capital just like human capital, it is hard but not impossible to directly measure making the reliance on proxy indicators vital for empirical purposes (Grootaert & Bastelaer, 2002). Although measuring capital has its distinct challenges, it is possible to do so and varied researches have established fundamental proxies of social capital utilizing varied forms and mix of comparative, quantitative and qualitative research methodologies (World Bank, 2011). Among methodologies adapted to measure, social capital includes carrying out census of groups and group memberships of a given community or society and carrying out large scale surveys to collect data on the degree of civic engagement and the level of trust as described by (Adam & Borut, 2003). Empirical experiences indicates that the most effective way of examining the rate and identifying the channels of producing and supplying social capital at the local level are attained by integrating qualitative methodologies such as in-depth interviews and focus groups discussions with quantitative methodologies such as collecting data using standardized questionnaires (UNIDO, 2012). Among the varied indicators used to generate relevant and valid empirical data includes civic engagements such as examining members of voluntary groups, assessing people’s general knowledge about public issues, participation in general and local elections, asking questions regarding social trust, collaboration for shared goals, social virtues and ideals and social solidarity. According to the World Bank, (2011), social capital is measured depending on how it is defined where based on the definition of the concept of social capital and context used; some indicators may be suitable and more reliable than others. According to the World Bank upon determination of how the concept is to be computed either by examining civic engagement through surveys carried out in household, cultural elements may be taken into consideration in developing the research instrument (World Bank, 2011). For instance, researching on civic engagement using newspaper readership may function effectively in Italy compared to India owing to the differences in literacy levels within these two states. Adam & Borut, (2003) indicates that measuring social capital in poor household over time is challenging since the poor are more likely, not have permanent addresses, have informal work, and may move anytime. In addition, poor perceptions and attitudes among the poor about the government agencies may hinder their being open since they may have little or no trust in government dealings (Szreter, 2000). According to Grootaert & Bastelaer (2002), the difficulty in measuring social capital is establishment of a contextually pertinent indicator of social capital and determines an empirical connection with appropriate benefit indicators. The author suggests that based on Social Capital Initiative surveys, social capital indicators vary sectorally and geographically where for instance the surveys found a relevant indicator in Kenya and states in Andean region, and not in Russia or India where informal social networks are more essential (Grootaert & Bastelaer, 2002). Therefore, the choice of proxy variables in measuring social capital are determined by specific materialization of social capital in the area of study or the particular elements such as social networks through which social capital is derived. How Social Capital is being used to address poverty as a social issue There are varied and numerous ways social capital is used to generate progress and development socially and economically. Social capital is able to influence on development due to interactions between structural and cognitive as the two forms of social capital. Where the former aids sharing of information, collective action, making decision through established networks, roles among other social systems complemented by precedents and rules while the latter entails the ideals, shared norms, beliefs, trust, values and attitudes (Uphoff 2000). Economically, social capital is attributed to improving rates of GDP; ensuring labour markets operate efficiently, minimizing levels of crime, promoting better health and ensuring accountability and effective operations of government institutions (World Bank, 2011). Socially, social capital promotes community cohesiveness and enhancing civic and social engagements and primarily, reducing uncertainties of social and economic interactions UNIDO (2012). According to the World Bank, social capital is essential for alleviating poverty and fostering sustainable human and economic growth and development, which culminates to productivity and increased levels of income, which are key economic performance indicators (World Bank, 2011). Alternatively, lack of social capital hinders the ability of the community to take advantage of social and economic opportunities for failure of the community to effectively and efficiently adapt to socioeconomic changes. According to UNIDO, the significance of social capital for community growth is generated from its capacity to promote strong norms of generalized reciprocity by developing expectations and its ability to aid in coordination and communication hence developing systems through which information on other people’s credibility can flow, be assessed and verified (UNIDO, 2012). The ways and means by which social capital impacts development outcomes make it apparent that fostering of social capital is part of the poverty alleviation plan (Grootaert & Bastelaer, 2002). Varied aspects of social norms and practices are responsible for poverty. Intolerance and discrimination related to gender, race, creed, religion, social status, ethnicity and existence of exclusive agencies and institutions present obstacles to the upward mobility and sufficiently minimizes the capacity and opportunities for people to create valuable assets as discussed by Grootaert & Bastelaer (2002). However, on a positive note, social capital embedded in communal help groups, merry-go –round and credit associations among others generate income opportunities for community members which they would otherwise not have (Szreter, 2000). In addition, where poor households are part of social networks and associations, their capacity to deal with social economic changes such as changes in income and other catastrophes such as fires, accidents and illnesses among others are improved and their level of insecurities be it environmental, financial or job insecurities are greatly minimized (Adam & Borut, 2003). This means that identifying, safeguarding and promoting existing stock of social capital should be fundamental elements of poverty eradiation strategies as suggested by Grootaert & Bastelaer (2002). It is critical that existing capital in terms of people’s relations and organizations are integrated in designing projects and programs meant for alleviating poverty. This has implications of enhancing beneficiary targeting, minimizing project costs and increasing sustainability. Despite the numerous gains, that social capital generates socially and economically, there are elements of social capital that have adverse impacts. The power dynamics of social relations and connections especially from close bonding relations can lead to a myriad of negative outcomes. Social networks can benefit their members at the expense of people exterior to the social networks (UNIDO, 2012). UNIDO, (2012) notes that people or institutions can draw on their social capital for ill intentions such as criminal intents as evidenced by vigilante groups, terrorist networks and Mafia organizations. Social connections can exhaust a person’s resources where robust norms of shared assistance mean people are routinely asked for help by free riders masquerading as community members. There are instances where societies with strong social capital may exact compliance from its members and limiting one’s autonomy (Adam & Borut, 2003). Be it as it may, it is important to note that, the harmful aspects of social capital do not weaken the potential gains it has as a concept of public policy. Conclusion Social capital is a concept that is transforming the way institutions and government agencies perceive economic growth and development where they not only take into account economic structures to ensure economic success but also, they adjust social structures to advance the same. According to the World Bank, social capital is ‘the institutions, relationships, and norms that shape the quality and quantity of a society's social interactions.’ Varied researches and evidence indicates that social unity and cohesiveness is vital for societies to thrive economically and ensure sustainable socioeconomic developments. Among the basic elements of social capital includes social norms, social trust, social relations, social virtues, social ideals, and the element of reciprocity. Social capital is vital for minimizing the rate of poverty in the society and fostering a sustainable human and economic development, which leads to enhanced productivity and enhanced rates of income, that are critical economic performance indicators. The lack of sufficient stock of social capital in a society or community hinders the capacity for the community to capitalize on social and economic opportunities, owing to the failure of the said community to adequately and effectively adapt to changes occurring economically and socially. In regards to measuring social capital, just like human capital it is difficult to measure. However, to measure social capital effectively, accurately and reliably, one can blend qualitative and quantitative methodologies as proposed by the UNIDO. Despite the potential gains of social capital, there is the downside to it such as social networks benefiting their members at the expense of people exterior to the social networks. Be it as it may, the harmful aspects of social capital do not weaken the potential gains it has as a concept of public policy References Adam, F, and Borut R. (2003). Social Capital: Recent Debates and Research Trends. Social Science Information 42: 155-183. Boix, C. and Daniel N. P. (1998). Social Capital: Explaining its Origins and Effects on Government Performance. British Journal of Political Science 28: 686-94. Coleman, J.S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of Human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120 Grootaert, C., & Bastelaer, T.V. (2002). Understanding and Measuring Social Capital: A Synthesis of Findings and Recommendations from the Social Capital Initiative. Forum Series on the Role of Institutions in Promoting Growth, accessible from http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/economic_growth_and_trade/eg/forum_series/social-capital.pdf Isham, J. (1999). The Effect of Social Capital on Technology Adoption: Evidence from Rural Tanzania. Middlebury College: Department of Economics, mimeo. Loury, G. 1977. A Dynamic Theory of Radical Income Differences.' in Women, Minorities, and Employment Discrimination. A. LeMund. Lexington, Mass: Lexington Books. Narayan, Deepa. (1999). Bonds and Bridges: Social Capital and Poverty. Policy Research Working Paper 2167. Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network, World Bank, Washington, D.C. Schafft, K. & David B. (2000). Social Capital and Grassroots Development: the Case of Roma Self-Governance in Hungary. Social Problems Szreter, S. 2000. Social capital, the economy, and education in historical perspective.  Social Capital: Critical Perspectives, Pp. 56-77 UNIDO. (2012). Social Capital. UNIDO. Accessible from http://www.unido.org/index.php?id=5290 Uphoff, N. (1992). Learning from Gal Oya: Possibilities for Participatory Development and Post-Newtonian Social Science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Varshney, A. (2000). Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life: Hindus and Muslims in India. New Haven: Yale University Press. Wilson, P. A. (1997). Building Social Capital: A Learning Agenda for the Twenty-first Century. Urban Studies 34: 745-760. Woolcock, M. (1998). The Place of Social Capital in Understanding: Social and Economic Outcomes. Accessible from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/5/13/1824913.pdf World Bank (2011). Social Capital. World Bank. Accessible from http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/EXTTSOCIALCAPITAL/0,,contentMDK:20185164~menuPK:418217~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:401015,00.html Read More