Manuel Antonio Velandia Mora
Political Science University of Alicante
Alicante, May 2010
This reflection is from a paper delivered in class support for students to read and comment, by Professor Dr. Canales, during Political Science Course in Sociology degree at the University of Alicante, called "social capital" (1), whose transcript is presented below:
There are various definitions of social capital, a concept that is increasingly used not only in academic settings but also in the field of public policy, especially in the field of sustainable development. The World Bank defines it as "the institutions, relationships and rules that ultimately define the quantity and quality of social interactions", The World Bank evidence has shown that social cohesion is critical for achieving economic development sustainable, in the words of organization, social capital is not just the sum of the institutions that are at the base of a given society, but is also the "glue" that makes these institutions remain united. The OECD, for its part, defines social capital as "networks together with shared norms, values \u200b\u200band understandings that facilitate operation within social groups and between them. " (Paragraph one)
In most cases, the term is understood as a social resource for collective action, which is created and accumulated through formal and informal relationships established between people of a community given. The term social capital describes in essence the social environment in which people live, is a collective resource that is accessible to you, families and communities. Some items worth noting what the concept is as follows: (Paragraph two)
is not a precise concept and there are several current debates and discussions about its meaning. However, there seems to be. The consensus within the social sciences around a definition that emphasizes the role of civic networks and norms. In general the concept of social capital refers to the social and cultural internal consistency of a given society, the norms and values \u200b\u200bthat govern interactions between people and institutions. (Paragraph three)
The concept of social capital is useful to understand the degree of social cohesion that exists in a given community and can provide useful ideas for understanding and grasp variations in social and economic characteristics. (Paragraph four)
Social capital can be accumulated when people interact with others in family, neighborhoods, organizations and other formal and informal meeting. (Paragraph five)
Echebarría asserts the notion that social capital has made a fortune as one of the most promising conceptual developments to explain the causes of development or underdevelopment and propose alternatives beyond traditional investments in physical and human capital. Social capital expresses the value of informal practices of conduct derived from securities integrators relationship based on reciprocity and trust. The social capital works in societies and communities, but their conceptualization can be extrapolated to organizations that can improve their performance through investment in social capital (2).
document is alleged in the media that "There various definitions of social capital, a concept that is increasingly used not only in academic settings but also in the field of public policy, especially in the field of sustainable development. " Actually the term "social capital" is about to celebrate a century since an author to define. The first definition of what is now called social capital can be attributed, according to Woolcock, a Hanifan in 1916, when he describes social capital as "those tangible substances (that) account for most in the daily lives of the people, called good will, fellowship, sympathy and social relations between individuals and families that make up a social unit ... If (an individual enters) in contact with his neighbor and they with other neighbors, there will be an accumulation of social capital, which may immediately satisfy his social needs and which may have a potential to substantially improve living conditions throughout the community. "(3)
The term" Capital social "was not taken up until the 1960 when first used in theories of economic development, since it comes from an analogy with economic capital.
Seven decades after Hanifan, Pierre Bourdieu, with a similar idea to that of Marx regarding the capital is the basis of domination, defined in 1985 that "permanent networks and group membership to ensure their members a set of actual or potential resources." For Bourdieu, there are different types of capital, some interchangeable so basically four: economic capital, cultural capital, social capital and symbolic capital, although in practice not always recognized even refuses the connection or convertibility between them. The most powerful conversion is the transformation into symbolic capital of any of the other forms, thus, become perceived and recognized as legitimate. (4)
Being a capital that can be produced by any group capable of resources to produce economic, cultural, social and symbolic, or the interactions between these groups. The ruling classes are one of these groups. The place par excellence of symbolic struggle is the area where they face the ruling classes and the dominated classes, is rather in the ruling class itself. Struggles over the definition of legitimate culture facing intellectuals and artists are only one aspect of the incessant struggles facing the different fractions of the dominant class to impose its definition of the principle of legitimate domination: economic capital, school or social capital. Thus, all convictions against Darwinian naively, the illusion of "natural distinction" is based mainly on the dominant power they have to impose their existence, a definition of excellence. Discourses on the social world, they are presented as scientists, are almost always symbolic imposition strategies (5).
As the document states base, paragraph three "is not a precise concept and there are several current debates and discussions about its meaning", as shown in the following authors and definitions.
Three years after Bourdieu, James Coleman (1988), defines social capital as aspects of social structure that facilitate certain joint actions of agents within the structure. " (6)
Francis Fukuyama asserts that the term "social capital" was reinstated to the lexicon of social science by James Coleman (1990) in the eighties and refers to the ability of people to work in groups. The author considers it preferable to define the concept in respect wide, and used in all situations in which people cooperate to achieve certain common objectives, based on a set of shared informal norms and values \u200b\u200b(7).
The World Bank, which in 1994 created a working group on issue within its Social Development Unit. For the World Bank (1988), social capital refers to "the institutions, relationships and norms that shape the quality and quantity of social interactions of a society." (8) Definition which also appears in the base document, paragraph one without citation. We read in that document that "The World Bank evidence has shown that social cohesion is a factor critical to achieving sustainable economic development, in the words of organization, social capital is not just the sum of the institutions that are at the base of a given society, but is also the "glue" that makes these institutions stick together. "
Robert Putnam (1993, 1996), outlines just some of the organizational aspects, ie as "aspects of social organizations such as networks, norms and trust that enable action and cooperation mutual benefit (development and democracy). " (9)
The OECD defines it, in its report The Well-Being of Nations: the role of human and social capital (2001) as "networks together with norms, values \u200b\u200band shared beliefs that facilitate cooperation within and between groups. (10) Idea which also is located in the base document, paragraph one, walk acknowledged.
Narayan and Pritchett (2000) proposed a definition: "or a" society "constituted by N different nodes (which can be households, if ignored intra-household relations, or individuals). Between two nodes i and j is a directional connection (not necessarily symmetric) may be called the intensity of a given social relationship between i and j. This social relationship can be from a disposition or attitude (for example, a sense of mutual confidence, a willingness to postpone the reciprocity of obligations), to an identification of kinship, ethnic or social group culturally defined and constructed (eg, cousins, tribe or clan) to a union or voluntarily adopted social bond (eg a friend or member of the club volunteers). In this abstraction of society a general definition of "social capital" is some aggregation of relations between nodes (11).
From several works on the state of the art, which were prepared during the ECLAC Conference (2001), we can see that there are two dimensions or principal axes that can be aligned to different approaches to the definition of the concept. The first dimension relates to social capital understood as a specific capacity of mobilization of certain resources from a group, the second refers to the availability of networks of social relations. Around the ability to mobilize two notions converge particularly important, such as leadership and its counterpart, empowerment. In the dimension of the resources appear involved the notion of partnership and the nature of horizontal or vertical social networks. (12) These characteristics have led to the distinction between the networks of relationships within a group or community (bonding), networks of relationships between groups or similar communities (bridging) and networks of external relations (linking). (13)
In all the above definitions is common to the way social capital 'the role of civic networks and norms ", the weight given to" the internal coherence of social and cultural. " The World Bank is the only definition that refers to the "norms and values \u200b\u200bthat govern interactions between people and existing institutions" (paragraph three).
argue Pérez Alberdi and Ermine, that certain authors, such as Harriss and De Renzio (1997), have made several criticisms of conceptions of social capital of Putnam and the World Bank, as the following: a) The existence of networks and norms that promote economic exchange does not guarantee that they promote democracy, good for the markets need not be for democracy . b) The social capital is not always positive, since networks and organizations such as mafias are bad for most of society. c) The term "social capital" is vague and leads to misunderstandings, as it is used in reference to content rather different (family ties, social organizations, relations between civil society and state, political and institutional framework, social norms, etc.). . d) Depending is the concept of social capital that is split, the projects aimed at increasing it may help to reduce structural inequalities in power relations, but sometimes also to increase them. (14)
In an interview with ABC, Spain, Fukuyama defines Capital social as "the ability of people to work in groups, gather around values \u200b\u200band norms. It is the third form of capital, along with physical capital and human capital. The social capital stems from the ability to interact socially, to be able to trust other people or have common standards of honesty and reciprocity "(15). Francis Fukuyama, in "The End of History and the Last Man, Trust, Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity ", believes that" the vitality of [social capital] is essential for the functioning of markets and democracy. "
For Fukuyama, social capital is " what enables weak individuals band together to defend their interests and organize to support collective needs; the authoritarian government, by contrast, thrives on the basis of social atomization. If you want liberal democracy is the context in which most developing countries seek to enact their policies and stimulate growth, then social capital is critical to the strength and stability of that policy framework. The democracies strong and well established are in a better position to meet the challenges of development (...) The social capital is a utilitarian way of looking at culture. The culture tends to be regarded as an end in itself, what is undeniable, or as a form of creative expression. But also plays an important functional role in every society, since it is the means by which groups of individuals communicate and cooperate in a variety of activities. While we find it difficult to judge the culture as an end in itself, the functionality of culture in economic terms is much more measurable (...) The concept of social capital puts policies and institutions in their proper cultural context, and we no longer harbor certain naive expectations that a relatively simple political formula inevitably leads to economic growth . (16) The definition of Fukuyama is also useful to understand the degree of social cohesion that exists in a given community (base document, paragraph four).
Understanding development requires holistic, systemic complexity and resources. Morin, Prigogine, Capra, Drucker, Fukuyama, Habermas, Luhmann, Maturana, Varela and others are some of the names begin to be behind a new paradigm, says Boisier, who asks: "And if, as openly suggested in the title of this paper, the development is not attainable by the sum of shares, but by a simultaneity that do arise, they do emerge? Where does this leave us? The answer is simple principle: if so, would have to rethink development (the process and completion status at any time) in light of a more systemic framework of reasoning. Would specifically reflect and work on the issue from the perspective of systems theory.
From a systemic perspective, Manuel Velandia, author of this text, defines social capital (18) as:
" The emergence of interactions, interaffectivity and interdependencies or various forms of attachment that arise in social relations among individuals, groups, institutions, associations, organizations or any other social organizations as social networks, establish bonds of kinship, community, formal and informal social organizations CBOs, etc., from voluntarily adopted social ties, which consequently substantially improve living conditions throughout the community. With social networking Social Capital gain or generate benefits in terms of flows of solidarity, capacity and rights advocacy, information gathering and creation of links that are crucial when making decisions, acting as individuals or members of a collective action under the criteria of solidarity and redirect such as trust, voluntarism, altruism, respect, solidarity, honesty and reciprocity, as well as for intragroup relationships networking, performance standards and intra service or intra-networks of relationships among groups or communities with goals, missions and visions similar to his work and social and community networks external relations. "
Notes:
1. Mimeo. No sources.
2. Echebarria Ariznabarreta, Koldo (2007). Social capital, organizational culture and gender mainstreaming in public administration.
www.flacso.cl/getFile.php?file=file_4bbf77eee7953.pdf
3. Hanifan, (1916). P. 130. In: Woolcock, Michael; Narayan, Deepa (2000) "Social Capital: Implications for Development Theory, Research, and Policy" The World Bank Research Observer, vol.15, n º .2, pp.225-249. August 2000.
4. Bourdieu, Pierre (1988). Distinction. A Social Critique of Taste, Taurus, Madrid. 1988: 251, 311.
5. Fernandez, J. Manuel (2005). The notion of symbolic violence in the work of Pierre Bourdieu. Social Working Papers 30, Vol 18 (2005): 7-31. http://revistas.ucm.es/trs/02140314/articulos/CUTS0505110007A.PDF
6. Coleman, James S. (2000). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. In: Dasgupta, Partha, Serageldin, Ismail (eds) Social Capital: A Multifaceted Perspective (Washington, DC: The World Bank): 13-39.
7. Fukuyama. Francis (2003). Social capital and development: the coming agenda. In: Atria, Siles et al. Compilers (2003). Social capital and poverty reduction in Latin America and the Caribbean: towards a new paradigm. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean / Michigan State University. Santiago de Chile, January 2003. http://www.grupochorlavi.org/php/doc/documentos/capitalsocialr.pdf # page = 579
8. Coleman, James S. (2000). Social Capital in the creation of Human Capital. En: Dasgupta, Partha, Serageldin, Ismail (eds) Social Capital: A Multifaceted Perspective (Washington, D.C.: The World Bank): 13-39.
9. Putnam, Robert (2000) “Social Capital: Measurement and Consequences”. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. Paper presented at Symposium on the Contribution of Human and Social Capital to Sustained Economic Growth and Well Being, Quebec. March 2000.
10. OCDE (2001). The Well-being of Nations. The role of Human and Social Capital.
11. Narayan, Deepa, Pritchett, Lant (2000) “Social Capital: Evidence and Implications” En Dasgupta, Partha, Serageldin and Ismail (eds) Social Capital: A Multifaceted Perspective (Washington, DC: The World Bank): 269-295.
12. Atria, Raul (ECLAC), Siles, Marcelo (MSU), Arriagada, Irma (ECLAC), Robison, Lindon J. (MSU), Whiteford, Scott (MSU). Compilers (2003). Social capital and poverty reduction in Latin America and the Caribbean: towards a new paradigm. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean / Michigan State University. Santiago de Chile, January 2003. http://www.grupochorlavi.org/php/doc/documentos/capitalsocialr.pdf # page = 579
12. Coleman, James S. (2000). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. In: Dasgupta, Partha, Serageldin, Ismail
12. Woolcock, Michael (1998), "Social capital and economic development: Toward a Theoretical synthesis and policy framework" Theory and Society, vol. 27, No. 2. Pp 151-208
14. Alberdi, Jokin, Perez de Ermine, Karl (2005). Social capital. In: Dictionary of Humanitarian Action and Development Cooperation.
http://dicc.hegoa.efaber.net/listar/mostrar/29
15. Rodriguez, Pedro (2000). Fukuyama's ideas. In: ABC Journal, Spain. April 15, 2000. Washington.
http://presencias.net/indpdm.html?http://presencias.net/miscel/ht4023.html
16. Op. Fukuyama. Francis (2003).
17. Boisier, Sergio. What if the emergency was a systemic development? Governor of Huila, Colombia; Planning Administrative Department / Departmental Council of Science and Technology - CODECYT. http://www.gobhuila.gov.co/cms/images/stories/file/codecyt/BOLETINES% 20INFORMATIVOS/SI% 20desarrollo% 20to% 20the% 20fuese% 20emergencia% 20sistemica.pdf
18. Velandia Mora. Manuel Antonio (2006). Social capital and systems perspective. Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia. Faculty of Sociology. Bogotá.
Additional information may be requested from the author. 
0 comments:
Post a Comment