James DeFilippisa
"The myth of social capital in community development"
[Challenges to the theory of social capital:]
Housing Policy Debate
Volume 12, Issue 4, 2001
Abstract
This article argues that contemporary interest in social capital by community development theorists, funders, and practitioners is misguided and needs to be thoroughly rethought. It argues that social capital, as understood by Robert Putnam and people influenced by his work, is a fundamentally flawed concept because it fails to understand issues of power in the production of communities and because it is divorced from economic capital. Therefore, community development practice based on this understanding of social capital is, and will continue to be, similarly flawed.
The article further argues that instead of Putnam's understanding of social capital, community development practice would be better served by returning to the way the concept was used by Glenn Loury and Pierre Bourdieu and concludes with a discussion of how these alternative theories of social capital can be realized in community development practice.
Authors:
Farrell, Clare1
Source:
Irish Journal of Sociology; Dec2007, Vol. 16 Issue 2, p27-49, 23p
Abstract: "Although clearly sociological in origin, the concept of social capital has become popular in a number of academic disciplines, and prominent in discourses about tackling social inequality. It has managed to cross over into popular consciousness and the vocabulary of political leaders and it has been invoked as a sort of cure-all for an assortment of societal problems. Putnam (1998) has linked social capital to 'better schools, safer streets, faster economic growth, more effective government, and even healthier and longer lives'. Given its rapid journey into political, policy and popular discourse, this paper seeks to critically explore the concept, and its application in research and social policy terms. It calls for a critical and thoughtful approach to the application of the concept, particularly in the context of addressing the problems faced by communities experiencing deprivation or disadvantage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]"
posted by Lloyd at 12:08 PM
Social Capital And Community Governance†
Samuel Bowles,
Herbert Gintis
The Economic Journal
Volume 112, Issue 483, pages F419–F436, November 2002
Abstract: "Community governance is the set of small group social interactions that, with market and state, determine economic outcomes. We argue (i) community governance addresses some common market and state failures but typically relies on insider-outsider distinctions that may be morally repugnant and economically costly; (ii) the individual motivations supporting community governance are not captured by either selfishness or altruism; (iii) communities, markets and states are complements, not substitutes; (iv) when poorly designed, markets and states crowd out communities; (v) some distributions of property rights are better than others at fostering community governance; and (vi) communities will probably increase in importance in the future."
posted by Lloyd at 12:01 PM 