PSL-PDKLP-PPSUB 2013
MODAL SOSIAL
DALAM
KAJIAN
LINGKUNGAN
Dihimpun oleh: E.Djayadi, M.Mokoginta, Nunuk H., A.Nuril, dan Soemarno
DEFINISI
Modal sosial adalah bagian-bagian dari
organisasi sosial seperti kepercayaan, norma
dan jaringan yang dapat meningkatkan
efisiensi masyarakat dengan memfasilitasi
tindakan-tindakan yang terkoordinasi.
Modal sosial juga didefinisikan sebagai
kapabilitas yang muncul dari kepercayaan
umum di dalam sebuah masyarakat atau
bagian-bagian tertentu dari masyarakat
tersebut.
Selain itu, konsep ini juga diartikan sebagai
serangkaian nilai atau norma informal yang
dimiliki bersama di antara para anggota suatu
kelompok yang memungkinkan terjalinnya
kerjasama.
Diunduh dari: http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_sosial ……….5/1/2013
DEFINISI
Modal sosial merupakan penampilan organisasi sosial,
seperti kepercayaan, norma-norma (atau hal timbal balik),
dan jaringan (dari ikatan-ikatan masyarakat), yang dapat
memperbaiki efisiensi masyarakat dengan memfasilitasi
adanya koordinasi dan kerjasama bagi keuntungan bersama.
Modal sosial mencerminkan kemampuan yang timbul dari
adanya kepercayaan (trust) dalam sebuah komunitas.
Modal sosial merupakan suatu rangkaian proses hubungan
antar manusia yang ditopang oleh jaringan, norma- norma
dan kepercayaan social yang memungkinkan efisien dan
efektifnya koordinasi dan kerjasama untuk keuntungan dan
kebajikan bersama.
Modal sosial adalah aturan-aturan, norma-norma,
kewajiban-kewajiban, hal timbal balik dan kepercayaan yang
mengikat dalam hubungan sosial, struktur sosial dan
pengaturan-pengaturan kelembagaan masyarakat yang
memungkinkan para anggota untuk mencapai hasil sasaran
individu dan masyarakat.
Diunduh dari: www.polines.ac.id/ragam/index_files/.../paper_6%20apr%202012.pd...
……….5/1/2013
DEFINIFTION
OF
SOCIAL
CAPITAL
Diunduh dari:
……….4/1/2013
Social Capital
Social capital is a complex theory with many dimensions, types,
levels and determinants and although different authors identify
different dimensions of social capital all authors seem to agree
that social capital is multi-dimensional.
Further research is needed to conceptualize the various
dimensions within a workable framework. Although widely
debated, it is now accepted that social capital exists at the micro,
meso and macro levels.
Again it is identified that further work is required to conceptualize
the various levels, and ownership of social capital as well as the
types, to establish an agreed framework and definition. Much
work is still required to move the understanding of social capital
determinants from the applied theory area to have empirical
support.
It is now widely accepted that social capital can be increased in
the short term however there is a lack of understanding of the
processes and how they operate to build or improve social capital
structure.
Although there has been very little work directly on social capital
and natural resource management there are studies that can be
applied to the area. Much work is required to understand the
interaction of social capital and natural resource management
outcomes.
Diunduh dari:
……….4/1/2013
DEFINITIONS OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
There are therefore numerous definitions of social capital found in the
literature.
A considerable number of definitions have been listed in the table below
(adapted from Adler and Kwon 2002).
They vary depending on whether their focus is primarily on (1) the
relations an actor maintains with other actors, (2) the structure of relations
among actors within a collectivity, or (3) both types of linkages (Adler and
Kwon 2002).
A focus on external relations have also been called 'bridging' (Woolcock
1998) or 'communal' (Oh et al. 1999) and a focus on internal relations
'bonding' or 'linking'.
Similar categorization could be done according to other criteria such as
strong or weak ties, horizontal or vertical, open or closed, structural or
cognitive, geographically dispersed or circumscribed, and instrumental or
principled (further discussion of these types and categorizations can be
found in the types of social capital section).
In table 2 below the external definitions are those that focus primarily on
the relations as actors maintain with other actors the internal are those
that focus on the structure of relations among actors within a collectivity
and both types of linkages (Adler and Kwon 2002).
1.
2.
3.
Adler, Paul S, and Seok-Woo Kwon. 2002. 'Social Capital: Prospects For a New
Concept.' Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review 27:
17-40.
Oh, H., M. Kilduff, and D.J. Brass. 1999. "Communal social capital, linking social
capital, and economic outcomes." in Paper presented at the annual meeting of
the Academy of Management. Chicago.
Woolcock, Michael. 1998. "Social capital and economic development: Towards a
theoretical synthesis and policy framework." Theory and Society 27: 151-208.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
DEFINITIONS OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Authors
Baker
Belliveau,
O'Reilly, Wade
Bourdieu
Bourdieu
Wacquant
Boxman, De
Graai. Flap
Burt
Definitions of Social Capital
'a resource that actors derive from specific social structures and
then use to pursue their interests; it is created by changes in the
relationship among actors'; (Baker 1990, p. 619).
'an individual's personal network and elite institutional affiliations'
(Belliveau et al. 1996, p. 1572).
'the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked
to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized
relationships of mutual acquaintance or recognition' (Bourdieu
1986, p. 248).
'made up of social obligations ('connections'), which is convertible,
in certain conditions, into economic capital and may be
institutionalized in the form of a title of nobility' (Bourdieu 1986, p.
243).
'the sum of the resources, actual or virtual, that accrue to an
individual or a group by virtue of possessing a durable network of
more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance
and recognition' (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992, p. 119).
'the number of people who can be expected to provide support and
the resources those people have at their disposal' (Boxman et al.
1991, p. 52).
'friends, colleagues, and more general contacts through whom you
receive opportunities to use your financial and human capital' (Burt
1992, p. 9).
'the brokerage opportunities in a network' (Burt 1997, p. 355).
Knoke
'the process by which social actors create and mobilize their
network connections within and between organizations to gain
access to other social actors' resources' (Knoke 1999, p. 18).
Portes
'the ability of actors to secure benefits by virtue of membership in
social networks or other social structures' (Portes 1998, p. 6).
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
DEFINITIONS OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Internal/
Bonding/ Brehm Rahn
Linking
'the web of cooperative relationships between citizens that
facilitate resolution of collective action problems' (Brehm and
Rahn 1997, p. 999).
Coleman
'Social capital is defined by its function. It is not a single entity,
but a variety of different entities having two characteristics in
common: They all consist of some aspect of social structure,
and they facilitate certain actions of individuals who are within
the structure' (Coleman 1990, p. 302).
Fukuyama
'the ability of people to work together for common purposes in
groups and organizations' (Fukuyama 1995, p. 10).
'Social capital can be defined simply as the existence of a
certain set of informal values or norms shared among members
of a group that permit cooperation among them' (Fukuyama
1997).
Inglehart
'a culture of trust and tolerance, in which extensive networks of
voluntary associations emerge' (Inglehart 1997, p. 188).
'those expectations for action within a collectivity that affect
Portes
the economic goals and goal' seeking behavior of its members,
Sensenbrenn
even if these expectations are not oriented toward the
er
economic sphere' (Portes and Sensenbrenner 1993, p. 1323).
Putnam
'features of social organization such as networks, norms, and
social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for
mutual benefit' (Putnam 1995, p. 67).
Thomas
'those voluntary means and processes developed within civil
society which promote development for the collective whole'
(Thomas 1996, p. 11).
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
DEFINITIONS OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Both
Loury
types
'naturally occurring social relationships among
persons which promote or assist the acquisition of
skills and traits valued in the marketplace. . . an asset
which may be as significant as financial bequests in
accounting for the maintenance of inequality in our
society' (Loury 1992, p. 100).
Nahapiet
Ghoshal
'the sum of the actual and potential resources
embedded within, available through, and derived
from the network of relationships possessed by an
individual or social unit. Social capital thus comprises
both the network and the assets that may be
mobilized through that network' (Nahapiet and
Ghoshal 1998, p. 243).
Pennar
'the web of social relationships that influences
individual behavior and thereby affects economic
growth' (Pennar 1997, p. 154).
Schiff
'the set of elements of the social structure that affects
relations among people and are inputs or arguments
of the production and/or utility function' (Schiff 1992,
p. 160)
Woolcock
'the information, trust, and norms of reciprocity
inhering in one's social networks' (Woolcock 1998, p.
153).
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
DEFINITIONS OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Social Capital Theory
Social capital theory is incredibly complex with
researchers and practitioners approaching it from
various disciplines and backgrounds for various
applications.
The result is considerable diversity, controversy
and disagreement surrounding the theory.
Components of the theory:
1.Dimensions
2.Levels
3.Types
4.Determinants
5.Benefits
6.Downsides
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
DIMENSIONS OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Dimensions of Social Capital Theory
As previously identified, social capital theory suffers from much criticism
for being poorly defined and conceptualized. This problem largely stems
form the fact that social capital is multi-dimensional with each dimension
contributing to the meaning of social capital although each alone is not
able to capture fully the concept in its entirety.
The main dimensions are commonly seen as:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Trust (Coleman 1988; Collier 1998; Cox 1997; Kawachi et al. 1999a; Kilpatrick
2000; Leana and Van Buren III 1999; Lemmel 2001; Putnam 1993; Putnam et al.
1993; Snijders 1999; Welsh and Pringle 2001)
Rules and norms governing social action (Coleman 1988; Collier 1998;
Fukuyama 2001; Portes and Sensenbrenner 1993)
Types of social interaction (Collier 1998; Snijders 1999)
Network resources (ABS 2002; Kilpatrick 2000; Snijders 1999)
Other network characteristics (Burt 1997; Hawe and Shielle 2000; Kilpatrick
2000; Putnam 1995)
Other authors have identified different groups of dimensions, for example
Liu and Besser (2003) identified four dimensions of social capital: informal
social ties, formal social ties, trust, and norms of collective action.
Narayan and Cassidy (2001) identify a range of dimensions illustrated in
figure 5.
1. Coleman, James S. 1988. 'Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.' The American
Journal of Sociology 94: S95.
2. Collier, Paul. 1998. 'Social Capital and Poverty.' World Bank.
3. Burt, R. 997. 'The Contingent Value of Social Capital.' Administrative Science Quarterly 42: 33965.
4. Fukuyama F. 2001. 'Social capital, civil society and development.' Third World Quarterly 22: 720.
5. Narayan, Deepa, and Michael F. Cassidy. 2001. "A dimensional approach to measuring social
capital: development and validation of a social capital inventory." Current Sociology 49: 59-102.
6. Putnam, R. 1995. "Bowling alone: America's declining social capital." Journal of Democracy 6:
65-78.
7. Snijders, T.A.B. 1999. "Prologue to the measurement of social capital." The Tocqueville Review
20: 27-44.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
DIMENSIONS OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
The dimensions of social capital defined by Narayan and Cassidy
(2001). Source: Narayan and Cassidy (2001).
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
DIMENSIONS OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Piazza-Georgi (2002) posited that Woolcock (1998) was the first
to attempt a dissection of the concept of social capital within a
unified conceptual framework. She goes on to state that
Woolcock does this by defining four dimensions of social capital,
in two pairs of opposing concepts: embeddedness and autonomy,
and the macro and the micro level.
Four dimensions of social capital defined by Michael Woolcock
(1998). Source: Woolcock (1998).
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
TYPES OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Attempts to more thoroughly conceptualize social capital have resulted in
many authors identifying different types and characteristics, the most
common being the distinction of structural and cognitive, and bonding and
bridging. Although not always called the same thing, the distinction
between bridging and bonding (and often linking as well) is common in the
literature.
Aldridge, Halpern et al. (2002) identified these main types of social capital.
Bonding is horizontal, among equals within a community whereas bridging
is vertical between communities (Dolfsma and Dannreuther 2003).
Wallis (1998) and Wallis and Crocker et al (1998) referred to bonding
capital as localized which he defined as being found among people who
live in the same or adjacent communities, and bridging capital, which
extends to individuals and organizations that are more removed. Bridging
social capital is closely related to thin trust, as opposed to the bonding
(splitting) social capital of thick trust (Anheier and Kendall 2002).
1.
2.
3.
Aldridge, Stephen, David Halpern, and Sarah Fitzpatrick. 2002. Social Capital: A
Discussion Paper. London, England: Performance and Innovation Unit.Anheier,
Helmut, and Jeremy Kendall. 2002. 'Interpersonal Trust and Voluntary
Associations.' British Journal of Sociology 53: 343-362.Wallis, Allan. 1998.
"Social capital and community building.(Building Healthier Communities: Ten
Years of Learning)(part 2)." National Civic Review 87: 317-19.
Wallis, Allan, Jarle P. Crocker, and Bill Schechter. 1998. "Social capital and
community building, part 1." National Civic Review 87: 253-72.
Dolfsma, Wilfred, and Charlie Dannreuther. 2003. 'Subjects and boundaries:
Contesting social capital-based policies.' Journal of Economic Issues 37: 405413.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
TYPES OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
The other important distinction of social capital, developed by Norman
Uphoff and Wijayaratna (2000) spans the range from structural
manifestations of social capital to cognitive ones (Grootaert and Van
Bastelaer 2002a).
Structural social capital facilitates mutually beneficial collective action
through established roles and social networks supplemented by rules,
procedures and precedents (Hitt et al. 2002).
Cognitive social capital, which includes shared norms, values, attitudes,
and beliefs, predisposes people towards mutually beneficial collective
action (Krishna and Uphoff 2002; Uphoff 1999).
Cognitive and structural forms of social capital are commonly connected
and mutually reinforcing (Uphoff and Wijayaratna 2000).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Grootaert, Christiaan, and Thierry Van Bastelaer. 2002a. 'Conclusion: measuring
impact and drawing policy implications.' Pp. 341 - 350 in The Role of Social
Capital in Development, edited by Thierry Van Bastelaer. Melbourne: Cambridge
University Press.
Hitt, Michael A, Ho-Uk Lee, and Emre Yucel. 2002. 'The importance of social
capital to the management of multinational enterprises: Relational networks
among Asian and Western firms." Asia Pacific Journal of Management 19: 353.
Krishna, Anirudh, and Norman Uphoff. 2002. 'Mapping and measuring social
capital through assessment of collective action to conserve and develop
watersheds in Rajasthan, India." Pp. 85 - 88, 115 - 124 in The Role of Social
Capital in Development, edited by Thierry Van Bastelaer. Melbourne: Cambridge
University Press.
Uphoff, Norman. 1999. "Understanding social capital: Learning from the analysis
and experience of participation." Pp. 215-253 in Social Capital: A multifaceted
perspective, edited by Ismail Serageldin. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Uphoff, Norman, and C. M. Wijayaratna. 2000. "Demonstrated Benefits from
Social Capital: The Productivity of Farmer Organizations in Gal Oya, Sri Lanka."
World Development 28: 1875-1890.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
TYPES OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
There are numerous other examples in the literature; for example,
whether its ties are strong (intensive and repeated) or weak (temporary
and contingent);
vertical (operating through formal hierarchical structures) or horizontal (in
which authority is more decentralized);
open (civically engaged and exercising open membership) or closed
(protective and exercising closed membership);
geographically dispersed or circumscribed; and
instrumental (membership as social collateral for individual wants) or
principled (membership as bounded solidarity) (Heffron 2000).
These varieties of types of social capital require further exploration to
establish a widely agreed upon framework, vital for empirical analysis
(Van Deth 2003).
1.
2.
Heffron, John M. 2000. 'Beyond community and society: The externalities of
social capital building.' Policy Sciences 33: 477-494.
Van Deth, Jan W. 2003. "Measuring social capital: orthodoxies and continuing
controversies." International Journal of Social Research Methodology 6: 79.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
DETERMINANTS OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
The determinants are numerous and varied and there is both a lack of
consensus and a lack of evidence to support the propositions.
Several influential studies have suggested that social capital's roots are
buried in centuries of cultural evolution (Fukuyama 1995; Putnam et al.
1993). Other investigators suggest that social capital can be created in
the short term to support political and economic development (Brown and
Ashman 1996; Fox 1994).
Aldridge, Halpern et al (2002) suggested that the main determinants of
social capital include: history and culture; whether social structures are
flat or hierarchical; the family; education; the built environment; residential
mobility; economic inequalities and social class; the strength and
characteristics of civil society; and patterns of individual consumption and
personal values.
Pantoja (1999) identified a different set again, including: family and
kinship connections; wider social networks of associational life covers the
full range of formal and informal horizontal arrangements; networks;
political society; institutional and policy framework which includes the
formal rules and norms that regulate public life; and social norms and
values.
The majority of these claims originate in applied theory and stem from
much work done on other concepts such as network analysis, civic
society, cultural studies, education, psychology, and many others. Even
where empirical research has been performed, the findings have
questionable validity.
1. Brown, L. David, and Darcy Ashman. 1996. 'Participation, Social Capital, and Intersectoral
Problem Solving: African and Asian Cases.' World Development 24: 1467-1479.
2. Fox,J. 1994. 'The difficult transition from clientelism to citizenship: Lessons from Mexico.' World
Politics 46: 151-184.
3. Fukuyama, Francis. 1995. Trust : the social virtues and the creation of prosperity. London:
Hamish Hamilton.
4. Pantoja, E. 1999. "Exploring the concept of social capital and its relevance for community
based development: the case of minin areas in Orissa, India." South Asia Infrastructure Unit,
World Bank.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
Benefits and Importance
OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
The importance of social capital theory is apparent from the literature with
many empirical studies that purport to show the importance of social
capital to a very wide-ranging set of socioeconomic phenomena (Durlauf
2002a; Krishna 2001).
Adam and Roncevic (2003) stated that:
'despite problems with its definition as well as its operationalization, and
despite its (almost) metaphorical character, social capital has facilitated a
series of very important empirical investigations and theoretical debates
which have stimulated reconsideration of the significance of human
relations, of networks, of organizational forms for the quality of life and of
developmental performance'.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Adam, Frane, and Borut Roncevic. 2003. 'Social Capital: Recent Debates and
Research Trends.' Social Science Information 42: 155-183.
Durlauf, Steven N. 2002a. 'On the empirics of social capital.' The Economic
Journal 112: 459-479.
Krishna, Anirudh. 1999. 'Creating and Harnessing Social Capital.' Pp. pp 71-93
in Social Capital: A multifaceted perspective, edited by Ismail Serageldin.
Washington, DC: World Bank.
-----. 2001. 'Moving from the Stock of Social Capital to the Flow of Benefits: The
Role of Agency.' World Development 29: 925-943.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
Benefits and Importance
OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Requena (2003) suggested that the importance of social capital lies in
that it brings together several important sociological concepts such as
social support, integration and social cohesion. This view is supported by
Rothstein (2003) who stated that the real strength of social capital theory
is the combination of macro-sociological historical structures with microlevel causal mechanisms, a rare feature in the social sciences.
The literature recognizes social capital as important to the efficient
functioning of modern economies, and stable liberal democracy
(Fukuyama 2001; Kenworthy 1997), as an important base for cooperation
across sector and power differences, and an important product of such
cooperation (Brown and Ashman 1996), and Lyon (2000) described the
importance of social capital in shaping regional development patterns. It is
clear that social capital is of importance in societal wellbeing.
Some aspects of the concept, such as inter-personal trust, are clearly
desirable in themselves while other aspects are more instrumental
(Bankston and Zhou 2002). Optimism, satisfaction with life, perceptions of
government institutions and political involvement all stem from the
fundamental dimensions of social capital (Narayan and Cassidy 2001).
1. Brown, L. David, and Darcy Ashman. 1996. 'Participation, Social Capital, and Intersectoral
Problem Solving: African and Asian Cases.' World Development 24: 1467-1479.
2. Fukuyama F. 2001. 'Social capital, civil society and development.' Third World Quarterly 22: 720.
3. Kenworthy, Lane. 1997. 'Civic Engagement, Social Capital, and Economic Cooperation.'
American Behavioral Scientist 40: 645-656.
4. Lyons, Mark. 2000. 'Non-profit organisations, social capital and social policy in Australia." Pp.
165 - 191 in Social capital and public policy in Australia, edited by Ian Winter. Melbourne:
National Library of Australia.
5. Narayan, Deepa, and Michael F. Cassidy. 2001. "A dimensional approach to measuring social
capital: development and validation of a social capital inventory." Current Sociology 49: 59-102.
6. Rothstein, Bo. 2003. "Social capital, economic growth and quality of government: The causal
mechanism." New Political Economy 8: 49-71.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
Benefits and Importance
OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Social capital is charged with a range of potential beneficial effects
including:
1.
2.
3.
4.
facilitation of higher levels of, and growth in, gross domestic product (GDP);
facilitation of more efficient functioning of labor markets;
lower levels of crime; and
improvements in the effectiveness of institutions of government (Aldridge et al.
2002; Halpern 2001; Kawachi et al. 1999b; Putnam et al. 1993).
Social capital is an important variable in educational attainment (Aldridge
et al. 2002; Israel et al. 2001), public health (Coulthard et al. 2001;
Subramanian et al. 2003), community governance, and economic
problems (Bowles and Gintis 2002), and is also an important element in
production (Day 2002).
Economic and business performance at both the national and subnational level is also affected by social capital (Aldridge et al. 2002).
Others have emphasized the importance of social capital for problem
solving and how only certain types of social capital contribute to this
(Boyte, 1995).
1. Aldridge, Stephen, David Halpern, and Sarah Fitzpatrick. 2002. Social Capital: A Discussion
Paper. London, England: Performance and Innovation Unit.
2. Bowles, Samuel, and Herbert Gintis. 2002. 'Social Capital and Community Governance.' The
Economic Journal 112: 419-436.
3. Boyte, H. 1995. 'Beyond Deliberation: Citizenship as Public Work.' in PEGS conference, edited
by Civic Practices Network.
4. Coulthard, M, A Walker, and A Morgan. 2001. 'Assessing people's perceptions of their
neighbourhood and community involvement (Part 1'quot; London: Health Development Agency.
5. Day, Ronald E. 2002. 'Social capital, value, and measure: Antonio Negri's challenge to
capitalism.' Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 53: 10741082.
6. Israel, Glenn, Lionel Beaulieu, and Glen Hartless. 2001. 'The influence of family and community
social capital on educational achievement." Rural Sociology 66: 43-68.
7. Subramanian, S. V., Kimberly A. Lochner, and Ichiro Kawachi. 2003. "Neighborhood differences
in social capital: a compositional artifact or a contextual construct?" Health & Place 9: 33-44.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
Disadvantages
OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
The same characteristics of social capital that enable beneficial,
productive benefits have the potential to cause negative externalities.
Potential downsides of social capital include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Fostering behavior that worsens rather than improves economic performance;
Acting as a barrier to social inclusion and social mobility;
Dividing rather than uniting communities or societies;
Facilitating rather than reducing crime, education underachievement and healthdamaging behavior. (Aldridge et al. 2002).
The same orchestrating mechanisms that reduce transaction costs in
market exchange can have negative consequences (Carroll and Stanfield
2003); Erickson (2002) supports this identifying the following paradox:
'every feature of social structure can be social capital in the sense that it
produces desired outcomes, but also can be a liability in the sense that it
produces unwanted results'.
Social capital can become a constraint to individuals' actions and choices
(Wall et al. 1998). For example, there is a particularly high risk of negative
social capital in urban poverty situations (Small 2002).
A stock of social capital is simultaneously productive and perverse.
Simplistically speaking, the make up of these types determines the
structure of the overall social capital present. As this is highly context
specific further research is required to understand the causal relationships
that determine the realization of productive, or perverse, social capital.
1. Aldridge, Stephen, David Halpern, and Sarah Fitzpatrick. 2002. Social Capital: A Discussion
Paper. London, England: Performance and Innovation Unit.
2. Carroll, Michael C, and James Ronald Stanfield. 2003. 'Social capital, Karl Polanyi, and
American social and institutional economics.' Journal of Economic Issues 37: 397-404.
3. Small, Mario Luis. 2002. "Culture, cohorts, and social organization theory: Understanding local
participation in a Latino housing project." The American Journal of Sociology 108: 1-54.
4. Wall, Ellen, Gabriele Ferrazzi, and Frans Schryer. 1998. "Getting the goods on social capital."
Rural Sociology 63: 300-322.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
LEVELS AT WHICH SOCIAL CAPITAL
IS LOCATED
Further to dimensional problems, social capital has been located at the
level of the individual, the informal social group, the formal organization,
the community, the ethnic group and even the nation (Bankston and Zhou
2002; Portes 1998; Sampson et al. 1999).
There are divergent views in the literature; some authors posit social
capital at the individual level, some the community level and others have a
more dynamic view.
Kilby (2002) stated that social capital exists within levels or scales as one
feels belonging to family, community, profession, country, etc,
simultaneously.
Adler and Kwon (2002) supported this stating that social capital's sources
lie in the social structure within which the actor is located. Thus, social
capital can be thought of as having an individual and an aggregate
component (Buys and Bow 2002). That is, social capital belongs to the
group and can be used by the group or individuals within the group
(Kilpatrick et al. 1998; Sander 2002).
1. Adler, Paul S, and Seok-Woo Kwon. 2002. 'Social Capital: Prospects For a New Concept.'
Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review 27: 17-40.
2. Bankston, Carl L, and Min Zhou. 2002. 'Social Capital as a Process: The Meanings and
Problems of a Theoretical Metaphor.' Sociological Inquiry 72: 285-317.
3. Buys, Laurie, and Val Bow. 2002. 'The impact of privacy on social capital.' in Social Change in
the 21st Century Conference. Brisbane: QUT.
4. Kilpatrick, Sue, Rowena Bell, and Ian Falk. 1998. 'Groups of Groups: the role of group learning
in building social capital.' Pp. 13. Launceston: Centre for Research and Leaning in Regional
Australia.
5. Sampson, Robert J, Jeffrey D Morenoff, and Felton Earls. 1999. "Beyond Social Capital: Spatial
dynamics of collective efficiancy for children." American Journal of Sociological Review 64: 63360.
6. Sander, Thomas H. 2002. "Social capital and new urbanism: leading a civic horse to water."
National Civic Review 91: 213-221.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
LEVELS AT WHICH SOCIAL CAPITAL
IS LOCATED
Brewer (2003) stated that although social capital was originally conceived
as a community-wide concept, it should be observable at the individual
level. Baum and Ziersch (2003) disagreed with this, identifying that
Bourdieu identified it at the individual level and that Putnam since at the
community level.
Coleman argued that social capital is not an attribute of individuals but a
context-dependent aspect of social structure (Hogan and Owen 2000;
Robinson 2000).
Glaeser, Laibson et al (2002) identified that post-Coleman literature has
almost universally viewed social capital as a community-level attribute.
Social capital and civil society are essentially social and collective
property of social systems, not a characteristic of individuals (Newton
2001). The key empirical difference between human and social capital is
that social capital inheres in relations between individuals and groups, not
in individuals per se (Edwards and Foley 1998).
The general consensus in the literature is that social capital is identifiable
from the individual level to the level of the nation however it is clear that
social capital is evident at any level where there is identification and
belonging. The classification into micro (individual), meso (group) and
macro (societal) is useful in analysis of social capital.
1. Baum, FE, and AM Ziersch. 2003. 'Social Capital.' Journal of Epidemiology Community Health
57: 320-3.
2. Brewer, Gene A. 2003. 'Building Social Capital: Civic Attitudes and Behavior of Public Servants.'
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13: 5-26.
3. Edwards, Bob, and Michael Foley. 1998. 'Civil society and social capital beyond Putnam.'
American Behavioural Scientist 42: 124-139.
4. Glaeser, Edward L, David Laibson, and Bruce Sacerdote. 2002. 'An economic approach to
social capital.' The Economic Journal 112: 437-458.
5. Hogan, David, and David Owen. 2000. 'Social capital, active citizenship and political equality in
Australia.' Pp. 74 - 104 in Social capital and public policy in Australia, edited by Ian Winter.
Melbourne: National Library of Australia.
6. Newtonj, K. 2001. "Trust, social capital, civil society, and democracy." International Political
Science Review 22: 201-214.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
LEVELS AT WHICH SOCIAL CAPITAL IS LOCATED
The goods produced by social capital can also occur at different levels of
the social structure (Paxton 1999). It can be a private good or a public
good depending on the level (Aldridge et al. 2002). Onyx and Bullen
(2001) supported this identifying that social capital appears to be both a
private and a public good. There is not consensus in the literature
however. Coleman (1988) argued that social capital is a public good,
however Fukuyama posited that it is in fact a private good (Fukuyama
2001; Fukuyama 2002). Fukuyama (2002) suggested that social capital is
not a public good but a private good that produces extensive positive and
negative externalities. This is supported by Dasgupta (1999) who stated
that 'social capital is a private good that is nonetheless pervaded by
externalities, both positive and negative'.
Illustration of the interaction of levels at which social capital exists.
1. Coleman, James S. 1988. 'Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.' The American
Journal of Sociology 94: S95.
2. Paxton, Pamela. 1999. "Is social capital declining in the United States? A multiple indicator
assessment." The American Journal of Sociology 105: 88.
3. Onyx, Jenny, and Paul Bullen. 2001. "The different faces of social capital in NSW Australia." Pp.
45 - 58 in Social Capital and Participation in Everyday Life, edited by Eric M. Uslaner. London:
Routledge.
4. Fukuyama, F. 2001. 'Social capital, civil society and development.' Third World Quarterly 22: 720.
5. -----. 2002. 'Social capital and development: The coming agenda.' SAIS Review 22: 23-37.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
Social Capital and Natural Resource Management
Enhanced social capital can improve environmental outcomes through decreased
costs of collective action, increase in knowledge and information flows, increased
cooperation, less resource degradation and depletion, more investment in common
lands and water systems, improved monitoring and enforcement (Anderson et al.
2002). There is a growing interest in social capital and its potential impact for
affecting collective action in sustainable renewable natural resource institutions
(Rudd 2000; Sobels et al. 2001; Walters 2002).
Pretty and Ward (2001) identified that where social capital is well-developed, local
groups with locally developed rules and sanctions are able to make more of existing
resources than individuals working alone or in competition. Social capital indicates a
community's potential for cooperative action to address local problems (Fukuyama
2001). As it lowers the costs of working together, social capital facilitates cooperation
and voluntary compliance with rules (Isham and Kahkonen 2002). The norm of
generalized reciprocity assists in the solution of problems of collective action.
Adler and Kwon (2002) identified that it transforms individuals from self-seeking and
egocentric agents with little sense of obligation to others into members of a
community with shared interests, a common identity, and a commitment to the
common good. Brewer (2003) believed that denser networks increase the likelihood
that people will engage in collective action. There is also evidence linking social
capital to greater innovation and flexibility in policy making (Knack 2002).
1. Adler, Paul S, and Seok-Woo Kwon. 2002. 'Social Capital: Prospects For a New Concept.'
Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review 27: 17-40.
2. Anderson, C. Leigh, Laura Locker, and Rachel Nugent. 2002. 'Microcredit, Social Capital, and
Common Pool Resources.' World Development 30: 95-105.
3. Brewer, Gene A. 2003. 'Building Social Capital: Civic Attitudes and Behavior of Public Servants.'
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13: 5-26.
4. Isham, Jonathan, and Satu Kahkonen. 2002. 'How do participation and social capital affect
community-based water projects? Evidence from Central Java, Indonesia." Pp. 155, 175 - 187
in The Role of Social Capital in Development, edited by Thierry Van Bastelaer. Melbourne:
Cambridge University Press.
5. Knack, Stephen. 2002. 'Social capital and the quality of government: Evidence from the states.'
American Journal of Political Science 46: 772-785.
6. Pretty, Jules, and Hugh Ward. 2001. "Social capital and the environment." World Development
29: 209-227.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
Social Capital and Natural Resource Management
In the field of development it offers the potential for more participatory, sustainable
and empowering approaches in theory and practice (Chhibber 1999).
Krishna and Uphoff (2002) found that an index of social capital variables is positively
and consistently correlated with superior development outcomes. Social and human
capital, embedded in participatory groups within rural communities has been central
to equitable and sustainable solutions to local development problems (Pretty and
Frank 2000).
Grootaert and Van Bastelaer (2002a) stated that social capital has a profound impact
in many different areas of human life and development: it affects the provision of
services, in both urban and rural areas; transforms the prospects for agricultural
development; influences the expansion of private enterprises; improves the
management of common resources; helps improve education; can contribute to
recovery from conflict; and can help compensate for a deficient state.
Social capital is critical for poverty alleviation and sustainable human and economic
development (Dolfsma and Dannreuther 2003). It represents a potential link between
policy level thinking and community level action (Pretty and Ward 2001).
The mobilization of social capital requires a high degree of sensitivity to the specific
nature of the societies involved in order to have positive effects (McHugh and
Prasetyo 2002). Social capital reduces the costs associated with working together
thereby facilitating collective action (Ostrom 1994). There is a need for further
research in this area.
1. Chhibber, Ajay. 1999. 'Social capital, the state, and development outcomes.' Pp. 296-310 in
Social Capital: A multifaceted perspective, edited by Ismail Serageldin. Washington, DC: World
Bank.
2. Dolfsma, Wilfred, and Charlie Dannreuther. 2003. 'Subjects and boundaries: Contesting social
capital-based policies.' Journal of Economic Issues 37: 405-413.
3. Grootaert, Christiaan, and Thierry Van Bastelaer. 2002a. 'Conclusion: measuring impact and
drawing policy implications.' Pp. 341 - 350 in The Role of Social Capital in Development, edited
by Thierry Van Bastelaer. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
4. McHugh, Rebecca, and Raphael Jane Prasetyo. 2002. "Social capital in Asia: A proposal for
discussion." The International Scope Review 4.
5. Ostrom, Elinor. 1994. "Consituting social capital and collective action." Journal of Theoretical
Politics 6: 527-562.
6. Pretty, Jules, and B.R. Frank. 2000. "Participation and social capital formation in natural
resource management: Achievements and lessons." in Plenary paper for International Landcare
2000 Conference. Melbourne, Australia.
7. Pretty, Jules, and Hugh Ward. 2001. "Social capital and the environment." World Development
29: 209-227.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/definition.html ……….4/1/2013
THE THREE DIMENSIONS OF SOCIAL
CAPITAL
the three dimensions of social capital and its relation with social
performance: relational capital involves interpersonal networking,
organizational capital involves the quality and effectivenes of
organizations and ecosystems to deliver value and institutional capital
refers to the rules of the game -rule of law, protection of contracts,
customers and markets-. As organizational capital, both Groupon and
Facebook have serious shortcomings that customers and now
stockholders are starting to recognize -and price-. As institutions, both
have dangerously loose rules and regulations.
Diunduh dari:
http://www.piiblog.com/2012/08/from-social-capital-tosocial.html……….4/1/2013
Sources, mechanisms and outcomes of social capital
according to Ruuskanen's presentation
In Finland, Petri Ruuskanen (2001) has proposed a distinction between
the sources, mechanisms and outcomes of social capital, stressing the
importance of keeping these dimensions apart in the measurement of
social capital.
Diunduh dari:
http://www.piiblog.com/2012/08/from-social-capital-tosocial.html……….4/1/2013
Sources, mechanisms and outcomes
of social capital
The sources of social capital are considered separately at three
different levels, i.e. the individual, community and society.
A similar distinction is made by David Halpern, who distinguishes
between the micro, meso and macro level of social capital
(Halpern 2005).
The mechanisms of social capital, trust and communication,
facilitate the flow of information from one individual to another and
make it easier for people to maintain contact with one another.
According to Ruuskanen both the sources and the outcomes of
social capital are apparently context-dependent, whereas its
mechanisms seem to work in the same way across different
contexts. (Ruuskanen 2001.)
Trust is variably considered as either a source or an outcome of
social capital.
Michael Woolcock (2000), for example, takes the view that trust is
an outcome rather than a feature or source of social capital.
Some definitions of social capital do not mention trust at all. This
is the case with the OECD definition of social capital, even though
trust does appear in the OECD statistical framework.
Indeed most research in OECD countries recognizes trust as an
important dimension of social capital (Ilmonen 2005).
In international comparisons the measure of trust has uncovered
clear country differences in social capital.
Diunduh dari:
http://www.piiblog.com/2012/08/from-social-capital-tosocial.html……….4/1/2013
:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
SOCIAL CAPITAL FRAMEWORK
Boeck, Thilo & Fleming, Jennie (2005). Social policy—a help or a hindrance to
social capital? Social Policy and Society, 4(3), 259-270.
Field, John (2003). Social capital. London: Routledge.
Morrow, Virginia (2002). Children's experiences of "community" implications of
social capital discourses. In Catherine Swann (Ed.), Social capital and health—
insights from qualitative research (pp.9-28). London: HDA.
Onyx, Jenny & Bullen, Paul (2000). Measuring social capital in five communities.
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 36(1), 23-42.
Putnam, Robert (2000). Bowling alone—the collapse and revival of American
community new. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Diunduh dari: http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/55/113 ……….4/1/2013
SOCIAL CAPITAL FRAMEWORK
RECIPROCITY
Reciprocity - do i trust you?
Diunduh dari:
http://kategenever-stevepool.blogspot.com/2012/05/reciprocity-do-itrust-you.html……….4/1/2013
SOCIAL CAPITAL FRAMEWORK
TRUST
Definitions of trust typically refer to a situation characterised by the
following aspects: One party (trustor) is willing to rely on the actions of
another party (trustee); the situation is directed to the future. In addition,
the trustor (voluntarily or forcedly) abandons control over the actions
performed by the trustee. As a consequence, the trustor is uncertain
about the outcome of the other's actions; he can only develop and
evaluate expectations. The uncertainty involves the risk of failure or harm
to the trustor if the trustee will not behave as desired.
Trust can be attributed to relationships between people. It can be
demonstrated that humans have a natural disposition to trust and to judge
trustworthiness that can be traced to the neurobiological structure and
activity of a human brain, and can be altered e.g. by the application of
oxytocin.
Conceptually, trust is also attributable to relationships within and between
social groups (families, friends, communities, organisations, companies,
nations etc.). It is a popular approach to frame the dynamics of inter-group
and intra-group interactions in terms of trust.
When it comes to the relationship between people and technology, the
attribution of trust is a matter of dispute. The intentional stance
demonstrates that trust can be validly attributed to human relationships
with complex technologies. However, rational reflection leads to the
rejection of an ability to trust technological artefacts.
Diunduh dari:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trust_%28social_sciences%29……….5/1/2013
SOCIAL CAPITAL FRAMEWORK
Trust is one of several social constructs, an element of the social
reality. Other constructs, frequently discussed together with trust,
are: control, confidence, risk, meaning and power. Trust is naturally
attributable to relationships between social actors, both individuals
and groups (social systems). Because trust is a social construct, it
is valid to discuss whether trust can be trusted (e.g. ), i.e. whether
social trust operates as expected.
Society needs trust because it increasingly finds itself operating at
the edge between confidence in what is known from everyday
experience, and contingency of new possibilities. Without trust, all
contingent possibilities should be always considered, leading to a
paralysis of inaction. Trust can be seen as a bet on one of
contingent futures, the one that may deliver benefits. Once the bet is
decided (i.e. trust is granted), the trustor suspends his or her
disbelief, and the possibility of a negative course of action is not
considered at all. Because of it, trust acts as a reductor of social
complexity, allowing for actions that are otherwise too complex to be
considered (or even impossible to consider at all); specifically for
cooperation.
Sociology tends to focus on two distinct views: the macro view of
social systems, and a micro view of individual social actors (where it
borders with social psychology). Similarly, views on trust follow this
dichotomy. Therefore, on one side the systemic role of trust can be
discussed, with a certain disregard to the psychological complexity
underpinning individual trust.
The behavioural approach to trust is usually assumed while actions
of social actors are measurable, leading to statistical modelling of
trust. This systemic approach can be contrasted with studies on
social actors and their decision-making process, in anticipation that
understanding of such a process will explain (and allow to model)
the emergence of trust.
Diunduh dari: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trust_%28social_sciences%29……….
……….5/1/2013
Is Trust Important?
Trust in each other gives strength and vitality to our relationships.
It gives us inner happiness, which is priceless. It brings joy all
around and life appears brighter and brighter. Its fragrance
spreads far and wide. Trust keeps us in a positive mental
framework. When you trust each other you feel self-confident.
The feeling of believing others is electrifying. It not only provides
sense of security but provides us new zeal to fight the vagaries of
life. Trusting each other gives us a sense of deep bonding. It
signifies that we are united to fight the battles ahead.
Diunduh dari:
http://raamabaanam.blogspot.com/2011/05/is-trustimportant.html……….5/1/2013
The Trust Equation 1.0 !
This is a 1.0 version of a formula for measuring trust in
relationships. It's intended to use a formula for assessing the
complex and intangible dynamic of trust.
It basically says that trust is the multiplication of weighted
expectations and delivery on expectations, divided by the
multiplication of expectation clarity and usefulness of feedback.
It's actually based on intensive work I've done recently in client
organizations on trust building between individuals, managers
and departments.
Diunduh dari:
http://www.networkweaving.com/blog/2006/09/trust-equation10.html……….5/1/2013
Trust in Social Internetworking
The computation of trust in social networks has attracted the interest of a
large number of researchers. Such an interest is explained by the relevant
benefits that the usage of trust can bring in multiple application domains,
e.g. trust metrics have been incorporated in Recommender Systems to
raise their accuracy. Existing approaches to computing trust in social
networks can be classified into two categories:
Explicit, in which a user can declare to trust/distrust other users
Implicit, in which user activities are analyzed to infer trust values
In this project we illustrate both the features of explicit approaches and
implicit ones and we show how trust metrics can be incorporated in a
Recommender System.
Diunduh dari: http://trustinternetworking.wordpress.com/2010/11/26/trust-in-social-internetworking/
……….5/1/2013
Trust is an emergent property of
effective networks
It seems that markets, our dominant form of economic transactions, are
not really designed to optimize trust.
As Charles Green states:
The reason is simple: trust is not a market transaction, it’s
a human transaction. People don’t work by supply and demand, they work
by karmic reciprocity. In markets, if I trust you, I’m a sucker and you take
advantage of me. In relationships, if I trust you, you trust me, and we get
along. We live up or down to others expectations of us.
Diunduh dari:
http://www.jarche.com/2012/08/trust-is-an-emergent-property-ofeffective-networks/……….5/1/2013
COLLABORATION
Collaboration is working together to achieve a goal.[1] It is a recursive[2]
process where two or more people or organizations work together to
realize shared goals, (this is more than the intersection of common goals
seen in co-operative ventures, but a deep, collective, determination to
reach an identical objective) — for example, an intriguing endeavor[3][4]
that is creative in nature[5]—by sharing knowledge, learning and building
consensus. Most collaboration requires leadership, although the form of
leadership can be social within a decentralized and egalitarian group.[6] In
particular, teams that work collaboratively can obtain greater resources,
recognition and reward when facing competition for finite resources.[7]
Collaboration is also present in opposing goals exhibiting the notion of
adversarial collaboration, though this is not a common case for using the
word.
Structured methods of collaboration encourage introspection of behavior
and communication.[6] These methods specifically aim to increase the
success of teams as they engage in collaborative problem solving. Forms,
rubrics, charts and graphs are useful in these situations to objectively
document personal traits with the goal of improving performance in
current and future projects.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
"collaboration". Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 11th Edition.
Retrieved September 18, 2012 from CollinsDictionary.com.
Marinez-Moyano, I. J. Exploring the Dynamics of Collaboration in
Interorganizational Settings, Ch. 4, p. 83, in Schuman (Editor). Creating a
Culture of Collaboration. Jossey-Bass, 2006. ISBN 0-7879-8116-8.
Collaborate, Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary, 2007
Collaboration, Encyclopædia Britannica Online, 2007
Collaboration, Oxford English Dictionary, Second Edition, (1989). (Eds.) J. A.
Simpson & E. S. C. Weiner. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Spence, Muneera U. "Graphic Design: Collaborative Processes = Understanding
Self and Others." (lecture) Art 325: Collaborative Processes. Fairbanks Hall,
Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon. 13 April 2006.
Wagner, Caroline S. and Loet Leydesdorff. Globalisation in the network of
science in 2005: The diffusion of international collaboration and the formation of
a core group.
Diunduh dari:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaboration……….5/1/2013
What is Collaboration?
Collaboration is a working practice whereby individuals work together to a
common purpose to achieve business benefit. Key features of
collaboration tools are:
1. Synchronous collaboration such as online meetings and instant
messaging
2. Asynchronous collaboration such as shared workspaces and
annotations
3. Many organizations are also looking at Free-form Collaboration tools
to improve collaboration and reduce the number of emails used for
collaboration.
4. Collaboration, at the conceptual level, involves:
5. Awareness - We become part of a working entity with a shared
purpose
6. Motivation - We drive to gain consensus in problem solving or
development
7. Self-synchronization - We decide as individuals when things need to
happen
8. Participation - We participate in collaboration and we expect others to
participate
9. Mediation - We negotiate and we collaborate together and find a
middle point
10. Reciprocity - We share and we expect sharing in return through
reciprocity
11. Reflection - We think and we consider alternatives
12. Engagement - We proactively engage rather than wait and see
Diunduh dari: http://www.aiim.org/What-is-Collaboration ……….5/1/2013
What is Collaboration?
Collaboration relies on openness and knowledge sharing but also
some level of focus and accountability on the part of the business
organization. Governance should be established addressing the
creation and closing of team workspaces with assignment of
responsibility for capturing the emergent results of the
collaborative effort for preservation in the repository.
Diunduh dari: http://www.aiim.org/What-is-Collaboration ……….5/1/2013
Collaboration Cycle
Diunduh dari: http://www.aiim.org/What-is-Collaboration ……….5/1/2013
MEASUREMENT
OF
SOCIAL
CAPITAL
Diunduh dari:
……….4/1/2013
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
There is considerable debate and controversy over the possibility,
desirability and practicability of measuring social capital, yet without a
measure of the store of social capital, its characteristics and potential
remain unknown (Durlauf 2002b; Falk and Harrison 1998).
Measurement attempts are flawed by problems with separating form,
source and consequences (Adam and Roncevic 2003; Onyx and Bullen
2001; Sobels et al. 2001).
An example is trust, which is commonly seen as a component of social
capital.
Some authors equate trust with social capital (Fukuyama 1995;
Fukuyama 1997), some see trust as a source of social capital (Putnam et
al. 1993), some see it as a form of social capital (Coleman 1988), and
some see it as a collective asset resulting from social capital construed as
a relational asset (Lin 1999).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Adam, Frane, and Borut Roncevic. 2003. 'Social Capital: Recent Debates and
Research Trends.' Social Science Information 42: 155-183.
Coleman, James S. 1988. 'Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.' The
American Journal of Sociology 94: S95.
Durlauf, Steven N. 2002a. 'On the empirics of social capital.' The Economic
Journal 112: 459-479.
--------. 2002b. 'Symposium on social capital: Introduction.' The Economic
Journal 112: 417-418.
Falk, Ian, and Sue Kilpatrick. 1999. 'What is Social Capital? The study of
interaction in a rural community.' Pp. 27. Launceston: Centre for Research and
Leaning in Regional Australia
Fukuyama, Francis. 1995. Trust : the social virtues and the creation of
prosperity. London: Hamish Hamilton.
-----. 1997. 'Social capital and the modern capitalist economy: Creating a high
trust workplace.' Stern Business Magazine 4.
-----. 2001. 'Social capital, civil society and development.' Third World Quarterly
22: 7-20.
-----. 2002. 'Social capital and development: The coming agenda.' SAIS Review
22: 23-37.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Collier (2002) identified that social capital is difficult, if not impossible to
measure directly and that for empirical purposes the use of proxy
indicators is necessary.
Social capital has constructs that are inherently abstract and require
subjective interpretation in their translation into operational measures, that
are invariably indirect surrogates of their associated constructs (Grootaert
et al. 2002; Narayan and Cassidy 2001).
Callahan (1996) supported this, identifying that while it is hard to measure
social capital directly, it can be inferred from its powerful effects.
The choice of indicators to measure social capital is also guided by the
scope of the concept and the breadth of the unit of observation used
(Collier 2002).
1.
2.
3.
Collier, Paul. 1998. 'Social Capital and Poverty.' World Bank.
-----. 2002. 'Social capital and poverty: a microeconomic perspective.' Pp. 19 - 41
in The Role of Social Capital in Development, edited by Thierry Van Bastelaer.
Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
Collier, Paul, and Jan Willem Gunning. 1999. 'Explaining African economic
performance.' Journal of Economic Literature 37: 64-111.
4. Narayan, Deepa, and Michael F. Cassidy. 2001. "A dimensional
approach to measuring social capital: development and validation of a
social capital inventory." Current Sociology 49: 59-102.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Social capital is such a complex concept that it is not likely to be
represented by any single measure or figure.
The multiple dimensions require sets of indicators to be effective
(Cox and Caldwell 2000). Considerations of measurement of
social capital inevitably reflect the conceptual debates about
social capital itself, in particular, whether social capital can be
measured at an individual or community level (Baum and Ziersch
2003).
1.
Cox, Eva. 1997. 'Building social capital.' Health Promotion Matters 4: 1-4.
Social Capital Integrated Questionnaire (SOCAP IQ)
The purpose of this paper is to introduce the Integrated Questionnaire for the
Measurement of Social Capital (SC-IQ with a focus on applications in
developing countries. The tool aims to generate quantitative data on various
dimensions of social capital as part of a larger household survey (such as the
Living Standards Measurement Survey or a household income/expenditure
survey). Specifically, six dimensions are considered: groups and networks;
trust and solidarity; collective action and cooperation; information and
communication; social cohesion and inclusion; empowerment and political
action. The paper addresses sampling and data collection issues for
implementing the SC-IQ and provides guidance for the use and analysis of
data. The tool has been pilot-tested in Albania and Nigeria and a review of
lessons learned is presented.
1. Albania Field Test: Integrated Questionnaire for the Measurement of
Social Capital
2. Report of Social Capital Household Survey Pilot in Adamawa State,
Nigeria
3. Social Capital Household Survey in Osun State, Nigeria
4. Social Capital (Pilot) Survey in Enugu State, Nigeria
5. Integrated Questionnaire for the Measurement of Social Capital
6. Cuestionario Integrado para la Medicion del Capital Social.
(http://go.worldbank.org/KO0QFVW770)
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Measuring social capital clearly has an intrinsic appeal (Inkeles 2000)
however, as Fukuyama (2001) states, 'one of the greatest weaknesses of
the social capital concept is the absence of consensus on how to
measure it'.]
The measurement of social capital and the assessment of its contribution
are certainly in their infancy (Fox 1997).
Daniere, Takahashi et al (2002a) suggested that existing measures of
social capital are subject to criticism because researchers often define
terms differently and because it is difficult to develop concrete, tangible
evidence of social capital that lends itself to quantitative analysis.
Durlauf (2002) supported this, positing that many definitions mix functional
and causal conceptions of social capital and that causal definitions of
social capital are necessary for successful empirical analysis.
1.
2.
3.
Fox. J. 1997. 'The World Bank and social capital: contesting the concept in
practice.' Journal of International Development 9: 963-71.
Daniere, Amrita, Lois M Takahashi, and Anchana NaRanong. 2002a. 'Social
capital and environmental management: culture, perceptions and action among
slum dwellers in Bangkok." in Social Capital and Economic Development: Wellbeing in Developing Countries, edited by Sunder Ramaswamy. Cheltenham, UK:
Edward Eglar.
Inkeles, Alex. 2000. 'Measuring social capital and its consequences.' Policy
Sciences 33: 245-268.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Paxton (1999) identified the widening gap between the concept of social capital and
its measurement. The popularity of the term seems to have encouraged the use of
overly-aggregated, heterogeneous indexes (Knack 2002). Due to the abstract nature
of social capital and varying definitions, it is often measured inconsistently between
studies (Liu and Besser 2003). Previous studies provide little rationale for how their
measures of social capital connect to the theoretical definition of social capital
(Paxton 1999).
1.
2.
3.
Knack, Stephen. 2002. 'Social capital and the quality of government: Evidence from the
states.' American Journal of Political Science 46: 772-785.
Liu, Amy Qiaoming, and Terry Besser. 2003. 'Social capital and participation in community
improvement activities by elderly residents in small towns and rural communities." Rural
Sociology 68: 343.
Paxton, Pamela. 1999. "Is social capital declining in the United States? A multiple indicator
assessment." The American Journal of Sociology 105: 88.
Qualitative Studies
Portes and Sensenbrenner (1993) examine what happens to immigrant
communities when some of their members succeed economically, and wish to
leave the community. Their interviews reveal the pressures that strong
community ties can place on members; so strong are these ties that some
members have Anglicized their names to free themselves of the obligations
associated with community membership.
Fernandez-Kelley (1996) interviewed and observed young girls in urban ghetto
communities in Baltimore, and discovered that normative pressures to leave
school, have a baby while still a teenager, and reject formal employment were
very powerful. Surrounded on a daily basis by violence, unemployment, and
drug addicts, the girls’ only way of establishing their identity and status was
through their bodies.
Anderson (1995) studied the role of "old heads," long-term elderly members of
the poor urban African-American community, as sources of social capital. "Old
heads" once provided wisdom and guidance to the young, but their advice and
input today is being increasingly ignored as respect for the elderly declines, and
as the community continues to fragment economically.
(http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/EXTTSOCIALC
APITAL/0,,contentMDK:20193037~menuPK:418220~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:40101
5~isCURL:Y,00.html)
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Stone (2001) posited that there are insufficient tools for empirical measurement
available and this is an area where further research is required despite the extensive
work of the Australian Bureau of Statistics (2002), Bullen and Onyx (1998), Lochner,
Kawachi et al (1999), Onyx and Bullen (2000) and Stone and Hughes (2002).
1.
Bullen, Paul, and Jenny Onyx. 1998. 'Measuring Social Capital in Five Communities in NSW.'
Pp. 49: Centre for Australian Community Organisations and Management (CACOM) CACOM
Working Paper Series (No 41).
2.
Lochner, Kimberly A, Ichiro Kawachi, and Robert T Brennan. 2003. 'Social
capital and neighborhood mortality rates in Chicago.' Social Science & Medicine
56: 1797-805.
Lochner, Kimberly, Ichiro Kawachi, and Bruce P. Kennedy. 1999. 'Social capital:
a guide to its measurement.' Health Place 5: 259-270.
3.
Quantitative Studies
Knack and Keefer (1997) use indicators of trust and civic norms from the
World Values Survey for a sample of 29 market economies. They use these
measures as proxies for the strength of civic associations in order to test two
different propositions on the effects of social capital on economic growth, the
"Olson effects" (associations stifle growth through rent-seeking) and "Putnam
effects" (associations facilitate growth by increasing trust).
Narayan and Pritchett (1997) construct a measure of social capital in rural
Tanzania, using data from the Tanzania Social Capital and Poverty Survey
(SCPS). This large-scale survey asked individuals about the extent and
characteristics of their associational activity, and their trust in various
institutions and individuals. They match this measure of social capital with
data on household income in the same villages (both from the SCPS and from
an earlier household survey, the Human Resources Development Survey).
They find that village-level social capital raises household incomes.
(http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/EXTTSO
CIALCAPITAL/0,,contentMDK:20193037~menuPK:418220~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~the
SitePK:401015~isCURL:Y,00.html)
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Cavaye (2004) identified the following issues in the measurement of social
capital that remain unresolved:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
A clear understanding of the context and purpose of the measurement of social
capital
Understanding the limitations of evaluation and measurement, and ensuring that
the interpretation of measures is held within these limitations
The practical mechanics of gaining community feedback such as community
representation and coverage, feedback to communities, use in local decision
making, and resourcing measurement
Benchmarking vs. measures of incremental change
Dealing with qualitative information, diversity, variation and complexity
The nature and rigor of indicators
The interpretation and use of measurement information
How evaluation itself can contribute to fostering social capital.
How is Social Capital Measured?
Social capital has been measured in a number of innovative ways, though for a
number of reasons obtaining a single "true" measure is probably not possible, or
perhaps even desirable.
1. First, the most comprehensive definitions of social capital are
multidimensional, incorporating different levels and units of analysis.
2. Second, any attempt to measure the properties of inherently ambiguous
concepts such as "community", "network" and "organization" is
correspondingly problematic.
3. Third, few long-standing surveys were designed to measure "social capital",
leaving contemporary researchers to compile indexes from a range of
approximate items, such as measures of trust in government, voting trends,
memberships in civic organizations, hours spent volunteering.
Measuring social capital may be difficult, but it is not impossible, and several
excellent studies have identified useful proxies for social capital, using
different types and combinations of qualitative, comparative and quantitative
research methodologies.
(http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/EXTTSOCI
ALCAPITAL/0,,contentMDK:20193037~menuPK:418220~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~the
SitePK:401015~isCURL:Y,00.html)
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Fukuyama (2001) posited that producing anything like a believable census
of a society's stock of social capital is a nearly impossible task, since it
involves multiplying numbers that are either subjectively estimated or
simply non-existent. Measurement of social capital becomes self fulfilling
as one tends to find what one is looking for but does not tend to question
the path (White 2002).
In fact, the concepts usefulness appears to be limited in that it is difficult
to operationalise using proxy measures that are distinct from the predicted
effects (Krishna 1999; Sobels et al. 2001; Woolcock 1998).
This is further supported by Stone (2001) who stated that 'where social
capital has been measured to date, it has often been done so using
'questionable measures', often designed for other purposes, and without
sufficient regard to the theoretical underpinnings of the concept to ensure
validity or reliability'. The act of measuring social capital can and probably
will affect the stock of capital that is being assessed, which adds further
questions to the suitability of attempts to empirically measure social
capital (MacGillivray and Walker 2000; Popay 2000).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Krishna, Anirudh. 1999. 'Creating and Harnessing Social Capital.' Pp. pp 71-93
in Social Capital: A multifaceted perspective, edited by Ismail Serageldin.
Washington, DC: World Bank.
------. 2001. 'Moving from the Stock of Social Capital to the Flow of Benefits: The
Role of Agency.' World Development 29: 925-943.
MacGillivray, Alex, and Perry Walker. 2000. 'Local Social Capital: Making it Work
on the Ground." Pp. 197-211 in Social Capital: Critical Perspectives, edited by
Tom Schuller. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Popay, Jennie. 2000. "Social capital: The role of narrative and historical
research." Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 54: 401.
White, Leroy. 2002. "Connection matters: exploring the implications of social
capital and social netowrks for social polcy." Systems Research and Behavioral
Science 19: 255-269.
Woolcock, Michael. 1998. "Social capital and economic development: Towards a
theoretical synthesis and policy framework." Theory and Society 27: 151-208.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Grootaert and Van Bastalaer (2002a) on the other hand posited that it is
possible to measure social capital and its impact. Onyx and Bullen
(2000b) claimed they have developed a reliable and valid measure of
social capital one that is relatively easy to apply.
Ideal indicators recognize that social capital can be expressed through
attitudes and expectations; through reported, recorded and observed
actions and activities; and by comparing people’s interpretations of how
things happened or are expected to happen (Cox and Caldwell 2000).
Ideally, measures of social capital should be thoroughly based on, and
tied to, the conceptual framework for the specific study.
1.
2.
3.
Grootaert, Christiaan. 2001. 'Social capital: the missing link.' Pp. 9 - 29 in Social
Capital and Participation in Everyday Life, edited by Eric M. Uslaner. London:
Routledge.
Grootaert, Christiaan, and Thierry Van Bastelaer. 2002a. 'Conclusion: measuring
impact and drawing policy implications.' Pp. 341 - 350 in The Role of Social
Capital in Development, edited by Thierry Van Bastelaer. Melbourne: Cambridge
University Press.
-----. 2002b. 'Introduction and Overview.' Pp. 1-7 in The Role of Social Capital in
Development, edited by Thierry Van Bastelaer. Melbourne: Cambridge University
Press.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Cavaye (2004) described the development of consistent frameworks and that
there are no best indicators, rather some key characteristics that guide the
choice of indicators such as:
1. Specificity targeted to the variable to be measured,
2. Measurability - ease of measurement,
3. Comprehensiveness - measures of a range of social characteristics,
4. Reliability and rigor,
5. Continuity ability to translate across situations and be consistent in local
state or national frameworks.
The challenge is to develop consistent indicators that can allow conclusions to
be drawn across local, state and national frameworks (Cavaye 2004).
1.
Cavaye, Jim. 2004. 'Social Capital: A Commentary on Issues, Understanding and
Measurement.' Pp. 27. Australia: Obersatory PASCAL - Place Management, Social Capital
and Learning Regions.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html ……….4/1/2013
Building Social Capital in Virtual Learning Communities
Diunduh dari:
http://www.usask.ca/education/coursework/802papers/daniel/index.htm……….6/1/2013
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
A report by the Productivity Commission (2003) made the following
observation about the measurement of social capital:
Like the theoretical literature, the empirical literature is evolving. Because
social capital as a concept is relatively new, multifaceted and imprecise,
'hard data' on it are not readily available. Inevitably, many early studies
have had to rely on rough proxies for social capital and/or have been
somewhat experimental. Hence, the results need to be interpreted with
care; in most cases they are 'suggestive', rather than definitive.
Social Capital Assessment Tool (SOCAT)
The SOCAT is a multifaceted instrument designed to collect
social capital data at the household, community and
organizational levels. It is an integrated quantitative/qualitative
tool. An important feature is the detailed information about
structural and cognitive social capital that is collected at the level
of the household, which is crucial to link social capital information
with poverty and household welfare outcomes.
1. Community Profile and Asset Mapping
2. Community Questionnaire
3. Household Questionnaire
4. Organization Profile Interview Guides
5. Organizational Profile Scoresheet
6. Social Capital Assessment Tool (SOCAT) in its entirety
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/
EXTTSOCIALCAPITAL/0,,contentMDK:20193049~menuPK:418220~pagePK:148956~
piPK:216618~theSitePK:401015,00.html
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Some authors have applied various indicators of social capital in
different contexts. Examples include:
1. Trust (Cox and Caldwell 2000; Glaeser et al. 2000; Guenther
and Falk 1999);
2. Membership (Baum and Ziersch 2003);
3. Membership and trust (Lappe et al. 1997; Lochner et al.
2003);
4. Membership, trust and norms of reciprocity (Isham et al. 2002;
Skrabski et al. 2003; Staveren 2003); and
5. Network resources (Zhao 2002).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Baum, FE, and AM Ziersch. 2003. 'Social Capital.' Journal of Epidemiology
Community Health 57: 320-3.
Cox, Eva, and Peter Caldwell. 2000. 'Making policy social.' Pp. 43 - 73 in Social
capital and public policy in Australia, edited by Ian Winter. Melbourne: National
Library of Australia.
Glaeser, Edward L, David I Laibson, Jose A Scheinkman, and Christine L
Soutter. 2000. 'Measuring trust.' The Quarterly Journal of Economics 115: 811846.
Glaeser, Edward L, David Laibson, and Bruce Sacerdote. 2002. 'An economic
approach to social capital.' The Economic Journal 112: 437-458.
Guenther, John, and Ian Falk. 1999. 'Measuring trust and community capacity:
social capital for the common good.' Pp. 90. Launceston: Centre for Research
and Leaning in Regional Australia.
Lappe, Frances, Moore Du Bois, and Paul Martin. 1997. 'Building social capital
without looking backward.' National Civic Review 86: 119.
Isham, Jonathan, and Satu Kahkonen. 2002. 'How do participation and social
capital affect community-based water projects? Evidence from Central Java,
Indonesia." Pp. 155, 175 - 187 in The Role of Social Capital in Development,
edited by Thierry Van Bastelaer. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
Zhao, Yandong. 2002. "Measuring the social capital of laid-off Chinese workers."
Current Sociology 50: 555-571.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Grootaert (2001) identified the indicators as having all been used
in empirical studies.
Indicators of social capital (Source: Grootaert 2001)
Horizontal associations
1. Number and type of
associations or local
institutions
2. Extent of membership in local
associations
3. Extent of participatory
decision making
4. Extent of kin homogeneity
within the association
5. Extent of income and
occupation homogeneity
within the association
6. Extent of trust in village
members and households
7. Extent of trust in government
1. Extent of trust in trade
unions
2. Perception of extent of
community organization
3. Reliance on networks of
support
4. Percentage of household
income from remittances
5. Percentage of household
expenditure for gifts and
transfers
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Grootaert (2001) identified the indicators as having all been used
in empirical studies.
Indicators of social capital (Source: Grootaert 2001)
Civil and political society
1. Index of civil liberties
2. Percentage of population
facing political
discrimination
3. Index of intensity of
political discrimination
4. Percentage of population
facing economic
discrimination
5. Index of intensity of
economic discrimination
6. Percentage of population
involved in separatist
movement
7. Gastil's index of political
rights
8. Freedom House index of
political freedoms
1. Index of democracy
2. Index of corruption
3. Index of government
inefficiency
4. Strength of democratic
institutions
5. Measure of 'human liberty'
6. Measure of political stability
7. Degree of decentralization of
government
8. Voter turnout
9. Political assassinations
10. Constitutional government
changes
11. Coups
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Grootaert (2001) identified the indicators as having all been used
in empirical studies.
Indicators of social capital (Source: Grootaert 2001)
Social integration
1. Indicator of social mobility
2. Measure of strength of 'social
tensions'
3. Ethnolinguistic fragmentation
4. Riots and protest
demonstrations
5. Strikes
6. Homicide rates
7. Suicide rates
1. Other crime rates
2. Prisoners per 100,000
people
3. Illegitimacy rates
4. Percentage of singleparent homes
5. Divorce rate
6. Youth unemployment rate
Legal and governance aspects
1. Quality of bureaucracy
2. Independence of court system
3. Expropriation and
nationalization risk
1. Repudiation of contracts
by government
2. Contract enforceability
3. Contract-intensive money
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Putnam's indicators of social capital for the United States
Source: Putnam (2000) cited in Productivity Commission (2003).
Putnam's indicators of social capital for the United States
Measures of community or organizational life:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Percentage of individuals who served on a committee of a local
organization in the last year (0.88a)
Percentage of individuals who served as an officer of some club or
organization in the last year (0.83)
Civic and social organizations per 1000 population (0.78)
Mean number of club meetings attended in the last year (0.78)
Mean number of group memberships (0.74)
Measures of engagement in public affairs:
1.
2.
Turnout in presidential elections, 1988 and 1992 (0.84)
Percentage of individuals who attended public meeting on town or school
affairs in last year (0.77)
Measures of community volunteerism:
1.
2.
3.
Number of non-profit organizations per 1000 population (0.82)
Mean number of times worked on a community project in last year (0.65)
Mean number of times did volunteer work last year (0.66)
Measures of informal sociability:
1.
2.
Percentage of individuals who agree that 'I spend a lot of time visiting
friends' (0.73)
Mean number of times entertained at home last year (0.67)
Measures of social trust:
1.
2.
Percentage of individuals who agree that 'most people can be trusted' (0.92)
Percentage of individuals who agree that 'most people are honest' (0.84)
The figure in brackets indicates the item's coefficient of correlation with
the final constructed measure across the individual states of the United
States.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
……….4/1/2013
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Social capital can be seen as the structure and quality of social networks.
As such, the core dimensions of social capital are seen to be networks of
social relations (structure), which are characterized by norms of trust and
reciprocity (quality).
Core dimensions of social capital and their characteristics (Stone, 2001)
Structure of social relations:
networks
Type:
Informal / formal
Size / capacity:
Limited / extensive
Spatial:
Household / global
Structural:
Open / closed
Dense / sparse
Homogenous /
heterogeneous
Quality of social relations:
norms
Norms of trust:
1. Social trust
1. Familiar / personal
2. Generalized
2. Civic / institutional trust
Norms of reciprocity:
1. In-kind v in lieu
2. Direct v indirect
3. Immediate v delayed
Relational:
Vertical / horizontal
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Stone (2001) stated that 'by linking social capital measurement
directly to theoretical understandings of the concept, we are able
to: first, recognize that social capital is a multidimensional concept
comprising social networks, norms of trust, and norms of
reciprocity; second, understand social capital properly as a
resource to action; and third, empirically distinguish between
social capital and its outcomes'. This provides a sound basis for
developing a measurement framework but much work is required
to ensure the indicators relate to this theoretical understanding. If
we break down one of the core dimensions, social networks, the
complexity becomes immediately evident.
The networks are broken into informal and formal and the types
evident at the macro level listed. For each of the types listed in
the table a series of questions could be developed. However the
problem of how they relate to the theoretical understanding
remains unresolved. Other problems also become evident. This
macro level analysis of social capital is of little use to the majority
of studies that investigate social capital at the meso level.
1.
2.
Stone, Wendy. 2001. "Measuring social capital: Towards a theoretically informed
measurement framework for researching social capital in family and community
life." Family Matters Autumn: 38.
Stone, Wendy, and Jody Hughes. 2002. "Social capital: empirical meaning and
measurement validity." Pp. 64. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Other issues remain unresolved such as spatial and temporal issues,
externalities, feedback loops, and the role of chance in shaping both the
structure and the outcomes. It is implausible to add bridging capital to
bonding capital and subtract perverse social capital. Thus an amount of
social capital should not be sort, not even qualitatively. Instead, social
capital should be analysed in terms of a composite of its disparate, yet
interrelated, components. Therefore, social capital building initiatives
should aim to improve the structure of social capital rather than increase
social capital per se.
Types of Informal and Formal Networks (Stone, 2001)
Informal networks
1. Family household
2. Family beyond the
household
3. Friends / intimates
4. Neighbors
Formal networks of social relations
Non-group based civic relations:
1. Good deeds
2. Individual community or political action
Associations / groups based on relationships:
1. Antenatal
2. Childcare
3. Education
4. Sport / leisure
5. Music / art
6. Church
7. Charity
8. Voluntary
9. Self help
Work based:
1. Colleagues
2. Associations
3. Institutional
4. State
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Natural resource management applications of social capital
can involve micro to macro level analysis.
The primary level of interest is the meso level as studies
focus on the application of social capital theory to an area of
common interest: natural resource management.
The focus can be on micro individuals; meso - groups of
individuals, groups of like groups, groups of natural
resource management groups, or national natural resource
management groups; or macro societal.
This situation is further complicated when taking into
account various institutions associated with natural resource
management, including voluntary, non-government,
government and private sector.
The structural elements of social capital will be different
depending on the level of study, as will be the relationships
between determinants, structure, manifestations and levels,
even those levels not under investigation.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Levels at which social capital operates within natural resource
management.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Building Social Capital
A fundamental question is whether social capital can be increased in
the short term. This question is further complicated by the debate
over whether social capital can be measured, as without
measurement, change cannot be determined.
According to Putnam (1993), social capital is largely determined by
historical factors; it can thus not be enhanced in the short term. This
view has been challenged in the literature.
Petersen (2002) posited that social capital creation is possible be
definition. This is supported by Schmid (2000) and Uslaner and
Dekker (2001) who saw social capital development as a by-product
of other activities.
Falk and Harrison (1998) suggested that it is possible to build social
capital in the short term and that this is also known as capacity
building. Social capital can be produced by the government,
nongovernmental organizations, local societal actors and external
actors in the civil society, both in combination and in isolation
(Huntoon 2001).
1. Falk, Ian, and Lesley Harrison. 1998. 'Indicators of Social Capital: social capital as the product
of local interactive learning processes." Pp. 23. Launceston: Centre for Research and Leaning
in Regional Australia.
2. Putnam, Robert D. 1993. "The prosperous community: Social capital and public life." The
American Prospect 4.
3. —. 1995. "Bowling alone: America's declining social capital." Journal of Democracy 6: 65-78.
4. —. 2000. Bowling alone : the collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon &
Schuster.
5. Putnam, Robert D, Robert Leonardi, and Raffaella Y Nanetti. 1993. Making democracy work :
civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
6. Schmid, A. Allan. 2000. "Affinity as social capital: its role in development." The Journal of SocioEconomics 29: 159.
7. Uslaner, Eric M. 2001. "Volunteering and social capital: how trust and religion shape civic
participation in the United States." Pp. 104 - 117 in Social Capital and Participation in Everyday
Life, edited by Eric M. Uslaner. London: Routledge.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Building Social Capital
Insufficient attention has been paid to the variety of locations where
social capital can be generated, inhibited, and appropriated, and the
role played by other actors, such as public institutions in this
process (Heller 1996; Preece 2002).
To better explain the production of social capital, analytical
frameworks need to account for widely varying outcomes in terms of
time, space and social groups (Fox 1996; Lorensen 2002; Minkoff
1997).
Soubeyran and Weber (2002) posited that social capital can be
created through repeated exchange and face-to-face contacts, which
is facilitated by geographic proximity.
Maloney, Smith et al (2000) suggested that there is a lack of research
into generation, maintenance, and destruction of social capital.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Heller, Patrick. 1996. 'Social capital as a product of class mobilization and state
intervention: Industrial workers in Kerala, India." World Development 24: 10551071.
Fox.J. 1996. 'How does civil society thicken? the political construction of social
capital in rural Mexico.' World Development 24: 1089-1103.
Maloney, William, A., Graham Smith, and Gerry Stoker. 2000. "Social capital and
associational life." Pp. 212-225 in Social Capital: Critical Perspectives, edited by
Tom Schuller. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lorensen, Marianna. 2002. 'Building social capital.' Journal of Family and
Consumer Sciences 94: 80.
Minkoff, Debra C. 1997. "Producing Social Capital: National Social Movements
and Civil Society." American Behavioral Scientist 40: 606-619.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
Building Social Capital
Onyx and Bullen (2000a) believed that the development of social capital requires the
active and willing engagement of citizens within a participative community.
Social capital building exercises initiated by the state have been identified as weak
due to distant ties, therefore social capital building must occur through outsourcing
by government (Onyx and Bullen 2001; Taylor 2000; Warner 1999). This supports
Lowndes and Wilson's (2001) theory that the best way for government to increase
social capital is to be involved in indirect social capital building.
Warner (2001) posited that local government is better placed to create local social
capital through community based interventions. Cox and Caldwell (2000) identified
that the key social dynamics for building social capital occur in the non-intimate and
non-exclusive groups.
Falk and Harrison (1998) had a different view, suggesting that social capital building
can be equated with capacity building in terms of community development. The use
of social capital in any of its forms does not deplete the supply of social capital
(Lyons 2000; Turner 1999).
Some authors suggest that use of social capital in fact enhances the supply of social
capital. From this debate it is clear that some authors conceptualize social capital as
either a flow or stock resource (Walker and Kogut 1997). There is limited
understanding of the processes and how they operate to build or improve social
capital structure.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Onyx, Jenny, and Paul Bullen. 2000. "Sources of social capital." Pp. 105 - 135 in
Social capital and public policy in Australia, edited by Ian Winter. Melbourne:
National Library of Australia.
—. 2001. "The different faces of social capital in NSW Australia." Pp. 45 - 58 in
Social Capital and Participation in Everyday Life, edited by Eric M. Uslaner.
London: Routledge.
Warner, Mildred. 1999. "Social capital construction and the role of the local
state." Rural Sociology 64: 373-393.
—. 2001. "Building social capital: the role of local government." The Journal of
Socio-Economics 30: 187.
Walker, G, and B Kogut. 1997. "Social Capital, Structural Holes and the
Formation of an Industry Network." Organization Science: A Journal of the
Institute of Management Sciences 8: 109.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/measurement.html
A NEW CONCEPTUALISTION OF SOCIAL
CAPITAL
Any conceptualization of social capital aims to simplify the complexity of
the social world to assist in the development of an understanding of the
structures and processes that affect a variety of outcomes.
The challenge is to make tradeoffs between competing objectives
simplification to facilitate increased understanding, and maintenance of
the complexity to maximize validity. In the past, many efforts to
conceptualize social capital have resulted in over-simplification and
therefore questionable operationalization. There are considerable
unknowns surrounding our current understanding of social capital theory.
We know that various relationships exist between determinants, structural
elements and consequences or manifestations but interactions are largely
unknown.
Anything that has an impact on social interactions can be seen as a
determinant and any situation arising because of social interactions can
be seen as a manifestation. We know some of the elements in between
but have little understanding of the processes. This highlights the
importance of establishing a rigorous conceptualization, as the
appropriate operationalization of social capital must be based on a
rigorous conceptualization.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/conceptualisation.html
A NEW CONCEPTUALISTION OF SOCIAL
CAPITAL
The conceptualization designed for the purposes of this study details
processes and relationships operating between the determinants of social
capital, the structure, or elements of social capital, and the consequences
or manifestations of social capital.
The literature review identified a wide range of determinants that have
been linked to social capital including history and culture, social
structures, family, education, environment, mobility, economics, social
class, civil society, consumption, values, networks, associations, political
society, institutions, policy, and social norms at various levels.
Clearly the factors listed here play an important role in determining the
characteristics of the social capital structure however the causal factors
and functional relationships are largely unknown. Some studies have
focused on some of the factors in-so-much as detailing the social capital
of the circumstance, for example, family, trust, or networks, but have not
studied factors as determinants of multi level, multi dimensional social
capital.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/conceptualisation.html ……….4/1/2013
Diunduh dari: http://pinoycareercoach.blogspot.com/2012/03/enhancingyour-social-capital.html ...... 6/1/2013
A NEW CONCEPTUALISTION OF SOCIAL
CAPITAL
The links between determinants, structural elements and
consequences or manifestations are currently not well understood
and generally grossly oversimplified.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/conceptualisation.html
A NEW CONCEPTUALISTION OF SOCIAL
CAPITAL
It attempts to take into account factors such as causal
relationships, specific contexts, externalities, levels, feedback
loops and chance.
Conceptualization of social capital simplifying the complexity of
the social world into a diagram outlining relationships between
determinants, structure (or elements) and consequences.
Diunduh dari: http://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/conceptualisation.html
MODAL SOSIAL
Kemampuan masyarakat untuk bekerjasama demi mencapai
tujuan bersama di dalam berbagai komunitas disebut modal
sosial.
Kemampuan bekerjasama muncul dari kepercayaan umum di
dalam sebuah masyarakat atau di bagian paling kecil dalam
masyarakat.
Modal sosial dapat dilembagakan (menjadi kebiasaan) dalam
kelompok yang paling kecil ataupun kelompok masyarakat yang
besar seperti negara.
Kerjasama yang dilandasi kepercayaan akan terjadi apabila
dilandasi oleh kejujuran, keadilan, keterbukaan, saling peduli,
saling menghargai, saling menolong di antara anggota kelompok
(warga masyarakat).
Pihak luar komunitas (kelompok) akan memberikan dukungan,
bantuan dan kerjasama kepada kelompok apabila kelompok
tersebut bisa dipercaya, artinya kepercayaan merupakan modal
yang sangat penting untuk membangun jaringan kemitraan
(kerjasama) dengan pihak luar.
Diunduh dari: http://www.p2kp.org/pustakadetil.asp?mid=67&catid=6&
……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
Apa Ikatan Sosial dan Modal Sosial itu?
Sebuah komunitas terbangun karena adanya ikatan – ikatan sosial di
antara anggotanya. Kita sering mendengar komunitas petani, komunitas
tukang becak, perkumpulan nelayan, asosiasi insinyur dan sebagainya.
Komunitas warga kelurahan merupakan ikatan sosial di antara semua
warga kelurahan yang terdiri dari individu– individu dan atau kelompok –
kelompok yang berinteraksi dalam sebuah hubungan sosial yang
didasarkan kepada suatu tujuan bersama.
Komunitas masyarakat kelurahan bisa digambarkan sebagai berikut :
Diunduh dari: www.p2kp.org/...Modal_Sosial.../BB_modal_Sosia... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
. Semua masyarakat suatu desa satu sama lain pasti saling
berhubungan, hanya saja kualitas hubungan di antara masing –
masing warga akan sangat berlainan. Kualitas ikatan sosial akan
terbangun apabila di antara warga saling berinteraksi pada waktu
yang relatif lama dan mendalam. Biasanya kualitas ikatan sosial
tadi akan lebih baik apabila sesama warga tergabung untuk
melakukan kegiatan – kegiatan bersama dalam berbagai
kelompok atau organisasi atau kegiatan kegiatan yang sifatnya
sesaat.
Modal dasar dari adanya ikatan sosial yang kuat adalah adanya
kerjasama di antara anggota kelompok atau organisasi dalam hal
komunitas kelurahan ikatan sosial akan terbanguan apabila ada
kerjasama di antara semua warga masyarakat. Kerjasama akan
terbangun dengan baik apabila berlandaskan kepercayaan di
antara para anggotanya.
Kemampuan masyarakat untuk bekerjasama demi mencapai
tujuan bersama di dalam berbagai kelompok dan organisasi
disebut MODAL SOSIAL. Kemampuan bekerjasama muncul
dari kepercayaan umum di dalam sebuah masyarakat atau di
bagian – bagian paling kecil dalam masyarakat. Modal sosial
bisa dilembagakan (menjadi kebiasaan) dalam kelompok
yang paling kecil ataupun dalam kelompok masyarakat yang
besar seperti negara.
Diunduh dari:
……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
.
Masyarakat yang mempunyai modal sosial yang kuat adalah
masyarakat yang guyup (Jawa) dan dinamis. Di Indonesia modal
sosial yang paling menonjol adalah gotong royong yang dalam
masa sekarang terutama di daerah perkotaan sudah mulai luntur.
Untuk apa menumbuhkan modal sosial?
Kemampuan komunitas atau kelompok – kelompok untuk
bekerjasama dan menumbuhkan kepercayaan baik di antara
anggota – anggotanya maupun dengan pihak luar merupakan
kekuatan yang besar untuk bekerjasama dan menumbuhkan
kepercayaan pihak lain, karena itulah disebut ‘modal sosial’.
Jika warga masyarakat saling bekerjasama dan saling percaya
yang didasarkan kepada nilai – nilai universal yang ada , maka
tidak akan ada sikap saling curiga, saling jegal, saling menindas
dan sebagainya sehingga ketimpangan – ketimpangan antara
kelompok yang miskin dengan yang kaya akan bisa
diminimalkan.
Di pihak lain komunitas kelurahan yang kuat dan mempunyai
modal yang layak dipercaya akan memudahkan jaringan
kerjasama dengan pihak luar.
Diunduh dari:
……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
Robert Putnam (1993) mendefinisikan modal sosial sebagai suatu nilai
mutual trust (kepercayaan) antara anggota masyarakat dan
masyarakat terhadap pemimpinnya.
Modal sosial didefinisikan sebagai institusi sosial yang melibatkan
jaringan atau network, norma-norma dan kepercayaan sosial yang
mendorong sebuah kolaborasi sosial untuk kepentingan bersama.•
Diperlukan adanya suatu sosial network ikatan (jaringan) sosial yang
ada dalam masyarakat dan norma yang mendorong produktifitas,
komunitas.
Putnam melonggarkan pemaknaan asosiasi horizontal, tidak hanya
memberikan desiriable out come (hasil pendapatan yang diharapkan)
melainkan juga underdesirible
The concept of Social Capital is broken down to five
sub-categories for operational purposes. These subcategories capture both the structural and cognitive
forms of social capital.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The five dimensions of social capital include:
Groups and networks;
Trust and Solidarity;
Collective Action and Cooperation;
Social Cohesion and Inclusion; and
Information and Communication.
(http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/EXTTSOCI
ALCAPITAL/0,,contentMDK:20193068~menuPK:418218~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~th
eSitePK:401015,00.html)
Diunduh dari: ... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
Bagaimana Membangun Kepercayaan?
Kepercayaan tidak akan tercapai dengan sendirinya, memerlukan proses
untuk membangun kepercayaan secara terus menerus. Untuk
menumbuhkan kepercayaan setiap kelompok (komunitas) paling tidak
membutuhkan 4 hal yang mendasar, yaitu :
Penerimaan
Sejak awal hubungan, setiap orang membutuhkan jaminan bahwa mereka
diterima sepenuhnya, termasuk rasa aman untuk mengemukakan
pendapat dan berkontribusi dalam kegiatan kelompoknya.
Membutuhkan suasana saling menghargai untuk tumbuhnya penerimaan
dalam kelompok, sehingga kelompok tersebut akan tumbuh menjadi
komunitas yang kuat.
Dalam perkembangan ikatan sosial sebuah komunitas, saling mengenal
dengan baik merupakan awal dari tumbuhnya komunitas tersebut,
kepercayaan tidak akan tumbuh terhadap orang baru dengan begitu saja,
perlu pembuktian dalam sikap dan perilaku masing–masing dalam waktu
yang relatif lama.
Sikap dan perilaku yang berdasarkan kepada nilai–nilai universal yang
diyakini sebagai nilai yang berlaku di seluruh tempat di dunia seperti jujur,
adil, kesetiaan, saling melindungi di antara sesama semua warga
komunitas.
Apabila salah satu warga melakukan kecurangan, maka kepercayaan
terhadap orang tersebut otomatis akan luntur.
Diunduh dari: www.p2kp.org/...Modal_Sosial.../BB_modal_Sosia... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
Berbagi Informasi dan Kepedulian
Setiap orang yang berhubungan dalam satu komunitas, agar bisa memecahkan
masalah bersama, membutuhkan informasi mengenai :
Kehidupan, pengalaman, gagasan, nilai masing–masing.
Masalah–masalah yang dianggap penting dalam kehidupan mereka.
Untuk menumbuhkan kepercayaan,pertukaran informasi yang diberikan di antara
warga haruslah informasi yang jujur dan terbuka. Informasi yang diberikan tidak akan
berarti apabila dalam hubungan–hubungan tadi tidak didasari kepedulian.
Setiap warga yang berhubungan dalam masyarakat akan menggunakan dan terlibat
untuk memecahkan masalah di lingkungannya apabila ada kepedulian di antara
mereka.
Apabila warga masyarakat mempunyai kemampuan dan kemauan saling berbagi,
saling peduli , maka kepentingan–kepentingan individu akan mengalah kepada
kepentingan–kepentingan komunitas kelompok.
Diunduh dari: www.p2kp.org/...Modal_Sosial.../BB_modal_Sosia... ……….15/12/2012
People who had reciprocated with the confederate showed a stronger bonding social capital
(e.g., perception that they will receive help when needed), as well as stronger trust and
presence. The following model shows a mediated model on the effect of trust, presence, and
reciprocity on bonding social capital. Reciprocity in itself had a significant but small effect on
bonding social capital, but with presence as a mediator, we begin to see how social capital is
formed. Reciprocity was a behavioral measure and presence was a psychological measure,
suggesting that even without a motivation to be closer to someone, if you engage in reciprocal
behavior, that could potentially lead to more bonding social capital.
Diunduh dari: http://yvettewohn.com/2011/07/16/how-reciprocity-leads-to-formation-of-bondingsocial-capital-in-social-network-games/……….6/1/2013
MODAL SOSIAL
Menentukan Tujuan
Kebutuhan yang ketiga adalah untuk menentukan tujuan bersama. Setiap anggota
(warga) tidak akan tertarik dan memberikan komitmen yang dibutuhkan apabila tidak
terlibat dalam perumusan tujuan. Proses pengambilan keputusan akan menentukan
komitmen warga dalam pelaksanaan pemecahan masalah bersama.
Pengorganisasian dan Tindakan
Pada tahap awal dalam menentukan tujuan yang hendak dicapai oleh seluruh
anggota (warga masyarakat), memastikan ada yang akan bertanggung jawab untuk
menggerakan semua kegiatan untuk mencapai tujuan, untuk itu diperlukan seorang
atau sekelompok pemimpin. Dalam organisasi, kelompok, atau komunitas warga
masyarakat peranan sikap dan perilaku pemimpin sangat dominan untuk
menumbuhkan kepercayaan anggotanya.
Perilaku pemimpin yang jujur, adil, peduli dan melindungi anggotanya (warga), akan
menumbuhkan kepercayaan dari semua unsur komunitasnya.
Diunduh dari: www.p2kp.org/...Modal_Sosial.../BB_modal_Sosia... ……….15/12/2012
Mark W. McElroy, (2002) "Social innovation capital", Journal of
Intellectual Capital, Vol. 3 Iss: 1, pp.30 - 39
Diunduh dari: .
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=883948&show=html.. ……….6/1/2013
MODAL SOSIAL
Setelah tujuan ditetapkan, harus ada perencanaan untuk melaksanakan
keputusan–keputusan yang sudah dibuat. Hal penting yang harus
diketahui adalah kebutuhan–kebutuhan apa yang dirasakan oleh
anggotanya untuk memecahkan masalah.Untuk itulah perlunya
keterlibatan (partisipasi) warga masyarakat dalam proses menemukenali
masalah (kebutuhan) mereka yang akan menjadi dasar perencanaan.
Kebutuhan yang ditentukan oleh pemimpin tanpa melibatkan warga
masyarakat, sering tidak menjawab masalah yang sebenarnya ada
sehingga dapat menghilangkan kepercayaan warga kepada niat baik
pemimpinnya.
Untuk memastikan bahwa rencana yang sudah dibuat efektif dalam
pelaksanaannya, dan semua orang melaksanakan yang menjadi
tanggung jawabnya maka harus dilakukan pemantauan dan evaluasi
secara terbuka dengan semua warga.
Diunduh dari: www.p2kp.org/...Modal_Sosial.../BB_modal_Sosia... ……….15/12/2012
Social capital is your
network with people
around you which
you can utilize to gain
access to resources
or to be able to get
favors or help with
situations in everyday
life.
In Indonesia social
capital is important
for harvesting fields,
repairs on house, for
local development
and for a sense of
belonging.
Diunduh dari:
http://www.uia.no/en/div/project/study_tour_indonesia_2011/social_and_cultural_capital…… 6/1/2013
MODAL SOSIAL
Bagaimana BKM membangun modal sosial?
BKM, sebagai dewan pimpinan kolektif , yang bertanggung jawab untuk
menggerakan potensi warga masyarakat kelurahan untuk menanggulangi
kemiskinan, mempunyai tugas untuk membangun modal sosial di wilayahnya. Modal
sosial yang dibangun akan menjadi modal (potensi) yang sangat besar bagi seluruh
warga kelurahan untuk berjaringan di antara sesama warga, maupun dengan pihak
luar.
Modal sosial yang harus dibangun oleh BKM:
1. Menumbuhkan kerjasama dan kepercayaan di antara anggota BKM
2. Menumbuhkan kerjasama dan kepercayaan antara BKM
dengan warga masyarakat
3. Menumbuhkan kerjasama dan kepercayaan antar kelompok
masyarakat
4. Menumbuhkan kerjasama dan kepercayaan antara BKM,
masyarakat dan pihak luar .
Diunduh dari: www.p2kp.org/...Modal_Sosial.../BB_modal_Sosia... ……….15/12/2012
Cultural Capital
"Inherited systems of
values and attitudes,
codes of behavior, and
rewards and sanctions,
which individuals need
to obey and can gain or
suffer from as long as
they are within that
culture, but which they
can be freed from by
physically moving out"
- Stein Kristensen
Diunduh dari:
... http://www.uia.no/en/div/project/study_tour_indonesia_2011/social_and_cultural_capital
……….6/1/2013
MODAL SOSIAL
Menumbuhkan kerjasama dan kepercayaan antar anggota
BKM
Keterbukaan dan kejujuran di antara anggota BKM, merupakan unsur yang paling
penting untuk bekerjasama. Oleh karena itu BKM harus menerapkan pola – pola
hubungan yang jujur dan terbuka, dengan cara:
1. Merumukan semua keputusan dan tindakan bersama, tidak ada anggota yang
memutuskan sendiri berdasarkan kepentingannya.
2. Menjalin dialog terbuka dengan diskusi – dikusi secara berkala, saling
memberikan informasi dan bertukar pengalaman.
3. Mencatat semua kegiatan yang dilakukan dan informasi yang diterima, agar
semua anggota bisa mengakses informasi tersebut.
4. Memberikan kesempatan yang sama kepada semua anggota untuk berpendapat
dan mengemukakan perasaan – perasaannya dalam suasana saling
menghargai.
5.
Diunduh dari: www.p2kp.org/...Modal_Sosial.../BB_modal_Sosia... ……….15/12/2012
Diunduh dari: http://www.ronaldvandenhoff.nl/blog/21461/Trust_is_the_key_……….6/1/2013
MODAL SOSIAL
Menumbuhkan kerjasama dan kepercayaan antara BKM dengan
masyarakat
Sebagai pemimpin kolektif dari masyarakat warga, BKM harus mendapat
kepercayaan warganya. Untuk kepentingan tersebut, BKM harus
mengembangkan pola – pola hubungan yang dimbal balik antara BKM
dengan masyarakat.
Beberapa cara menumbuhkan kepercayaan masyarakat yang bisa
dilakukan oleh BKM adalah:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Menjalankan tugas yang diamanahkan oleh masyarakat dengan pengelolaan
yang jujur dan adil. Adil bukan berarti bagi rata, akan tetapi menentukan prioritas
berdasarkan kebutuhan yang nyata, bukan untuk kepentingan pribadi.
Contohnya dalam menentukan penerima manfaat langsung, harus berdasarkan
data KK miskin berdasarkan hasil PS, bukan atas dasar kekeluargaan atau
kedekatan.
Tidak mencari keuntungan pribadi, akan tetapi menjalankan tugas dan tanggung
jawab semata – mata untuk kepentingan kesejahteraan masyarakat.
Mampu melindungi masyarakatnya (terutama warga miskin), tidak memihak
kepada kelompok tertentu akan tetapi memberikan kesempatan kepada semua
warga untuk terlibat dalam keseluruhan kegiatan.
Memberikan kesempatan seluas – luasnya kepada warga mayarakat untuk
berpartisipasi dalam proses dari menemukenali masalah (refleksi kemiskinan
dan pemetaan swadaya,merencanakan (menyusun PJM) dan monitoring
evaluasi kegiatan, walaupun keputusan terakhir BKM yang menentukan sebagai
pengambil kebijakan.
Memberikan informasi mengenai kegiatan BKM, keuangan dan informasi lain
yang dibutuhkan masyarakat dalam penanggulangan kemiskinan yang menjadi
tanggung jawab BKM.
Mempertanggung jawabkan pengelolaan keuangan,kegiatan – kegiatan dan
kebijakan yang dikeluarkan (akuntabilitas).
Diunduh dari: www.p2kp.org/...Modal_Sosial.../BB_modal_Sosia... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
Menumbuhkan kerjasama dan kepercayaan antar warga
masyarakat
Dalam mencapai tujuan penanggulangan kemiskinan, masyarakat tidak
bisa bergerak sendiri – sendiri, akan tetapi perlu kerjasama di antara
mereka. Untuk dapat bekerjasama diperlukan hubungan sosial yang kuat
dan guyup (Jawa). Oleh karena itu BKM perlu menggerakan modal sosial
di masyarakat dengan menciptakan hubungan – hubungan tadi dengan
berbagai cara di antaranya :
1. Menumbuhkan kepedulian warga dengan menggerakan kesadaran
kritis masyarakat terhadap permasalahan bersama terutama yang
menyangkut kemiskinan dengan cara melakukan refleksi kritis dengan
berbagai pihak, misal melalui Komunitas Belajar Kelurahan;
melibatkan seluruh unsur masyarakat di dalam setiap tahapan
program dari mulai identifikasi masalah, perencanaan, pelaksanaan
sampai monitoring evaluasi.
2. Menggalang kegiatan yang bisa menumbuhkan kebersamaan melalui
kelompok – kelompok seperti KSM, sehingga KSM dibentuk bukan
hanya sekedar untuk kepentingan pencairan dana BLM akan tetapi
menjadi sarana kegiatan bersama. Saling menghargai, saling percaya
di antara anggota kelompok akan tumbuh apabila kelompok tersebut
dibangun dalam suasana keterbukaan, kejujuran, keikhlasan dan
saling peduli di antara anggotanya. Dalam kelompok yang seperti ini
yang menjadi hal utama adalah tujuan kelompok bukan tujuan pribadi.
Kejujuran dalam pengelolaan KSM juga akan menjadi modal untuk
dapat dipercaya oleh kelompok masyarakat yang lain baik warga
kelurahan setempat atau pihak lain, sehingga kemungkinan untuk
bermitra dengan berbagai pihak menjadi sangat terbuka. Misal:
pengembalian dana bergulir dari KSM, akan menumbuhkan
kepercayaan dari warga lain, juga BKM terhadap KSM tersebut.
Diunduh dari: www.p2kp.org/...Modal_Sosial.../BB_modal_Sosia... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
Menumbuhkan kerjasama antara BKM dengan pihak luar
Apabila kerjasama dan kepercayaan dalam ketiga hal di atas dapat
terwujud, hal tersebut merupakan modal bagi BKM untuk dapat dipercaya
oleh pihak luar. Apabila kepercayaan pihak luar sudah tumbuh,
merupakan keniscayaan bagi para pihak baik itu lembaga swasta,
pemerintah maupun individu–individu untuk mau bermitra denngan BKM.
BKM yang menjunjung tinggi kejujuran, keterbukaan, keadilan, tidak
mementingkan kepentingan pribadi dan bekerja untuk kepentingan
penanggulangan kemiskinan merupakan modal sosial yang sangat besar
untuk dapat memperoleh kepercayaan dari berbagai pihak baik
masyarakat kelurahan maupun pihak luar. Dengan demikian modal sosial
ini akan menjadi modal yang sangat penting untuk mengembangkan
jaringan dengan berbagai pihak, sehingga masyarakat dapat semkin
maju dan sejahtera.
Diunduh dari: www.p2kp.org/...Modal_Sosial.../BB_modal_Sosia... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
Modal Sosial adalah sumberdaya yang dapat dipandang sebagai
investasi untuk mendapatkan sumberdaya baru. Seperti diketahui bahwa
sesuatu yang disebut sumberdaya (resources) adalah sesuatu yang
dapat dipergunakan untuk dikonsumsi, disimpan, dan diinvestasikan.
Sumberdaya yang digunakan untuk investasi disebut sebagai modal.
Dimensi Modal Sosial cukup luas dan kompleks.
Modal Sosial berbeda dengan istilah populer lainnya, yaitu Modal
Manusia (human capital). Pada modal manusia segala sesuatunya lebih
merujuk ke dimensi individual yaitu daya dan keahlian yang dimiliki oleh
seorang individu. Modal Sosial lebih menekankan pada potensi kelompok
dan pola-pola hubungan antarindividu dalam suatu kelompok dan
antarkelompok dengan ruang perhatian pada jaringan sosial, norma, nilai,
dan kepercayaan antarsesama yang lahir dari anggota kelompok dan
menjadi norma kelompok.
Modal sosial juga sangat dekat dengan terminologi sosial lainnya seperti
yang dikenal sebagai kebajikan sosial (social virtue). Perbedaan
keduanya terletak pada dimensi jaringan. Kebajikan sosial akan sangat
kuat dan berpengaruh jika di dalamnya melekat perasaan keterikatan
untuk saling berhubungan yang bersifat timbal balik dalam suatu bentuk
hubungan sosial.
Menurut Putnam (2000), suatu entitas masyarakat yang memiliki
kebajikan sosial yang tinggi, tetapi hidup secara sosial terisolasi akan
dipandang sebagai masyarakat yang memiliki tingkat Modal Sosial yang
rendah.
Diunduh dari: http://witrianto.blogdetik.com/2010/12/08/modal-sosial-dan-pembangunan-manusiaindonesia/... ……….15/12/2012
Peranan Modal Sosial dalam Pembangunan
Inayah
Staf Pengajar pada Jurusan Administrasi Niaga Politeknik Negeri Semarang
Jurnal Pengembangan Humaniora Vol. 12 No. 1, April 2012
UNSUR-UNSUR MODAL SOSIAL
Blakeley dan Suggate, dalam Suharto (2007) menyatakan bahwa unsurunsur modal sosial adalah:
1. epercayaan, tumbuhnya sikap saling percaya antar individu dan antar
institusi dalam masyarakat;
2. Kohesivitas, adanya hubungan yang erat dan padu dalam
membangun solidaritas masyarakat;
3. Altruisme, paham yang mendahulukan kepentingan orang lain;
4. Perasaan tidak egois dan tidak individualistik yang meng-utamakan
kepentingan umum dan orang lain di atas kepentingan sendiri;
5. Gotong-royong, sikap empati dan perilaku yang mau menolong orang
lain dan bahu-membahu dalam melakukan berbagai upaya untuk
kepentingan bersama; dan
6. Jaringan, dan kolaborasi sosial, membangun hubungan dan
kerjasama antar individu dan antar institusi baik di dalam komunitas
sendiri/ kelompok maupun di luar komunitas/kelompok dalam
berbagai kegiatan yang memberikan manfaat bagi masyarakat.
(Sumber: Suharto, Edy. 2007. Modal Sosial dan Kebijakan Publik).
Diunduh dari:..
http://www.polines.ac.id/ragam/index_files/jurnalragam/paper_6%20apr%202012.pdf. ……….15/1
2/2012
Peranan Modal Sosial dalam Pembangunan
Inayah
Staf Pengajar pada Jurusan Administrasi Niaga Politeknik Negeri Semarang
Jurnal Pengembangan Humaniora Vol. 12 No. 1, April 2012
Hasbullah (2006) mengetengahkan enam unsur pokok dalam modal sosial
berdasarkan berbagai pengertian modal sosial yang telah ada, yaitu:
1.
Participation in a network. Kemampuan sekelompok orang untuk melibatkan diri
dalam suatu jaringan hubungan sosial, melalui berbagai variasi hubungan yang
saling berdampingan dan dilakukan atas dasar prinsip kesukarelaaan
(voluntary), kesamaan (equality), kebebasan (freedom), dan keadaban (civility).
Kemampuan anggota kelompok atau anggota masyarakat untuk selalu
menyatukan diri dalam suatu pola hubungan yang sinergis akan sangat besar
pengaruhnya dalam menentukan kuat tidaknya modal sosial suatu kelompok.
2.
Reciprocity. Kecenderungan saling tukar kebaikan antar individu dalam suatu
kelompok atau antar kelompok itu sendiri. Pola pertukaran terjadi dalam suatu
kombinasi jangka panjang dan jangka pendek dengan nuansa altruism tanpa
mengharapkan imbalan. Pada masyarakat dan kelompok-kelompok sosial yang
terbentuk yang memiliki bobot resiprositas kuat akan melahirkan suatu
masyarakat yang memiliki tingkat modal sosial yang tinggi.
3.
Trust. Suatu bentuk keinginan untuk mengambil resiko dalam hubunganhubungan sosialnya yang didasari oleh perasaan yakin bahwa yang lain akan
melakukan sesuatu seperti yang diharapkan dan akan senantiasa bertindak
dalam suatu pola tindakan yang saling mendukung. Paling tidak, yang lain tidak
akan bertindak merugikan diri dan kelompoknya (Putnam, 1993). Tindakan
kolektif yang didasari saling percaya akan meningkatkan partisipasi masyarakat
dalam berbagai bentuk dan dimensi terutama dalam konteks kemajuan
bersama. Hal ini memungkinkan masyarakat untuk bersatu dan memberikan
kontribusi pada peningkatan modal sosial.
Diunduh dari:..
http://www.polines.ac.id/ragam/index_files/jurnalragam/paper_6%20apr%202012.pdf. ……….15/1
2/2012
Peranan Modal Sosial dalam Pembangunan
Inayah
Staf Pengajar pada Jurusan Administrasi Niaga Politeknik Negeri Semarang
Jurnal Pengembangan Humaniora Vol. 12 No. 1, April 2012
Hasbullah (2006) mengetengahkan enam unsur pokok dalam modal sosial
berdasarkan berbagai pengertian modal sosial yang telah ada, yaitu:
4.
Social norms. Sekumpulan aturan yang diharapkan dipatuhi dan diikuti oleh
masyarakat dalam suatu entitas sosial tertentu. Aturan-aturan ini biasanya terinstitusionalisasi, tidak tertulis tapi dipahami sebagai penentu pola tingkah laku
yang baik dalam konteks hubungan sosial sehingga ada sangsi sosial yang
diberikan jika melanggar. Norma sosial akan menentukan kuatnya hubungan
antar individu karena merangsang kohesifitas sosial yang berdampak positif
bagi perkembangan masyarakat. Oleh karenanya norma sosial disebut sebagai
salah satu modal sosial.
5.
Values. Sesuatu ide yang telah turun temurun dianggap benar dan penting oleh
anggota kelompok masyarakat. Nilai merupakan hal yang penting dalam
kebudaya-an, biasanya ia tumbuh dan berkembang dalam mendominasi
kehidupan kelompok masyarakat tertentu serta mempengaruhi aturan-aturan
bertindak dan berperilaku masyarakat yang pada akhirnya membentuk pola
cultural.
6.
Proactive action. Keinginan yang kuat dari anggota kelompok untuk tidak saja
berpartisipasi tetapi senantiasa mencari jalan bagi keterlibatan anggota
kelompok dalam suatu kegiatan masyarakat. Anggota kelompok melibatkan diri
dan mencari kesempatan yang dapat memperkaya hubungan-hubungan sosial
dan menguntung-kan kelompok. Perilaku inisiatif dalam mencari informasi
berbagai pengalaman, memperkaya ide, pengetahuan, dan beragam bentuk
inisiatif lainnya baik oleh individu mapun kelompok, merupakan wujud modal
sosial yang berguna dalam membangun masyarakat.
Diunduh dari:..
http://www.polines.ac.id/ragam/index_files/jurnalragam/paper_6%20apr%202012.pdf. ……….15/1
2/2012
Peranan Modal Sosial dalam Pembangunan
Inayah
Staf Pengajar pada Jurusan Administrasi Niaga Politeknik Negeri Semarang
Jurnal Pengembangan Humaniora Vol. 12 No. 1, April 2012
1.
2.
3.
Ridell, (dalam Suharto, 2007) menuliskan tiga parameter modal sosial:
Kepercayaan (trust), harapan yang tumbuh di dalam sebuah masyarakat, yang
ditunjukkan oleh adanya perilaku jujur, teratur, dan kerjasama berdasarkan
norma-norma yang dianut bersama;
Norma-norma (norms), norma terdiri pemahaman-pemahaman, nilai-nlai,
harapan-harapan, dan tujuan-tujuan yang diyakini dan dijalankan bersama oleh
sekelom-pok orang;
Jaringan-jaringan (networks), merupakan infrastruktur dinamis yang berwujud
jaringan-jaringan kerjasama antar manusia. Jaringan tersebut memfasilitasi
terjadinya komunikasi dan interaksi, memungkinkan tumbuhnya kepercayaan
dan mem-perkuat kerjasama.
Diunduh dari:..
http://www.polines.ac.id/ragam/index_files/jurnalragam/paper_6%20apr%202012.pdf. ……….15/1
2/2012
Nick Llewellyn, Colin Armistead, (2000) "Business process management: Exploring social
capital within processes", International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 11
Iss: 3, pp.225 - 243
Diunduh dari:... http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=851693&show=html
……….6/1/2013
Peranan Modal Sosial dalam Pembangunan
Inayah
Staf Pengajar pada Jurusan Administrasi Niaga Politeknik Negeri Semarang
Jurnal Pengembangan Humaniora Vol. 12 No. 1, April 2012
Modal Sosial dan Pembangunan Manusia
Putnam dalam Hasbullah (2006) menyatakan bahwa bangsa yang
memiliki modal sosial tinggi cenderung lebih efisien dan efektif dalam
menjalankan berbagai kebijakan untuk mensejahterakan dan memajukan
kehidupan rakyatnya. Modal sosial dapat meningkatkan kesadaran
individu tentang banyaknya peluang yang dapat dikembangkan untuk
kepentingan masyarakat.
Dalam konteks pembangunan manusia, modal sosial mempunyai
pengaruh yang besar sebab beberapa dimensi pembangunan manusia
sangat dipengaruhi oleh modal sosial antara lain kemampuan untuk
menyelesaikan kompleksitas berbagai permasalahan bersama,
mendorong perubahan yang cepat di dalam masyarakat, menumbuhkan
kesadaran kolektif untuk memperbaiki kualitas hidup dan mencari peluang
yang dapat dimanfaatkan untuk kesejahteraan.
Hal ini terbangun oleh adanya rasa saling memper-cayai, kohesifitas,
tindakan proaktif, dan hubungan internal-eksternal dalam membangun
jaringan sosial didukung oleh semangat kebajikan untuk saling
menguntungkan sebagai refleksi kekuatan masyarakat. Situasi ini akan
memperbesar kemungkinan percepatan perkembangan individu dan
kelompok dalam masyarakat tersebut.
Bagaimanapun juga kualitas individu akan mendorong peningkatan
kualitas hidup masyarakat itu berarti pembangunan manusia paralel
dengan pembangunan sosial.
Diunduh dari:..
http://www.polines.ac.id/ragam/index_files/jurnalragam/paper_6%20apr%202012.pdf. ……….15/1
2/2012
Peranan Modal Sosial dalam Pembangunan
Inayah
Staf Pengajar pada Jurusan Administrasi Niaga Politeknik Negeri Semarang
Jurnal Pengembangan Humaniora Vol. 12 No. 1, April 2012
Modal Sosial dan Pembangunan Manusia
Menurut Putnam (dalam Hasbullah, 2006), bangsa yang memiliki modal
sosial tinggi cenderung lebih efisien dan efektif dalam menjalankan
berbagai kebijakan untuk mensejahterakan dan memajukan kehidupan
rakyatnya. Modal sosial dapat meningkatkan kesadaran individu tentang
banyaknya peluang yang dapat dikembangkan untuk kepentingan
masyarakat.
Dalam konteks pembangunan manusia, modal sosial mempunyai
pengaruh yang besar sebab beberapa dimensi pembangunan manusia
sangat dipengaruhi oleh modal sosial antara lain kemampuan untuk
menyelesaikan kompleksitas berbagai permasalahan bersama,
mendorong perubahan yang cepat di dalam masyarakat, menumbuhkan
kesadaran kolektif untuk memperbaiki kualitas hidup dan mencari peluang
yang dapat dimanfaatkan untuk kesejahteraan.
Hal ini terbangun oleh adanya rasa saling mempercayai, kohesifitas,
tindakan proaktif, dan hubungan internal-eksternal dalam membangun
jaringan sosial didukung oleh semangat kebajikan untuk saling
menguntungkan sebagai refleksi kekuatan masyarakat.
Situasi ini akan memperbesar kemungkinan percepatan perkembangan
individu dan kelompok dalam masyarakat tersebut. Kualitas individu dapat
mendorong peningkatan kualitas hidup masyarakat, hal ini berarti
pembangunan manusia sejajar dengan pembangunan sosial.
Diunduh dari:..
http://www.polines.ac.id/ragam/index_files/jurnalragam/paper_6%20apr%202012.pdf. ……….15/1
2/2012
Peranan Modal Sosial dalam Pembangunan
Inayah
Staf Pengajar pada Jurusan Administrasi Niaga Politeknik Negeri Semarang
Jurnal Pengembangan Humaniora Vol. 12 No. 1, April 2012
Modal Sosial dan Pembangunan Sosial
Masyarakat yang memiliki modal sosial tinggi akan membuka
kemungkinan menyelesaikan kompleksitas persoalan dengan lebih
mudah. Dengan saling percaya, toleransi, dan kerjasama mereka dapat
membangun jaringan baik di dalam kelompok masyarakatnya maupun
dengan kelompok masyarakat lainnya.
Pada masyarakat tradisional, diketahui memiliki asosiasi-asosiasi informal
yang umumnya kuat dan memiliki nilai-nilai, norma, dan etika kolektif
sebagai sebuah komu-nitas yang saling berhubungan. Hal ini merupakan
modal sosial yang dapat mendorong munculnya organisasi-organisasi
modern dengan prinsip keterbukaan, dan jaringan-jaringan informal dalam
masyarakat yang secara mandiri dapat mengembangkan pengetahuan
dan wawasan dengan tujuan peningkatan kesejahteraan dan kualitas
hidup bersama dalam kerangka pembangunan masyarakat.
Berkembangnya modal sosial di tengah masyarakat akan menciptakan
suatu situasi masyarakat yang toleran, dan merangsang tumbuhnya
empati dan simpati terhadap kelompok masyarakat di luar kelompoknya.
Menurut Hasbullah (2006), jaringan-jaringan yang memperkuat modal
sosial akan memudahkan saluran informasi dan ide dari luar yang
merangsang perkembangan kelompok masyarakat. Hal ini dapat
melahirkan masyarakat peduli pada berbagai aspek dan dimensi aktifitas
kehidupan, masyarakat yang saling memberi perhatian dan saling
percaya. Situasi seperti ini dapat mendorong kehidupan bermasyarakat
yang damai, bersahabat, dan tenteram.
Diunduh dari:..
http://www.polines.ac.id/ragam/index_files/jurnalragam/paper_6%20apr%202012.pdf. ……….15/1
2/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
Modal Sosial dan Pembangunan Ekonomi
Modal sosial sangat tinggi pegaruhnya terhadap perkembangan dan
kemajuan berbagai sektor ekonomi.
Fukuyama (2002) menunjukkan hasil-hasil studi di berbagai negara yang
menunjukkan bahwa modal sosial yang kuat akan merangsang
pertumbuhan berbagai sektor ekonomi karena adanya tingkat rasa
percaya yang tinggi dan kerekatan hubungan dalam jaringan yang luas
tumbuh antar sesama pelaku ekonomi.
Hasbullah (2006) memberikan contoh perkembangan ekonomi yang sangat tinggi di
Asia Timur sebagai pengaruh pola perdagangan dan perekonomian yang dijalankan
pelaku ekonomi Cina dalam menjalankan usahanya memiliki tingkat kohesifitas yang
tinggi karena dipengaruhi oleh koneksi-koneksi kekeluargaan dan kesukuan,
meskipun demikian pola ini mendorong pembentukan jaringan rasa percaya
(networks of trust) yang dibangun melewati batas-batas keluarga, suku, agama, dan
negara.
Budaya gotong-royong, tolong menolong, saling mengingatkan antar individu dalam
entitas masyarakat desa merefleksikan semangat saling memberi (reciprocity),
saling per-caya (trust), dan adanya jaringan-jaringan sosial (sosial networking). Hal
ini membangun kekompakan pada masyarakat desa untuk bersama-sama dalam
memulai bercocok tanam bersama-sama untuk menghindari hama, membentuk
kelompok tani untuk bersama-sama menyelesaikan permasalahan dan mencari
solusi bersama dalam rangka meningkatkan perekonomian pertanian.
Pembangunan industri pada masyarakat dengan modal sosial tinggi akan cepat
berkembang karena modal sosial akan menghasilkan energi kolektif yang
memungkinkan berkembangnya jiwa dan semangat kewirausahaan di tengah
masyarakat yang pada gilirannya akan menumbuhkembangkan dunia usaha.
Investor asing akan tertarik untuk menanamkan modal usaha pada masyarakat yang
menjunjung nilai kejujuran, kepercaya-an, terbuka dan memiliki tingkat empati yang
tinggi. Modal sosial, berpengaruh kuat pada perkembangan sektor ekonomi lainnya
seperti perdagangan, jasa, konstruksi, pariwisata dan lainnya.
Diunduh dari:
……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
Modal sosial adalah suatu konsep dengan berbagai definisi yang
saling terkait, yang didasarkan pada nilai jaringan sosial.
Sejak konsepnya dicetuskan, istilah "modal sosial" telah
digambarkan sebagai "sesuatu yang sangat manjur" [Portes,
1998] bagi semua masalah yang menimpa komunitas dan
masyarakat masa kini.
Sementara berbagai aspek dari konsep ini telah dibahas oleh
semua bidang ilmu sosial, sebagian menelusuri penggunaannya
pada masa modern kepada Jane Jacobs pada tahun 1960-an.
Namun ia tidak secara eksplisit menjelaskan istilah modal sosial
melainkan menggunakannya dalam sebuah artikel dengan
rujukan kepada nilai jaringan. Uraian mendalam yang pertama
kali dikemukakan tentang istilah ini dilakukan oleh Pierre
Bourdieu pada 1972
Diunduh dari: http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_sosial……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
Definisi
Modal sosial adalah bagian-bagian dari organisasi sosial seperti
kepercayaan, norma dan jaringan yang dapat meningkatkan
efisiensi masyarakat dengan memfasilitasi tindakan-tindakan
yang terkoordinasi.[1]
Modal sosial juga didefinisikan sebagai kapabilitas yang muncul
dari kepercayaan umum di dalam sebuah masyarakat atau
bagian-bagian tertentu dari masyarakat tersebut. Selain itu,
konsep ini juga diartikan sebagai serangkaian nilai atau norma
informal yang dimiliki bersama di antara para anggota suatu
kelompok yang memungkinkan terjalinnya kerjasama.[2]
1. Putnam, Robert D. (2000), Bowling Alone: The Collapse and revival of
American Community, New York: Simon and Schuster, ISBN
9780684832838
2. Fukuyama, F. (1995), Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of
Prosperity, New York: Free Press, ISBN 0684825252.
Diunduh dari: http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_sosial……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
Akar
Konsep yang mendasari modal sosial sudah lama. Para filsuf yang
menekankan hubungan antara kehidupan masyarakat yang pluralistik dan
demokrasi termasuk James Madison (The Federalist), Alexis de
Tocqueville (Democracy in America), dan banyak penulis lainnya dalam
tradisi pluralis yang dominan dalam ilmu politik Amerika.
Beberapa contoh dari modal sosial antara lain adalah POMG (Persatuan
Orang tua Murid dan Guru), kepramukaan, dewan sekolah, liga boling,
jaringan internet, dan bahkan kelompok-kelompok ekstrem seperti Ku
Klux Klan atau kelompok supremasis kulit putih, meskipun kelompokkelompok ini menciptakan modal sosial yang eksklusif yang dapat
menimbulkan akibat yang negatif.
Semua kelompok ini dapat menolong membangun dan menghancurkan
masyarakat karena mereka menjembatani atau mengikat perilaku. Bila
jumlah interaksi manusia meningkat, orang akan lebih mungkin untuk
saling menolong dan kemudian menjadi lebih terlibat secara politik.
Baru-baru ini muncul banyak diskusi tentang komunitas surat listrik dan
online dan apakah mereka menolong membangun modal sosial.
Sebagian orang berpendapat bahwa mereka memang menjembatani
orang tetapi tidak mengikatnya. Perdebatan menarik lainnya di antara
para ilmuwan politik berkaitan dengan apakah surat listrik menolong
menghasilkan atau mengurangi modal sosial di lingkungan tempat kerja.
Diunduh dari: http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_sosial……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL
Sejarah
Istilah modal sosial pertama kali muncul pada tulisan L.J Hanifan (1916)
dalam konteks peningkatan kondisi hidup masyarakat melalui keterlibatan
masyarakat, niat baik serta atribut-atribut sosial lain dalam bertetangga.
Dalam karya tersebut, muncul ciri utama dari modal sosial yakni
membawa manfaat internal dan eksternal. Setelah karya Hanifan, The
Rural School of Community Center, istilah modal sosial tidak muncul
dalam literatur ilmiah selama beberapa dekade. Pada tahun 1956,
sekelompok ahli sosiologi perkotaan Kanada menggunakannya dan
diperkuat dengan kemunculan teori pertukaran George C.Homans pada
tahun 1961. Pada era ini, istilah modal sosialmuncul pada pembahasan
mengenai ikatan-ikatan komunitas.
Penelitian yang dilakukan James S. Coleman (1988) di bidang pendidikan
dan Robert Putnam (1993) mengenai partisipasi dan performa institusi
telah menginspirasi banyak kajian mengenai modal sosial saat ini. (Wallis,
Joe; Killerby, Paul, 2004)
1.
2.
3.
Coleman, James. 1988. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.
American Journal of Sociology. 94 Supplement:(S95-S-120).
Loury, Glenn. 1977. A Dynamic Theory of Racial Income Differences. Chapter 8
of Women, Minorities, and Employment Discrimination, Ed. P.A. Wallace dan A.
Le Mund. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books.
Wallis, Joe; Killerby, Paul (2004), [www.emeraldinsight.com/0306-8293 "Socio
economics and social capital"], International Journal of Social Economics 31:
240.
Diunduh dari: http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_sosial……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL,
SOCIAL AGENCY
AND
SUSTAINABILITY
Chris Ling
Ann Dale:
Canada Research Chair in Sustainable
Community Development
Royal Roads University
Diunduh dari:
www.crcreresearch.org/survey.htm……….15/12/2012
Social capital?
“The set of norms, networks, and
organizations through which people gain
access to power and resources, and through
which decision-making and policy formation
occur” (Grootaert, 1998)
Grootaert, C. 1998. Social Capital: The Missing Link? Social Capital
Initiative Working Paper No. 3. Washington, DC: World Bank.
• Reciprocity
• Trust
•
• Strong
• Networks
• Weak
•
Diunduh dari:
Bonding
Bridging
www.crcreresearch.org/survey.htm……….15/12/2012
Measuring Social Capital
What are the social parameters that impact
social capital?
What doesn’t seem to be important:
•
Political position and faith in federal Government
•
Contractual arrangements (general trust is much
more significant)
•
The position of the individual without
consideration of the social context.
Onyx, J. and Bullen, P, 2000
Diunduh dari:
www.crcreresearch.org/survey.htm……….15/12/2012
Measuring Social Capital
What is important:
• Participation – involvement in community
activities
• Trust and Safety – do people trust their
neighbours, do they feel safe on their streets?
• Connections – Neighbourhoods (casual
contacts), Families and Friends (more intimate
contacts), Work (feeling part of a team)
• Tolerance of Diversity – a feeling that variety
enhances rather than detract from life
• Value of Life – Am I valued by my
community?
Onyx, J. and Bullen, P, 2000
Diunduh dari:
www.crcreresearch.org/survey.htm……….15/12/2012
Measuring Social Capital
AND MOST IMPORTANT
• Social Agency – a sense of personal and
collective efficacy
I and my community CAN make a difference
Diunduh dari:
www.crcreresearch.org/survey.htm……….15/12/2012
Social Agency – key questions
• Are agency, social capital and sustainable
community development related to each
other?
• Can agency be measured?
• Are there key actors or connectors who
facilitate bridging and networking?
• How do they perceive their role in the
network?
• What are the patterns of leadership and are
they critical to bridging and vertical capital?
• Does membership in overlapping networks
give greater agency to a community?
Diunduh dari:
www.crcreresearch.org/survey.htm……….15/12/2012
HASIL-HASIL
PENELITIAN
MODAL
SOSIAL
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
ABSTRAK
Semakin mengemukanya pencermatan terhadap keberadaan potensi dan
peran penting modal sosial di dalam sistem perekonomian dewasa ini,
mulai terjadi ketika para pakar dan pelaku ekonomi mulai merasakan
adanya sejumlah kejanggalan dan kegagalan implementasi mazab
ekonomi neo-klasik yang pro-globalisasi dan pro-liberalisasi perdagangan
dalam menata perekonomian dunia baru dewasa ini.
Secara umum modal sosial adalah merupakan hubungan-hubungan yang
tercipta dan norma-norma yang membentuk kualitas dan kuantitas
hubungan sosial dalam masyarakat dalam spektrum yang luas, yaitu
sebagai perekat sosial (social glue) yang menjaga kesatuan anggota
masyarakat (bangsa) secara bersama-sama.
Wujud dari tipologi modal sosial ini dapat berupa modal sosial terikat
(bonding social capital) dan modal sosial yang menjembatasi (bridging
social capital).
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Sistem perekonomian dewasa ini mulai didominasi oleh peranan human
capital, yaitu ‘pengetahuan’ dan ‘ketrampilan’ manusia.
Kandungan lain dari human capital selain pengetahun dan ketrampilan
adalah ‘kemampuan masyarakat untuk melakukan asosiasi
(berhubungan) satu sama lain’.
Kemampuan ini akan menjadi modal penting bukan hanya bagi kehidupan
ekonomi akan tetapi juga bagi setiap aspek eksistensi sosial yang lain.
Modal yang demikian ini disebut dengan ‘modal sosial’ (social capital),
yaitu kemampuan masyarakat untuk bekerja bersama demi mencapai
tujuan bersama dalam suatu kelompok dan organisasi (Coleman, 1990).
1.
Coleman, J., 1990. Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge Mass: Harvard
University Press.
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Bourdieu (1986) mengemukakan kritiknya terhadap terminologi
modal (capital) di dalam ilmu ekonomi konvensional.
Dinyatakannya modal bukan hanya sekedar alat-alat produksi,
akan tetapi memiliki pengertian yang lebih luas dan dapat
diklasifikasikan kedalam 3 (tiga) golongan, yaitu:
1. Modal ekonomi (economic capital),
2. Modal kultural (cultural capital), dan
3. Modal sosial (social capital).
Modal ekonomi, dikaitkan dengan kepemilikan alat-alat produksi.
Modal kultural, terinstitusionalisasi dalam bentuk kualifikasi
pendidikan. Modal sosial, terdiri dari kewajiban - kewajiban
sosial.
1. Bourdieu, P. 1986. The Form of Capital. In J. Richardson (Ed).
Handbook of Theory and Research for Sociology of Education. New
York: Greenwood Press.
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Definisi Modal Sosial
Modal sosial (social capital) dapat didefinisikan sebagai kemampuan
masyarakat untuk bekerja bersama, demi mencapai tujuan-tujuan
bersama, di dalam berbagai kelompok dan organisasi (Coleman, 1999).
Secara lebih komperehensif Burt (1992) mendefinsikan, modal sosial
adalah kemampuan masyarakat untuk melakukan asosiasi
(berhubungan) satu sama lain dan selanjutnya menjadi kekuatan yang
sangat penting bukan hanya bagi kehidupan ekonomi akan tetapi juga
setiap aspek eksistensi sosial yang lain.
Menurut Burt (1992), kemampuan berasosiasi ini sangat tergantung
pada suatu kondisi dimana komunitas itu mau saling berbagi untuk
mencari titik temu norma-norma dan nilai-nilai bersama. Apabila titik temu
etis-normatif ini diketemukan, maka pada gilirannya
kepentingankepentingan individual akan tunduk pada kepentingankepentingan komunitas kelompok.
1.
2.
3.
Burt. R.S. 1992. Excerpt from The Sosial Structure of Competition, in Structure
Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA and London:
Harvard University. In Elinor Ostrom and T.K. Ahn. 2003. Foundation of Social
Capital. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
Coleman, J., 1990. Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge Mass: Harvard
University Press.
--------------. 1999. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. Cambridge
Mass: Harvard University Press.
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Fukuyama (1995) mendifinisikan, modal sosial sebagai serangkaian nilainilai atau norma-norma informal yang dimiliki bersama diantara para
anggota suatu kelompok yang memungkinkan terjalinnya kerjasama
diantara mereka.
Cox (1995) mendefinisikan, modal sosial sebagai suatu rangkian proses
hubungan antar manusia yang ditopang oleh jaringan, norma-norma, dan
kepercayaan sosial yang memungkinkan efisien dan efektifnya koordinasi
dan kerjasama untuk keuntungan dan kebajikan bersama.
Partha dan Ismail S. (1999) mendefinisikan, modal sosial sebagai
hubungan-hubungan yang tercipta dan norma-norma yang membentuk
kualitas dan kuantitas hubungan sosial dalam masyarakat dalam
spektrum yang luas, yaitu sebagai perekat sosial (social glue) yang
menjaga kesatuan anggota kelompok secara bersama-sama.
Solow (1999) mendefinisikan, modal sosial sebagai serangkaian nilai-nilai
atau norma-norma yang diwujudkan dalam perilaku yang dapat
mendorong kemampuan dan kapabilitas untuk bekerjasama dan
berkoordinasi untuk menghasilkan kontribusi besar terhadap
keberlanjutan produktivitas.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Cox, Eva. 1995. A Truly Civil Society. Sydney:ABC Boook
Fukuyama, F. 1995. Trust: The Social Virtues and The Creation of Prosperity. New York: Free
Press.
Partha D., Ismail S. 1999. Social Capital A Multifaceted Perspective. Washington DC: The
World Bank.
Solow, R. M. 1999. Notes Social Capital and Economic Performance. In Partha D., Ismail S.,
1999. Social Capital A Multifaceted Perspective. Washington DC: The World Bank.
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Menurut Cohen dan Prusak L. (2001), modal sosial adalah sebagai setiap
hubungan yang terjadi dan diikat oleh suatu kepercayaan (trust), kesaling
pengertian (mutual understanding), dan nilai-nilai bersama (shared value)
yang mengikat anggota kelompok untuk membuat kemungkinan aksi
bersama dapat dilakukan secara efisien dan efektif.
Hasbullah (2006) menjelaskan, modal sosial sebagai segala sesuatu hal
yang berkaitan dengan kerja sama dalam masyarakat atau bangsa untuk
mencapai kapasitas hidup yang lebih baik, ditopang oleh nilai-nilai dan
norma yang menjadi unsurunsur utamanya sepetri trust (rasa saling
mempercayai), keimbal-balikan, aturan-aturan kolektif dalam suatu
masyarakat atau bangsa dan sejenisnya.
1.
2.
Cohen, S., Prusak L. 2001. In Good Company: How Social Capital Makes
Organization Work. London: Harvard Business Pres.
Hasbullah, J., 2006. Sosial Kapital: Menuju Keunggulan Budaya Manusia
Indonesia. Jakarta: MR-United Press.
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Dimensi Modal Sosial
Modal sosial (social capital) berbeda definisi dan terminologinya dengan
human capital (Fukuyama, 1995). Bentuk human capital adalah
‘pengetahuan’ dan ‘ketrampilan’ manusia. Ivestasi human capital
kovensional adalah dalam bentuk seperti halnya pendidikan universitas,
pelatihan menjadi seorang mekanik atau programmer computer, atau
menyelenggarakan pendidikan yang tepat lainnya. Sedangkan modal
sosial adalah kapabilitas yang muncul dari kepercayaan umum di dalam
sebuah masyarakat atau bagian-bagian tertentu darinya. Modal sosial
dapat dilembagakan dalam bentuk kelompok sosial paling kecil atau
paling mendasar dan juga kelompok-kelompok masyarakat paling besar
seperti halnya negara (bangsa).
Modal sosial ditransmisikan melalui mekanisme - mekanisme kultural
seperti agama, tradisi, atau kebiasaan sejarah (Fukuyama, 2000). Modal
sosial dibutuhkan untuk menciptakan jenis komunitas moral yang tidak
bisa diperoleh seperti dalam kasus bentukbentuk human capital. Akuisisi
modal sosial memerlukan pembiasaan terhadap norma-norma moral
sebuah komunitas dan dalam konteksnya sekaligus mengadopsi
kebajikan-kebajikan seperti kesetiaan, kejujuran, dan dependability.
Modal sosial lebih didasarkan pada kebajikankebajikan sosial umum.
1. Fukuyama, F. 1995. Social Capital and The Global Economy. Foreign Affairs, 74(5), 89-103. In
Elinor Ostrom and T.K. Ahn. 2003. Foundation of Social Capital. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar
Publishing Limited.
2. --------------. 2000. Social Capital and Civil Society. International Monetary Fund Working Paper,
WP/00/74, 1-8. In Elinor Ostrom and T.K. Ahn. 2003. Foundation of Social Capital.
Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Bank Dunia (1999) meyakini modal sosial adalah sebagai sesuatu yang merujuk ke
demensi institusional, hubungan-hubungan yang tercipta, dan norma-norma yang
membentuk kualitas serta kuantitas hubungan sosial dalam masyarakat. Modal sosial
bukanlah sekedar deretan jumlah institusi atau kelompok yang menopang (underpinning)
kehidupan sosial, melainkan dengan spektrum yang lebih luas. Yaitu sebagai perekat
(social glue) yang menjaga kesatuan anggota kelompok secara bersama-sama.
Dimensi modal sosial tumbuh di dalam suatu masyarakat yang didalamnya berisi nilai dan
norma serta pola-pola interaksi sosial dalam mengatur kehidupan keseharian anggotanya
(Woolcock dan Narayan, 2000). Oleh karena itu Adler dan Kwon (2000) menyatakan,
dimensi modal sosial adalah merupakan gambaran dari keterikatan internal yang
mewarnai struktur kolektif dan memberikan kohesifitas dan keuntungan-keuntungan
bersama dari proses dinamika sosial yang terjadi di dalam masyarakat. Demensi modal
sosial menggambarkan segala sesuatu yang membuat masyarakat bersekutu untuk
mencapai tujuan bersama atas dasar kebersamaan, serta didalamnya diikat oleh nilai-nilai
dan norma-norma yang tumbuh dan dipatuhi (Dasgupta dan Ismail, 1999).
Demensi modal sosial inheren dalam struktur relasi sosial dan jaringan sosial di dalam
suatu masyarakat yang menciptakan berbagai ragam kewajiban sosial, menciptakan iklim
saling percaya, membawa saluran informasi, dan menetapkan norma-norma, serta sangsisangsi sosial bagi para anggota masyarakat tersebut (Coleman, 1999).
1.
2.
3.
4.
Adler, P., Kwon S. 2000. Social Capital: the good, the bad and the ugly. In E. Lesser (Ed).
Knowledge and Social Capital: Foundations and Applications. Butterworth-Heinemmann.
Coleman, J. 1999. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. Cambridge Mass: Harvard
University Press.
Dasgupta, P., Ismail S. 1999. Social Capital A Multifaceted Perspective. Washington DC:
World Bank.
Woolcock, M. & D. Narayan. 2000. Social Capital: Implication for Development Theory,
Research, and Policy. World Bank Research Observer, 15(2), August, 225-49. In Elinor
Ostrom and T.K. Ahn. 2003. Foundation of Social Capital. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar
Publishing Limited.
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Beberapa acuan nilai dan unsur yang merupakan ruh modal sosial antara
lain: sikap yang partisipatif, sikap yang saling memperhatikan, saling
memberi dan menerima, saling percaya mempercayai dan diperkuat oleh
nilai-nilai dan norma-norma yang mendukungnya. Unsur lain yang
memegang peranan penting adalah kemauan masyarakat untuk secara
terus menerus proaktif baik dalam mempertahakan nilai, membentuk
jaringan kerjasama maupun dengan penciptaan kreasi dan ide-ide baru.
Inilah jati diri modal sosial yang sebenarnya.
Menurut Hasbullah (2006), demensi inti telaah dari modal sosial terletak
pada bagaimana kemampuan masyarakat untuk bekerjasama
membangun suatu jaringan guna mencapai tujuan bersama. Kerjasama
tersebut diwarnai oleh suatu pola interrelasi yang imbal balik dan saling
menguntungkan serta dibangun diatas kepercayaan yang ditopang oleh
norma-norma dan nilai-nilai sosial yang positif dan kuat. Kekuatan
tersebut akan maksimal jika didukung oleh semangat proaktif membuat
jalinan hubungan diatas prinsip-prinsip sikap yang partisipatif, sikap yang
saling memperhatikan, saling memberi dan menerima, saling percaya
mempercayai dan diperkuat oleh nilai-nilai dan norma-norma yang
mendukungnya.
1. Hasbullah, J., 2006. Sosial Kapital: Menuju Keunggulan Budaya
Manusia Indonesia. Jakarta: MR-United Press.
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Tipologi Modal Sosial
Pakar-pakar yang memiliki perhatian terhadap modal sosial pada
umumnya tertarik untuk mengkaji kerekatan hubungan sosial dimana
masyarakat terlibat didalamnya, terutama kaitannya dengan pola-pola
interaksi sosial atau hubungan sosial antar anggota masyarakat atau
kelompok dalam suatu kegiatan sosial.
Bagaimana keanggotaan dan aktivitas mereka dalam suatu asosiasi
sosial merupakan hal yang selalu menarik untuk dikaji .
Demensi lain yang juga sangat menarik perhatian adalah yang berkaitan
dengan tipologi modal sosial, yaitu bagaimana perbedaan pola-pola
interaksi berikut konsekuensinya antara modal sosial yang berbentuk
bonding/exclusive atau bridging atau inclusive.
Keduanya memiliki implikasi yang berbeda pada hasil-hasil yang dapat
dicapai dan pengaruhpengaruh yang dapat muncul dalam proses
kehidupan dan pembangunan masyarakat.
Menurut Woolcock (1998), pada pola yang berbentuk bonding atau
exclusive pada umumnya nuansa hubungan yang terbentuk mengarah
ke pola inward looking. Sedangkan pada pola yang berbentuk bridging
atau inclusive lebih mengarah ke ke pola outward looking.
1.
Woolcock, M. 1998. Social Capital and Economic Development: Toward a
Theoretical Synthesis and Policy Framework. Theory and Society, 27 (1),151208. In Elinor Ostrom and T.K. Ahn. 2003. Foundation of Social Capital.
Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Modal Sosial Terikat (Bonding Social Capital)
Modal sosial terikat adalah cenderung bersifat eksklusif. Apa yang
menjadi karakteristik dasar yang melekat pada tipologi ini, sekaligus
sebagai ciri khasnya, dalam konteks ide, relasi dan perhatian, adalah
lebih berorientasi ke dalam (inward looking) dibandingkan dengan
berorientasi keluar (outward looking). Ragam masyarakat yang menjadi
anggota kelompok ini pada umumnya homogenius (cenderung homogen).
The bonding social capital ini dikenal pula sebagai ciri sacred society.
Menurut Putman (1993), pada masyarakat sacred society dogma tertentu
mendominasi dan mempertahankan struktur masyarakat yang totalitarian,
hierarchical, dan tertutup. Di dalam pola interaksi sosial sehari-hari selalu
dituntun oleh nilai-nilai dan normanorma yang menguntungkan level
hierarki tertentu dan feodal.
Menurut Hasbullah (2006), pada mayarakat yang bonded atau inward
looking atau sacred, meskipun hubungan sosial yang tercipta memiliki
tingkat kohesifitas yang kuat, akan tetapi kurang merefleksikan
kemampuan masyarakat tersebut untuk menciptakan dan memiliki modal
sosial yang kuat. Kekuatan yang tumbuh sekedar dalam batas kelompok
dalam keadaan tertentu, setruktur hierarki feodal, kohesifitas yang bersifat
bonding.
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Modal Sosial yang Menjembatani (Bridging Social Capital)
Menurut Hasbullah (2006), bentuk modal sosial yang menjembatani ini ini
biasa juga disebut bentuk modern dari suatu pengelompokan, group,
asosiasi, atau masyarakat.
Prinsip-prinsip pengorganisasian yang dianut didasarkan pada prinsipprinsip universal tentang: (a) persamaan, (b) kebebasan, serta (c) nilainilai kemajemukan dan humanitarian (kemanusiaan, terbuka, dan
mandiri).
Prinsip persamaan, bahwasanya setiap anggota dalam suatu kelompok
masyarakat memiliki hak-hak dan kewajiban yang sama. Setiap
keputusan kelompok berdasarkan kesepakatan yang egaliter dari setiap
anggota kelompok. Pimpinan kelompok masyarakat hanya menjalankan
kesepakatan-kesepakatan yang telah ditentukan oleh para anggota
kelompok.
Prinsip kebebasan, bahwasanya setiap anggota kelompok bebas
berbicara, mengemukakan pendapat dan ide yang dapat
mengembangkan kelompok tersebut. Iklim kebebasan yang tercipta
memungkinkan ide-ide kreatif muncul dari dalam (kelompok), yaitu dari
beragam pikiran anggotanya yang kelak akan memperkaya ide-ide
kolektif yang tumbuh dalam kelompok tersebut.
Prinsip kemajemukan dan humanitarian, bahwasanya nilai-nilai
kemanusiaan, penghormatan terhadap hak asasi setiap anggota dan
orang lain yang merupakan prinsip dasar dalam pengembangan asosiasi,
group, kelompok, atau suatu masyarakat. Kehendak kuat untuk
membantu orang lain, merasakan penderitaan orang lain, berimpati
terhadap situasi yang dihadapi orang lain, adalah merupakan dasar-dasar
ide humanitarian.
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Masyarakat yang menyandarkan pada bridging social capital biasanya
hiterogen dari berbagai ragam unsur latar belakang budaya dan suku.
Setiap anggota kelompok memiliki akses yang sama untuk membuat
jaringan atau koneksi keluar kelompoknya dengan prinsip persamaan,
kemanusiaan, dan kebebasan yang dimiliki.
Bridging social capital akan membuka jalan untuk lebih cepat berkembang
dengan kemampuan menciptakan networking yang kuat, menggerakkan
identitas yang lebih luas dan reciprocity yang lebih variatif, serta
akumulasi ide yang lebih memungkinkan untuk berkembang sesuai
dengan prinsip-prinsip pembangunan yang lebih diterima secara
universal.
Menurut Colemen (1999), tipologi masyarakat bridging social capital
dalam gerakannya lebih memberikan tekanan pada demensi fight for
(berjuang untuk). Perjuangan ini mengarah kepada pencarian jawaban
bersama untuk menyelesaikan masalah yang dihadapi oleh kelompok
(pada situasi tertentu, termasuk problem di dalam kelompok atau problem
yang terjadi di luar kelompok tersebut).
Pada keadaan tertentu jiwa gerakan lebih diwarnai oleh semangat fight
againts yang bersifat memberi perlawanan terhadap ancaman berupa
kemungkinan runtuhnya simbul-simbul dan kepercayaan-kepercayaan
tradisional yang dianut oleh kelompok masyarakat.
Pada kelompok masyarakat yang demikian ini, perilaku kelompok yang
dominan adalah sekedar sense of solidarity (solidarity making).
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Bentuk modal sosial yang menjembatani (bridging capital social)
umumnya mampu memberikan kontribusi besar bagi perkembangan
kemajuan dan kekuatan masyarakat. Hasil-hasil kajian di banyak negara
menunjukkan bahwa dengan tumbuhnya bentuk modal sosial yang
menjembatani ini memungkinan perkembangan di banyak demensi
kehidupan, terkontrolnya korupsi, semakin efisiennya pekerjaanpekerjaan pemerintah, mempercepat keberhasilan upaya
penanggulangan kemiskinan, kualitas hidup manusia akan meningkatkan
dan bangsa menjadi jauh lebih kuat.
Modal Sosial Terikat dan Modal Sosial Menjembatani
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
MODAL SOSIAL: DEFINISI, DEMENSI, DAN TIPOLOGI
Agus Supriono2, Dance J. Flassy3, Sasli Rais4
2Staf Pengajar Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian – Fakultas Pertanian – Universitas Jember;
Mahasiswa S3, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta.
3Sekretaris Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Provinsi Papua Barat, Mahasiswa S3
Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Politik (FISIP) – Universitas Indonesia.
4Staf Pengajar STIE Pengembangan Bisnis dan Manajemen - Jakarta, Tim Teknis Project
Management Unit – Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Mandiri Daerah Tertinggal dan
Khusus – Bappenas.
Secara umum modal sosial adalah merupakan hubungan-hubungan yang
tercipta dan norma-norma yang membentuk kualitas dan kuantitas
hubungan sosial dalam masyarakat dalam spektrum yang luas, yaitu
sebagai perekat sosial (social glue) yang menjaga kesatuan anggota
masyarakat (bangsa) secara bersama-sama.
Demensi inti telaah dari modal sosial terletak pada bagaimana
kemampuan masyarakat (bangsa) untuk bekerjasama membangun suatu
jaringan guna mencapai tujuan bersama, dimana kerjasama ini diwarnai
oleh suatu pola inter-relasi yang imbal balik dan saling menguntungkan
serta dibangun diatas kepercayaan yang ditopang oleh norma-norma dan
nilai-nilai sosial yang positif dan kuat. Adapun kekuatan kerjasama ini
akan maksimal jika didukung oleh semangat proaktif membuat jalinan
hubungan diatas prinsip-prinsip sikap yang partisipatif, sikap yang saling
memperhatikan, saling memberi dan menerima, saling percaya
mempercayai, dan diperkuat oleh nilai-nilai dan norma-norma yang
mendukungnya.
Wujud dari tipologi modal sosial ini dapat berupa modal sosial terikat
(bonding social capital) dan modal sosial yang menjembatasi (bridging
social capital). Tipologi modal sosial terikat memiliki ciri khas di dalam
konteks ide, relasi dan perhatian, adalah lebih berorientasi ke dalam
(inward looking), sedangkan pada tipologi modal sosial yang
menjembatani lebih berorientasi ke luar (outward looking).
Diunduh dari: p2dtk.bappenas.go.id/downlot.php?...Modal%20S... ……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
Four main components of social capital are identified: social trust,
institutional trust, social networks and compliance with social
norms.
A theoretical analysis explores the links between these
components and environmental behaviour and policy in order to
lay the ground for an investigation of the influence of social capital
on the implementation of environmental policy.
The influence of social capital on citizens’ behaviour connected
with two solid waste management policies is investigated
empirically by means of a survey.
The findings indicate some differentiation regarding the influence
of the components of social capital upon environmental behaviour
in the context of different environmental policies.
Diunduh dari: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fenp20 ……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
We aim here to investigate further the influence of social capital, as an individual
characteristic, on environmental behaviour connected with environmental policy
implementation.
In particular, environmental behaviour is explored as a response to the
implementation of two environmental policies aimed at the general public’s
management of household solid waste in Mytilene, Greece.
The level of compliance and cooperation of citizens in relation to two different types
of policies – a compulsory waste regulation scheme and a voluntary recycling
programme – will be explored by taking into consideration four components of social
capital: social trust, institutional trust, social networks and compliance with social
norms.
Diunduh dari: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fenp20 ……….15/12/2012
Valeria Sodano,
Martin Hingley,
Adam Lindgreen,
(2008) "The
usefulness of
social capital in
assessing the
welfare effects of
private and thirdparty certification
food safety policy
standards: Trust
and networks",
British Food
Journal, Vol. 110
Iss: 4/5, pp.493 513
Diunduh dari:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm/journals.htm?articleid=1723965&show=html&WT.mc_id=alsore
ad……….6/1/2013
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
Social capital and environmental behaviour
Social capital may be regarded as one of the most successful exports
from the field of sociology to other scientific fields (Portes 2000).
The wide use of the social capital concept has also been accompanied by
significant criticism and discussion regarding issues of its definition,
consequences and measurement (e.g. Levi 1996, Newton 2001).
Despite the fact that there is no widely accepted definition of social
capital, it has been successfully utilised in several scientific fields as an
explanatory parameter for individual and collective issues (e.g.
Woodhouse 2006, Nyqvist et al. 2008).
The analysis is conducted by dividing social capital into four commonly
used indicators: social trust, institutional trust, compliance with social
norms and social networks.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Levi, M., 1996. Social and unsocial capital: a review essay of Robert Putnam’s
Making Democracy Work. Politics and Society, 24, 45–55.Newton, K., 2001.
Trust, social capital, civil society, and democracy. International Political Science
Review, 22, 201–214.
Nyqvist, F., et al., 2008. The effect of social capital in health: the case of two
language groups in Finland. Health and Place, 14, 347–360.
Portes, A., 2000. The two meanings of social capital. Sociological Forum, 15, 1–
12.
Woodhouse, A., 2006. Social capital and economic development in regional
Australia: a case study. Journal of Rural Studies, 22, 83–94.
Diunduh dari: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fenp20 ……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
Social trust
Trust is regarded as a core element of social capital (Putnam 2000) and is included
in most empirical studies (van Oorschot et al. 2006).
Coleman (1990) emphasised symmetric relationships of interpersonal trust thus
examining trust also on an individual level.
A significant distinction within social trust is between generalised and particularised
trust (Uslaner and Conley 2003).
The former refers to trust in other people in general whereas the latter refers to trust
towards certain social groups such as friends and neighbours.
The influence of trust has been used for the explanation of environmental behaviour.
Higher levels of social trust may imply a more positive perception of the
environmental behaviour of fellow citizens (Wagner and Fernandez-Gimenez 2008).
The individual behaviour is expected to be influenced by the perception that other
members of the community act in an environmentally responsible manner
(Wondolleck and Yaffee 2000).
Furthermore, particularised trust towards individuals connected with environmental
management initiatives (e.g. ministry employees) may also influence environmental
behaviour and individual attitudes towards a proposed policy (Stern 2008).
Finally, trust is connected with the willingness of stakeholders to participate in
decision-making processes, the level of their cooperation with other stakeholders
and the outcome of partnerships for the management of natural resources (Focht
and Trachtenberg 2005).
1.
2.
3.
Putnam, R., 2000. Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American
community. New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks.
Stern, M.J., 2008. The power of trust: toward a theory of local opposition to
neighboring protected areas. Society and Natural Resources, 21, 859–875.
Wagner, C.L. and Fernandez-Gimenez, M.E., 2008. Does community-based
collaborative resource management increase social capital? Society and Natural
Resources, 21, 324–244.
Diunduh dari: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fenp20 ……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
Institutional trust
A second element of social capital is trust of institutions. Trust in institutions was
identified as a social capital component through the work of Coleman (1990). Since
then institutional trust has been included in several empirical studies of social capital
(e.g. Paxton 1999). This element may be regarded as a reflection of the perceived
level of institutional effectiveness and an indicator of the satisfaction of citizens with
the performance of institutions (Kim 2005).
Perception of trust towards institutions involved in environmental policy procedures
may also influence the environmental behaviour of individuals (Beierle and Cayford
2002, Jones et al. 2009).
Higher levels of institutional trust, especially towards political institutions, lead
citizens to be more willing to accept changes following the application of an
environmental policy (Cvetkovich and Winter 2003).
The trust in actors responsible for providing information on environmental issues is
expected to influence the level of acceptance of this information by citizens
(Groothuis and Miller 1997, Petts 1998).
Finally, institutional trust is also expected to influence the level of participation of
stakeholders in decision-making processes (Focht and Trachtenberg 2005).
1. Cvetkovich, G. and Winter, P.L., 2003. Trust and social representations of the management of
threatened and endangered species. Environment and Behaviour, 35, 286–307.
2. Focht, W. and Trachtenberg, Z., 2005. A trust-based guide to stakeholder participation. In: P.
Sabatier et al., eds. Swimming upstream. Collaborative approaches to watershed management.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. Groothuis, P.A. and Miller, G.A., 1997. The role of social distrust in risk–benefit analysis: a study
of the siting of a hazardous waste disposal facility. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 15, 241–
257.
4. Jones, N., et al., 2009. Social capital and environmental policy instruments. Environmental
Politics, 18 (4), 595–611.
5. Kim, J.Y., 2005. ‘Bowling together’ isn’t a cure-all: the relationship between social capital and
political trust in South Korea. International Political Science Review, 26,
6. 193–213.
Diunduh dari: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fenp20 ……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
Compliance with social norms
Coleman (1990) identified social norms on a micro level as elements that ‘specify
which actions are regarded by a set of persons as proper or correct’ norms may be
‘internalised’ and influence an individual’s behaviour (Bratt 1999) through the
creation of personal norms (Schwartz 1977).
Individuals who tend to disregard social norms may present antisocial behaviour
(Corral-Verdugo and Frias-Armenta 2006).
The influence of social and personal norms has been extensively analysed (de Kort
et al. 2008).
It is claimed that norms may be used in order to explain environmental behaviour
(Nordlund and Garvill 2002).
Individuals who tend to present antisocial behaviour (noncompliance to social norms)
may also present anti-environmental behaviour.
Furthermore, in communities where individuals tend to comply with social norms
there is a higher probability that both internal and external control will be imposed
either in the means of penalties, social exclusion or personal disgrace (Pretty 1998).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Bratt, C., 1999. The impact of norms and assumed consequences on recycling
behaviour. Environment and Behaviour, 31, 630–656.
Coleman, J.S., 1990. Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Corral-Verdugo, V. and Frias-Armenta, M., 2006. Personal normative beliefs, antisocial
behaviour, and residential water conservation. Environment and Behaviour, 38 (3), 406–421.
De Kort, Y.A.W., McCalley, L.T., and Midden, C.J.H., 2008. Persuasive trash cans:
activation of littering norms by design. Environment and Behaviour, 40, 870–891.
Nordlund, A.M. and Garvill, J., 2002. Value structures behind proenvironmental behaviour.
Environment and Behaviour, 34, 740–756.
Pretty, J., 1998. Participatory learning in rural Africa: towards better decisions for agricultural
development. In: F.H.J.M. Coenen, D. Huitemaand, and L.J. O’Toole, eds. Participation and the
quality of environmental decision-making. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic
Publishers, 251–266
Diunduh dari: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fenp20 ……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
Social networks
The most common structural indicator utilised in the social capital literature is social
networks (Coleman 1990).
Social networks have been widely analysed in the social sciences through different
theories (Granovetter 1973).
In the context of social capital literature, social networks were first analysed by
Bourdieu (1986) mainly to emphasise the benefits arising from individuals’
participation in such networks. Through this theory, social networks are regarded as
indicators of the tendency of an individual to participate in collective issues and
his/her level of interest in the common good.
Especially regarding formal social networks, these often refer to membership
(passive participation) or volunteerism (active participation) in organised groups such
as non-governmental organisations (van Oorschot et al. 2006).
However, social networks may also refer to the interconnections between different
organisations (Schneider et al. 2003).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Bourdieu, P., 1986. The forms of capital. In: J.G. Richardson, ed. Handbook of
theory and research for the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood
Press, 241–258.
Coleman, J.S., 1990. Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Granovetter, M., 1973. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology,
78,
1360–1379.
Schneider, M., et al., 2003. Building consensual institutions: networks and the
national estuary program. American Journal of Political Science, 47, 143–158.
van Oorschot, W., Arts, W., and Gelissen, J., 2006. Social capital in Europe.
Measurement and social and regional distribution of a multifaceted
phenomenon. Acta Sociologica, 49, 149–176.
Diunduh dari: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fenp20 ……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
Regarding the influence of these structural elements on environmental
behaviour, the present analysis emphasises the involvement of individuals
in formal networks. It is assumed that individuals who participate in such
networks are also recipients of a higher flow of information on
environmental issues. This information may pass from management
actors to citizens in the context of an environmental policy and vice versa.
Furthermore, it may refer to information distributed among citizens
through informal networks (Miller and Buys 2008).
Although provision of information alone is not enough to change
environmental habits (Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002), it may contribute to
the diffusion of knowledge on environmental issues, such as improved
environmental management practices and increasing awareness of
relevant issues (Cramb 2005).
Apart from the provision of information, social networks are also
connected with increased environmental awareness and activation for
environmental issues (Wakefield et al. 2006).
1.
2.
3.
4.
Cramb, R.A., 2005. Social capital and soil conservation: evidence from the
Philippines. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 49,
211–226.
Kollmuss, A. and Agyeman, J., 2002. Mind the gap: why do people act
environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour?
Environmental Education Research, 8, 239–260.
Miller, E. and Buys, L., 2008. The impact of social capital on residential wateraffecting behaviours in a drought-prone Australian community. Society and
Natural Resources, 21, 244–257.
Wakefield, S., et al., 2006. Taking environmental action: the role of local
composition, context, and collective. Environmental Management, 37, 40–53.
Diunduh dari: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fenp20 ……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
Interconnection of social capital components
Social trust is connected with social networks through the enforcement of
participation (Newton and Norris 2000).
Individuals who tend to trust their fellow citizens present a higher
tendency of participating in activities for the resolution of environmental
problems and an increased environmental awareness (Lubell 2002).
This is also connected to an individual’s perception that certain members
of the community behave in an environmentally responsible manner
(Wondolleck and Yaffee 2000).
Furthermore, trust and compliance with norms are both linked with an
individual’s perception of the behaviour of fellow citizens, as analysed
both by Putnam (2000).
Putnam et al. (1993) underlined the importance of norms of reciprocity,
which are also connected with the symmetric relationships of trust
identified by Coleman (1990).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Lubell, M., 2002. Environmental activism as collective action. Environment and
Behaviour 34, 431–454.
Newton, K. and Norris, P., 2000. Confidence in public institutions: faith, culture,
or performance? In: S.J. Pharr and R. Putnam, eds. Disaffected democracies:
what’s troubling the trilateral countries. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press, 52–73.
Putnam, R., 2000. Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American
community. New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks.
Putnam, R., Leonardi, R., and Nanetti, R.Y., 1993. Making democracy work: civic
traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Wondolleck, J.M., and Yaffee, S.L., 2000. Making collaboration work. Lessons
from innovation in natural resource management. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Diunduh dari: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fenp20 ……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
Social capital and citizens’ behaviour during environmental policy
implementation
The literature review has highlighted significant links between the four components of social capital
and environmental behaviour.
The level of compliance and cooperation of citizens during environmental policy applications may
depend on several factors (Etzioni 1961, Bullock and Rogers 1976, Parsons 2001) including social
capital parameters (Jones et al. 2009). However, the influence of social capital components may
vary depending on the type of policy instrument implemented.
A significant distinction is between obligatory and voluntary policies. The former promote certain
regulations and force citizens to comply with them whereas the latter depend on voluntary
participation and promote collaboration of individuals during policy implementation (Bruckmeier and
Teherani-Kronner 1992, Rittberger and Richardson 2003, Olsson et al. 2004, Koontz and Thomas
2006, Morton 2008).
The other instruments exist, such as marketbased instruments, providing economic incentives in
order to promote citizens’ cooperation (Driesen 2006) and communicative instruments (Eckerberg
1997) aiming to diffuse information and increase environmental awareness. In reality,
environmental policies refer to a combination of these instruments in order to increase their
efficiency.
1. Bullock, C.S. III. and Rodgers, H.R. Jr., 1976. Civil rights policies and the matter of compliance.
In: J.E. Anderson et al., eds. Cases in public policy making. New York: Praeger, 237–257.
2. Driesen, D., 2006. Economic instruments for sustainable development. In: B.J. Richardsonand
and S. Wood, eds. Environmental law for sustainability. Portland, OR: Hart, 277–308.
3. Eckerberg, K., 1997. Comparing the local use of environmental policy instruments in Nordic and
Baltic countries – the issue of diffuse water pollution. Environmental Politics, 6, 24–47.
4. Etzioni, A., 1961. A comparative analysis of complex organizations. New York: Free Press.
5. Jones, N., et al., 2009. Social capital and environmental policy instruments. Environmental
Politics, 18 (4), 595–611.
6. Koontz, T.M. and Thomas, C.W., 2006. What do we know and need to know about the
environmental outcomes of collaborative management. Public Administration Review, 66, 111–
121.
7. Morton, L.W., 2008. The role of civic structure in achieving performance-based watershed
management. Society and Natural Resources, 21, 751–766.
8. Parsons, W., 2001. Public policy: an introduction to the theory and practice of policy analysis.
4th edn. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Diunduh dari: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fenp20 ……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
The four components of social capital are expected to influence
significantly citizens’ cooperation and compliance with an environmental
policy. The most indicative connection derives from the influence of
structural elements.
Social networks are important during the implementation of public policies
in order to diffuse information and minimise non-compliance due to lack of
knowledge (Anderson 2006). However, social networks are expected to
be of high significance in the case of ‘softer’ policy instruments (voluntary
and informative) which do not oblige citizens to change their behaviour. In
order for citizens to cooperate voluntarily and present a shift in their
behaviour, there is a greater need for benefits resulting from social
networks. These mainly refer to an increase in participation, the diffusion
of knowledge of the positive outcomes of the policy and information on
means of participation.
Involvement in participatory management projects may also have a
positive influence on other aspects of social capital such as trust
(Mandarano 2008).
Furthermore, the tendency of individuals to comply with formal social
norms may have a significant influence in the case of regulatory
instruments (Jones et al. 2009).
1.
2.
3.
Anderson, J.E. 2006. Public policymaking: an introduction. 6th ed. Boston, MA:
Houghton Mifflin Company.
Jones, N., et al., 2009. Social capital and environmental policy instruments.
Environmental Politics, 18 (4), 595–611.
Mandarano, L.A., 2008. Evaluating collaborative environmental planning outputs
and outcomes: restoring and protecting habitat in the New York–New Jersey
Harbor Estuary Program. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 27, 456–
468.
Diunduh dari: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fenp20 ……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
Model
A structural equation model (SEM) was used to validate the proposed
conceptual structure. In particular, the observed variables measuring
social capital were connected with the four latent factors of social capital
(social and institutional trust, compliance with social norms and social
networks). The latent variables were then connected with different types
of environmental behaviours each constituting a different model .
Structural model for waste regulation.
Diunduh dari:
www.crcreresearch.org/survey.htm……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
SOCIAL CAPITAL VARIABLES
The selection of the observed social capital variables was based on relevant studies
measuring social capital (e.g. Narayan and Cassidy 2001, Grootaert and Bastelaer
2002, van der Gaag and Snijders 2005, van Oorschot et al. 2006).
Regarding social trust, both generalised and particularised trusts were measured.
The former was explored through the commonly used question of social trust: ‘Would
you say that most people can be trusted or you can’t be too careful?’ along with the
respective question on fairness, ‘Most people are fair or try to take advantage of you’
(Narayan and Cassidy 2001, Woodhouse 2006).
Both questions were measured on a 10-point Likert scale where 0 represented ‘can’t
be too careful’ and 10 referred to ‘most people can be trusted’. Regarding
particularised trust, it was explored in relation to neighbours on a same 10-point
Likert scale. This parameter was included in the model because in Mytilene
neighbours share the same waste bins and thus it is expected to influence individual
behaviour.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Grootaert, C. and van Bastelaer, T., 2002. Understanding and measuring social
capital: a multidisciplinary tool for practitioners. Washington, DC: World
Bank.Narayan, D. and Cassidy, M.F., 2001. A dimensional approach to
measuring social capital: development and validation of a social capital
inventory. Current Sociology, 49, 59–102.
van der Gaag, M. and Snijders, T.A.B., 2005. The resource generator: social
capital quantification with concrete items. Social Networks, 27, 1–29.
van Oorschot, W., Arts, W., and Gelissen, J., 2006. Social capital in Europe.
Measurement and social and regional distribution of a multifaceted
phenomenon. Acta Sociologica, 49, 149–176.
Woodhouse, A., 2006. Social capital and economic development in regional
Australia: a case study. Journal of Rural Studies, 22, 83–94.
Diunduh dari:
www.crcreresearch.org/survey.htm……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
SOCIAL CAPITAL VARIABLES
Institutional trust was also explored on a 10-point Likert scale (0 – ‘Don’t trust at all’
10 – ‘I trust completely’) (Paxton 1999, Newton and Norris 2000, Van Oorschot et al.
2006) for three institutions.
Trust towards the Ministry of Environment and the Municipality of Mytilene was
explored due to their responsibility for the management of household solid waste
management and recycling. Furthermore, trust towards local NGOs was included in
the structural model for recycling behaviour due to the responsibility of the institution
for the recycling programme in Mytilene.
A third component explored participation of individuals in formal social networks
either as members or volunteers in organisations. Similar to previous measurements
(Newton and Norris 2000, Beugelsdijk and van Schaik 2005, van Oorschot et al.
2006) individuals were asked whether they are a member or a volunteer in an
organisation, measured in dichotomous format.
The aim of the question was to investigate active and passive participation of
individuals and their tendency to participate in community issues. A list of
organisations functioning on the island was presented in order to facilitate
individuals. These included a variety of environmental, health, sport and other
organisations.
1. Beugelsdijk, S. and Schaik, T.V., 2005. Differences in social capital between 54 Western
European Regions. Regional Studies, 39, 1053–1064.
2. Newton, K. and Norris, P., 2000. Confidence in public institutions: faith, culture, or
performance? In: S.J. Pharr and R. Putnam, eds. Disaffected democracies: what’s troubling the
trilateral countries. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 52–73.
3. Paxton, P., 1999. Is social capital declining in the United States? A multiple indicator
assessment. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 88–127.
4. van Oorschot, W., Arts, W., and Gelissen, J., 2006. Social capital in Europe. Measurement and
social and regional distribution of a multifaceted phenomenon. Acta Sociologica, 49, 149–176.
Diunduh dari:
www.crcreresearch.org/survey.htm……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
The questionnaire included several questions aiming to investigate the
tendency of complying with certain norms of behaviour. In the social
capital literature, this parameter is explored through questions
investigating how wrong individuals regard certain actions (van Oorschot
et al. 2006,Jones et al. 2008).
A general question of antisocial behaviour was included regarding the
avoidance of paying taxes. Furthermore, illegal disposal of construction
waste along with illegal construction were also included.
All questions were measured on a 5-point Likert scale (1 – ‘totally
justifiable’, 5 – ‘totally unjustifiable’).
1.
2.
Jones, N., et al., 2008. Social capital in Greece: measurement and comparative perspective.
South European Society and Politics, 13, 175–193.
van Oorschot, W., Arts, W., and Gelissen, J., 2006. Social capital in Europe. Measurement
and social and regional distribution of a multifaceted phenomenon. Acta Sociologica, 49, 149–
176.
Diunduh dari:
www.crcreresearch.org/survey.htm……….15/12/2012
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND HOUSEHOLD SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT POLICIES:
A CASE STUDY IN MYTILENE, GREECE
Nikoleta Jones*, Constantinos P. Halvadakis and Costas M. Sophoulis
Department of Environment, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece
Environmental Politics. Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2011, 264–283
Environmental behaviour variables
Regarding variables investigating environmental behaviour for the
management of household solid waste, respondents were asked to
declare the frequency of proceeding to four environmental actions.
Three behaviours were connected with the waste regulation: disposal of
waste in closed plastic bags, waste disposal close to the hours of waste
collection and reduction of waste volume. The recycling of aluminium cans
was also examined. All behaviours were measured on a 4-point scale (1 –
‘Never’, 2 – ‘Sometimes’, 3 – ‘Most times’ and 4 – ‘Always’).
For the investigation of each type of behaviour, different structural models
were created. In Figure 1, the structural model for behaviours connected
with the waste management is presented (excluding trust in NGOs).
Finally, demographic data (gender, age, income, education and
employment) were collected in the final part of the questionnaire.
Diunduh dari:
www.crcreresearch.org/survey.htm……….15/12/2012
Nick Llewellyn, Colin Armistead, (2000) "Business process
management: Exploring social capital within processes",
International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol.
11 Iss: 3, pp.225 - 243
This paper explores evidence of “social capital” within the service
delivery process of a large telecommunications company. It
considers the extent to which a specific business process
exhibited structural, relational and cognitive features of social
capital, which enabled social credits to be traded and status to be
conferred across operational boundaries.
Through a textual analysis of interview data, the research
generates an understanding of how certain groups within
business processes – often utilising informal structures – created,
maintained and exchanged social credits.
This framework of analysis is then applied to address the function
of social capital within the process. Evidence is presented to
suggests that credits shared across functional boundaries
informed upon employees ability to deal with emergencies,
recover services and to cope when things went wrong.
The paper concludes by making a range of propositions that may
enable managers to identify, build and maintain social capital
within processes.
Diunduh dari:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=851693&show=html
……….4/1/2013
Nick Llewellyn, Colin Armistead, (2000)
"Business process management: Exploring social capital
within processes“.
International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 11 Iss: 3, pp.225 - 243
Diunduh dari:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=851693&show=html
……….4/1/2013
Schaefer-McDaniel, Nicole J. (2004).
“Conceptualizing Social Capital among Young People:
Toward a New Theory.”
Children, Youth and Environments 14(1): 140-150.
The concept of social capital has gained more recognition in the
past few decades but has created conceptual confusion due to
varying uses of the term by different writers. Definitional and
methodological flaws plague the few studies that have explored
social capital among young people.
This paper offers a critical synthesis of the construct and also
introduces a new theoretical framework of social capital among
young people to encourage future research.
The author understands social capital among young people to
consist of three components, two of which have previously been
discussed in the adult social capital literature:
1. Social networks/interactions and sociability;
2. Trust and reciprocity; and
3. Sense of belonging/place attachment. Lastly, beneficial
outcomes of exploring and investing social capital in this
population are discussed.
Diunduh dari: http://www.colorado.edu/journals/cye/14_1/articles/article6full.htm
……….4/1/2013
Schaefer-McDaniel, Nicole J. (2004). “Conceptualizing Social
Capital among Young People: Toward a New Theory.” Children,
Youth and Environments 14(1): 140-150.
Pierre Bourdieu: Social Capital and Cultural Capital
Social capital, according to Bourdieu (1984), consists of two dimensions:
1) social networks and connections/relationships and 2) sociability.
Bourdieu specifically explains that people must not only have relationships
with others, they must further understand how these networks operate
and how one can maintain and utilize these relationships over time.
Particularly, Bourdieu emphasizes that social networks must be
constructed and then skillfully maintained in order for the actor to utilize
their resources.
Bourdieu (1977) further described the concept of “cultural capital.” He
used the term to refer to information or knowledge about specific cultural
beliefs, traditions, and standards of behavior that promote success and
accomplishment in life. Cultural capital is passed through the family from
parents to children by spending economic resources on culturally valued
and specific items such as books, tickets to the theater or museums, and
other culturally-specific artifacts. This concept specifically incorporates an
understanding and familiarity of a dominant culture and language in
society.
1. Bourdieu, Pierre (1977). “Cultural Reproduction and Social Reproduction.” In Halsey, A.H. and
Jerome Karabel, eds. Power and Ideology in Education. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Bourdieu, Pierre (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. London:
Routledge.
Diunduh dari: http://www.colorado.edu/journals/cye/14_1/articles/article6full.htm
……….4/1/2013
Schaefer-McDaniel, Nicole J. (2004). “Conceptualizing Social
Capital among Young People: Toward a New Theory.” Children,
Youth and Environments 14(1): 140-150.
James Coleman: Social Capital in Families and Schools
The family system is the basis for American sociologist James Coleman’s
definition of social capital. He observed that family systems are made up
of a) financial capital (financial resources for household and child rearing
expenses); b) human capital (parental education and economic skills);
and c) social capital (Coleman 1988, 1990a).
While the first two concepts refer to parental financial and cognitive
abilities, the latter term strictly refers to the more social and interpersonal
aspects of family life.
Coleman (1988) recognized two distinct components of social capital:
social capital (1) as a relational construct and (2) as providing resources
to others through relationships with individuals.
Social capital is specifically defined by its function (Coleman 1990a) and
refers to “an asset that a person or persons can use as a resource. Social
capital is any kind of social relationship that is a resource to the person”
(Coleman 1990b).
1. Coleman, James S. (1985). “Schools and the Communities They Serve.” Phi Delta Kappa
66:527-532.
2. Coleman, James S. (1987). “Social Capital and the Development of Youth.” Momentum 18 (4):
6-8.
3. Coleman, James S. (1988). “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.” American
Journal of Sociology 94: S95-S120.
4. Coleman, James S. (1990a). Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Bellknap Press.
5. Coleman, James S. (1990b). “How Worksite Schools and other Schools Reforms can
Generate Social Capital: An Interview with James Coleman.” American Federation of Teachers:
35-45.
Diunduh dari: http://www.colorado.edu/journals/cye/14_1/articles/article6full.htm
……….4/1/2013
Schaefer-McDaniel, Nicole J. (2004). “Conceptualizing
Social Capital among Young People: Toward a New
Theory.” Children, Youth and Environments 14(1): 140-150.
Robert Putnam: Social Capital in Communities
Robert Putnam extends the definition to apply to societies and
communities in general. His interpretation of social capital has therefore
often been referred to as a “collective asset” and a “common good”
(Warren, Thompson, and Saegert 2001, 1) of neighborhoods and
communities.
Putnam (2000) differentiates between physical capital (physical objects),
human capital (individual properties), and social capital. In his theory and
like the two theories previously discussed, social capital refers to social
networks and interpersonal relationships.
According to Putnam, the notions of trust and reciprocity arise from our
social network relationships and thus generate “civic virtue” (Putnam
2000) or a trusting community where residents not only know each other
but are actively involved in each other’s lives and maintain trustful and
helpful relations (e.g., looking after a neighbor’s children).
Putnam notes that close or collective communities have greater social
capital. The understanding of social capital primarily as a private good
(increased social capital facilitates beneficial outcomes for the individual,
such as academic success), Putnam’s theory solely understands social
capital as a public good (high social capital facilitates beneficial outcomes
for the community, such as reduced crime or increased political
participation).
1. Putnam, Robert D. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
2. Putnam, Robert D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community.
New York: Simon and Schuster.
Diunduh dari: http://www.colorado.edu/journals/cye/14_1/articles/article6full.htm
……….4/1/2013
Schaefer-McDaniel, Nicole J. (2004). “Conceptualizing
Social Capital among Young People: Toward a New
Theory.” Children, Youth and Environments 14(1): 140-150.
The dimensions of a social capital framework for young people
Diunduh dari: http://www.colorado.edu/journals/cye/14_1/articles/article6full.htm
……….4/1/2013
Schaefer-McDaniel, Nicole J. (2004). “Conceptualizing
Social Capital among Young People: Toward a New
Theory.” Children, Youth and Environments 14(1): 140-150.
Social Networks and Sociability
The first component, social networks and sociability, are original
dimensions of Bourdieu’s social capital theory. Bordieu’s definition of
sociability- the ability to sustain and utilize one’s social network- is similar
to de Souza Briggs’ (1998) notion of “social leverage” (possessing the skill
to get ahead) as a feature of social capital.
Morrow (2001) similarly urged that “actors need to recognize their
networks as a resource in order for these networks to constitute social
capital” (56). Sociability is no less a central concept in children’s social
capital as well.
The emphasis on social relationships and subsequently social network
analysis has been gaining increasing attention since the late 1970s.
Wellman’s classic 1979 article highlights how intimate relationships to
others in our community can help us in everyday matters. Network
analysis has been referred to as a “powerful model of [the] social
structure” (Scott 1988) and has further contributed to other social science
areas including political sociology, social support, social influence, and
epidemiology (Galaskiewicz and Wasserman 1993).
A review of the history of network analysis suggests that communities are
in fact networks and that “social capital is a network phenomenon” .
1.
2.
3.
Galaskiewicz, J. and S. Wasserman (1993). “Social Network Analysis:
Concepts, Methodology, and Directions for the 1990s.” Sociological Methods
and Research 22(1): 3-22.
Morrow, V. (2001). “Young People’s Explanation and Experiences of Social
Exclusion: Retrieving Bourdieu’s Concept of Social Capital.” International
Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 21(4/5/6): 37-63.
Scott, J. (1988). “Social Network Analysis.” Sociology 22(1): 109-127.
Diunduh dari: http://www.colorado.edu/journals/cye/14_1/articles/article6full.htm
……….4/1/2013
Schaefer-McDaniel, Nicole J. (2004).
“Conceptualizing Social Capital among Young People: Toward a
New Theory.”
Children, Youth and Environments 14(1): 140-150.
Trust and Reciprocity
Drawing on Coleman’s and Putnam’s understanding of social capital,
mutual levels of trust and reciprocity will also be incorporated into this
theory of social capital among young people.
In order to benefit from relationships to others and to use them as
resources, one needs to be able to trust that network members are
providing us with correct and helpful information and genuine support.
In particular, children need to establish trustful relations with family
members, people in their neighborhoods, peers, and teachers or other
role models.
This dimension also refers to authentic fairness, overall trustworthiness,
and acts of helpfulness such as engaging in helping behavior without
gaining direct benefit (e.g., helping a person cross the street).
Diunduh dari: http://www.colorado.edu/journals/cye/14_1/articles/article6full.htm
……….4/1/2013
Schaefer-McDaniel, Nicole J. (2004). “Conceptualizing
Social Capital among Young People: Toward a New
Theory.” Children, Youth and Environments 14(1): 140-150.
Sense of Belonging / Place Attachment
Despite the significance of place attachment or sense of belonging in the
environmental psychology literature (Chawla 1992), this concept has gained very
little recognition in the social capital literature. Putnam mentions sense of belonging
to a community in his definition (Putnam 1993) but neglects to explain or integrate
this concept into his overall theory.
Sense of belonging, as defined here, is closely related to the concept of
“psychological sense of community” that is oftentimes mentioned in the community
psychology literature (Sarason 1974). While sense of belonging refers to an
individual feeling of belonging after attaching symbolic meaning to a certain
environment, psychological sense of community refers to the degree to which
individuals feel that they are part of a collective community.
More specifically, two components overlap with sense of belonging:
1. membership (sense of feeling a part of a group or environment;
2. sense of feeling like one belongs in their environment) and influence (the
individual matters to the group;
3. cohesiveness;
4. the group is complete only with the individual) (MacMillan and Chavis 1986).
Sense of belonging also incorporates a more symbolic attachment or investment to
the place, particularly a feeling of “rootedness or centeredness” (Proshansky, Fabian,
and Kaminoff 1983).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Chawla, Louise (1992). “Childhood Place Attachment.” In Altman, I. and S.M. Low, eds.
Place Attachments. New York: Plenum Press.
MacMillan, D.W. and D.M. Chavis (1986). “Sense of Community: A Definition and Theory.”
Journal of Community Psychology 14: 6-23.
Proshansky, H.M., A.K. Fabian and R. Kaminoff (1983). “Place Identity: Physical World
Socialization of the Self.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 3: 57-83.
Putnam, Robert D. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Saranson, S. (1974). The Psychological Sense of Community: Prospects for a Community
Psychology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Diunduh dari: http://www.colorado.edu/journals/cye/14_1/articles/article6full.htm
……….4/1/2013
Schaefer-McDaniel, Nicole J. (2004). “Conceptualizing
Social Capital among Young People: Toward a New
Theory.” Children, Youth and Environments 14(1): 140-150.
Social Capital and the Environment
This theory of social capital should now be grounded in the physical
environment. James Gibson (1979) discusses in his theory of
environmental affordances that certain parts of the environments allow or
afford certain types of behaviors.
Along with this understanding, it is also necessary to explore young
people’s use of physical space in their everyday environments and identify
areas that enhance or foster social interactions as well as recognize areas
that restrict or prohibit such activity. Spaces that enhance social
interactions and a sense of belonging (such as parks, meetings places,
spaces for socializing, etc.) thus can contribute to building social capital.
This line of research should determine the places where social capital is
being created and explore how the physical form of the places contributes
to its growth.
Urban planners should then collaborate with young people in designing
these types of spaces in their communities. Social and public policies and
interventions can also address the creation or modification of these
spaces to serve the particular needs of their users. These types of
designs, policies, and interventions would then contribute to building
social capital among young people.
Gibson, J.J. (1979). Ecological Approaches to Visual Perception. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin.
Diunduh dari: http://www.colorado.edu/journals/cye/14_1/articles/article6full.htm
……….4/1/2013
Gilda's Club and Social Capital Development:
Furthering Health and Well-being
Social Capital and Health
Social capital is a by-product of our social relationships that makes
possible the achievement of certain aims that cannot be accomplished by
individuals in its absence . It is premised upon the notion that an
“investment” in a relationship will ultimately result in some sort of “return”.
In other words, social capital has (1) a relational element residing in the
social organizations of which the individual is a member, and (2) a
material element that relates to the resources to which that individual has
claim by virtue of his or her membership within the group. Accordingly,
social capital enables individuals to use the relationships they develop to
“get by” (e.g., gain emotional support and caregiving) or to “get ahead”
(e.g., information sharing) (Lin, 2001), both of which have implications for
health and well being.
The contribution of social capital to health has been demonstrated in a
variety of fields, particularly within epidemiology. Wilkinson (1996) first
introduced social capital to the public health field, arguing in 2000 that “an
important part of the social gradient in human health is attributable to the
direct effects of social status, rather than to other influences on health like
poorer housing, diet and air pollution”.
1.
2.
Lin, N. (2001). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action . New York :
Cambridge University Press.
Wilkinson, R. (1996). Unhealthy societies: The afflictions of inequality . London :
Routledge.
Diunduh dari: http://healthycommunities.uwaterloo.ca/gc/background.htm
……….4/1/2013
Gilda's Club and Social Capital Development:
Furthering Health and Well-being
Macinko and Starfield (2001) determined social capital has been applied
in four ways in the epidemiology literature: “(1) as an explanatory
‘pathway' in the relationship between income equality and health status;
(2) as a factor in the study of social networks and health; (3) as a
mediator of the performance of health policies or reforms; and (4) as
synonymous with social deprivation or social cohesion in relationship with
violence and crime”).
Szreter and Woolcock (2004) noted social capital has links to health in
three main ways: social support, inequality, and political economy. Our
intent here by noting the various ways social capital has been studied is
simply to demonstrate the breadth of the social capital scholarship within
the epidemiological literature. More importantly, we emphasize that the
volume and diversity of the empirical evidence demonstrating the
significance of social capital as a determinant of at least some important
health outcomes is quite impressive. Indeed, health researchers have
long known that, at an individual level, networks, social participation, and
supportive social relationships are good for individual health. People with
strong social ties, for instance, have mortality half or a third of that of
people with weak social ties (Berkman, 1995), and low social support
predicts coronary heart disease (Bosma et al., 1997).
1. Berkman, L. E. (1995). The role of social relations in health promotion. Psychosom Med , 57 ,
245-254.
2. Bosma, H., Marmot, M., Hemingway, H., Nicholson, A., Brunner, E., & Stansfield, S. (1997).
Low job control and risk of CHD in the Whitehall II study. British Medical Journal , 314 , 558565.
3. Macinko, J., & Starfield, B. (2001). The utility of social capital in research on health
determinants. The Milbank Quarterly , 79 (3), 387-427.
4. Szreter, S., & Woolcock, M. (2004). Health by association? Social capital, social theory, and the
political economy of public health. International Journal of Epidemiology , 33 , 650-667.
Diunduh dari: http://healthycommunities.uwaterloo.ca/gc/background.htm
……….4/1/2013
Gilda's Club and Social Capital Development:
Furthering Health and Well-being
Third Places
Here, we use the term place deliberately, in contrast to space , which is “a realm
without meaning” (Cresswell, 2004). Place is defined by more than biophysical
elements; it refers to the socio-cultural meanings and emotional attachments held by
an individual or group for a spatial setting. Accordingly, this conceptualization
recognizes that places are social constructions insofar as their meanings are
“created and reproduced through interpersonal interaction, formalized in social
behaviour, and ultimately persist in collective memory” (Stokowski, 2002).
Put another way, the accumulation of experiences within a place personalizes it and
gives it meaning (Stedman, 2003). By attributing meaning to a space, individuals
become attached to the meanings themselves (Stedman, 2003). Consequently, “the
connections people have with a place extend far beyond use; they are layered with
very passionate and deep-seated personal elements” (Cheng, Kruger & Daniels,
2003).
Ultimately, Stokowski (2002) argued, “each effort to create a place becomes an
elaboration of the beliefs and values of some collection of people, expressed and
fostered in their promotion of a preferred reality” . The construction of place,
therefore, involves a process of relationship building that ultimately reflects a
collective identity that we believe can be used as a resource to aid in the
maintenance and enhancement of individual health. This proposal aims to
investigate this possibility.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Cheng, A. S., Kruger, L. E., & Daniels, S. E. (2003). “Place” as an integrating
concept in natural resource politics: propositions for a social science agenda.
Society and Natural Resources , 16 , 87-104.
Cresswell, T. (2004). Place: A short introduction. Malden , MA : Blackwell
Publishing.
Stedman, R. C. (2003). Sense of place and forest science: Toward a program of
quantitative research. Forest Science , 49 (6), 822-829.
Stokowski, P. A. (2002). Languages of place and discourse of power:
Constructing new senses of place. Journal of Leisure Research , 34 (4), 368382.
Diunduh dari: http://healthycommunities.uwaterloo.ca/gc/background.htm
……….4/1/2013
Gilda's Club and Social Capital Development:
Furthering Health and Well-being
Third Places
In particular, we are interested in third places , informal gathering places
apart from home (the first place) and work (the second place).
Oldenburg, the originator of this concept, defined third places as “havens
of sociability where conversation is the main activity and conviviality
prevails” (2003). In his writings about third place, Oldenburg has argued
third places give extended meaning to the concept of the support group.
That is, they provide “not only emotional support but practical assistance
as well. As acquaintances evolve into friends, the desire to help others
grows. Needed items are loaned or given, as is skill, advice, and
expertise.
Time, effort, and money are saved when needs and problems are
mentioned in the company of friends” ( Oldenburg , 2003). This
description is consistent with social capital theory, yet Oldenburg and
other scholars have failed to identify the explicit connection. It does,
however, fit well with a theoretical framework we have developed to
explain the process of social capital development for health and wellbeing (Glover & Parry, 2005).
1.
2.
Glover, T. D., & Parry, D. C. (2005). Context, by-product, and action: The
linkages among leisure, social capital, and health. In D. L. Kerstetter & W.
Hendricks (eds.), Abstracts from the 2005 Leisure Research Symposium [CD
ROM] . San Antonio , TX : National Park and Recreation Association.
Oldenburg, R. (2003). Third places. In K. Christensen, & D. Levinson (eds.),
Encyclopedia of community (pp. 1373-1376). Thousand Oaks , CA : Sage.
Diunduh dari: http://healthycommunities.uwaterloo.ca/gc/background.htm
……….4/1/2013
Gilda's Club and Social Capital Development:
Furthering Health and Well-being
A Model of Social Capital Development
Our model (see figure 1) begins with sociability at its core. Indeed, if
social capital is about anything, it is about what Portes (1998) called “the
positive consequences of sociability” .
Settings, like third places (e.g., Gilda's club), that encourage social
contact draw relative strangers together routinely and frequently, thus
building a durable social network for those involved. Moreover, these
social contexts serve an important function in terms of facilitating the
ongoing maintenance and sustainability of social relationships.
Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) noted, “social relationships generally,
though not always, are strengthened through interaction but die out if not
maintained” . This observation ultimately speaks to an accepted notion
upon which social capital is premised: The maintenance and reproduction
of social capital are made possible only through the social interactions of
members and the continued investment in social relationships (Portes,
1998).
Repeated social contact reaffirms the sociable bonds among individuals.
To this end, ongoing sociability is paramount to the sustainability of
relationships that provide some return to the individual.
1. Nahapiet, J., & Ghosal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organization
advantage. Academy of Management Review , 23 (2), 242-266.
2. Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual
Review of Sociology , 24 , 1-24.
Diunduh dari: http://healthycommunities.uwaterloo.ca/gc/background.htm
……….4/1/2013
Gilda's Club and Social Capital Development:
Furthering Health and Well-being
The relationships developed in social contexts can lead to certain spin off
effects or byproducts of those relationships.
These by-products, conceptualized here as social capital (e.g., norms of
reciprocity, obligation, group sanctions), are crucial to an individual's
health, for they can facilitate three forms of action: (1) expressive, (2)
instrumental, and (3) obstructive.
The first, expressive action , fits within the social support school of
thought insofar as it facilitates emotional support, thereby helping
individuals maintain their emotional well-being. Here, group solidarity is
cemented by a common experience of adversity (e.g., dealing with
cancer).
The second form of action, instrumental , is tied to the material dimension
of social capital, which gives members of a social network access to
resources. Acquiring valuable information from friends and acquaintances
is one of the most common, yet important by-products of relationships.
Cancer patients, for instance, may share their treatment experiences,
notes about doctors, and various tips or advice they received regarding
their conditions.
By providing access to this information, these individuals help to advance
their own health and that of their friends who are also dealing with cancer.
While getting ahead does not necessarily mean “curing” their cancer, the
information they gain and put to use places them further along in coping
with their experiences and aids in their decision making processes.
In short, instrumental action allows individuals to “get ahead” by gaining
access to resources to which they would otherwise have no access.
Diunduh dari: http://healthycommunities.uwaterloo.ca/gc/background.htm
……….4/1/2013
Gilda's Club and Social Capital Development:
Furthering Health and Well-being
Finally, the third form of action, obstructive , recognizes the harm
relationships can have on individual health. Correspondingly, its inclusion
in the model provides a more balanced perspective related to social
capital and health insofar as it acknowledges the ill-effects relationships
can create for individuals.
In direct contrast to instrumental action, obstructive action can represent a
set back or keep an individual from getting ahead. In our findings from our
study of women dealing with infertility, we offered many examples related
to this outcome. Notably, research participants who remained infertile felt
compelled to support friends who conceived or adopted children, even
though such support made them feel uncomfortable and upset about their
own situations.
The activities that generated stress in the participants were, more often
than not, child centered activities such as birthday parties, baby showers,
toy-shopping, Easter egg hunts, and Halloween parties. All of these
events served to remind the research participants of their own
childlessness, thereby creating further stress in their lives. Nevertheless,
the social norms and sanctions embedded in their friendships (e.g., social
capital) compelled them to continue to support their friends under stressful
circumstances.
We aim to further explore the potential outcomes (e.g., expressive,
instrumental, and obstructive action) of social capital developed in the
context of Gilda's Club, with particular emphasis on the role of place as a
container for the sociability that impacts upon health and well-being.
Diunduh dari: http://healthycommunities.uwaterloo.ca/gc/background.htm
……….4/1/2013
Gilda's Club and Social Capital Development:
Furthering Health and Well-being
Diunduh dari: http://healthycommunities.uwaterloo.ca/gc/background.htm
……….4/1/2013
Valeria Sodano, Martin Hingley, Adam Lindgreen, (2008) "The
usefulness of social capital in assessing the welfare effects of
private and third-party certification food safety policy standards:
Trust and networks", British Food Journal, Vol. 110 Iss: 4/5,
pp.493 - 513
The aim of this paper is to assess the welfare effects of the
newest trends in food safety policies characterised by the shift
from public to private intervention.
Design/methodology/approach – Food safety policies are
analysed through concepts of new economic sociology, with a
critical review of the literature on social capital.
Findings – The article shows that as food safety and quality
attributes responsible for the exchange complexity are simply
codified and enforced through standards and third-party
certification, the global value chain governance shifts from a
relational type to a power-based type, with possible negative
welfare effects.
Research limitations/implications – Further research would be
required to verify the welfare effects suggested on the theoretical
ground.
Practical implications – The article makes a useful updating of
food safety policies and organisational innovation in the food
system.
Originality/value – The paper introduces some new (with respect
to the marketing literature related to the food system) concepts
and theories of economic sociology.
Diunduh dari:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm/journals.htm?articleid=1723965&show=html&WT.mc_i
d=alsoread……….4/1/2013
Valeria Sodano, Martin Hingley, Adam Lindgreen, (2008) "The
usefulness of social capital in assessing the welfare effects of
private and third-party certification food safety policy standards:
Trust and networks", British Food Journal, Vol. 110 Iss: 4/5,
pp.493 - 513
Diunduh dari:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm/journals.htm?articleid=1723965&show=html&WT.mc_i
d=alsoread……….4/1/2013
. Paul J. Ferri, David Deakins, Geoff Whittam, (2009)
THE MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL IN THE
ENTREPRENEURIAL CONTEXT.
Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Vol.
3 Iss: 2, pp.138 - 151
1. Purpose – Whilst all models of the entrepreneurial process identify the
role of networking as important at both the start-up and developmental
stage of a business latterly these models have expanded the notion of
networking and embraced the concept of social capital. However,
much of the literature on measuring social capital has focussed on the
quantity of social capital within a given geographical space. This paper
seeks to expand this research by examining the depth and richness of
social capital for new venture creation and thereby identifying the
impact of social capital in new venture creation.
2. Design/methodology/approach – Current research has tended to be
quantitative, for example the World Values Survey. However, 2001
there is a need to explore the value of social capital in the
entrepreneurial process. This paper presents a critical review of the
existing literature on measuring social capital in the entrepreneurial
process. It is anticipated that the research will reveal rich, contextual
information which will identify the need to investigate social capital
from a qualitative perspective.
3. Findings – The paper's examination of the social capital literature thus
far, although not exhaustive, has noted the emergence of several
common themes that associate the issues of measurement with lack
of empirical consensus on an accepted definition of social capital.
Diunduh dari:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1793368&show=html……….5/1/2013
. Paul J. Ferri, David Deakins, Geoff Whittam, (2009)
THE MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL IN THE
ENTREPRENEURIAL CONTEXT.
Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Vol.
3 Iss: 2, pp.138 - 151
Diunduh dari:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1793368&show=html……….5/1/2013
LIVE LONG AND PROSPER: COLLECTIVE ACTION, SOCIAL
CAPITAL AND SOCIAL VISION
Murray A Rudd
Ecological Economics. Volume 34, Issue 1, July 2000, Pages 131–144.
To understand the social driving forces that lead to environmental change,
we must account for the role of social interactions, the development of
norms of behavior and the institutionalization of rules and norms — the
development of ‘social capital’.
This paper demonstrates the utility of social capital theory by articulating
linkages between human decision making at individual and collective
levels and social vision, an important research focus within the emerging
ecological economics research tradition.
Social capital theory clarifies relationships between social interactions and
outcomes that contribute to the production of environmental quality, public
peace and economic prosperity, necessary factors for long-term social
and ecological sustainability.
Increasing social capital in society can help people avoid violent conflict,
exploit gains from increased specialization, and increase knowledge about
the physical and social factors important in the production and provision of
public goods.
It will be necessary for ecological economists to use insights from social
capital theory in order to link theories of individual choice, collective
choice, sustainability and the social forces driving environmental change.
Only then may we be in a position to truly live long and prosper.
Diunduh dari:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180090000152X……….5/1/2013
LIVE LONG AND PROSPER: COLLECTIVE ACTION, SOCIAL
CAPITAL AND SOCIAL VISION
Murray A Rudd
Ecological Economics. Volume 34, Issue 1, July 2000, Pages 131–144.
Why is social capital important?
Economic problems involve making choices under conditions of
uncertainty and scarcity. Factors of production are transformed to produce
commodities including diverse quasi-public goods such as education and
public health, and universal public goods such as environmental quality or
international order.
Public goods share two characteristics important to theories of collective
choice: (1) they are under-produced; and (2) we would be better if more
were produced (Coleman, 1987).
A crucial cause of underproduction are incentives rewarding the
maximization of short-term self-interest while leaving all participants worse
off in aggregate than feasible alternatives (i.e. individuals tend to free
ride).
1.
Coleman,J.S. 1987. Norms as social capital. G. Radnitzky, P. Bernholz (Eds.),
Economic Imperialism: The Economic Approach Applied Outside the Field of
Economics, Paragon, New York (1987), pp. 133–155
Diunduh dari:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180090000152X……….5/1/2013
LIVE LONG AND PROSPER: COLLECTIVE ACTION, SOCIAL
CAPITAL AND SOCIAL VISION
Murray A Rudd
Ecological Economics. Volume 34, Issue 1, July 2000, Pages 131–144.
Specific definitions of social capital that can be cleaved into three
broad categories:
1. The view that social capital is 'generalized trust', formed largely as a
byproduct of the activities of individuals interacting with each other
within voluntary or informal associations (e.g. Putnam, 1993,
Fukuyama, 1995, Inglehart, 1997 and Stolle, 1998);
2. The view that social capital consists of the norms and social networks
that facilitate collective action for instrumental and collective benefit
(e.g. Granovetter, 1985, Coleman, 1987, Nee and Ingram, 1998,
Ostrom, 1999, Portes and Sensenbrenner, 1998 and Burt, 2000);
3. The view that social capital consists of the institutional infrastructure
that facilitates the development of trust, cooperation and trade
between individuals who would otherwise remain socially isolated (e.g.
North, 1990, North, 1998 and Williamson, 1994).
1. Burt, R.S. 2000. The network structure of social capital. R.I. Sutton, B.M. Staw (Eds.), Research
in Organizational Behavior, JAI, Greenwich, CT.
2. Fukuyama,F. 1995. Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of ProsperityFree Press, New
York.
3. Putnam, R.D.. 1993. Making Democracy WorkPrinceton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
4. Granovetter,M.. 1985. Economic action and social structure. Am. J. Sociol., 91 (1985), pp. 481–
510.
5. North, D.C.. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic PerformanceCambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK.
6. Stolle, D. 1998. Making associations work: group characteristics, membership and generalized
trust Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of APSA, Boston, September, 3–6, 1998.
O.E. Williamson, Transaction cost economics and organization theory
N.J. Smelser, R. Swedberg (Eds.), The Handbook of Economic Sociology, Princeton University
Press, Princeton, NJ (1994), pp. 77–107
Diunduh dari:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180090000152X……….5/1/2013
LIVE LONG AND PROSPER: COLLECTIVE ACTION, SOCIAL
CAPITAL AND SOCIAL VISION
Murray A Rudd
Ecological Economics. Volume 34, Issue 1, July 2000, Pages 131–144.
The conceptual basis for social capital
Social capital is a productive asset that enables individuals to better fulfill their
aspirations through access to goods and services via their social network and
through collective action (Castle, 1998). Social capital is deemed to increase
production of quasi-public and public goods by increasing levels of knowledge about
production, transformation processes and trading partners, and by exploiting the
gains from trade through specialization.
Transaction costs associated with trading are reduced via an increase in levels of
trust between trading partners and the development of institutions that provide
incentives for lasting cooperation (Coleman, 1988, North, 1990, Ostrom, 1990,
Ostrom, 1999 and Woolcock, 1998). Social capital, unlike other forms of capital, is
not depleted with use but actually increases in value with use (Ostrom, 1999)
In social capital theory, norms and rule-ordered relationships are viewed as
resources that individuals can use to reduce risk, access services, obtain
information, and coordinate collective action (Grootaert, 1998).
The overall capacity for coordination raises output in four potential ways according to
Collier (1998):
1. Social sanctions against opportunism by free-riding individuals reduce
transaction costs;
2. Common pool resources can be effectively managed on a sustainable basis;
3. Public good provision can increase; and
4. Society can take advantage of economies of scale in non-market activities.
Social capital can act as an input to the production function for individuals and
organizations by constraining opportunism and thereby increasing the probability
of collective action to deal with social externalities.
1. Castle,E.N.. 1998. A conceptual framework for the study of rural places. Am. J. Agric. Econ., 80
(1998), pp. 621–631
2. Collier, P., 1998. Social capital and poverty. The World Bank, Social Capital
Initiative Working Paper, Rep. No. 4 (unpubl.).
3. Grootaert, C., 1998. Social capital: the missing link? The World Bank, Social
Capital Initiative Working Paper, Rep. No. 3 (unpubl.).
Diunduh dari:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180090000152X……….5/1/2013
LIVE LONG AND PROSPER: COLLECTIVE ACTION, SOCIAL
CAPITAL AND SOCIAL VISION
Murray A Rudd
Ecological Economics. Volume 34, Issue 1, July 2000, Pages 131–144.
Linking social capital and collective action
Ostrom (1998: A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action
Am. Political Sci. Rev., 92 (1998), pp. 1–22) developed a theory of behavioral
rational choice that proposes the idea that a ‘core relationship’ between trust,
reputation and norms of reciprocity reinforce each other and can lead to increased
levels of cooperation and, hence, net benefits. Theory can, as a result, be used to
develop testable models for the laboratory or field. For any particular ‘action situation’
there might be a mix of structural variables, some of which would produce social
capital via their enduring structure (e.g. small group size) and some in which the
effect itself is enduring (e.g. information about past actions).
Using the typology of structures and effects based on Collier (1998: Social capital and
poverty. The World Bank, Social Capital Initiative Working Paper, Rep. No. 4 ) and presented in
Fig. 1, one can refine ideas presented by Ostrom. In her theory, trust, reputation and
reciprocity form a self-reinforcing triad. Here, each of the six components of social
capital can be explicitly accounted for via the type of social interaction.
Fig. 1. Structural variables, social capital and net benefits
Diunduh dari:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180090000152X……….5/1/2013
Descargar

Document