Mat,
I fully agree that there are serious problems with
the concept of "social capital." I have just received
a book review by Steve Durlauf to be published in
JEBO that is positively scathing regarding the definitional
and measurement problems (he accepts human capital).
However, I would note that at least in contrast with
natural capital, at least certain aspects of capital show
up in this concept, if not all of them (and certainly not
the full meaning of the Marxian definition as in social relations
of production). Thus, one can "invest in social capital," that
is by participating in social organizations and groups. This
is certainly implied by Putnam's use of the term that emphasizes
such social group membership and participation, even if the
bottom line is "trust."
Of course, one of the reasons the
concept is now hot is that there are quite a few studies showing
that there are strong correlations between measured "trust"
and economic growth rates around the world. The obvious
theoretical explanation is lower transactions costs.
One major issue with social capital, discussed at length
by Putnam in his book, is between "good" social capital
(he calls it "bridging") and "bad" social capital (he calls it
"bonding"). The former is more generalized, leading to that
wonderful social trust. The latter is focused on a more narrow
group, as in ethnic solidarity or racism. Durlauf notes that it
may be impossible to separate the two. Is nationalism a
form of bridging or bonding social capital?
Barkley Rosser
-----Original Message-----
From: Forstater, Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 11:21 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:8024] RE: Social Capital
>I have a problem with the term "social capital." First, in economics they
are
>already using the term "human capital" for labor power, with rational
>individuals "investing" to seek maximum return over time, etc. Lester
Thurow
>actually pointed out some of the problems with this years ago, but in any
case,
>now we have "natural capital" being used for natural resources by the
ecological
>economics crowd, so the earth and nature has to be capital now too, so now
we've
>gone from "land, labor, and capital" to just three kinds of capital "human
>capital, natural capital, and...what...capital capital, i guess? So
everything
>is capital. The reason they started using it in the natural resource case
is
>that these ecological economists wanted to stress how these resources are
>important and we shouldn't waste them, etc., and so i guess if we call them
>"capital" then we are supposed to care about them more than if we refer to
the
>apparently unimportant "nature" "eco-systems" etc. So that is really sad.
So now
>"community" has to also be capital, with "social capital"? How sad. It is
also a
>problem analytically. Whether you are Marxist or not, capital is supposed
to
>have some analytical meaning and making everything capital threatens that
as
>well. We already had enough problems with distinguishing between finance
capital
>and industrial capital or money capital and capital goods, but now it will
be
>even worse. Capital is supposed to refer to reproducible means of
production as
>well as a social relation regarding ownership of means of production. I
dont
>see anything progressive or socialist about the term "social capital"...
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Chris Burford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 1:09 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: [PEN-L:8018] Social Capital
>
>
>The concept of social capital has been used in World Bank discussion
documents.
>
>While this is not a good omen, the concept is gaining greater currency.
>Perhaps it is a sign that the social nature of production is reasserting
>itself over relations of private ownership of the means of production.
>
>Is the concept of social capital, inherently socialist?
>
>The Amazon book description below illustrates how this concept has already
>become a commodity in the marketplace for managerial fixes.
>
>Is it more than that?
>
>If so, how can we turn this to our advantage in the world-wide battle for
>intellectual hegemony?
>
>Chris Burford
>
>London
>
>________________________
>
>
>In Good Company : How Social Capital Makes Organizations Work by Don Cohen,
>Laurence Prusak
>
>List Price: $27.50 Our Price: $22.00 You Save: $5.50 (20%)
>
>
>Hardcover - 224 pages (January 2001) Harvard Business School Pr; ISBN:
>087584913X
>
>
>Book Description:
>
> Knowledge has always resided in organizations-but it wasn't until the
>Information Age put a premium on ideas that intellectual capital was
>recognized as a critical resource. Now, forces like technology,
>globalization, and the rise of free agency and virtual workplaces are
>bringing another form of "hidden" capital to the forefront.
>
>In Good Company is the first book to examine the role that social capital-a
>company's "stock" of human connections such as trust, personal networks,
>and a sense of community-plays in thriving organizations. Written by
>leading knowledge management experts Don Cohen and Laurence Prusak, this
>groundbreaking book argues that social capital is so integral to business
>life that without it, cooperative action-and consequently productive
>work-isn't possible. The authors help today's leaders understand the nature
>and value of social capital, suggest ways they can encourage and enhance
>it, and explore how they can protect this vital but increasingly vulnerable
>resource in a volatile, virtual world.
>
>Drawing on major social and economic theories, and the experiences of
>organizations including the World Bank, Aventis Pharma, Alcoa, Russell
>Reynolds, and UPS, In Good Company identifies the social elements that
>contribute to knowledge sharing, innovation, and high productivity. The
>authors convincingly show how almost every managerial decision-from hiring,
>firing, and promotion to implementing new technologies to designing office
>space-is an opportunity for social capital investment or loss. They also
>reveal the benefits that derive from investments in social capital, such as
>greater commitment and cooperation, increased talent retention, and more
>intelligent responses to customer needs.
>
>A landmark book on the critical role that relationships play in
>organizational success, In Good Company helps employees at all levels
>recognize the power of social capital to help people work better, and make
>organizations better places to work.
>
>
