Social Capital and Politics

1. Social Capital and Politics

2. Outline • Political theories of social entrepreneurship • Social capital

3. Community Vitality Revitalization Communityorganizing Developing Organizational and Leadership Skills Capacity forcollectiveaction Collectiveefficacy Social capital Building Social Capital Social cohesion Social Interactions Atomistic Ref.: RAND

4. Social Enterprises as Mediating Structures • Protect individuals from alienation before Leviathan by translating social problems into personal terms (Berger and Neuhaus 1977) • Enhance state’s legitimacy by connecting public problems to private means • Roman Catholic “subsidiarity”: mediating the relationship between people and governments ata level that favors the individual Ref.: Frumkin (ch 2) 2002

5. Nonprofit Links with the Political Process Least political 1. Social capital building 2. Civic engagement 3. Grassroots organizing 4. Advocacy 5. Lobbying 6. Direct electoral activity Most political Ref.: Frumkin (ch 2) 2002

6. Political Theories of social Enterprise • Nonprofits counteract the coercive power of the state • Nonprofits are a laboratory for institutions that governments later adopt • Nonprofits provide “space” between individuals and states (Locke) • Voluntary associations are a force to fragment the proletariat (C. Wright Mills) Ref.: Frumkin (ch 2) 2002

7. Tocqueville’s Model of Voluntary Associations Civic association Political association Equality Democracy Ref.: Frumkin (ch 2) 2002

8. Links Between Government and Social Enterprise • Moral suasion (Reagan) • Promotion of national service (GHW Bush) • Stipended volunteering (Clinton) • Faith-based initiatives (GW Bush) Ref.: Frumkin (ch 2) 2002

9. Public subsidies versus private charity

10. Different types of giving

11. Volunteering

12. It’s not just about money

13. But it’s not politics per se

14. Some international evidence

15. Outline • Political theories of social entrepreneurship • Social capital

16. Social Capital Robert Putnam Networks, norms, and social trust that facillitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefits Francis Fukuyama An institutional informal norm that promotes cooperation between two or more individuals Synthesis The trust and social cohesiveness that promotes giving, volunteering, and participation in civil society Evidence of social capital is more tangible than social capital itself Ref.: Putnam, Fukuyama

17. Two Types of Ties Foster Social Capital Bonds • Ties based on homogeneity of identity, demography and sense of purpose • Can promote pursuit of narrow interests at the expense of the wider community • Ties that span social differences (gender, ethnicity, SES) • Build social trust that facilitates cooperation for mutual benefit Bridges (Putnam, 2000) Ref.: Granovetter (1974)

18. Benefits of Social Capital • Less passive reliance on state • Proactive citizen intervention into social issues • Schools, crime, economic development • Constructive association • Money for charities • Lower transaction costs with contracts and laws • Fewer public resources needed to govern • Amelioration of “excessive individualism” (Tocqueville 1835) Ref.: Putnam, Fukuyama

19. Costs of Social Capital • In-group trust means out-group distrust • Some social capital is socially destructive • Less interchange of ideas between tight-knit groups • Less moral suasion not to cheat out-group members Ref.: Fukuyama

20. The Putnam Hypothesis • Social capital is falling in America • Evidence: lower attendance by many traditional groups (e.g. PTA, bowling leagues, church-related groups) • Reasons • Societal cynicism • Female labor force participation • Population mobility and rootlessness • Less marriage, more divorce, fewer kids • Technology—individual consumption of leisure Ref.: Putnam

21. Not Everyone Subscribes to the Putnam Hypothesis • Some groups increase membership, others lose—can’t just study the losers • Group membership was abnormally high in the American 1950s—can’t measure from that point Ref.: Fukuyama

22. Person2 compete cooperate 5 0 cooperate 5 20 Person 1 20 10 compete 0 10 An Economic Theory of Social Capital Hypothesis: Social capital is a natural adaptation to suboptimal non-cooperative behavior

23. Prisoner’s Dilemma Implications • Without trust, dominant (but suboptimal) strategy obtains • With trust, optimal strategy becomes viable • Social capital promotes cooperation through trust

24. 2000 Social Capital CommunityBenchmark Survey • 30,000 respondents • 50 communities nationwide • Supervised by Putnam and Harvard • Undertaken by local Community Foundations Ref.: SCCBS

25. SCCBS Summary (1) Ref.: SCCBS

26. SCCBS Summary (2) Ref.: SCCBS

27. Lessons for Policymakers and Managers • Don’t assume that social capital is always good • Example: Social capital can push giving and volunteering either up or down • Individual and community-level social capital have different impacts • Create proper conditions for social capital creation (e.g. property rights, public safety) • How does the public sector impact social capital—does it encourage crowding out?