[FAQ & bibliography omitted, mail me if needed]
Google's cache of
http://home.kimo.com.tw/pastudy/pais/define/s-list/social_capital_theory.htm
社會資本理論(Social Capital Theory)的界定
Social capital may be defined as those resources inherent in social
relations which facilitate collective action. Social capital resources
include trust, norms, and networks of association representing any group
which gathers consistently for a common purpose. A norm of a culture high
in social capital is reciprocity, which encourages bargaining, compromise,
and pluralistic politics. Another norm is belief in the equality of
citizens, which encourages the formation of cross-cutting groups.
Key Concepts and Terms
* Correlates of high levels of social capital include education (Smith,
Beaulieu, and Seraphine, 1995; Teachman, Paasch, and Carver, 1996), health
(Smith, 1997), confidence in political institutions (Brehm and Rahn, 1997),
and satisfaction with government and political engagement (Putnam, 1993).
Mentoring, job networking, and mutual support associated with high levels
of social capital is a partial cause of success in education (Loury, 1977;
Coleman, 1988). Such mutual support also is associated with self-reliant
economic development without need for government intervention (Putnam, 1993;
Fukuyama, 1995).
* The decline of social capital is a theme of social capital theory.
Articulated by Putnam (1993, 1995a, 1995), the argument is made that the
level of social capital has been declining in the United states at least
since the 1970's.
* Factors in the decline of social capital centrally include television,
which is seen as having a profound privatizing impact which undercuts
social capital in a society (Putnam, 1995a).
* The role of information technology is seen as bidirectional. High levels
of social capital, such as preexisting strong non-electronic networks, is
a success factor in establishment of electronic-based networks (Fukuyama,
1995). At the same time, the spread of information technology creates
networking infrastructure which encourages the formation of social capital
(Calabrese and Borchert, 1996). Information technology, however, can also
have an anonymizing, deindividuating effect which relaxes social norms and
erodes social capital (Kiesler, Siegel, and McGuire, 1991; Loeh and Conger,
1996). It is a mixed empirical question which tendency of information
technology will be dominant.
* Relation to public administration/public policy. Implementation of
government programs ultimately depends less on authority and control than
on mobilizing policy stakeholders, including policy recipients. The less
the social capital, the more difficult such mobilization becomes. At the
extreme, in a society with very low social capital, administrators are
much more apt to find reliance on authority and control necessary, with
resulting low governmental effectiveness. At the other extreme, in a
society with very high social capital, many problems are taken care of by
social networking outside of government, and when remaining problems are
addressed through governmental intervention, administrators find a rich
array of implementation allies.
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 140.112.60.4