The Collapse and Revival of American Community
Once we bowled in leagues, usually after work—but no longer. This seemingly
small phenomenon symbolizes a significant social change that Robert
Putnam has identified.
Drawing on vast new data that reveal Americans’ changing behavior, Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from one another and how social structures—whether they be PTA, church, or political parties - have disintegrated. Until the publication of this groundbreaking work, no one had so deftly diagnosed the harm that these broken bonds have wreaked on our physical and civic health, nor had anyone exalted their fundamental power in creating a society that is happy, healthy, and safe.
Like defining works from the past, such as The Lonely Crowd and The Affluent Society, and like the works of C. Wright Mills and Betty Friedan, Putnam’s Bowling Alone has identified a central crisis at the heart of our society and suggests what we can do.
https://www.amazon.com/Bowling-Alone-Collapse-American-Community/dp/1982130849/
Reviewed by: James A. Montanye; Falls Church, Virginia
The book’s central theme is simply stated: “For the first two-thirds of the twentieth century a powerful tide bore Americans into ever deeper engagement in the life of their communities, but a few decades ago—silently, without warning—that tide reversed and we were overtaken by a treacherous rip current. Without at first noticing, we have been pulled apart from one another and from our communities over the last third of the century” (p. 27). The ebb and flow to which Putnam alludes pertains to the shifting dimensions of “social capital,” which he clarifies as follows:
Whereas physical capital refers to physical objects and human capital refers to properties of individuals, social capital refers to connections among individuals—social networking and the norm of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them. In that sense, social capital is closely related to what some have called “civic virtue.” The difference is that “social capital” calls attention to the fact that civic virtue is most powerful when embedded in a dense network of reciprocal social relations. A society of many virtuous but isolated individuals is not necessarily rich in social capital. (p. 19)
Putnam concludes that “social capital is a cause, not merely an effect, of contemporary social circumstances [i.e., social malaise]” (p. 294, emphasis in original).
https://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?id=205
Social Capital - Wikipedia
Social capital is "the networks of relationships among people who live and work in a particular society, enabling that society to function effectively". It involves the effective functioning of social groups through interpersonal relationships, a shared sense of identity, a shared understanding, shared norms, shared values, trust, cooperation, and reciprocity. Social capital is a measure of the value of resources, both tangible (e.g., public spaces, private property) and intangible (e.g., actors, human capital, people), and the impact that these relationships have on the resources involved in each relationship, and on larger groups. It is generally seen as a form of capital that produces public goods for a common purpose.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_capital
Summary Below Created by ChatGPT
Contents
Preface
The preface sets the stage for "Bowling Alone: Revised and Updated 2020" by highlighting the vital importance of social connections and civic engagement in American society and introducing the themes of community collapse and revival.
Section I - Introduction:
This section sets the stage by exploring the intricate shifts in American society's fabric over time and lays out the central concepts and ideas that will be explored in the book, including the decline of civic engagement, the erosion of social capital, and the various factors contributing to these trends. The author discusses the changing landscape of American society and introduces the concept of social capital, emphasizing its role in fostering community engagement and overall well-being. Social capital is key ingredient in fostering communal bonds, collaboration, and shared values. These connections have traditionally been crucial for the smooth functioning of communities, and it lays the foundation for the subsequent analysis of their decline.
Chapter 1: Thinking about Social Change in America:
The opening chapter of the book sets the stage by exploring the intricate shifts in American society's fabric over time. It introduces the notion of social capital as a key ingredient in fostering communal bonds, collaboration, and shared values. The chapter highlights how these connections have traditionally been crucial for the smooth functioning of communities, and it lays the foundation for the subsequent analysis of their decline. It serving as a primer for the subsequent examination into the decline of community engagement.
Section II - Trends in Civic Engagement and Social Capital:
This section delves into specific aspects of civic engagement and social capital, examining their decline and exploring the underlying reasons. Chapters 2-9 analyze different forms of civic engagement and social connections, including political participation, civic involvement, religious engagement, workplace relationships, informal social connections, altruism, volunteering, philanthropy, reciprocity, honesty, and trust. decrease in community-based activities and associations. They paint a comprehensive picture of the decline of political participation and civic engagement, discussing the waning interest in traditional political activities; the decline of casual social interactions, the consequences for community cohesion, decrease in acts of altruism, volunteering, and charitable giving, its effects on community vitality, eroding social trust declining levels of reciprocity and honesty affect community relationships. Then the section looks at small groups, social movements, the internet's impact on community-building and engagement, assessing whether these factors can counteract the decline of social capital.
Chapter 2: Political Participation:
This chapter scrutinizes the dwindling landscape of political participation and its implications. It delves into the gradual wane of traditional political activities like voting and party involvement. By examining the factors contributing to this decline, the chapter offers insights into the transformation of political engagement and its impact on the democratic process.
Chapter 3: Civic Participation:
Expanding beyond politics this chapter delves into the erosion of civic engagement. It then examines the decline of community-based activities, from local associations to volunteer work, unveiling the consequences for societal cohesion. By dissecting the causes of decreased civic involvement, the chapter illuminates the shifts in values and lifestyles that underpin this change.
Chapter 4: Religious Participation:
Next the focus shifts to the realm of religious engagement and its decline. The chapter dissects how changing religious affiliations and beliefs have impacted the cohesive force of communities. Through the exploration of the implications of decreased religious participation, the chapter offers a window into the transformation of communal bonds grounded in faith.
Chapter 5: Connections in the Workplace:
This chapter delves into the intricate relationships within workplaces and their alteration over time. It dissects the shifting dynamics of workplace connections, from face-to-face interactions to remote work and the gig economy. By examining how these changes affect social connections, the chapter offers insights into the evolving nature of professional relationships and its wider societal implications.
Chapter 6: Informal Social Connections:
This chapter unravels the decline of casual social interactions in everyday life. It explores the fading prevalence of chance encounters, neighborhood interactions, and spontaneous conversations. Through an examination of the influence of technology, urban planning, and societal norms, the chapter offers a glimpse into the complexities of informal social connections and their integral role in community vitality.
Chapter 7: Altruism, Volunteering, and Philanthropy:
This chapter addresses the decrease in acts of altruism, volunteering, and philanthropy, and their implications for communal well-being. It probes the motivations behind the reduction in these activities, from shifting societal values to economic constraints. By examining how these trends impact community vitality, the chapter underscores the broader consequences of diminished charitable engagement.
Chapter 8: Reciprocity, Honesty, and Trust:
This chapter delves into the fading social trust, exploring the repercussions of diminishing reciprocity, honesty, and trust in interpersonal relationships. By examining the factors contributing to this decline, the chapter offers insights into the erosion of social bonds and the implications for community dynamics. Through the analysis of the delicate balance between trust and societal cohesion, the chapter paints a nuanced picture of the challenges at hand.
Chapter 9: Against the Tide? Small Groups, Social Movements & the Net:
This chapter investigates the potential counterforces to the decline of social capital. It assesses the roles of small groups, social movements, and the internet in reinvigorating community engagement. By exploring whether these avenues can reverse the decline, the chapter underscores the evolving nature of communal bonds and the potential pathways to rebuilding a sense of connectedness in an increasingly digital age.
Section III - Why?:
This section examines the underlying causes of the decline in civic engagement and social capital, exploring various societal shifts that have contributed to this phenomenon. Chapters 10-15 investigate factors such as the impact of time constraints and financial pressures on community engagement, the effects of urban sprawl and increased mobility on community connections, the influence of technology and mass media on social interactions and engagement and generational shifts in attitudes toward community engagement. The focus of this section narrows to the profound influence of time and financial constraints on community involvement and examines the consequences of urban sprawl and increased mobility on community connections. Then it delves into how spatial expansion and heightened mobility have transformed the physical and social landscapes of communities and the ways the rise of digital technologies and pervasive mass media have revolutionized the modes of communication and interaction; reshaping the nature of social connections. Finally the section delves into the evolving perspectives of different age cohorts and the impact of societal changes on the ways in which each generation approaches communal participation.
Chapter 10: Introduction:
This chapter serves as a pivotal starting point, laying the groundwork for the subsequent discussions. It introduces the central theme of the impact of time and financial constraints on community engagement. It sets the stage by exploring the ways in which these pressures have reshaped the landscape of civic participation. By illuminating the multifaceted nature of the challenges posed by modern demands, the chapter paves the way for a comprehensive examination of the complexities of restoring community bonds.
Chapter 11: Pressures of Time and Money:
In this chapter the focus narrows to the profound influence of time and financial constraints on community involvement. By delving into how these pressures impact individuals' ability to engage in communal activities, the chapter exposes the challenges posed by the accelerating pace of modern life. Through a nuanced exploration of how time scarcity and economic pressures affect the allocation of resources, the chapter underscores the need to address these barriers in efforts to rejuvenate community engagement.
Chapter 12: Mobility and Sprawl:
This chapter shifts the lens to examine the consequences of urban sprawl and increased mobility on community connections. It delves into how spatial expansion and heightened mobility have transformed the physical and social landscapes of communities. By dissecting the impact of these changes on the accessibility of social interactions, the chapter underscores how they have contributed to the weakening of social bonds and the challenges of sustaining active communities.
Chapter 13: Technology and Mass Media:
The intricate relationship between technology, mass media, and community engagement takes center stage in this chapter. It delves into the ways in which the rise of digital technologies and pervasive mass media have revolutionized the modes of communication and interaction. By examining how these changes have reshaped the nature of social connections, the chapter probes both the potential benefits and drawbacks of these transformations for the vitality of communities.
Chapter 14: From Generation to Generation:
In this chapter the exploration extends to generational shifts in attitudes toward community engagement. It delves into the evolving perspectives of different age cohorts and the impact of societal changes on the ways in which each generation approaches communal participation. By examining how changing values, technological advancements, and cultural shifts influence engagement levels, the chapter sheds light on the complex interplay of generational dynamics in shaping community bonds.
Chapter 15: What Killed Civic Engagement? Summing Up:
As a summation of the preceding discussions this chapter offers a synthesis of the factors that collectively contributed to the decline of civic engagement. It distills the multifaceted aspects explored across the book, offering a comprehensive view of the complex web of influences that led to the erosion of community bonds. By bringing these factors together, the chapter sets the stage for the subsequent sections, which focus on pragmatic strategies to reverse these trends and reinvigorate community engagement.
Section IV - So What?:
Moving beyond analysis, this section focuses on the practical implications of the decline in civic engagement and social capital across different aspects of society. Chapters 16-22 explore how the erosion of social capital impacts education, neighborhood safety, economic prosperity, health, happiness, democracy, and even its potential negative consequences. They examine the connection between community engagement and neighborhood safety and productivity, this chapter addresses the consequences of decline. Then explore how community engagement affects economic prosperity at both local and national levels. Then discusses the impact of social connections on individual well-being, this chapter looks at the link between community engagement, health, and happiness and then the relationship between civic engagement and democratic processes - the consequences of reduced participation. Then they delve into the potential negative aspects of social capital, including exclusionary dynamics and the potential for misuse. Next they look at how society has addressed similar challenges in the past and then suggests strategies and approaches to revitalize social capital and promote community engagement.
Chapter 16: Introduction:
This chapter serves as a comprehensive prelude, setting the groundwork for the ensuing exploration. It casts a wide lens on the intricate role of community engagement across diverse societal realms. It initiates the investigation into the decline of social capital and its far-reaching implications, providing a roadmap for readers to navigate the subsequent discussions. By elucidating the criticality of active community participation, the chapter draws readers into the multifaceted examination of the factors contributing to its decline and the potential pathways to rejuvenate communal bonds.
Chapter 17: Education and Children's Welfare:
Delving into the reverberations of dwindling community engagement, this chapter focuses on its impact on education and the well-being of children. By scrutinizing the symbiotic connection between active communities and the robust support systems crucial for children's growth, the chapter unearths the profound consequences of weakened communal bonds. It explores how the reduction in community involvement can hinder learning environments, emotional development, and the overall flourishing of young generations. By advocating for the revival of community engagement, the chapter underscores the significance of collaborative efforts to secure brighter futures for children.
Chapter 18: Safe and Productive Neighborhoods:
This chapter advances the conversation by examining the intricate interplay between community engagement and the vibrancy of neighborhoods. It highlights the inherent correlation between active communities and the creation of secure and flourishing local environments. Through in-depth exploration of case studies and real-world instances, the chapter elucidates how strong social capital contributes to fostering safer neighborhoods and promoting local economic growth. By delving into the ways in which community bonds enhance security, collaboration, and economic activity, the chapter underscores the pivotal role of social capital in shaping the character of neighborhoods.
Chapter 19: Economic Prosperity:
Turning its lens towards the intersection of community engagement and economic dynamism, this chapter delves into the mechanisms through which social capital influences economic prosperity. By dissecting how robust community ties facilitate entrepreneurship, resource-sharing, and economic progress, the chapter underscores the profound impact of communal bonds on economic well-being. Through a comprehensive analysis of the role of social networks in fostering business growth, enhancing market access, and bolstering economic resilience, the chapter reinforces the imperative of nurturing active communities for the overall vitality of economies.
Chapter 20: Health and Happiness:
Intricately weaving together the threads of social connections, well-being, and happiness, this chapter probes the intricate relationship between community engagement and individual health. Through a deep exploration of research that links strong social ties to heightened happiness and improved physical and mental well-being, the chapter underscores the profound influence of social capital on the quality of life. By unraveling the mechanisms through which community connections foster emotional support, stress reduction, and overall life satisfaction, the chapter positions the revival of communal bonds as a vital avenue for cultivating healthier, happier societies.
Chapter 21: Lessons of History: The Gilded Age and the Progressive Era:
This chapter delves into historical epochs, the Gilded Age and the Progressive Era, extracting lessons applicable to addressing the decline of social capital. By examining these eras, the chapter uncovers strategies that societies employed to combat similar challenges. It scrutinizes reform movements, societal shifts, and policy changes that aimed to strengthen community bonds. Bridging the historical gap, this chapter illuminates how past endeavors can guide modern efforts to rekindle civic engagement and reinforce the societal fabric.
Chapter 22: Toward an Agenda for Social Capitalists:
In this chapter a roadmap emerges for reviving social capital and galvanizing community connection. It sketches an ambitious agenda tailored to individuals, communities, and institutions committed to reversing civic wane. By blending governmental initiatives, corporate roles, educational platforms, and grassroots actions, this chapter underscores actionable strategies to rebuild societal cohesion. By envisioning a proactive network of social capitalists, it paints a vision of collective empowerment, steering society toward renewed vitality and shared prosperity.
Section V - What Is to Be Done?:
This section addresses the question of how to address the decline in civic engagement and social capital, drawing on historical examples and proposing potential solutions. Chapter 23 examines historical periods characterized by similar challenges and discusses how lessons from the past can inform efforts to revive civic engagement and social capital. Then chapter 24, the final chapter, outlines a potential agenda for revitalizing social capital, suggesting strategies and approaches that individuals, communities, and institutions can adopt to strengthen civic engagement and rebuild a sense of community.
Chapter 23: Lessons of History: The Gilded Age and the Progressive Era:
This chapter delves into historical periods that provide valuable lessons for addressing declines in social capital. By examining the Gilded Age and the Progressive Era, the chapter explores how societies confronted similar challenges in the past. It analyzes the strategies, movements, and reforms that emerged during these periods to counteract social disintegration and promote community engagement. By drawing parallels between historical circumstances and modern challenges, this chapter offers insights into how past successes and failures can inform contemporary efforts to revive social capital and foster stronger community ties.
Chapter 24: Toward an Agenda for Social Capitalists:
The concluding chapter outlines a comprehensive agenda for revitalizing social capital and strengthening community engagement. It offers practical strategies and actionable steps that individuals, communities, and institutions can adopt to counteract the decline in civic participation and rebuild a sense of community. It explores the roles of government, businesses, educational institutions, and social organizations in supporting these efforts. By providing a roadmap for social capitalists—individuals and groups invested in reinvigorating communal bonds—this chapter empowers readers with a vision for fostering lasting positive change and rebuilding the foundations of a vibrant society.
Afterword: Has the Internet Reversed the Decline of Social Capital?:
The afterword probes the impact of the internet on social interactions and community engagement. It questions whether digital technologies have served as a counterforce against the decline of social capital, examining the extent to which online platforms have contributed to the reimagining and rebuilding of connections in the modern age.
Book Summary - Wikipedia
Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community is a 2000 nonfiction book by Robert D. Putnam. It was developed from his 1995 essay entitled "Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital". Putnam surveys the decline of social capital in the United States since 1950. He has described the reduction in all the forms of in-person social intercourse upon which Americans used to found, educate, and enrich the fabric of their social lives. He argues that this undermines the active civil engagement which a strong democracy requires from its citizens.
Putnam discussed ways in which Americans disengaged from political involvement, including decreased voter turnout, attendance at public meetings, service on committees, and work with political parties. Putnam also cited Americans' growing distrust in their government. Putnam accepted the possibility that this lack of trust could be attributed to "the long litany of political tragedies and scandals since the 1960s", but believed that this explanation was limited when viewing it alongside other "trends in civic engagement of a wider sort".
Putnam noted the aggregate loss in membership and number of volunteers in many existing civic organizations such as religious groups (Knights of Columbus, B'nai Brith, etc.), labor unions, parent–teacher associations, Federation of Women's Clubs, League of Women Voters, military veterans' organizations, volunteers with Boy Scouts and the Red Cross, and fraternal organizations (Lions Clubs, Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks, United States Junior Chamber, Freemasonry, Rotary, Kiwanis, etc.). Putnam used bowling as an example to illustrate this; although the number of people who bowled had increased in the last 20 years, the number of people who bowled in leagues had decreased. If people bowled alone, they did not participate in the social interaction and civic discussions that might occur in a league environment.
Putnam cites data from the General Social Survey that showed an aggregate decline in membership of traditional civic organizations, supporting his thesis that U.S. social capital had declined. He noted that some organizations had grown, such as the American Association of Retired People, the Sierra Club, and a plethora of mass-member activist groups. But he said that these groups did not tend to foster face-to-face interaction, and were the type where "the only act of membership consists in writing a check for dues or perhaps occasionally reading a newsletter." He also drew a distinction between two different types of social capital: a "bonding" type (which occurs within a demographic group) and a "bridging" type (which unites people from different groups).
He then asked: "Why is US social capital eroding?" and discussed several possible causes. He believed that the "movement of women into the workforce" and other demographic changes had an impact on the number of individuals engaging in civic associations. He also discussed the "re-potting hypothesis", that people become less engaged when they frequently move towns, but found that Americans actually moved towns less frequently than in previous decades. He did suggest that suburbanization, economics and time pressures had some effect, though he noted that average working hours had shortened. He concluded the main cause was technology "individualizing" people's leisure time via television and the Internet, suspecting that "virtual reality helmets" would carry this further in the future.
He estimated that the fall-off in civic engagement after 1965 was 10% due to pressure of work and double-career families, 10% to suburbanisation and commuting, 25% to the individualisation of media (television), and 50% to ‘generational change’. 5% remained unexplained.
Putnam suggested closer studies of which forms of associations could create the greatest social capital, and how various aspects of technology, changes in social equality, and public policy affect social capital. He closed by emphasizing the importance of discovering how the United States could reverse the trend of social capital decay.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowling_Alone
Summary by Brett Reeder - Conflict Research Consortium
Social capital refers to "the connections among individuals' social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them." (p 19) Much like the economic concepts of physical and human capital, the social networks of social capital are thought to have value. Bowling Alone empirically demonstrates a drop in social capital in contemporary America, identifies the cause and consequences of this drop, and suggests ways to improve social capital in the future.
Though social capital varies across many dimensions, according to Putnam. the most important distinction is between bridging (inclusive) and bonding (exclusive) social capital. Bonding social capital networks are inward-looking and tend to reinforce exclusive identities and homogenous groups. Examples of such networks include ethnic fraternal organizations and country clubs. On the other hand, bridging social capital networks are outward looking and include people across "diverse social cleavages." Examples of bridging social capital include the civil rights movement and youth service groups.
In general, bonding networks are most useful when specific reciprocity and mobilizing solidarity is necessary for "getting by" in oppressive situations. Bridging networks are good for linking to external assets and for information diffusion for the purpose of "getting ahead" of the status quo. As Putnam put it, "bonding social capital constitutes a kind of sociological superglue, whereas bridging social capital provides a sociological WD-40" (p 23). While useful for analytical purposes, this bonding/bridging distinction is not an "either or" category, but is rather a "more or less" dimension. That is, social capital can (and usually does) exist in both a bonding and a bridging forms simultaneously. For example: a black church may bond individuals based on race and religious belief, but bridge individuals across class lines.
Having described what social capital is, Putnam turns his attention to how it has changed over time by conducting a meta-analysis of a large body of data from various sources. In doing so, he identifies a dominant theme: "For the first two-thirds of the twentieth century a powerful tide bore Americans into ever deeper engagement in the life of their communities, but a few decades ago--silently, without warning--that tide reversed and we were overtaken by a treacherous rip current" (p 27). Thus, social capital increased in the US until the 1970s and then suddenly decreased right up to the present. This theme is consistent across seven separate measures of social capital, including: political participation, civic participation, religious participation, workplace networks, informal networks, mutual trust, and altruism.
Though most measures indicate a significant drop in social capital over the last three decades, Putman identifies four exceptions: an increase in volunteerism among youth, the growth in telecommunications, grassroots activity among evangelical conservatives, and an increase in self-help support. However, these exceptions do not offset the overall trend, indeed, by virtually every conceivable measure, social capital has eroded steadily and sometimes dramatically over the past two generations." (p 287)
To identify why this might be, Putnam looked to see "whether the declines in civic engagement (social capital) are correlated across time and space with certain social characteristics" (p 185). Once he identified a correlation, he applied three additional tests to ensure the validity of potential causal factors. First, all correlations he identified had to lack spuriousness. Second, the proposed explanatory factor had to change in the relevant way. Finally, the direction of causation (result vs. cause) was questioned. Using these standards, Putnam rejected several common explanations for the contemporary drop in social capital, none of which were found to have had a statistically significant effect. These included educational deficiency, destruction of the nuclear family, race and racism, big government and the welfare state, and market economics.
Additionally he identified four social characteristics that passed his tests of validity: pressures of time and money, mobility and sprawl, television, and generational differences. The lion's share (up to 50%) of the change in social capital over the last three decades is thought to be attributable to generational differences. People born in the 20s and 30s are significantly more socially connected than later generations, largely as a result of social habits and values developed during the "great mid-century cataclysm" or World War II. Generational differences are also synergistic with TV, as different generations have different habits regarding TV. As a whole, TV is thought to contribute up to 25%, the pressures of time and money, about 10%, and sprawl another 10% because it takes more time to get places. Sprawl is hence associated with increasing social segregation, and it disrupts community "boundedness". This leaves at least 15% unexplained.
But does it really matter that social capital is declining? Putnam argues that, indeed, it does, as social capital "has many features that help people translate aspirations into realities." (p 288) Putnam identifies five such features. First, social capital makes collective problems easier to resolve, as there is less opposition between parties. This results in improved social environments, such as safer and more productive neighborhoods. Second, it makes business transactions easier, since when people trust each other, there is less of a need to spend time and money enforcing contracts. As a result, economic prosperity increases generally. Third, social capital widens our awareness of our mutual connectivity. This can improve the quality of our civic and democratic institutions. Fourth, it helps to increase and speed up the flow of information, which, in turn, improves education and economic production. Finally, social capital improves our health and happiness through both psychological and biological processes which require human contact.
Unfortunately the effects of social capital are not always positive. Indeed, bonding social capital, in particular, can lead to destructive divisions within and between societies as groups develop a collective identity based largely on exclusion. But the "classical liberal argument" against community (or social capital networks) is its potential to restrict freedom and tolerance. Closely-linked communities (those with high social capital) can restrict individual freedoms through social pressure, especially if tolerance and freedom are not values of the community. Putnam acknowledges that this can happen, but it is not an inherent effect of social capital. In fact, he provides evidence to the contrary which suggests that, "Far from being incompatible, liberty and fraternity (or bonding social capital) are mutually supportive, and this remains true when we control for other factors" (p 356).
Another argument against community holds that social capital can encourage inequality by concentrating wealth in closed communities. Again, Putnam acknowledges that this can happen, but is not a necessary consequence of community or social capital. Instead he argues that while "[s]ocial inequalities may sometimes be embedded in social capital ...both across space and across time, equality and fraternity (bonding social capital) are strongly positively correlated." (p 358-359). Thus, while social capital can, at times, restrict freedom, and enhance inequality, it does not inherently do so. On the contrary, empirical evidence suggests that social capital, freedom, and equality are in general, mutually reinforcing.
But what can we do to improve our social capital? According to Putnam, we should first learn from the past where "lessons can be found in a period uncannily like our own" (p 367). The period he is referring to consists of roughly 1870-1915. During this time "dramatic technological, economic, and social change rendered obsolete a significant stock of social capital" (p 368) due to industrial revolution, urbanization, and waves of new immigration. In response, the leaders of the day re-developed social capital with an "extraordinary burst of social inventiveness and political reform" (p 368), which included the founding or refurbishing of most of our contemporary civic institutions such as the Boy Scouts, the NRA and the NAACP.
While the specific reforms of this time period "are no longer appropriate for our time...the practical, enthusiastic idealism of that era--and its achievements-- should inspire us" (p 401). In this vein, Putnam makes general suggestions in seven "spheres deserving special attention" with the intention of encouraging readers to develop contemporary innovative solutions.
First, he suggests educational reforms be undertaken, including improved civics education, well designed service learning programs, extra curricular activities and smaller schools.
- He argues for a more family-oriented workplace which allows for the formation of social capital on the job.
- He encourages further efforts at new urbanism.
- He would like to see religion become both more influential and at the same time more tolerant.
- The technologies that reinforce, rather than replace, face-to-face interaction should be encouraged.
- Art and culture should become more interactive.
- Finally, politics requires campaign reforms and a decentralization of power.
Conclusion
In this important book, Putnam demonstrates that social capital increased between 1900 and the late 1960s and then dramatically decreased, largely as a result of generational succession, television, urban sprawl and the increasing pressures of time and money. This has resulted in an increase in a variety of social problems ranging from ineffective education to economic strain, to social conflict between individuals as well as groups. The solution to these problems likely rests with re-developing social capital, much like was done in the Progressive Era (but with solutions designed for contemporary America).
Though not inherent to community development, such a project must take into account the potential of social capital to limit liberty and equality. This is particularly true when developing bonding social capital which is unfortunately much easier to develop than bridging social capital as, "Social capital is often most easily created in opposition to something or someone else." (p 361) While bonding social capital can help oppressed people to "get by" through solidarity, bridging social capital is required to "get ahead" through increased generalized norms of reciprocity. The development of innovative forms of such social capital is Putnam's ultimate challenge to the reader.
https://www.beyondintractability.org/bksum/putnam-bowling
Bowling Alone at Twenty
Two decades ago, Robert Putnam published a book that provoked a small cottage industry's worth of responses from pundits and scholars alike. Bowling Alone, based on an essay of the same title Putnam had written for the Journal of Democracy five years earlier, made a claim that cut to the quick of American identity: Americans just aren't doing things together anymore. By choosing to engage in activities individually rather than communally, he asserted, we were putting at risk America's capacity to build social capital and undermining our national character.
It is difficult to overstate the influence of Putnam's thesis. His argument and evidence understandably caused much concern. A subgenre of books followed in Putnam's footsteps, decrying America's civic decline as well as its social fragmentation. Charles Murray's Coming Apart, J. D. Vance's Hillbilly Elegy, Ben Sasse's Them, and Tim Carney's Alienated America are among the most recent and best known of this genre, but they represent just a few of the many civil society "declinists" that are so vocal today.
During the two decades following Bowling Alone's publication, America has witnessed major changes that have fundamentally altered our social and communal lives. This makes revisiting Putnam's original investigation into American civic health a worthy exercise.
Today, the evidence on the health of civil society is in many ways just as distressing as it was 20 years ago. Not everything has gone as Putnam expected, however; some trends that have emerged since 2000 suggest forms of trouble he did not anticipate. And even in Bowling Alone, Putnam recognized a few trends that ran counter to his declinist thesis — some of which are still gravitating that way today.
Two decades on, the condition of American civil society is more complex than a modern reader of Bowling Alone might imagine. Yet the book's core insights remain essential for understanding our society's prospects. American civic life — as measured by a variety of metrics at earlier points in American history, at the time of Putnam's writing, and today — has endured ebbs and flows, dissipation and re-invention, offering reason to have faith in the resilience of America's civic tradition. In short, we have always been, and in our own way still are, the "nation of joiners" that historian Arthur Schlesinger, Sr., and Alexis de Tocqueville before him, praised. For all its troubles, our civic life is still full of the potential for renewal.
https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/bowling-alone-at-twenty
From Bowling Alone to Posting Alone
Testing Time - The weaknesses in this approach were already plain to see by the early 2000s. For one, Bowling Alone spent too little time investigating the structural transformation of its civil society — the rise of new NGOs as substitutes for mass membership organizations, the ascent of new sporting clubs, the revival of association in evangelical megachurches and schools.
Putnam also deployed a highly dubious notion of social capital. In this aspect, the book spoke to the market-friendly sensibilities of the late 1990s: civic ties were useful as a means for social mobility, not as expressions of collective power. They could adorn college applications or help people land trainee programs, not change nations or make revolutions.
Such economism also explained a glaring gap in Putnam’s book — the aggressive drop in union strength at the close of the century...
https://jacobin.com/2022/12/from-bowling-alone-to-posting-alone
Participation & Social Capital
The central premise of social capital is that social networks have value. Social capital refers to the collective value of all "social networks" [who people know] and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each other ["norms of reciprocity"].
The term social capital emphasizes not just warm and cuddly feelings, but a
wide variety of quite specific benefits that flow from the trust,
reciprocity, information, and cooperation associated with social networks.
Social capital creates value for the people who are connected and - at least
sometimes - for bystanders as well.
http://www.bowlingalone.com/socialcapital.php3
Reviewed by The Examined Life
One of the central arguments of the book is that both civic engagement and organizational involvement experienced marked declines during the second half of the twentieth century. According to the best available evidence, these declines have continued uninterrupted. Since the turn of the twenty-first century, fewer and fewer Americans are socializing through membership organizations.
[S]ocial trust has deteriorated further over the past twenty years as well. This continues to be explained in part by generational replacement… As more trusting generations have died out, they have been succeeded by less trusting youth cohorts, leaving America a less trusting society, year after year.
In recent years social scientists have framed concerns about the changing character of American society in terms of the concept of “social capital.” By analogy with notions of physical capital and human capital – tools and training that enhance individual productivity – the core idea of social capital theory is that social networks have value. Just as a screwdriver (physical capital) or a college education (human capital) can increase productivity (both individual and collective), so too social contacts affect the productivity of individuals and groups. … Social capital refers to connects among individuals – social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them.
https://www.theexaminedlife.org/library/bowling-alone-the-collapse-and-revival-of-american-community/
Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital
Robert D. Putnam
Many students of the new democracies that have emerged over the past decade and a half have emphasized the importance of a strong and active civil society to the consolidation of democracy. Especially with regard to the postcommunist countries, scholars and democratic activists alike have lamented the absence or obliteration of traditions of independent civic engagement and a widespread tendency toward passive reliance on the state. To those concerned with the weakness of civil societies in the developing or postcommunist world, the advanced Western democracies and above all the United States have typically been taken as models to be emulated. There is striking evidence, however, that the vibrancy of American civil society has notably declined over the past several decades.
Ever since the publication of Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America, the United States has played a central role in systematic studies of the links between democracy and civil society. Although this is in part because trends in American life are often regarded as harbingers of social modernization, it is also because America has traditionally been considered unusually “civic” (a reputation that, as we shall later see, has not been entirely unjustified).
When Tocqueville visited the United States in the 1830s, it was the Americans’ propensity for civic association that most impressed him as the key to their unprecedented ability to make democracy work. “Americans of all ages, all stations in life, and all types of disposition,” he observed, “are forever forming associations. There are not only commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but others of a thousand different types—religious, moral, serious, futile, very general and very limited, immensely large and very minute. . . . Nothing, in my view, deserves more attention than the intellectual and moral associations in America.”
Recently, American social scientists of a neo-Tocquevillean bent have unearthed a wide range of empirical evidence that the quality of public life and the performance of social institutions (and not only in America) are indeed powerfully influenced by norms and networks of civic engagement. Researchers in such fields as education, urban poverty, unemployment, the control of crime and drug abuse, and even health have discovered that successful outcomes are more likely in civically engaged communities. Similarly, research on the varying economic attainments of different ethnic groups in the United States has demonstrated the importance of social bonds within each group. These results are consistent with research in a wide range of settings that demonstrates the vital importance of social networks for job placement and many other economic outcomes.
Meanwhile, a seemingly unrelated body of research on the sociology of economic development has also focused attention on the role of social networks. Some of this work is situated in the developing countries, and some of it elucidates the peculiarly successful “network capitalism” of East Asia. Even in less exotic Western economies, however, researchers have discovered highly efficient, highly flexible “industrial districts” based on networks of collaboration among workers and small entrepreneurs. Far from being paleoindustrial anachronisms, these dense interpersonal and interorganizational networks undergird ultramodern industries, from the high tech of Silicon Valley to the high fashion of Benetton.
The norms and networks of civic engagement also powerfully affect the performance of representative government. That, at least, was the central conclusion of my own 20-year, quasi-experimental study of subnational governments in different regions of Italy. Although all these regional governments seemed identical on paper, their levels of effectiveness varied dramatically. Systematic inquiry showed that the quality of governance was determined by longstanding traditions of civic engagement (or its absence). Voter turnout, newspaper readership, membership in choral societies and football clubs—these were the hallmarks of a successful region. In fact, historical analysis suggested that these networks of organized reciprocity and civic solidarity, far from being an epiphenomenon of socioeconomic modernization, were a precondition for it.
No doubt the mechanisms through which civic engagement and social connectedness produce such results—better schools, faster economic development, lower crime, and more effective government—are multiple and complex. While these briefly recounted findings require further confirmation and perhaps qualification, the...
https://xroads.virginia.edu/~Hyper/DETOC/assoc/bowling.html
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/16643
What is the Difference Between Bonding & Bridging Social Capital?
The difference between bonding and bridging social capital relates to the nature of the relationships or associations in the social group or community. Bonding social capital is within a group or community whereas bridging social capital is between social groups, social class, race, religion or other important sociodemographic or socioeconomic characteristics. The bonding/bridging distinction can be made in relation to a range of relationship and network characteristics. The table below summarises the main features of each.
(( table data here from link ))
Robert Putman in his book Bowling Alone discussed bonding social capital is good for “getting by” and bridging is crucial for “getting ahead”. Putnam credit these terms to Ross Gittell and Avis Vidal.
Scholars at the World Bank are credited with adding the concept of linking social capital to describe relationships among people or institutions at different levels of societal power hierarchy . Some authors include linking to make the three-way distinction between bonding, bridging, and linking social capital.
The distinction between bonding and bridging social capital builds on the seminal work of Mark Granovetter on embeddedness. This line to social capital theory is called the network approach and is most commonly used by researchers approaching social capital from economics. Key authors in this theoretical tradition can be traced from James Coleman to Ronald Burt, Nan Lin, and Alejandro Portes.
The concepts of bonding and bridging social capital are associated with the network theories of structural holes and network closure. In this context the difference between bridging and bonding social capital is structural holes as bridging and network closure as bonding. The social network theories provide a rich tradition of research that social capital theorists find highly applicable.
The taxonomic refinement of bonding and bridging has been described as types of social capital, as forms of social capitall, as dimensions of social capital, and as functions of social capital. These terms are often used interchangeably, even by the same author in a single publication.
Some authors have conceptualised the difference between bonding and bridging social capital as different types of trust. Bridging social capital could be conceptualised as generalized trust (earned trust) and bonding social capital as ascribed trust.
In practice the distinction between bonding, bridging and linking social capital is not easy given the multiple and overlapping relationships individuals have with others
In the past some authors have taken one type, bonding or bridging, as the approach for their research. This is uncommon in recent years when researchers have preferred more comprehensive approaches.
https://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/difference-bonding-bridging-social-capital/
What is Social Capital
A simple way to describe social capital is the benefits derived from being social. The core idea of social capital is that ‘relationships matter’ and that social networks are a valuable asset. That being social and working together is important and valuable.
Social capital is aspects of social context (the “social” bit) that have productive benefits (the “capital” bit). It includes the store of solidarity or goodwill between people and groups of people. You could think of it like a ‘favour bank’, although this only encapsulates part of social capital. Another simple explanation is as helpfulness behaviours resulting from feelings of gratitude, respect, and friendship.
The adage: “it’s not just what you know, but who you know” relates to the powerful effects that social capital can have and is an easy way to understand the concept in the context of how it impacts our everyday lives.
We intuitively understand that we can derive benefits from our social relationships with others, whether it be as simple as finding a reliable mechanic (which can save you money), or borrowing a cup of sugar from a neighbour (which can save you time), or finding a new job or client (which can make you money). These are just a few tangible examples of the benefits of social capital, there are many more. In fact, social capital is what allows humans to collaborate, coordinate, and coexist. It is essential to the human social existence.
Social capital is fundamentally about how people interact with each other. It is about 1) the nature of our social connections, and 2) the norms and shared understandings that influence our action and interaction.
Most scholars agree that social capital is multidimensional and is an umbrella term for a range of social factors such as networks, norms, trust, social identity, belonging, and many more.
Social capital is about knowing a lot of people well, but it’s more than that. It’s about having strong positive relationships embedded in positive social structures with a lot of people from a variety of backgrounds and positions.
The following points illustrate how social capital is multidimensional:
- A large social network is important because knowing more people gives us access to more potential resources, both in terms of total value and variety of resources. A larger network also increases the likelihood of access to those resources when required. For example, you may know a mechanic who can help with your car, but if she is on holidays at the same time your car breaks down then you cannot access that resource. Chance plays an important role the manifestation of social capital (but is rarely acknowledged in the literature). If you have a larger network then you are more likely to have more than one contact for any given resource, so increasing the likelihood of access to that resource when required.
- Strong relationships develop over time through repeated interactions. It takes time to develop deep connections and to establish norms that, if positive, can provide access to more valuable resources. For example, a strong relationship may facilitate access to more sensitive and richer information.
- Positive relationships are also important because social capital exists where there is trust, mutual respect, goodwill, favours, or obligation. Consider the different ‘value’ of a relationship with someone you disrespected, or lied to, or stole from, compared to with someone whom you have helped or supported.
- Relationships with people from diverse positions is also important because not all ties have equal value. Everything else being equal a tie with someone who has access to more resources is more valuable than a tie with some with someone who has access to few resources. Keeping in mind that there are wide variety of resources that have value. Material goods and services are obvious, but it can also include aspects of human capital such as knowledge, skills, and wisdom, as well as social capital such as introductions to a ‘friend of a friend’. It can include power and influence, as well as emotional resources such as compassion, caring, support – for example, someone who will listen to your problems.
- Positive social structures relate to the social context within which your relationships exist. For example, within the context of society, your organisation, your family, or any other grouping within which the relationship is grounded. The social structures, including social norms, provide the background context for interaction. They influence individual behaviour and set the tone for social interactions between group members. Social structures provide the background context for interaction even where no previous relationship exists.
- Social capital started as an academic concept, having been widely applied to a very wide range of phenomenon in the social sciences over the last few decades. The concept has even spread outside of academia to economic and community development, politics, business, health, and a range of other areas.
Unfortunately, social capital is not a unified theory. Social capital has been approached from different perspectives and different disciplines, resulting in a huge variety of definitions and conceptualisations. There is disagreement about what is and is not social capital, confusion about how to measure social capital, and widespread use of different terminology.
The commonalities of most definitions of social capital are that they focus on social structures that have productive benefits. Definitions generally have some combination of role-based or rule-based (structural) and mental or attitudinal (cognitive) origins.
In addition to different theoretical approaches to social capital, there are differences between conceptualisations at different levels of analysis:
- At the level of the individual, social capital tends to focus on social networks and the characteristics of these relationships.
- At the group or organisation level, there tends to also be a focus on social norms and social structures such as roles and rules.
- At the community or societal level, the focus tends to be on trust, trustworthiness, civic norms, association membership, and voluntary activities.
- Despite the various criticisms of social capital, the concept has great potential to transform our society and our economy.
https://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/what-is-social-capital/
