TOOLS OF CHANGE §Social capital is becoming very „sexy“ issue - it comes with a promise of understanding of modern world and modern society. § §Social capital deals with social nets, relations and interconnections and their influence in reaching goals. § §Social capital highlights importance of values such as trust and civic participation. § §Fukuyama suggests that social capital has an impact on economic growth, Putnam considers social capital to be an elementary part of stabilized and functional democracy. § Social capital - new or old phenomenon? §Does the concept of social capital brings something new, or it just repeats well-known facts from classical sociology?: §Tocqueville has been connecting well-functioning American democracy with high level of civic participation. §Tönnies wrote about shift from collective Gemeinschaft to individualized Gesellschaft. §Marx and Engels came with an idea of „bounded solidarity“ describing creation of group cohesion caused by negative circumstances. §Simmel mentions reciprocal relations, relations, norms, and obligations that are key elements of social networks a stresses how important impact have atomized cities on a life of modern society. §Durkheim highlights necessity of internalization of group values and describes development of anomy caused by extreme individualization and by absence of communal life. §In the work of Max Weber one can find idea of „enforced trust“ and he describes various mechanisms used by formal institutions and social groups in order to secure expected social behavior. Types of capitals §Róna-Tas distinguish two types of classification of capitals. § §1. Substantive approach. It distinguish physical, human, and social capitals. § §2. Institutional approach. It divides types of capitals according to types of institutions that offer their accumulation - physical capital becomes economic, human capital becomes cultural, and social capital is usually being replaced by political one. § §Pierre Bourdieu´s approach. He divides individual, objectivized, and institutionalized cultural capital and economic, social, informational, and political capitals. Bourdieu adds also symbolical capital that he considers to be superior. Pierre Bourdieu §Pierre Bourdieu elaborated first systematic analysis of a social capital when he wrote about advantages and opportunities created by membership in various communities. § §He defined social capital as an „aggregate of real or potential sources that are inter-connected with ownership of a network more or less institutionalized relations of mutual recognition. In other words every member of the group collectively owns a capital. § §According to Bourdieu social capital covers relations in a broad family, neighborhood, or among collaborators which mean long-term obligations - feelings of gratitude, respect, friendship, etc. Benefits are deriving from membership in a group and they are core-stones of solidarity. Social capital makes individual trustworthy and allows him/her to act more effectively. § Robert Putnam §Putnam suggests, however, that social capital compete with human capital as a factor of individual effectiveness. He suggests that income is generated more by social contacts than by education. § §From the societal perspective social capital helps to develop economic growth and democratic institutions. § §Social capital, according to Putnam, is embodying characteristics of social organizations such as trust, norms, or social networks that can enhance productivity of a society by enlarging possibilities of coordinated activities. Classifications of different types and dimensions of social capital §Formal versus informal social capital. § §Strong versus weak social capital. § §Inside oriented versus outside oriented social capital. (Club goods versus public goods) § §Bridging versus bonding versus linking social capital. Measuring of social capital §According to National Statistics social relations, formal and informal social networks, membership in groups, trust, reciprocity, and civic engagement are among key indicators of a social capital. § §Concept is therefore multidimensional and there is a need to measure it in all dimensions. § §Social capital is understood rather as an ownership of the group than ownership of individuals. DIMENSIONS OF SOCIAL CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT §Questions derive from following dimensions: § §Participation, social engagement, commitments – involvement with the local groups, volunteer organizations, clubs, activity in local affairs; §Control, self-efficacy – perception of control over the local affairs, awareness of influence in decision-making, in health, satisfaction with life; §Perception of structures or characteristics of the community standard – satisfaction with services, opinions on local issues/problems; §Social interactions, social networks, social support – contacts with friends, family, neighbors, depth of socialization network, perception of social support; §Trust, reciprocity, social cohesion – trust in the others, in institutions and in public services, perception of the shared values, life expectancy in the region. § § MEASURING OF SOCIAL CAPITAL §Social relations and social networks are among key-stones of a social capital. § §3 types of networks have been distinguished: §Informal networks (divided to relations with relatives, friends, neighbors, and collaborators); §Generalized relations (divided to relations with local people, people in general, and on social participation); §Institutional relations (divided into civic participation and relations to institutions). § MEASURING OF SOCIAL CAPITAL §Three basic elements were evaluated according to four criteria: § §Structure (number, frequency, and proximity of relations); §Quality (trust, reciprocity, support, shared values, tolerance); §Diversity (range of social networks across the structure of society; homogeneity and heterogeneity); §Cohesion (mutual knowledge of particular members of a network). § MEASURING OF SOCIAL CAPITAL §Further on characteristics of respondents have been distinguished. These characteristics are not independent variables, they serve as indicators of social capital: § §Characteristics of a region, (security, cultural and economic possibilities, quality of environment); §Personal characteristics (age, gender, health status, satisfaction with life, ethnicity, religion, geographic mobility); §Resources (socio-economic background, education, job); §Family characteristics (existence of a partner, marriage, children, character of a household). § Trust to institutions §Don´t trust at all(1); Mostly don´t trust(2); Mostly do trust(3); Fully trust(4); in %: § §Government 43,5 39,3 14,3 2,6 §Parliament 42,4 38,9 13,9 2,6 §Local government 22,1 40,2 26,3 7,5 §European Union 23,4 45,0 22,7 4,9 §Police 26,5 39,7 25,8 4,9 §Courts 29,1 39,5 22,5 6,0 §Media 30,7 40,0 22,3 3,3 §Educational system 17,9 41,1 35,1 3,5 §Health care 19,6 46,1 27,2 3,3 §Public media 26,0 39,7 26,3 6,2 § Do you know other people well? §In case of a difficult situation in your life do you know some people who can intervene on your behalf? § §Nobody 16,1% §Few 40,6% §More than few 32,2% §A lot 8,2% Help to others and connections §Helping others I help mostly myself (in %; from I completely disagree to I fully agree): § §8,2 7,1 10,4 7,7 20,3 8,4 7,5 10,4 6,8 12,6 § § §In order to succeed in life it is important to have connections on important places (in %; from I fully disagree up to I fully agree): § §8,8 7,1 6,4 8,8 19,4 7,1 10,8 10,6 7,3 13,0 § § General trust §Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted, or one should be always careful?(n %) § §One should be always careful § versus §Most of people can be trusted: § §Never can be trusted 23,0 §Mostly cannot be trusted 50,3 §Mostly can be trusted 22,5 §Can be always trusted 3,8 § § § Mistreatment versus seriousness §Do you think that others would try to mistreat you in case they would have a chance, or would they be serious?(in %) § §Most of people would try to mistreat me § versus §Most of people would be serious § § §Most of people would mistreat me 12,4 §They would rather mistreat me 49,4 §They would be rather serious 31,6 §Most of people would be serious 6,2 Helping others versus helping myself? §Would you say that people try to help others or they mostly take care of themselves?(in %) § §People mostly take care of themselves § versus §People mostly try to help others § § §People take care mostly of themselves 20,1 §People rather take care of themselves 50,3 §People rather try to help others 24,5 §People mostly try to help others 3,8 What is acceptable? §2 situations that happens regularly - are they ok or not really? § §Fully employed person takes a weekend job that is payed in cash and not taxed. §It is absolutely fine 25,6% §It is more or less fine 31,1% §It is rather not ok 28,9% §It is absolutely wrong 13% § §A person pays in a shop, he gives 100 Euro to a cashier, she gives back cash like from 200 Euro. Person realizes a mistake but keeps the money. §It is absolutely fine 3,3% §It is more or less fine 9,7% §It is rather not ok 26,9% §It is absolutely wrong 60% Social participation - taking part on group activities §Did you take part on some of group activities? (average - 3,29) § §Every week 16,8 % §Two or three times a month 19,0 % §Once a month 10,8 % §Several times a year 22,1 % §Practically never 27,8 % §Other 1,1 % Time devoted to social participation §How much time do you spend by various activities in clubs, associations, or other organized groups? (average - 2,57) § §None 43,0 % §1 to 5 hours monthly 23,8 % §6 to 10 hours monthly 7,5 % §11 to 15 hours monthly 5,5 % §16 to 20 hours monthly 3,5 % §More than 20 hours monthly 4,6 % §Don´t know 10,4 % Religious social participation §How often do you take part on religious services or religious meetings? (average - 2,64) § §Every week 46,4 % §Twice or three times a month 10,2 % §Once a month 5,1 % §Several times a year 14,1 % §Practically never 11,7 % §Only on Christmas, weddings, funerals, etc. 10,2 %