Talk:Social capital/Draft: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Roger A. Lohmann
No edit summary
m (Text replacement - "insurgency" to "insurgency")
 
(38 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{subpages}}
{{archive box|auto=short}}
{{archive box|auto=short}}


The first draft of this article was written by Mark Middleton, a graduate student in sociology at West Virginia University. Unlike many contemporary approaches to social capital, this initial definition places explicit emphasis on economic capital. This article is part of the WVU contribution to the [[CZ:Eduzendium]] initiative.


[[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 18:50, 2 January 2008 (CST)
==Ready Now?==


Is it intended to consider the economic influence of social capital?-[[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 02:35, 10 June 2008 (CDT)
Once again, interest in adding to and editing this item has flagged and it has been nearly two months since there has been any activity. Is it ready to approve now? There is an outstanding call for illustrations, but no one seems to have come up with anything. Personally, I haven't a clue how to visualize social capital. Any ideas? It looks like there are many possible related articles, only some of which have made it to the Related Articles pages. This seems to indicate approving only the main page at this point.
: [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 02:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


Roger - I have been encouraged by your email to give some thought to the possibility of expanding this article to include specific economic effects. This turns out not to be straightforward because different categories may have different effects, and quantification of those effects is bedevilled by measurement difficulties. In the end I settled on the draft structure of headings that you see. The "economic significance" heading would contain a range of sub-paragraphs, the structure of which I hope to develop as I attempt to draft the text. I am taking it for granted, on the basis of you email, that this will not conflict with the Eduzendium project. What do you think? - [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 09:22, 23 June 2008 (CDT)
: I have nothing further to add to this article (having just added some wikilinks), and my only misgiving about giving it approval concerns the first paragraph, which  seems to me to give an impression of learnedness that is more appropriate to a contribution to an academic journal than to an encyclopedia article.
: A minor problem is that it is drafted in a mixture of American English and British English. If you could make a ruling about which version to adopt, one of us could put that right.
::[[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 11:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
:::Since the original metadata page I created indicated AE, I think we should stick with AE. Will you make the conversions? [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 13:18, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


It is hard to see why a reference to the Social Capital Foundation has been placed under the heading of definitions. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 15:44, 26 June 2008 (CDT) I have now transferred it to the bibliography subpage. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 09:57, 5 July 2008 (CDT)  
:::The illustration does not have to be complicated, it should just provide some context. An example of the kind that I think might be useful is [http://www.mmorpgrealm.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/gold-farming-figure-9.png here]. One could use overlapping circles or other visualizations for the individual items, and we could turn it into a series of illustrations to be included in all of the concerned articles in a way that highlights the one on whose page it is, but links (like the [[CZ:Biology Week]] banner) to the other [[Capital (economics)]] articles. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 11:37, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


As I have given further consideration to detailed matters such as the measurement of social capital, I have felt impelled to make a few amendments to Mark Middleton's draft. One reason for doing so is a realisation that it is unwise to be dogmatic about the effects of social capital. For example, Mark's opening statement was, in my opinion, mistaken in implying that its effects  are always beneficial (think of the Robbers Cave experiments) and I have amended it to avoid that implication. Another reason is my conviction that, while we should present the reader with an account of the received wisdom, we should leave it to him/her to decide whether to believe it.  That has led me to insert qualifications on the lines of "it is generally held that" here and there. Thirdly, I have become aware of the danger of the circularity trap of defining social capital as what makes people better off and then using its statistics to demonstrate that it makes people better off. Some of my amendments were to avoid pre-empting what has to be said about that problem (yet to be drafted). However, I should welcome comments on all this, especially in view of my lack of sociology qualifications. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 05:32, 27 June 2008 (CDT)
::::I don't see anything wrong with Daniel's example, and if it is considered to be helpful to the reader, I have no objection to its insertion (perhaps on a Tutorials subpage?) [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 11:59, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


A late realisation that this topic remains a matter of controversy - concerning such matters as how it should be defined, what it should include and how it should be measured - has led me to add some further qualifications and to add a concluding section  for objections and qualifications. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 06:02, 1 July 2008 (CDT)
:::::The thing that's wrong with the suggested graph is that it is completely inconclusive (like many such illustrations). It says only that all forms of capital are related. (Well, duh. Isn't that why they all have the word capital in the term?) Are those meant to be causal links? Or just signs of connection? I still agree that in theory an illustration might add something, but I don't think this one does. [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 13:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


The text that is to appear under the heading of "Sociological implications" is being withheld for the time being, in the hope that a sociology scholar will come forward to make a contribution. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 09:57, 5 July 2008 (CDT)
:::::The only thing wrong with the description is it has no content. What "individual items" would be pictured by those overlapping circles? Venn diagrams are a mathematical formalism. But how does it apply here? What "series of illustrations" should be included? That's where the suggestion breaks down, I suspect, and why no one has followed up with any examples: I know of visualizations of trading, markets, third sectors, etc. but I don't "see" social capital illustrated; nor apparently does anyone else. If you want illustrations, Daniel, you're going to have to supply them. It's a good idea, but it appears we lack the inspiration. [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 13:18, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


Subject to the possibility of comments to respond to, I have nothing further to contribute to this article and I now submit it for approval.   [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 09:48, 28 July 2008 (CDT)
::::::I simply don't buy that a concept cannot be illustrated. I have difficulties supplying illustrations because it's not my specialty, but I had another look around and found things like [http://www.collectiveintelligence.net/files/SocialCapital.map031502.ins.gif this organizational chart (which would have to be simplified)] or [http://www.slideshare.net/CameronNeylon/science-in-the-open the depiction of social capital in research on slides 103-107 of this presentation] to be a useful starting point. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 13:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


==Some suggestions==
:::::::Well, let's hope someone will read this and agree with you that your examples show something worth presenting and come up with some usable illustrations. In which case, I certainly have no objections. This is (broadly) my area, and my point was (and is): 1) I agree that all concepts can, in principle, be illustrated. 2) This one hasn't been (that amazingly complex CI map, notwithstanding); 3) I personally can't visualize the social capital concept and don't have the graphics skill to do so; 4) No one else has risen to your call, and we don't have an illustrations department on call; 5) That all just means, it's a good idea, but who is going to do it? BTW, I didn't see the point of slides 103-7 at all; I just see pretty pictures done by somebody's marketing department.
Here are a couple of thoughts I had as I started reading through the text:
:::::::The real question now is, is this an important enough point that we should wait with approving this article until someone comes up with something? [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 14:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


* The intro seems a little brief. Maybe it could be fleshed out with some statements conveying a sense of the signficance of the social capital concept within the social sciences? Also, the last part of the sentence there -- "to facilitate their actions" -- seems a bit limiting. If I recall correctly, social capital can be mobilized towards ends other than coordination and efficiency; e.g. democratic and institutional stability.
::::::::I won't stand in the way of this approval (and I can't anyway), but I think the handling of illustrations merits some further thoughts, for which I have started [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,3068.0.html this forum thread]. Hope to see you there. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:58, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
* In the "Definitions" section, there seems to be a lot of surname dropping, which assumes a lot of knowledge (of both the literature pertaining to social capital and scholarly communication conventions) on the part of readers. It might be a good idea to fill in the first names and perhaps include some identifying information about them (as is done, for example, in the second paragraph: "The sociologist James Coleman ...").


I'll probably be back with more tomorrow or Wednesday. [[User:Shamira Gelbman|Shamira Gelbman]] 02:58, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
(Undent) Look at the illustrations in insurgency. If you strip out the specific counterinsurgency force, especially in Kilcullen's three pillars, I think you get close. I'm willing to redraw that to something more specific. It's probably more political social capital, and I'm not as insistent about graphics as others. --[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 17:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


: Shamira, Roger:  I will think about expanding the introduction, but the definitions paragraph was the work of the original author, and its sources are unfamiliar to me (a mere economist). My preference would be to cut most of them out, but if you consider them to be helpful, perhaps you could tidy them up, Shamira?  Or perhaps you could help me to do so, Roger? -[[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 05:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
:You see some sort of a connection between the Kilcullen chart and social capital that I'm afraid I don't understand. Has anyone other than you drawn this link between counter-insurgency and social capital? Or, are we getting into original research here? [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 21:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 
: I've added in the first names for recognition, but I'm opposed to leaving that section out completely. That would tilt the article too far in the direction of "mere economics." ;-) As Shamira notes, the concept is not just used in the context of economic production, but also as it relates to political stability, not to mention organizational performance and social development. It truly is an interdisciplinary topic.
 
: I'm going to wait to see what Shamira comes up with for the introduction. Since she says "two or three days" I'm also going to move the approval date back a couple more days to give her a chance to work out what she thinks needs to be done.[[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 14:06, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 
::"Definitions" seems to be a bit of a misnomer -- there's some defining going on in that section, but it seems to be at least as interested in establishing the geneaology of both the term and the underlying concept of social capital. In addition to perhaps renaming it, it might also help to restructure it, moving from the term/concept's origins (including both the Hanifan usage and the last paragraph's references to Madison etc.) to the more contemporary definitions. I think it would also be useful to have some discussion of where all those definitions are coming from (at least, which disciplines) and how they relate to each other. [[User:Shamira Gelbman|Shamira Gelbman]] 14:29, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 
== The contribution of Elinor Ostrom ==
 
It occurs to me that the work of [[Elinor Ostrom]] might deserve a reference in this article. I had not come across it when I drafted the economics paragraph and I only know of it now because of her Nobel Prize award[http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2009/ecoadv09.pdf]. Her work on iterated games might be thought relevant  [http://www.elsevier.com/framework_aboutus/pdfs/Dilemma-games-game-parameters-and-matching-protocols.pdf], although an alternative would be its inclusion in the - at present, underdeveloped -  article on [[Game theory]] and a cross-reference to that article in this. I should in either case need time to track down and read some more of her work. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 07:14, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 
: I would agree we need an article (perhaps several) on her work, but I'm not sure this is the place for more than a mention. In (I think it was) Governing the Commons, she bases her discussion of fisheries, pastures and other common resource pools on parallels she draws between Mancur Olson, Garrett Hardin's "tragedy of the commons" and The Prisoner's Dilemma game. Resource pools (common or not) may be another expression for capital, which makes for a possible connection, but I'm not aware of any explicit use by her of "social capital," per se in this context. [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 14:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 
::I just started a new entry on [[Elinor Ostrom]]. [[User:Shamira Gelbman|Shamira Gelbman]] 14:36, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 
::Great! [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 15:01, 20 October 2009 (UTC) And I added a crude bibliography, harvested from the first 200 entries of a Google Scholar search. (I hope I got all the duplicates out.) That lot include seven mentions of "social capital" in titles of publications between 1994 and 2007. What should that mean for inclusion here? (We're verging on original research, I suspect, since I'm haven't seen any journal articles with titles like "Elinor Ostrom's contributions to social capital, and the one book I'm aware of reviewing her (and Vincent's) work doesn't have any index entries for social capital." [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 12:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 
== If you are moving approval anyway... ==
 
The lead sentence of "objections and qualifications"
:''The consensus in favor of any of the approaches to social capital is not universal.''
needs, I think, a bit of wordsmithing -- "There is no single consensus approach", perhaps?
[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 14:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 
: Okay. Gotcha. That makes sense. [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 14:32, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 
==Move Definitions?==
 
Since most of the discussion in the current Definitions section deals with sociological approaches, and there is already a minimal and fairly generic definition in the introduction, would it make sense to relocate the entire present "Definitions" section to the "Sociological Implications" section further down the page?
:[[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 14:32, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 
:I don't think so -- defining the concept seems to be a very different discussion than explaining its implications. That said, I think the definitions section could be structured more effectively (see above), and maybe expanded a bit to incorporate more from other disciplines. More generally, I think it would pay to really play up the interdisciplinarity of "social capital" throughout the article. [[User:Shamira Gelbman|Shamira Gelbman]] 14:41, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


:Sorry, I moved it before I saw your note. (This gets confusing!) I took out the word definition and renamed the header to Social and Political Implications. The point is to differentiate Nick's largely economic handling from the multi-disciplinary (political and social?) usages. I like the direction you suggest for restructuring the section toward explaining its implications and focusing on the interdisciplinarity but I think that can work in this location; I'd recommend you try the modifications you mentioned and let's see how it reads. I'm done for now. [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 15:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
::Here's the problem. In such concepts as [[peace operations#nation-building|nation-building]] and counterinsurgency, there's a very strong match to the concepts in social capital. The term, however, does not seem to be used in the counterinsurgency literature. Perhaps some of the problem is that social capital tends to be described in Western terms, where the counterinsurgents (e.g., [[Iraq War, insurgency]]) tend to be talking in terms of building, and then transcending, tribal structures. I'd call it synthesis to say that social capital broke down with the Islamic sectarian conflict in Iraq, and in the Balkans, where Serbs, Croatians, Muslims, and others had lived peacefully side-by-side. --[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 22:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


::Trying to put myself in the shoes of a reader coming at the article with fresh eyes and not a lot of background knowledge, I think the definitions section should go back to where it was. It can be disconcerting to jump straight into a phenomenon's components without first establishing what that phenomenon is and how it came about. Put differently, I think there's something to be said for moving sequentially from definition (i.e. defining the whole) --> components (breaking the whole down into parts) --> implications. On that note, measurement might belong before implications as well. [[User:Shamira Gelbman|Shamira Gelbman]] 16:38, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
:::Insurgency, and indeed urban decay, are, to me, examples of the lack of social capital. Is, for example, the [[James Q. Wilson]] broken windows theory of urban policing an attempt to invest capital in repairs?  One of the marks of pacification, at the neighborhood level, in Iraq was when people of different tribes and ethnicities would pick up trash.


::Okay, I'm not sure I agree, but its back. (I left measurement where it is until it's clear what you can do with this section.) [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 17:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
:::So, the argument can be made that social capital puts multiple groups into each of Kilcullen's pillars. In the former Yugoslavia, there was quite a bit of discussion of how there was local government until the Serbs/Bosnians/Croats/etc. wanted others out of their turf. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 22:03, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


== Illustrations? ==
== Changes after approval nomination ==


I am specialized in imaging, so I may be biased, but wouldn't it be possible to capture the essence (or at least some important aspects) of Social capital in a figure? I am primarily thinking of interdependences with other social or economic variables, but there would certainly be other options. I do read quite a bit outside my fields of expertise, but if there is no visual guidance as to the essential points (in my field, that's almost always the figures), I rarely embark on a piece of text, especially in unfamiliar waters where they tend to be hard to digest anyway. Having a good illustration may well lure people in — here and elsewhere. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:12, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Since I see you added some text, Roger, let me bring up something that I've been wondering: is there anything published about things leading to the encouragement, or even imposition, of social capital? The first thing that comes to mind is James Q. Wilson's "broken windows" policing, but I'm also thinking of counterinsurgency work where tribal or ethnic groups were subsidized or encouraged to work on community building/maintenance.  


:Some kind of flow chart, perhaps? [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 17:32, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
There's even the situation where the previously at-odds residents start bonding in the face of a common enemy.  Al-Qaeda doctrine, for example, is to marry into local clans, but this created friction in Somalia and Iraq. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 12:28, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


::Yes, that would be a possibility. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 18:39, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
: I'm not aware of anyone publishing anything connecting this to either Wilson's broken windows theory or counterinsurgency, but the connection strikes me as a sound one. This probably relates to William J. Wilson's work on inner cities also. The problem is we may be wandering off the CZ reservation, and bordering on original research in exploring those connections. You've raised this point before, and its a good one, but I'm not convinced those points should be in the basic social capital article. Would a paragraph/section in some entry related to counterinsurgency and linking back to this one work?
:[[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 19:11, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


==Just good thoughts==
::Perhaps it could make the "original synthesis" category if the ideas were simply placed side-by-side...maybe even as an extended annotation in the Bibliography? 
I have no special expertise on the topic, although some special cases may exist in counterinsurgency theory. Nevertheless, the collaboration is great to see.


It's obviously in a content elucidation phase, but I'd be happy to do some flow edits when the authors would think it useful. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 17:49, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
::Certainly, there could be links or Related Articles. They should, however, have an introduction...even if as simple as "While other disciplines have addressed ideas that share some principles with social capital, social scientists are not known to have published specific unifying research."  I don't like the word "research" there -- "synthesis" is more apt.


==Citation Style==
::Another thing along these lines would be some of Edward T. Hall's work on the American Southwest, where, after Latinos gained political power, there was a near revolt (i.e., loss of social capital) until it was realized that each group had a coherent but different view of the roles of police and courts. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 19:18, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
We've got an odd mixture of APA-style reference-list footnote citations (though APA doesn't really do footnotes) and something resembling Chicago Manual on the main page and a lot of idiosyncratic stuff on the bibliography subpage. Any objections to making all the footnotes Chicago style and the bibliography list all APA? [[User:Shamira Gelbman|Shamira Gelbman]] 19:01, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
===Research update===
Driving back from an errand, I was about to suggest that we create an "original research needed/possible" section, which remains a good idea. It seemed a decent idea, however, to look for some publications.
*Insurgency/Counterinsurgency work referring to social capital
**[http://afraf.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/109/435/231  Social capital  and civil war: The Dinka communities in Sudan’s civil war]]
**[http://www.carlisle.army.mil/USAWC/Parameters/Articles/09autumn/gregg.pdf Beyond Population Engagement: Understanding Counterinsurgency]
**[http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=5bo2IX5oftAC&oi=fnd&pg=PP9&dq=counterinsurgency+%22social+capital%22&ots=-AocQSbohh&sig=wdcRtTD9X92__49c3Mh15LSWfzo#v=onepage&q=counterinsurgency%20%22social%20capital%22&f=false Violent conflict and the transformation of social capital]
**[http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub751.pdf Understanding Indian Insurgencies: Implications for Counterinsurgency  Operations in the Third World]
*comments mentioning social capital, by [[James Q. Wilson]]
**[http://www.acton.org/publications/randl/rl_interview_313.php The Free Society Requires a Moral Sense, Social Capital ]
**[http://www.city-journal.org/html/5_1_welfare_reform.html Welfare Reform and Character Development]
**[http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/bowling-with-others-10936 Bowling with Others]
--[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 22:50, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


::No objection from me! Go for it! (All of CZ is a citation style mix, but it would be good to be consistent within articles. [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 12:50, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
:Does anyone have full-text access to the first article about the Dinka and the third book?


==New Wrinkle re: Definitions==
:Do we need a stub, at least, on Wilson's theories?  I'm no expert.  I may try on Hall, simply because I find him one of the most delightful writers in social science. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 16:31, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


Turns out Hanifan wasn't first to use the term after all; In the ''Political Theory'' article I listed on the bibliography subpage (freely accessible to all [http://web1.millercenter.org/apd/colloquia/pdf/col_2003_1031_farr.pdf here (pdf)]), the earliest usage is traced back at least to [[John Dewey]] in 1900 and perhaps to [[Karl Marx]] in 1867 ("gesellschaftliche Kapital") and other political economists during the late 19th century. [[User:Shamira Gelbman|Shamira Gelbman]] 22:47, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
===Next political step===
:It certainly appears in [http://books.google.de/books?id=cuh06RV_8GUC&pg=PA71&lpg=PA71&dq=%22Das+gesellschaftliche+Kapital%22+marx&source=bl&ots=VoWu6Mx2Fi&sig=cwWxHAZf45oLeJZWtKlqjo3oaA0&hl=en&ei=RpzfSpCLL42asgaDkpmyDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=13&ved=0CE0Q6AEwDA#v=onepage&q=%22Das%20gesellschaftliche%20Kapital%22%20marx&f=false Volume II] (1885). --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 23:51, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
A first draft is now in the article, and I'm quite open to flow edits on it. Hopefully, this is a reasonable level of detail -- to go into more depth, there is the insurgency article, which could do with more links to social capital. Perhaps some of you might consider working on that and helping get it to Approval. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 22:41, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


::These are interesting...And well worth noting. In that case, I would think the text should indicate that 1) Putnam brought the Hanifan connection to light as part of the general modern revival of the concept; 2) Hanifan's 1920 book involves more than a mention (and a definition). There is a full chapter on the topic, as I recall; and 3) It appears from what you indicate that Dewey and Marx are simply mentions. Perhaps all of these should be combined with Nick's mentions further down of Alfred Marshall and J.S. Mill? [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 01:40, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
:Something to consider: how Western-oriented is the article in general?  The idea of patron-client relationships establishing social capital runs through the military references. I have a sense that much of the rest of the article, however, focuses on the idea of voluntary peer association as the core of social capital; am I reading something that is not there? [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 00:54, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


== Toward Approval ==


Hi all, looking this over, it looks like we need one more editor on board here before we can lock this article on June 2.  [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 00:51, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


== Related topics ==
::Nick Gardner has signed on.
::[[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 15:54, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


I've done some rethinking, and now renaming of [[models of the stability of states‎]], apropos of the problems of states or regions that, among other things, lack social capital. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 15:44, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
:::<s>Alright then, we're looking good for June 2, barring any unforeseen circumstances. [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 16:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)</s>


==More on Ostrom and Social Capital==
::::Just wanted to make sure everyone is aware that [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Social_capital&oldid=100675590 these edits] are not included in the approved version that everyone is signed on to.  If we want these edits included, Roger needs to update the version number in the metadata tempalte and '''all three editors''' will need to let it be known that they agree here on this talk page so that when I return on June 2, 2010, it will be apparent that you all agree on the same version.  If that doesn't make sense, make sure to contact me on my talk page before June 2.  Otherwise, [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Social_capital&oldid=100675590 this] is the version that will be approved. Thanks in advance!  [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 16:29, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


The bibliography I posted in the new [Elinor Ostrom] article includes seven references with social capital in the title. I've posted them in the bibliography of this article.
::Right, Matt. There have been a number of minor changes, and the addition of an illustration is in process. I have no problems with the changes made, and if anyone does, please let me know today if possible. I will update the version number as soon as we get the illustration settled in. (I'll probably wait until tomorrow. That will give anyone who isn't satisfied one more day to raise issues, but we should be pretty well set by then.
::[[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 16:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


I haven't read any of them and don't have time to, but if someone is interested, these look like the basis for an addition to the mention of Ostrom in this entry.
:::Okay, Roger, sounds good.  It looks like ya'll (southern for you all) have it under control. I'll let you have at it (southern for 'handle it') till June 2. :) [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 16:50, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
[[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 01:40, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
::::You must be feeling very regional today! ;-) Me too. I think we'uns (Western Pennsylvanian for all of us) have it about done up (West Virginian for finished.) Are we done? You betcha! (Minnesotan for certainly). As soon as Howard is a'done a'fixin (again, West Virginian) one last bit. That illustration Milton done up for us'uns is a real knee slapper! (That was fun!) ;-) [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 17:06, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


==Ready?==
:::::Hehe (text shorthand for Haha), Roger, that was a barrel of laughs (LOL)! [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 17:10, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


There haven't been any edits on this article for more than two weeks. Is everyone satisfied now? Should we try this one for approval again?
:::::Anyone read "Digging the Weans"?  
:[[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 02:12, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
::I should be content [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 14:30, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
:::I am more on the user side here but really would appreciate some sort of illustration of the key aspects, e.g. relation to other kinds of capital, or how social capital interacts with other aspects of society. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:40, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
::::You have prompted me to read it again, Daniel, and on reflection I think you have a point. I fear that many educated laymen would find the opening paragraph dauntingly academic. As an alternative to deleting or delaying that paragraph, I suggest the insertion above it of a brief paragraph that explains the concept in plain non-technical language without academic attributions. Any volunteers? [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 16:29, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
[[Image:Kilcullen3Pillars.png|400px| thumb |Kilcullen's Three Pillars, not containing explicit social capital &mdash; ''but could it?'']]
:::::For me, this is a "high impact" article. While I haven't seen much use of the term social capital in the theoretical literature on [[insurgency#Political rhetoric, myths and models]], [[weak state|weak]] and [[failed state]]s, I see it as fitting very well. See, for example, the  annual ''Failed State Index'' produced by a joint project between ''[[Foreign Policy (magazine)|Foreign Policy]]'' and the [[Fund for Peace]], which rates on indices including:<ref name=FSI-2009>{{citation
| url =http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/06/22/2009_failed_states_index_interactive_map_and_rankings
| title = The Failed States Index 2009}}</ref>
:::::*Demographic pressures
:::::*Refugees and [[internally displaced person]]s
:::::*Group grievances
:::::*Human flight
:::::*Unequal development
:::::*Economic decline
:::::*Delegitimization of the state
:::::*Public services
:::::*Human rights
:::::*Security apparatus
:::::*Factionalized Elites
:::::*Foreign interventions
:::::Let me offer a few standard models and see if there's a way to modify them to include social capital.  Clearly, this would be original synthesis.


:::::If you read through some of the material in [[Iraq War, insurgency]] and especially [[Iraq War, Surge]], you may agree that some of the more successful efforts in stabilization (see also [[peace operations]]) built a sense of social capital (or some equivalent) in ethnically fragmented societies. After the ratification of one document, one local leader said "for the first time in my life, I fell like an Iraqi." It wasn't meant nationalistically, but as an idea that [[Islamic sectarian conflict]] was being overcome. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 16:31, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::Matt still should write an article distinguishing "y'all" from "all y'all". As a newcomer to New England, I still am working on "yup" vs. "ayup". The fishermen with whom I work also remind me that while one may prosecute a submarine contact, it's not what you do to a scallop. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 17:26, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
::::::Howard, I'm wondering if you have had a chance yet in New England to paark ya caar in the Haavard Yaard? [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 18:01, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


:::::::Good idea! [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 06:17, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
:::::::No, I take the T to Haaavard.  There is a story, though, of the "12 or fewer items" line in a Cambridge supermarket. An obvious student, with heaped cart, went through, and the cashier commented when he paid, "tell me, is it that you are from Harvard and can't count, or MIT and can't read?" [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 18:25, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


::::::I appreciate your re-reading, Nick, but instead of another paragraph, I would prefer a figure or diagram of the kind Howard just proposed. A few examples from a brief Google search that go into this direction are [http://images.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http://www.robertamsterdam.com/socialcapital1029.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.robertamsterdam.com/2007/10/russia_facing_a_social_capital_deficit.htm&usg=__JGhpZpMZggI6LfRYmYCKkYkZ1oo=&h=307&w=569&sz=47&hl=en&start=1&sig2=n-gL-imK-U5XtptUIgrysg&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=mMk6ysvBw32rvM:&tbnh=72&tbnw=134&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsocial%2Bcapital%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1&ei=RUMQS4GKA5O4sgaFrZmNAw here], [http://images.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http://www.stat.fi/tup/julkaisut/isbn_950-467-602-2_luku1_en_001.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.stat.fi/tup/julkaisut/isbn_950-467-602-2_luku1_en.html&usg=__Fa52XwLvCix0CGdqpgJKkXdwMaA=&h=530&w=475&sz=16&hl=en&start=4&sig2=eSi5apFxjRhXpkg4T8liTg&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=QBfN28wUZswmFM:&tbnh=132&tbnw=118&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsocial%2Bcapital%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1&ei=RUMQS4GKA5O4sgaFrZmNAw here] and [http://images.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/canada/regions/atlantic/Publications/Babies_boardrooms/figure_03.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/canada/regions/atlantic/Publications/Babies_boardrooms/4-eng.php&usg=__fn461YrqsldJ7rmKMQWIY610BzQ=&h=353&w=403&sz=35&hl=en&start=24&sig2=OaBWoHD5XaxBmhgzKKo72g&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=P9o7JWKC1WOyHM:&tbnh=109&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsocial%2Bcapital%26ndsp%3D21%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN%26start%3D21%26um%3D1&ei=P0QQS8OVIIufsAb53eyIAw here] but I suppose some textbooks on the subjects have better ones (don't have anything like this at hand right now). --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:31, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
==Finished!==
::::::: I would prefer to leave the article as it is. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 06:17, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Okay, with that last round of revisions bringing in some rather unexpected and very interesting literature on social capital thinking in regard to insurgencies and counter-insurgencies, this article is now finished. That Evans-Prichard quotation is priceless and traces another (social anthropology) tap root in the social capital family tree!


::::::: Howard's reference to failed states is a reminder that the subject has a political dimension that has been overlooked. I suggest withholding approval until that omission has been repaired (as well as the insertion of a reader-friendly opening paragraph that meets Daniel's  points). If nobody else tackles this, I may return to the subject and attempt some drafting - after I have attended to some unfinished CZ business elsewhere. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 11:13, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Please refrain from any more changes until this article is formally approved tomorrow. Any subsequent changes can then be made on the Draft page and will be incorporated in a later revision. All three editors appear to be in agreement that this is ready. I will update the permanlink (and notify the Constabulary that it is updated) sometime later this evening or tomorrow morning.


(undent) If I'm not overcomplicating, I'd be delighted to have some of the people here look at the articles I've mentioned; [[insurgency]] is much more mature than [[failed state]] and [[weak state]]. There is an article, [[Transnational spillover from weak and failed states]], which this discussion is making me think about: could many of the undesirable effects mentioned there be mirrored in situations with lack of social capital in urban areas?
Thanks to all concerned. This article has grown into something CZ can be truly pleased with.
[[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 18:15, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


Indeed, is there a inadequate-social-capitalization spectrum from urban renewal all the way to geopolitics? Can we put these various articles in that context? I don't know; if you will, a counterinsurgent is a social engineer rather than a social scientist. Do note, however, that military leaders are increasingly getting social scientist advisers, who are much more useful than in many early applications -- I worked for the Army-sponsored Center for Research in Social Systems and Human Resources Research Organization in the Vietnam period; some of the work was excellent and some was ludicrous. There are people who are thought military first and social scientist second, such as [[David Kilcullen]], where [[Emma Sky]] is social scientist first. It is not without notice that some of the more successful U.S. generals, in counterinsurgency, have doctorates usually in international relations or history, but sometimes a social science. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 17:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
:First Law of Plumbing: if it don't leak, don't fix it.


== Political implications ==
:I'm absolutely delighted with the level of interdisciplinary work shown here, which I suspect will enrich other articles. Indeed, I'm going to introduce the Evans-Pritchard quote into insurgency -- U.S. Army Field Manual 3-24 quotes it exactly, but without attribution. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 18:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


I have added a new paragraph headed "Political implications" with  the intention of drawing upon the collection of papers on the subject listed by the Social Capital Gateway[http://www.socialcapitalgateway.org/NV-eng-state.htm#ER]. I think it may also be useful to create a glossary on the Related articles subpage, drawing on material in the [[politics]] article. I will await comments and the possibility of a contribution from a politics author before going further. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 12:02, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
== Toward Approval 2 ==


Failing any response to the above, I have done some drafting myself - but I am not entirely satisfied with it, so I should still welcome some help.[[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 17:11, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I see that Howard and Roger are satisfied with the new version (it needs updating in the template) that includes Howard's work.  All I need now is Nick's consent and we'll lock this version. Of course, if not, please keep working to get it right!  [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 13:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


:How could I be of help in the insurgency and failed state areas? --[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 18:54, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
:I've updated the permalink to the latest approved version, so it is ready to go. [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 16:40, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


::Thanks for the prompt, I agree that there should be evidence on that topic. I have  ordered "Why States Fail: Causes and Consequences" in the hope that it will provide some authoritative evidence on the subject. Can you recommend any  other aources? [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 06:51, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
::I am very happy to add my approval of the new version (I see it is already entered on the metadata template). Congratulations, Howard! [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 06:15, 3 June 2010 (UTC)


:::There are several in [[failed state]] and  [[insurgency]], not stated as "social capital" but clearly paralleling its ideas. An introduction to the ''Failed State Index'' (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/06/22/2009_failed_states_index_interactive_map_and_rankings), is a good starting point, although you should read the ''Index'' itself, which is downloadable as a PDF. Eizenstat and Kilcullen have much to say, and there actually is an indirect discussion in [[Iraq War, Surge]] on experience in building -- and also buying -- local institutions. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 15:01, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
== Approved [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Social_capital&oldid=100677229 Version 1.0] ==
::::I could not find the PDF article to which you refer, and, although the other material is authoritative, it did not lead me to the empirical evidence that I am looking for. However, the "Why States Fail: Causes and Consequences" book has arrived and seems to contain useful references to survey evidence (it is based on the Harvard University Failed States Project, but was published by the Princeton UP in  1964). I plan to spend a few days digesting it, but I have seen enough by skimming through it to suggest to me that it will be mainly useful as providing additional material for the [[failed state]] article. Watch this space! [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 15:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


:::::Pure lower-case editorial: I was trying to get the national/regional examples to follow the general discussion. The last few paragraphs, which you separated by spaces. Perhaps the section should be organized into Examples, with the regions below it, and then General Observations?
Congratulations!!  again!! [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 23:45, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::By empirical evidence, do you mean specific linkage of the idea of social capital? I did request the George Mason/CIA/SAIC report. --[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 11:26, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
::::::I have incorporated your contributions in a slight rearrangement of the text that I hope you find acceptable. Do you intend to add citations?[[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 12:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
:::::::That looks good, at least without coffee.  As far as citation, there's a stylistic question here: almost all of my contributions are wikilinked to other articles, which do have the bibliographic information. In some of the cases, it would be a simple matter of copying the citation from the linked article. In other cases, however, the article has many citations that support the summary point made here. At what point is it best to keep the citations in the linked article? I have no immediate answer. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 16:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


== The balance of the article ==
<div class="usermessage plainlinks">Discussion for [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Social_capital&oldid=100677229 Version 1.0] stopped here. Please continue further discussion under this break. </div>


The paragraph on political implications has grown to the extent that it tends to dominate. However, I am inclined to think that this is justified by the importance of that aspect, and by the consideration that attempts to tackle the failed states problem are testing the usefulness of the concept of social capital in a new and revealing ways. Rather than abbreviating this paragraph, I should prefer to see a strengthening of some of the others.[[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 12:08, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Wow, excellent article, all. [[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]] 07:13, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 
:Let me avoid putting in more, but encouraging others to collaborate with [[failed state]] ([[weak state]] is a lemma), and perhaps some of the [[insurgency]] article material on theories of insurgency.
 
:There are a great many things to think about as far as related articles. I started to put in [[Islamic sectarian conflict]], and hesitated. In pre-2003 Iraq, Shi'a and Sunni, in mixed neighborhoods, often lived together quite compatibly. After the [[Iraq War, insurgency|insurgency]] built, there certainly was deliberate instigation of sectarian hostility, but some may have been spontaneous. In either case, this is arguably a breakdown of social capital.  In Tito's Yugoslavia, again there were mixed neighborhoods that appeared to lose the social capital, perhaps from deliberate ethnic cleansing, perhaps from other factors. The  point is made about of the shifts in Hutu-Tutsi relations in Rwanda (and, less known, in neighboring countries).
 
:I'm also thinking of urban isolation in the U.S. In what had been considered a reasonably friendly residential area in New York City, Kitty Genovese was slowly killed, in the street, over a period exceeding an hour. As I remember, at least 50 people were aware of it but did not intervene, even to the extent of an anonymous call to the police.
 
:Ideas? --[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 16:33, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 
==Ready Now?==
 
Once again, interest in adding to and editing this item has flagged and it has been nearly two months since there has been any activity. Is it ready to approve now? There is an outstanding call for illustrations, but no one seems to have come up with anything. Personally, I haven't a clue how to visualize social capital. Any ideas? It looks like there are many possible related articles, only some of which have made it to the Related Articles pages. This seems to indicate approving only the main page at this point.
: [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 02:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 
: I have nothing further to add to this article (having just added some wikilinks), and my only misgiving about giving it approval concerns the first paragraph, which  seems to me to give an impression of learnedness that is more appropriate to a contribution to an academic journal than to an encyclopedia article.
: A minor problem is that it is drafted in a mixture of American English and British English. If you could make a ruling about which version to adopt, one of us could put that right.
::[[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 11:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
:::Since the original metadata page I created indicated AE, I think we should stick with AE. Will you make the conversions? [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 13:18, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 
:::The illustration does not have to be complicated, it should just provide some context. An example of the kind that I think might be useful is [http://www.mmorpgrealm.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/gold-farming-figure-9.png here]. One could use overlapping circles or other visualizations for the individual items, and we could turn it into a series of illustrations to be included in all of the concerned articles in a way that highlights the one on whose page it is, but links (like the [[CZ:Biology Week]] banner) to the other [[Capital (economics)]] articles. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 11:37, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 
::::I don't see anything wrong with Daniel's example, and if it is considered to be helpful to the reader, I have no objection to its insertion (perhaps on a Tutorials subpage?) [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 11:59, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::The thing that's wrong with the suggested graph is that it is completely inconclusive (like many such illustrations). It says only that all forms of capital are related. (Well, duh. Isn't that why they all have the word capital in the term?) Are those meant to be causal links? Or just signs of connection? I still agree that in theory an illustration might add something, but I don't think this one does. [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 13:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::The only thing wrong with the description is it has no content. What "individual items" would be pictured by those overlapping circles? Venn diagrams are a mathematical formalism. But how does it apply here? What "series of illustrations" should be included? That's where the suggestion breaks down, I suspect, and why no one has followed up with any examples: I know of visualizations of trading, markets, third sectors, etc. but I don't "see" social capital illustrated; nor apparently does anyone else. If you want illustrations, Daniel, you're going to have to supply them. It's a good idea, but it appears we lack the inspiration. [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 13:18, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::I simply don't buy that a concept cannot be illustrated. I have difficulties supplying illustrations because it's not my specialty, but I had another look around and found things like [http://www.collectiveintelligence.net/files/SocialCapital.map031502.ins.gif this organizational chart (which would have to be simplified)] or [http://www.slideshare.net/CameronNeylon/science-in-the-open the depiction of social capital in research on slides 103-107 of this presentation] to be a useful starting point. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 13:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::Well, let's hope someone will read this and agree with you that your examples show something worth presenting and come up with some usable illustrations. In which case, I certainly have no objections. This is (broadly) my area, and my point was (and is): 1) I agree that all concepts can, in principle, be illustrated. 2) This one hasn't been (that amazingly complex CI map, notwithstanding); 3) I personally can't visualize the social capital concept and don't have the graphics skill to do so; 4) No one else has risen to your call, and we don't have an illustrations department on call; 5) That all just means, it's a good idea, but who is going to do it? BTW, I didn't see the point of slides 103-7 at all; I just see pretty pictures done by somebody's marketing department.
:::::::The real question now is, is this an important enough point that we should wait with approving this article until someone comes up with something? [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 14:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::I won't stand in the way of this approval (and I can't anyway), but I think the handling of illustrations merits some further thoughts, for which I have started [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,3068.0.html this forum thread]. Hope to see you there. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 15:58, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 
(Undent) Look at the illustrations in [[insurgency]]. If you strip out the specific counterinsurgency force, especially in Kilcullen's three pillars, I think you get close. I'm willing to redraw that to something more specific. It's probably more political social capital, and I'm not as insistent about graphics as others.  --[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 17:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 
:You see some sort of a connection between the Kilcullen chart and social capital that I'm afraid I don't understand. Has anyone other than you drawn this link between counter-insurgency and social capital? Or, are we getting into original research here? [[User:Roger Lohmann|Roger Lohmann]] 21:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 06:59, 11 March 2024

This article has a Citable Version.
 Main Article
 Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition:  Productive assets arising out of social relations, such as trust, cooperation, solidarity, social networks of relations and those beliefs, ideologies and institutions that contribute to production of goods. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup categories:  Sociology, Politics and Economics [Editors asked to check categories]
 Subgroup category:  Social Policy
 Talk Archive:  1  English language variant:  American English


Ready Now?

Once again, interest in adding to and editing this item has flagged and it has been nearly two months since there has been any activity. Is it ready to approve now? There is an outstanding call for illustrations, but no one seems to have come up with anything. Personally, I haven't a clue how to visualize social capital. Any ideas? It looks like there are many possible related articles, only some of which have made it to the Related Articles pages. This seems to indicate approving only the main page at this point.

Roger Lohmann 02:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I have nothing further to add to this article (having just added some wikilinks), and my only misgiving about giving it approval concerns the first paragraph, which seems to me to give an impression of learnedness that is more appropriate to a contribution to an academic journal than to an encyclopedia article.
A minor problem is that it is drafted in a mixture of American English and British English. If you could make a ruling about which version to adopt, one of us could put that right.
Nick Gardner 11:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Since the original metadata page I created indicated AE, I think we should stick with AE. Will you make the conversions? Roger Lohmann 13:18, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
The illustration does not have to be complicated, it should just provide some context. An example of the kind that I think might be useful is here. One could use overlapping circles or other visualizations for the individual items, and we could turn it into a series of illustrations to be included in all of the concerned articles in a way that highlights the one on whose page it is, but links (like the CZ:Biology Week banner) to the other Capital (economics) articles. --Daniel Mietchen 11:37, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't see anything wrong with Daniel's example, and if it is considered to be helpful to the reader, I have no objection to its insertion (perhaps on a Tutorials subpage?) Nick Gardner 11:59, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
The thing that's wrong with the suggested graph is that it is completely inconclusive (like many such illustrations). It says only that all forms of capital are related. (Well, duh. Isn't that why they all have the word capital in the term?) Are those meant to be causal links? Or just signs of connection? I still agree that in theory an illustration might add something, but I don't think this one does. Roger Lohmann 13:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
The only thing wrong with the description is it has no content. What "individual items" would be pictured by those overlapping circles? Venn diagrams are a mathematical formalism. But how does it apply here? What "series of illustrations" should be included? That's where the suggestion breaks down, I suspect, and why no one has followed up with any examples: I know of visualizations of trading, markets, third sectors, etc. but I don't "see" social capital illustrated; nor apparently does anyone else. If you want illustrations, Daniel, you're going to have to supply them. It's a good idea, but it appears we lack the inspiration. Roger Lohmann 13:18, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I simply don't buy that a concept cannot be illustrated. I have difficulties supplying illustrations because it's not my specialty, but I had another look around and found things like this organizational chart (which would have to be simplified) or the depiction of social capital in research on slides 103-107 of this presentation to be a useful starting point. --Daniel Mietchen 13:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Well, let's hope someone will read this and agree with you that your examples show something worth presenting and come up with some usable illustrations. In which case, I certainly have no objections. This is (broadly) my area, and my point was (and is): 1) I agree that all concepts can, in principle, be illustrated. 2) This one hasn't been (that amazingly complex CI map, notwithstanding); 3) I personally can't visualize the social capital concept and don't have the graphics skill to do so; 4) No one else has risen to your call, and we don't have an illustrations department on call; 5) That all just means, it's a good idea, but who is going to do it? BTW, I didn't see the point of slides 103-7 at all; I just see pretty pictures done by somebody's marketing department.
The real question now is, is this an important enough point that we should wait with approving this article until someone comes up with something? Roger Lohmann 14:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I won't stand in the way of this approval (and I can't anyway), but I think the handling of illustrations merits some further thoughts, for which I have started this forum thread. Hope to see you there. --Daniel Mietchen 15:58, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

(Undent) Look at the illustrations in insurgency. If you strip out the specific counterinsurgency force, especially in Kilcullen's three pillars, I think you get close. I'm willing to redraw that to something more specific. It's probably more political social capital, and I'm not as insistent about graphics as others. --Howard C. Berkowitz 17:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

You see some sort of a connection between the Kilcullen chart and social capital that I'm afraid I don't understand. Has anyone other than you drawn this link between counter-insurgency and social capital? Or, are we getting into original research here? Roger Lohmann 21:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Here's the problem. In such concepts as nation-building and counterinsurgency, there's a very strong match to the concepts in social capital. The term, however, does not seem to be used in the counterinsurgency literature. Perhaps some of the problem is that social capital tends to be described in Western terms, where the counterinsurgents (e.g., Iraq War, insurgency) tend to be talking in terms of building, and then transcending, tribal structures. I'd call it synthesis to say that social capital broke down with the Islamic sectarian conflict in Iraq, and in the Balkans, where Serbs, Croatians, Muslims, and others had lived peacefully side-by-side. --Howard C. Berkowitz 22:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Insurgency, and indeed urban decay, are, to me, examples of the lack of social capital. Is, for example, the James Q. Wilson broken windows theory of urban policing an attempt to invest capital in repairs? One of the marks of pacification, at the neighborhood level, in Iraq was when people of different tribes and ethnicities would pick up trash.
So, the argument can be made that social capital puts multiple groups into each of Kilcullen's pillars. In the former Yugoslavia, there was quite a bit of discussion of how there was local government until the Serbs/Bosnians/Croats/etc. wanted others out of their turf. Howard C. Berkowitz 22:03, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Changes after approval nomination

Since I see you added some text, Roger, let me bring up something that I've been wondering: is there anything published about things leading to the encouragement, or even imposition, of social capital? The first thing that comes to mind is James Q. Wilson's "broken windows" policing, but I'm also thinking of counterinsurgency work where tribal or ethnic groups were subsidized or encouraged to work on community building/maintenance.

There's even the situation where the previously at-odds residents start bonding in the face of a common enemy. Al-Qaeda doctrine, for example, is to marry into local clans, but this created friction in Somalia and Iraq. Howard C. Berkowitz 12:28, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not aware of anyone publishing anything connecting this to either Wilson's broken windows theory or counterinsurgency, but the connection strikes me as a sound one. This probably relates to William J. Wilson's work on inner cities also. The problem is we may be wandering off the CZ reservation, and bordering on original research in exploring those connections. You've raised this point before, and its a good one, but I'm not convinced those points should be in the basic social capital article. Would a paragraph/section in some entry related to counterinsurgency and linking back to this one work?
Roger Lohmann 19:11, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps it could make the "original synthesis" category if the ideas were simply placed side-by-side...maybe even as an extended annotation in the Bibliography?
Certainly, there could be links or Related Articles. They should, however, have an introduction...even if as simple as "While other disciplines have addressed ideas that share some principles with social capital, social scientists are not known to have published specific unifying research." I don't like the word "research" there -- "synthesis" is more apt.
Another thing along these lines would be some of Edward T. Hall's work on the American Southwest, where, after Latinos gained political power, there was a near revolt (i.e., loss of social capital) until it was realized that each group had a coherent but different view of the roles of police and courts. Howard C. Berkowitz 19:18, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Research update

Driving back from an errand, I was about to suggest that we create an "original research needed/possible" section, which remains a good idea. It seemed a decent idea, however, to look for some publications.

--Howard C. Berkowitz 22:50, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Does anyone have full-text access to the first article about the Dinka and the third book?
Do we need a stub, at least, on Wilson's theories? I'm no expert. I may try on Hall, simply because I find him one of the most delightful writers in social science. Howard C. Berkowitz 16:31, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Next political step

A first draft is now in the article, and I'm quite open to flow edits on it. Hopefully, this is a reasonable level of detail -- to go into more depth, there is the insurgency article, which could do with more links to social capital. Perhaps some of you might consider working on that and helping get it to Approval. Howard C. Berkowitz 22:41, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Something to consider: how Western-oriented is the article in general? The idea of patron-client relationships establishing social capital runs through the military references. I have a sense that much of the rest of the article, however, focuses on the idea of voluntary peer association as the core of social capital; am I reading something that is not there? Howard C. Berkowitz 00:54, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Toward Approval

Hi all, looking this over, it looks like we need one more editor on board here before we can lock this article on June 2. D. Matt Innis 00:51, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Nick Gardner has signed on.
Roger Lohmann 15:54, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Alright then, we're looking good for June 2, barring any unforeseen circumstances. D. Matt Innis 16:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Just wanted to make sure everyone is aware that these edits are not included in the approved version that everyone is signed on to. If we want these edits included, Roger needs to update the version number in the metadata tempalte and all three editors will need to let it be known that they agree here on this talk page so that when I return on June 2, 2010, it will be apparent that you all agree on the same version. If that doesn't make sense, make sure to contact me on my talk page before June 2. Otherwise, this is the version that will be approved. Thanks in advance! D. Matt Innis 16:29, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Right, Matt. There have been a number of minor changes, and the addition of an illustration is in process. I have no problems with the changes made, and if anyone does, please let me know today if possible. I will update the version number as soon as we get the illustration settled in. (I'll probably wait until tomorrow. That will give anyone who isn't satisfied one more day to raise issues, but we should be pretty well set by then.
Roger Lohmann 16:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Okay, Roger, sounds good. It looks like ya'll (southern for you all) have it under control. I'll let you have at it (southern for 'handle it') till June 2. :) D. Matt Innis 16:50, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
You must be feeling very regional today! ;-) Me too. I think we'uns (Western Pennsylvanian for all of us) have it about done up (West Virginian for finished.) Are we done? You betcha! (Minnesotan for certainly). As soon as Howard is a'done a'fixin (again, West Virginian) one last bit. That illustration Milton done up for us'uns is a real knee slapper! (That was fun!) ;-) Roger Lohmann 17:06, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Hehe (text shorthand for Haha), Roger, that was a barrel of laughs (LOL)! D. Matt Innis 17:10, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Anyone read "Digging the Weans"?
Matt still should write an article distinguishing "y'all" from "all y'all". As a newcomer to New England, I still am working on "yup" vs. "ayup". The fishermen with whom I work also remind me that while one may prosecute a submarine contact, it's not what you do to a scallop. Howard C. Berkowitz 17:26, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Howard, I'm wondering if you have had a chance yet in New England to paark ya caar in the Haavard Yaard? Roger Lohmann 18:01, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
No, I take the T to Haaavard. There is a story, though, of the "12 or fewer items" line in a Cambridge supermarket. An obvious student, with heaped cart, went through, and the cashier commented when he paid, "tell me, is it that you are from Harvard and can't count, or MIT and can't read?" Howard C. Berkowitz 18:25, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Finished!

Okay, with that last round of revisions bringing in some rather unexpected and very interesting literature on social capital thinking in regard to insurgencies and counter-insurgencies, this article is now finished. That Evans-Prichard quotation is priceless and traces another (social anthropology) tap root in the social capital family tree!

Please refrain from any more changes until this article is formally approved tomorrow. Any subsequent changes can then be made on the Draft page and will be incorporated in a later revision. All three editors appear to be in agreement that this is ready. I will update the permanlink (and notify the Constabulary that it is updated) sometime later this evening or tomorrow morning.

Thanks to all concerned. This article has grown into something CZ can be truly pleased with. Roger Lohmann 18:15, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

First Law of Plumbing: if it don't leak, don't fix it.
I'm absolutely delighted with the level of interdisciplinary work shown here, which I suspect will enrich other articles. Indeed, I'm going to introduce the Evans-Pritchard quote into insurgency -- U.S. Army Field Manual 3-24 quotes it exactly, but without attribution. Howard C. Berkowitz 18:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Toward Approval 2

Okay, I see that Howard and Roger are satisfied with the new version (it needs updating in the template) that includes Howard's work. All I need now is Nick's consent and we'll lock this version. Of course, if not, please keep working to get it right! D. Matt Innis 13:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I've updated the permalink to the latest approved version, so it is ready to go. Roger Lohmann 16:40, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I am very happy to add my approval of the new version (I see it is already entered on the metadata template). Congratulations, Howard! Nick Gardner 06:15, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Approved Version 1.0

Congratulations!! again!! D. Matt Innis 23:45, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Discussion for Version 1.0 stopped here. Please continue further discussion under this break.

Wow, excellent article, all. Stephen Ewen 07:13, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Social_capital/Draft&oldid=930575"