trust – Page 2 – Success Across Cultures

Picture this: You’re driving down a rural road, and suddenly your car breaks down.

You’re stranded, with no phone signal and no idea what to do.

But then, a friendly farmer pulls up and offers to help. She calls a mechanic she knows, and within an hour, your car is fixed and you’re back on the road.

This is an example of social capital at work – the norms and networks that enable people to act collectively.

In their study, “Social Capital: Implications for Development Theory, Research, and Policy,” Michael Woolcock and Deepa Narayan explore the concept of social capital and its potential for promoting development in low-income communities.

They argue that social capital can play a crucial role in creating positive outcomes, including economic growth, improved health and education, and reduced crime and violence.

Let’s see how.

Social Capital, Defined

We’ve covered social capital extensively over the last several weeks, and similarly, the authors of this study define social capital as

“the norms and networks that enable people to act collectively.”

They emphasize that social capital is not just about individual connections but also about the broader social norms and institutions that support collective action.

Some of these norms include trust, reciprocity, and social networks that help create social capital, which can vary by community, region, and country.

Further, the study notes that while bonding social capital can provide social support and a sense of belonging, bridging social capital is particularly important for promoting economic growth and reducing poverty.

However, bridging social capital can be particularly challenging, as it often requires overcoming social and cultural barriers.

Regardless, social capital can be particularly important for marginalized communities, as it can provide a source of support and resources.

Social Capital vs. Individual Outcomes

According to research, social capital has several advantages over traditional development approaches that focus on individual outcomes or economic growth.

Social capital can create “public goods” that benefit everyone in a community, which can be self-sustaining over time.

The authors note that social capital can help to build trust and cooperation within a community, which can be particularly important in post-conflict or post-disaster contexts.

The Cons

While the study makes obvious the many benefits of social capital, it also notes potential pitfalls and emphasizes the need for a nuanced and context-specific approach to promoting it.

Social capital is not a universal remedy for development challenges – there are several potential disadvantages, including the possibility of exclusion and inequality within social networks, the risk of “elite capture” where social capital benefits only a select few, and the potential for social capital to be used for negative purposes such as corruption or discrimination.

Further research into social capital and its potential in low-income communities might give us a clearer idea of how to avoid these pitfalls.

Would you require more social capital and cultural capital to succeed in an individualist country? Or less?

Do you think the individualist system or the collectivist system is more conducive to social cohesion?

There is a debate among theorists about whether individualism poses a threat to a society’s cohesion and communal association or whether it aids the development of social solidarity and cooperation.

Some argue that the growth of individuality, autonomy, and self-sufficiency is essential for a healthy society, while others argue that excessive individualism undermines social ties and leads to a breakdown of community.

This study by Anu Realo and Jüri Allik suggests the opposite is true.

Let’s take a look.

Individualism-Collectivism & Social Capital

Social capital and individualism-collectivism (IC) are two important constructs that have been studied extensively in the social sciences.

As we outlined in a previous post, social capital refers to the networks, norms, and trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation among individuals and groups.

We’ve also extensively discussed IC – the degree to which people prioritize their own goals and interests versus those of the group.

Despite the seemingly contradictory nature of individualism and social ties, research on the relationship between social capital and IC suggests that there is a positive association between the two constructs.

Individualism & Trust

Countries with higher levels of social capital are more individualistic, which suggests that independence and freedom to pursue one’s personal goals are of value to social capital.

This is because social capital is based on trust, and trust is more likely to form in societies that value individual autonomy and self-determination.

Those societies in which trust is limited to only nuclear family or kinship have lower levels of social capital.

Social capital is not evenly distributed within societies and can vary depending on the size of social networks and the degree of trust within them.

Social Capital Not at Odds with Individualism

To put it simply, social capital and individualism are not necessarily at odds.

Instead, promoting social capital through policies that strengthen relationships and trust – such as investments in education, infrastructure, and community development – can help to build stronger communities, even in societies that value individual autonomy.