This review has been accessed  times since August 6, 2001
Baron, S., Field, J., and Schuller, T. (2000) Social
Capital: Critical Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Pp. x + 307
$60 (Cloth) ISBN 0-19-8297 13-0
$25 (Paper) ISBN 0-19-924367-0
Reviewed by Richard W. Race
Keele University (UK)
August 2, 2001
Baron's et al.'s impressive edited collection of essays on
social capital derives from a five-year Economic and Social
Research Council (ESRC) relating to the U.K. Learning
Society Programme. Essentially, the book aims to examine the
value of the theoretical concept across a variety of
European disciplinary and institutional settings with the
appeal of the book being global. There is no doubting that
social capital has become immensely fashionable in the U.K.
over the last five years, complementing the Third Way
(Giddens, 1998; Giddens, 2000; Hutton and Giddens, 2001)
ideas on re-introducing elements of social democracy to
local and global agendas. The authors argue that there is no
consensus in relation to social capital's conceptual
development. Methodologically approaches should combine
adequate timescales needed to measure social capital change,
as well as the concept needing to be examined from different
angles to capture change (pp. 23-29). For the authors,
social capital shifts focus of analysis from behaviour of
individual agents to patterns of relations between agents,
social units and institutions. The research within the book
across multi-disciplines offers growth for dialogue and
theoretical development (pp. 35-36). The review focuses on
the theories surrounding the concept as well as the chapters
relating directly to education. The review ends with a
discussion of themes relating to human and social capital
and some of the many issues that the book raises.
The authors
begin the book with a review and critique of social capital,
broadly explained as, "… social networks, the
reciprocities that arise from them and the value of these
for achieving mutual goals within the modern world" (p.
1). Pierre Bourdieu, James Coleman and Robert Putnam are the
major theorists from which key elements of trust and
networks are taken. Bourdieu's (1984) focus was on the way
people use consumer goods to create social bonds or
distinctions. For Bourdieu, consumption has been seen as
either a material process, rooted in human biological needs,
or as an ideal practice, rooted in symbols, signs and codes.
The major distinction Bourdieu made was between groups with
access to two different types of capital consumption:
first, economic capital emphasizing business,
entrepreneurial, management, commercial and financial
groups; second, cultural capital based upon education
qualifications and cultural knowledge relating to amongst
other things, novels, films and television. Social capital
comes a distant third behind economic and cultural capital
in Bourdieu's work. Coleman (1988) in his study of U.S.
Catholic High Schools argued that social capital, through
family and community relations, had a beneficial effect on
obtaining education qualifications. Social relations through
obligations, expectations and trust provided the resources
for a child to develop. Coleman perceived social capital as
educationally advantageous. Putnam (2001) argues that there
is a general secular decline in levels of social capital
with television and an exclusive culture being seen as the
major villains (p. 9). The exclusion of many is socially
disadvantageous with social capital seen as a bridging,
connecting link between groups. The visual image of
Bowling Alone highlights the massive decline in
social capital over the last twenty-five years in the U.S.
Putnam has been praised for being globally accessible and
policy relevant and by reintroducing the social and
normative dimension back into capitalism (Fukuyama, 1999).
Trust is one
of the key elements of social capital highlighting
interactions between institutions and individuals. Fukuyama,
(1995) in a Japanese context, distinguishes between high and
low trust of wealth. Japan is a high trust society while
China is a low trust society (p. 16). Fukuyama suggests that
Fordist organized capitalism is inhibitive and worker
discretion is required if trust is to exist between worker
and manager. Trust is a characteristic of the system, not an
individual personal attribute. Individuals unite around a
shared objective of economic progress. Networks are another
key element when considering social capital. Castells (1996)
describes a set of interconnected nodes, for example, the
European Union, Stock Exchanges, and Media Networks,
involving uncontrolled actors and actions whose relations
are unpredictable with unlimited social consequences.
Szreter
suggests that social capital depends on the quality of a set
of relationships or attitudes and dispositions of a social
group. A misconception sees social capital hijacked by the
political right who suggest it is required for the
preservation of traditional communities. Szreter highlights
the use and control of information within firms and
industrial districts, for example, in Silicon Valley which
is described as "competitive co-operation" whereby
the state at a central and local level are interdependent
and there is an incentive to co-operate (p. 62). Human
capital produced through education and training systems
combines with the market economy to produce commercial
partnerships. The author suggests that access and the
process of information is neither simple nor neutral (p.
67). Social capital emphasises mutually trusting
relationships; but is this realistic when considering
equality and inequality? Szreter argues that national
education systems are influential when increasing
communicative competences among citizens. Education systems
can lay the foundations for increased social capital (p.
68). Szreter then provides a history of social capital in
Britain (pp. 69-75). Different historical periods witness
different levels of social capital; but in an education
context, it is significant that the author argues that the
British education system is still divided and excludes the
majority at sixteen plus. The relative gainers in post-
secondary education in the U.K. have been women (David,
1993; Arnot et al., 1999). Szreter argues that an
"equitable education policy is needed" (p. 76).
State-maintained schools in England and Wales lost 1 in 10
teachers from the workforce during the 1990s and the new
decade continues to witness a crisis in teacher recruitment.
Szeter's solution to this problem is to extend social
capital by redefining the relations between public and
private by transforming, "… a comprehensive range
of publicly-funded educational facilities and associated key
social services" (p. 77). This would, he claims,
eliminate a class-divided citizenry and produce a mutually
respectful population of communicative equals.
Lauglo,
whose research is funded by the Norwegian Research Council,
examines why certain groups cope better with school given
their class position. Is Social Capital a productive
analytic tool useful for that purpose? Within immigrant
research, the author argues that the concept alienates the
disadvantaged. Lauglo takes his data from Oslo immigrant
youth, focusing on young persons whose parents both
immigrated. Using Bourdieu's theories, Lauglo highlights
symbolic expressions or the "insider against the
outsider" that causes racist exclusion and an
underclass. Pakistanis and Vietnamese are the largest
immigrant groups in Oslo and regularly outperform Norwegians
in math and sciences. This reflects a general trend common
in other European countries (Gillborn, 2000) The author used
questionnaires and surveys as methods to obtain data about
youth in Oslo. The author found a "constructive
engagement" from immigrants concerning schooling (p.
149). Cultural capital is high in immigrant homes, as
indicated by well-stocked home libraries and a high
frequency of immigrants who continue into higher education.
Elements of both Coleman and Bourdieu's theories are visible
within a "peer group solidarity" (p. 159).
Lauglo's research shows how, "… family cohesion
does help youth engage constructively with the school.
Immigrant youth is part of religious communities which is
conductive with positive school engagement" (p. 161).
From his evidence the author argues that ethnicity is more
important than school class and cultural capital. But
Norwegian nationalism remains strong. For Norwegian
immigrants, "… schooling acquires added importance
because it appears to them as the one available ladder to
the labour market" (p. 166).
Munn
explores the usefulness of the concept of social capital in
relation to understanding school practices, tackling school
exclusion. Social capital is used to promote inclusion by
drawing attention to the importance of family networks. A
Marxist interpretation of education sociology argues that
this is difficult as schooling reproduces social relations
of production. Munn suggests that there is a gap between
social capital theory and empirical research on schooling.
Coleman is criticised for under-representing people from
poor backgrounds. The conceptual focus should be on the
whole community, with a positive school ethos compensating
for disadvantaged pupils (p. 173). However, is this possible
within a community suffering from a combination of social
problems? In Scotland, a "Social Inclusion
Network" has been created and new community schools
have been opened in Education Action Zones (Jones and Bird,
2000). Schemes are designed to support children and families
within social networks. The situation with regard to
exclusion is contradictory. Munn highlights the disturbing
fact that British schools do not officially record all
exclusion numbers, but the evidence suggests these numbers
are increasing. The ideas of active parents and social
networks are all very well, but what happens when parents
and children do not want to conform to the schools' mores?
Munn concludes that a sensible option is to "… use
a number of theoretical issues in attempting to understand
the complex world of schools and the multi-faceted nature of
teaching" (p. 178). The danger of social capital is
that it focuses attention too firmly on the school as a
vehicle for combating social disadvantage. Inclusion policy
would see schools as part of a "larger
jigsaw."
The editors
of the book argue in a concluding chapter that social
capital is the one way of analyzing the
"embeddedness" of education in social networks
that produce one challenge to the dominant human capital
approach. Learning is embedded in networks of social
capital, but perhaps Coleman fails to highlight complex
patterns on participation and outcomes, especially those
found in adult learning (Hayes et al., 2000). The editors
are also critical of Coleman's theories in relation to
equity and education (McClenaghan, 2000). Social capital's
values close networks which immigrants, as Lauglo
emphasizes, must work very hard to succeed. Coleman neglects
issues concerning gender, ethnicity or disability (p. 248).
Bourdieu's (1984) structuralist approach in which
individuals or groups occupy a structure of access to
economic and educational forms of capital is perhaps more
helpful at this point. MacGilliary and Walker examine local
social capital and use Jacobs (1961) ideas on civic design
that can encourage social networks rather than urban
alienation.
Theoretical and pragmatic tensions between human and social
capital need to also be re-examined. We have qualifications,
skilling and jobs versus the social benefits to groups and
institutions of collective or voluntary work. Fevre
highlights that the very concept of work is changing in the
post-industrial world, (Beck, 2000) but social networks are
still relatively closed. The authors highlight the absence
of bridging Social Capital. From their research, access to
work is still the key to self-development, personal
fulfilment and social integration. However, in a post-
industrial job-market, what or where is social exclusion
within social capital? Field et al. suggest that the
concept, "…can be used to exclude or to limit
social participation as well as to promote it" (p.
261). In answer to the questions posed by the authors in the
introductory chapter, social capital might not be a new
concept, but as this book proves it can still address multi-
disciplinary issues, despite some authors describing it as a
"complementary concept, not having a primary
theoretical role" (Loizos) or as "vague and
slippery" (Campbell).
This is a well-balanced collection of essays on social
capital with some good empirical and theoretical ideas
coming at the end of the book. Maloney et al. examine the
role of civil and voluntary interest groups and are critical
of Putnam (2001) who they claim overlooks public and civic
roles. Brown and Lauder examine trust relations and human
capital with a focus on mistrust in relation to jobs and a
downsizing market. They claim a change in social policy-
making is needed. Drawing inspiration from Durkheim (1984),
one solution is to try to create more social and reflexive
solidarity. These examples highlight both the eclectic
nature of the book and the value of social capital as an
important theoretical perspective.
References
Arnot, M. David, M. Weiner, G. (1999). Closing the Gender
Gap: postwar education and social change. Polity Press,
Cambridge.
Beck, U. (2000). The Brave New World of Work, Polity
Press, Cambridge.
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: a social critique of
the judgement of taste, Routledge and Kegan Paul,
London.
Castels, M. (1996). The Information Age, Volume One. The
Rise of the Network Society, Basil Blackwell,
Oxford.
Coleman, J. (1988) “Social Capital, Human Capital and
Schools”, Independent Schools, Volume 12.
David, M. (1993). Parents, Gender and Education
Reform, Polity Press, Cambridge.
Durkheim, E. (1984). The Division of Labor in Society,
Translated by Hall, W.D. The Free Press, New York.
Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: the social virtues and the
creation of prosperity, Free Press, New York.
Fukuyama, F. (1999). The Great Disruption: human nature
and the reconstitution of social order, Profile Books,
London.
Giddens, A. (1998). The Third Way: the renewal of social
democracy, Polity Press, Cambridge.
Giddens, A. (2000). The Third Way and its Critics,
Polity Press, Cambridge.
Gillborn, D. (2000). Rationing Education: policy,
practice, reform and equity, Open University Press,
Buckingham.
Hayes, E. Flannery D.D. with Brooks, A. Tisdell, E. Hugo, J.
(2000). Women as Learners: the significance of gender in
adult learning, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San
Francisco.
Hutton, W. Giddens, A. (eds) (2001). On the Edge: living
with global capitalism, Vintage, London.
Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American
Cities: the failure of town planning, Random House, New
York.
Jones, K. Bird, K. (2000). Partnership as
Strategy: public-private relations in Education Action
Zones, British Educational Research Journal,
26(4), 491-506.
McClenaghan, P. (2000). Social Capital: exploring
the theoretical foundation of community development
education, British Educational Research Journal,
26(5), 565-582.
Putnam, R. (2001) Bowling Alone: the collapse and revival
of American community, Simon and Schuster, New York.
About the Reviewer
Richard W. Race, Ph.D., studies the relationship
between education politicians and civil servants. In his
dissertation, he used Max Weber's theoretical concepts of
substantive and rational legal authority to examine the
beginnings of a change from bureaucratic authority to
political influence in the education policy-making process.
His research interests include: history of education policy;
modern and postmodern theories; the research process; and,
the sociology of sport. Contact: Dr. Richard W. Race, Keele
University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, U.K. E Mail:
edc51@keele.ac.uk
|
