Meaningful distinctions within a concept: relational, collective, and generalized social capital.
The proliferation of definitions and applications of social capital has prompted debate regarding the usefulness of the concept; there is thus an urgent need for a more rigorous usage of the term. This article proposes a distinction between three meaningful variants within the concept of social capital for the purpose of an improved dialogue and a sharpened application. The differences between these three variants--relational, collective, and generalized social capital--are first illuminated through a conceptual discussion. An empirical analysis testing the linkages between relational and collective social capital is then provided in the context of a household disaster preparedness study in Dominica. Together, analytical and empirical evidence supports the idea that social capital covers a variety of interrelated, yet distinct, social processes that operate simultaneously and may serve different purposes. On the basis of these results, this article calls for a theoretically and empirically meaningful treatment of social capital in terms of its three variants.
Brunie
Aurélie
A
Family Health International, P.O. Box 13950, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC 27709, USA. ABrunie@fhi.org
D019058:Community Networks; D004189:Disaster Planning; D019424:Dominica; D005191:Family Characteristics; D006801:Humans; D007398:Interpersonal Relations; D016015:Logistic Models; D012944:Social Support; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors; D009626:Terminology as Topic