英语论文网

is distinction. On the one hand, Warde and Tampubolonwarde&tampubolon(2002: 158) argue that the distinction has proved difficult to operationalise.
 
This disagreement is rooted unsurprisingly in the absence of consensus not only as to how social capital should be conceptualised, but also as to its usefulness, and in the contentious debate concerning how social capital should be measured. The variety of measures of social capital that exist are evidence of the underdeveloped nature of the relationship between theoretical and empirical research on social capital. There are two principal ways in which academic scholars operationalise social capital for the purposes of empirical investigation. By including their own approach which emphasises the importance of social context for social capital, we can consider three approaches in all:
 
- First, the analysis of social capital by political scientists as well as some economists and psychologists, following Putnam tends to focus on trust, norms and values. His measures of social capital are typically based on a composite index containing the following elements:
 
(i) intensity of involvement in community or organisational life,

(ii) Public engagement (e.g. voting),

(iii) Community and volunteering,

(iv) Informal sociability (e.g. visiting friends), and

(v) Reported levels of interpersonal trust.
 
The use of aggregate measures of social capital derived from survey research (e.g., `generalised social trust', membership in organisations and norms such as reciprocity, cooperation and tolerance) has been criticised for overlooking how the norms and attitudes of individuals may be affected by the different social contexts in which they find themselves.
 
- Second, by contrast, Foley and Edwards argue that sociologists in particular tend to conceive of social capital as present in the structure of social relations between individuals and among individuals, which is operationalised as (both formal and informal) social networks, organisations or connections between individuals and/or organisations. The presence of social capital is viewed to be connected to local social structures (e.g. community social organisations), which in the tradition of Coleman has benefits for particular individuals or groups.
 
- Finally, and in a related way, Foley and Edwards (1999: 146) argue that it is important to consider how social context affects the production of social capital: The specific social context [e.g., community, organisation or network] in which social capital is embedded not only influences its `use value' [e.g. the potential for building links across different social groups]; it also shapes the means by which access to specific social resources [e.g., informal and formal and social organisation] is distributed and managed.
 
As will become clear in the next section, given how Putnam is associated with the 'popularisation' of the concept of social capital, the influence of his approach to the analysis of social capital is evident in the literature which focuses on the cultural sector. However, an underlying trend is also emerging, in the vein of Foley and Edwards whereby scholars seek to explicate the importance of the access of individuals, groups and communities etc. have to social capital as well as their ability t本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。