A Comprehensive Resource on Social Capital and Its Research. Introduction Definition Literature Conceptualisation Conclusions Further Research References Theory Dimensions Levels Types Determinants Benefits Downsides Conceptualisation Problems Approaches
Operationalisation Measurement Building 		Evolution Contemporary Authors Capital Debate Gender Issues NRM Summary
This approach assumes that communities are homogenous entities that automatically include and benefit all members and as such do not make the important distinction between productive social capital and perverse social capital.

Communitarian Approach to Social Capital Theory

Woolcock and Narayan (2000, p. 229) identified that the communitarian perspective equates social capital with such local organizations as clubs, associations, and civic groups. The communitarian approach was pioneered by Putnam (1993, 1995) and by Fukuyama (1995, 1997). Communitarians, who look at the number and density of these groups in a given community, hold that social capital is inherently good, that more is better, and that its presence always has a positive effect on a community's welfare. This approach assumes that communities are homogenous entities that automatically include and benefit all members and as such do not make the important distinction between productive social capital and perverse social capital. Narayan and Nyamwaya (1996) found evidence from the developing world that demonstrates that high levels of social solidarity or informal groups does not necessarily lead to economic prosperity (cited in Woolcock and Narayan 2000, p. 230).



View Comment Policy

Enter comments about this article

Your Name:
Your Comment:
Enter the code above:     
Please note: comments will not appear on this page until they have been approved. Comments containing links to other websites will only be approved if the link is directly relevant to the content of this page.



Comments about this article

There are no comments about this article as yet. Be the first to comment now.