Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 7-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The myth of social capital in community development

The myth of social capital in community development Abstract This article argues that contemporary interest in social capital by community development theorists, funders, and practitioners is misguided and needs to be thoroughly rethought. It argues that social capital, as understood by Robert Putnam and people influenced by his work, is a fundamentally flawed concept because it fails to understand issues of power in the production of communities and because it is divorced from economic capital. Therefore, community development practice based on this understanding of social capital is, and will continue to be, similarly flawed. The article further argues that instead of Putnam's understanding of social capital, community development practice would be better served by returning to the way the concept was used by Glenn Loury and Pierre Bourdieu and concludes with a discussion of how these alternative theories of social capital can be realized in community development practice. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Housing Policy Debate Taylor & Francis

The myth of social capital in community development

Housing Policy Debate , Volume 12 (4): 26 – Jan 1, 2001
26 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/the-myth-of-social-capital-in-community-development-kARYuo5P3M

References (90)

Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN
2152-050X
eISSN
1051-1482
DOI
10.1080/10511482.2001.9521429
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract This article argues that contemporary interest in social capital by community development theorists, funders, and practitioners is misguided and needs to be thoroughly rethought. It argues that social capital, as understood by Robert Putnam and people influenced by his work, is a fundamentally flawed concept because it fails to understand issues of power in the production of communities and because it is divorced from economic capital. Therefore, community development practice based on this understanding of social capital is, and will continue to be, similarly flawed. The article further argues that instead of Putnam's understanding of social capital, community development practice would be better served by returning to the way the concept was used by Glenn Loury and Pierre Bourdieu and concludes with a discussion of how these alternative theories of social capital can be realized in community development practice.

Journal

Housing Policy DebateTaylor & Francis

Published: Jan 1, 2001

Keywords: Development/revitalization; Urban environment

There are no references for this article.