This article, “The Importance of Different Forms of Social Capital for Health” by Sara Ferlander, published in Acta Sociologica in 2007, provides a comprehensive overview of the concept of social capital, with a particular focus on distinguishing its various forms and their potential effects on health. The author notes that while social capital has gained significant attention across social sciences, particularly in public health, there remains much confusion regarding its meaning, measurement, and specific health outcomes.
The article clarifies that social capital is generally described as a resource accessed through social networks and comprises elements such as social networks, norms of reciprocity, and social trust. While the social network is considered the core element, cognitive aspects like reciprocal norms and trust are also crucial. The discussion extends to different levels of social capital, recognizing it as a property that can benefit or harm both individuals and collectives.
A central contribution of the article is its conceptual distinction of different forms of social networks, which are the core structural element of social capital. These forms are differentiated by:
- Direction of ties: Horizontal (e.g., voluntary associations, friends, family) and vertical (e.g., the Church, work hierarchies, ties between citizens and civil servants). Horizontal networks are emphasized for building civil society, while the significance of vertical ties is also discussed.
- Levels of formality: Formal connections (e.g., voluntary associations, contacts with civil servants) and informal connections (e.g., friends, family, neighbors, colleagues). Informal networks are vital for emotional support, especially where formal social capital may be lacking.
- Strength of ties: Strong ties (intimate, regularly maintained, e.g., immediate family, close friends) and weak ties (non-intimate, infrequently maintained, e.g., acquaintances). Weak ties are highlighted for their role in providing new information, such as job opportunities.
- Diversity of ties:
- Bonding social capital: Based on homogeneous networks of people similar in demographics (e.g., age, ethnicity, education), tending to be inward-looking and strengthening exclusive identities. While providing emotional and instrumental support, bonding networks can also have negative features like localism, exclusion, and mistrust of outsiders, and may promote unhealthy norms or create burdens for support providers.
- Bridging social capital: Based on heterogeneous, outward-looking connections across social groups. It generates broader identities and reciprocity.
- Linking social capital: A sub-dimension of bridging capital that refers specifically to vertical ties connecting people across different hierarchical positions or social scales. Both bridging and linking social capital are considered cross-cutting social capital.
The article stresses the importance of distinguishing these forms because they imply different resources, support, and obligations, thus leading to varied health outcomes. While strong bonding networks are traditionally associated with positive health effects, especially mental health, through emotional support and stress reduction, they can also lead to strain, conflict, and the promotion of unhealthy behaviors.
In contrast, weak and cross-cutting social capital (bridging and linking) are increasingly emphasized for their positive health impacts. These ties improve access to new information and resources, enhance personal control, and improve problem-solving abilities. At a societal level, cross-cutting social capital can facilitate health promotion, spread healthy norms, and enable communities to influence political decisions, leading to better access to services like medical care.
The author concludes by emphasizing that a differentiated approach to social capital is essential for a better understanding of its mixed health effects. More research is needed, with a special focus on the health impacts of cross-cutting – or bridging and linking – forms of social capital, as these aspects are crucial for fully understanding health outcomes and promoting a balanced distribution of social capital for both individual and public health.
Reference: Ferlander, S. (2007). The Importance of Different Forms of Social Capital for Health. Acta Sociologica, 50(2), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001699307077654
