Measuring Social Capital Social Capital, Its Investment, and Destructive Fishing

Chapter 6 Social Capital, Its Investment, and Destructive Fishing

This chapter presents social capital assessment of each study site. Here three different dimensions of social capital are to assess: bonding, bridging, and linking social capital Woolcock 1998; Narayan 1999. Another dimension of social capital, namely organizational integrity of formal institution will be discussed on the subsequent chapter. Further, investment of social capital is explained Isham 2001; Rudd 2001: 12-13; Grafton 2005; Folke et al. 2005: 451. These island communities have been receiving community-based external assistance that affects the stock of social capital in these communities. This particularly influences linking social capital. Bonding, bridging and linking social capital are social networks. Social networks and membership in groups are viewed as causal factors of cooperation or collective action Grootaert et al. 2003: 14; Grafton 2005: 754. This chapter examines the causal factor, while next chapter examines the outcome of social capital, namely collective action.

6.1 Measuring Social Capital

Even though it is difficult to measure social capital, there are three areas, in which social capital may contribute to societal performance: trust and trustworthiness; civic engagement and cooperation; and social networks which encompass of bonding, bridging, and linking social capital Grafton 2005. These areas and their causal mechanisms are clarified below. Dimensions of Social Capital Three main dimensions of social capital with regard to social networks can be distinguished: bonding, bridging and linking social capital. Bonding social capital is strong bonds of social relationships which are endorsed among family members or among members of an ethnic group. Bridging social capital is weaker but more cross-cutting ties of social relationships, which can be found in relationships from different ethnic groups or acquaintances. Linking social capital are connections between those with differing levels of power or social status e.g. links between the political elite and the general public or between individuals from different social classes Aldridge 1999; Grootaert et al. 2003. In the context of fishery, these dimensions of social capital are of particular importance, as follows: Bonding social capital is associated with trust and cooperation that encourage individual fishers to observe fishing rules and sustainable fishing practices. Bridging social capital may play a crucial role in technological improvements, generating regional cooperation across fishing communities and in conflict resolution across competing fishing gears and interests. Linking social capital is the connections between a fishery regulator or a government agency and a group of fishers. Grafton 2005: 755. Woolcock’s 1998 paradigm of social capital provides a comprehensive framework that incorporates four dimensions of social capital, namely: 1. Strong ties between family members and neighbors integration. 2. Weak ties with the outside community and between communities linkages. 3. Formal institutions at the macro level organizational integrity. 4. State-community interactions synergy. This framework emphasizes the significance of informal and local horizontal relationships reflected on the dimensions of integration and linkages; as well as vertical relationships reflected on the dimensions of organizational integrity and synergy. Narayan 1999 emphasizes the significance of inclusion of the state in social capital analysis in the assessment of dynamics of complementarities and substitution. She argues that the focus must be not only on civic engagement, which is characterized by inclusive, cross-cutting ties that link individuals and groups, but also on the effectiveness of the state. Thus, she offers an analytical framework which highlights the interaction between two key dimensions: 1 cross-cutting ties and 2 state functioning. These dimensions are comparable to bonding, bridging and linking social capital Table 42. This study draws on bonding, bridging and linking social capital, as well as formal organizational integrity. Table 42 Dimensions of social capital by different authors Gittell and Vidal 1998; Putnam 2000; Narayan 2002; Woolcock 1999 1 Woolcock 1998 Narayan 1999 Bonding social capital Integration - Bridging social capital Linkages Cross-cutting ties of social groups Linking social capital Synergy or state- community interactions - - Organizational integrity Government’s functioning 1 Source: Grootaert et al. 2003. Causal Mechanism of Social Capital Similar to three areas of social capital with regard to measuring societal performance as proposed by Grafton 2005, Grootaert et al. 2003 offer three types of indicators to measure social capital, namely membership in local associations and networks; trust; and collective action. A causal mechanism for these indicators is proposed. Both classifications propose that collective action or cooperation represent outcome of social capital, while social networks or membership in local associations represent causal factors in its determination Figure 21. While Grafton 2005: 754 views that trust represents outcome of social capital; Grootaert et al. 2003 consider it “an input or output indicator, or even as a direct measure of social capital, depending upon ones conceptual approach” p. 14. Collective action Trust Social networks, groups Figure 21 Relationships between three indicators of social capital Adapted from: Grootaert et al. 2003 and Grafton 2005. Social Capital Investment Building trust and the growth of social network are closely related to investment in social capital. Social capital is built by investing in social relationships, and the network that emerges can either focus on horizontal or vertical collaboration Folke et al. 2005: 451. Social capital investments can be done through expenditures on stakeholder conferences; the training of community leaders, and support for fishing organizations Isham 2001. Investment in social capital will likely to promote collective action to govern coral reef resources. Likewise, social capital is built through creating meeting halls, sponsoring visits of fishers to other communities, organizing facilitators and extension agents for community management planning Rudd 2001: 12-13. Investment in social capital is building trust and rules through communication and interaction. It also includes recognizing resource users to develop rules as well as monitoring and sanctioning, in governing common-pool resource use Ostrom et al. 1994. Resource use conflicts among multiple users are frequently occurred. The opportunity or means to discuss common problem associated with resource use and to propose collective action is important. In addition, once solutions are adopted, they must be enforced to be effective Wilson 1982 in Schlager 1994: 251. In this way, bonding social capital interaction within a group as well as bridging social capital interaction across groups are built, as well as become important determinant to promote collection action. Collective action of fishers has a number of prerequisites, which basically involves the question of local institutions that are defined as the set of rules actually used rules-in-use by a group of individuals to organize their activities Ostrom 1990; North 1990. Nevertheless, not all groups of fishers have appropriate local institutions. Therefore, any initiatives to develop co- management between government and resource users, as well as self- management by resource users, will necessarily start with institution-building Pomeroy and Berkes 1997: 468. Some examples of institution-building are clarified in Table 43. Table 43 Institution building of local fishers Location Period years Intervention for institution building Source Philippines 3-5 Yes Carlos and Pomeroy 1996 St Lucia, West Indies 5-10 Yes Smith and Berkes 1993 Alanya, Turkey 10-15 No Berkes 1986 Source: Pomeroy and Berkes 1997. In addition to the ability of resource users or fishers to craft rules and institution in governing resource use, the access to linking social capital is demonstrably central to well-being Narayan 2000, as well as to effectively enforce resource use rules Wilson 1982 in Schlager 1994. Linking social capital refers to one’s ties to people in positions of authority, such as representatives of public i.e. government, police, political parties and private i.e. banks institutions Grootaert et al. 2003. Important sources of linking social capital are local leaders and intermediaries, who are able to facilitate connections between communities and external development assistance, including government programs Krishna 2002. In fishery, linking social capital is the relations between a fishery regulator or a government agency and a group of fishers. In promoting co-management initiatives, linking social capital has to be developed, such as through confidence- building measures Grafton 2005: 761 In sum, community-based coral reef management is the process of building social capital as well as organizational or institutional capacity of island communities. Building bonding social capital is promoted by delivering institutions or rules, promoting trust to maintain and apply rules-in-use. Building bridging social capital is constructed by resolving conflicts with other resource users through communication and discussion. Building linking social capital is created by opening ways to meet, discuss, and inform decision makers.

6.2 Bonding and Bridging Social Capital