Lecture 8: Social Capital, Social Exclusion, Social Networks and Health

What is Social Capital?

Definitions:
- Portes (1998): the ability of actors to secure benefits by virtue of membership in social networks and other social structures.
- Putnam (1995): features of social organization such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit.
- Fukuyama (1992): the existence of a certain set of informal values or norms shared among members of a group that permit cooperation among them.
Core idea: social capital is a resource embedded in social structures that facilitates cooperation and benefits for members.
Core features: social groups, interpersonal relationships, shared identity, shared norms/values, trust, reciprocity, conformity, and commitment to group goals.
Drivers/precursors: social trust/reciprocity, collective efficacy, voluntary participation, social cohesion.

Forms of social capital (high-level):
- Cognitive social capital: perceptions of trust, reciprocity, and sharing; less tangible.
- Structural social capital: density of networks and engagement; what people do.
Horizontal vs Vertical:
- Horizontal social capital: bonding/bridging within and across similar groups; focuses on relations and networks.
- Vertical (linking) social capital: ties between individuals and those in power or with access to resources.
Bonding vs Bridging:
- Bonding: strong ties within homogeneous groups (family, close friends).
- Bridging: weaker ties linking diverse networks (different communities, diverse backgrounds).
Operationalization (illustrative):
- Bonding/Bridging: relationship patterns;
- Linking: power/resource access across hierarchies.
Key takeaway: social capital comprises what people perceive and what they do in networks and institutions.

Two overarching viewpoints:
- Individual asset (Social Network Approaches, e.g., Bourdieu): resources accessible to individuals through their networks; access depends on personal investment and position.
- Collective social capital (Social Cohesion Approaches, e.g., Putnam): connections, norms of reciprocity, trustworthiness within a community; benefits accrue to groups.
Implications:
- Individual asset emphasizes personal networks and reciprocity.
- Collective social capital emphasizes community-level processes and shared benefits.

Pathways framework components:
- Structural antecedent factors (e.g., area socioeconomic conditions, residential stability)
- Individual confounders (e.g., education, income, race/ethnicity, gender, age)
- Social cohesion, connectedness, and values
- Social capital, social support & leverage, informal social control, neighborhood organization
- Participation, neighborhood attachment
- Health behaviors & risk factors, health status
Health pathways (three major categories):
- ext{Compositional health effects}: health outcomes via individual attributes and activities influenced by social networks (e.g., social support, stress buffering, engagement, norms).
- ext{Contextual health effects}: indirect effects through community-level determinants (economy, housing, access to resources) influenced by social capital.
- ext{Population health effects}: group-level interactions with neighbourhood wealth; dense networks can amplify health benefits (e.g., less crime, more green space).

Individual level (pathways):
- Social support buffers stress
- Social influence shapes health behaviours
- Social participation provides learning and skill-building opportunities
- Access to material resources via networks (jobs, health care, services)
Collective level (pathways):
- Mediates between income inequality and health; egalitarian communities tend to have better health outcomes
- Greater funding for social services in egalitarian settings
- Spread of health norms through networks

Built environment shapes health via:
- Public transportation, housing design, parks/green spaces, food access
- Segregation and exposure to health risks
- It also shapes social cohesion and network opportunities by influencing where people live, work, and interact
Social capital can buffer or magnify neighbourhood health effects through networks and norms

Descriptive norms influence uptake of physical activity; norms reflect what people perceive as typical behaviour among significant others.
Study findings (immigrants and racial/ethnic minorities):
- Foreign-born individuals showed lower physical activity descriptive norms than native-born.
- Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians had lower norms than Whites; socioeconomic factors largely explained gaps except for Asians (cultural/modesty factors, stereotypes, and cultural considerations).
Recommendations:
- Foster social/racial mixing to raise norms among minority groups
- Address socioeconomic disparities to boost norms
- Adapt physical activity options to cultural preferences (gardening, dancing, indoor activities, yoga)

Social capital reflects the vibrancy of social networks and shared norms that facilitate cooperation.
It exists in multiple forms and can be approached at the individual or collective level.
Higher social capital is associated with better health outcomes via multiple pathways (compositional, contextual, population-level effects).
Built environment and social capital interact to shape health, with descriptive norms illustrating how networks influence health behaviours.

Define social capital and name three core definitions.
Distinguish bonding, bridging, and linking social capital with examples.
Explain the difference between cognitive and structural social capital.
What are the three major health pathways through which social capital operates?
How can neighbourhood wealth interact with social capital to affect population health?
What do descriptive norms reveal about physical activity in minority groups, and what are the policy implications?