Building Social Capital: A Learning Agenda for the Twenty-first Century

Social capital creates local economic prosperity. This ® nding by Putnam (1993a), Fukuyama (1995), Coleman (1988, 1990) and other social scientists has lent legitimacy to what those involved in community economic development have known intuitively for years: the level of inter-personal trust, civic engagement and organisational capability in a community counts. Their research indicates that the lack of, or decline in, social capital lies behind the psychological, spiritual and economic malaise in communities throughout the world. While there is a rich literature deploring the lack of civic commitment and the rise of individualism (Bellah et al., 1985, 1991; Etzioni, 1994; Lappe and DuBois, 1994), the social capital literature gives the issue a more compelling rationale for urgency: the bottom line. Just as the inter-personal aspects of total quality management (TQM) ushered in trustbuilding and team-building to the private and public sectors (Deming, 1982; Osborne and Gaebler, 1992), the concept of social capital brings these same values centre stage in the so-called third sector: civil society. The recognition of social capital as a determinant of local economic development directs the attention of development planners to a very intangible goal. In addition to creating jobs, disbursing loans, generating income, training the labour force and delivering services, development planners must now confront head on the fuzzy task of shaping levels of inter-personal trust, feelings of belonging and responsibility, and the quality and ef® cacy of civic engagement in a community. These intangibles can no longer be relegated to quaint touchy-feely by-products of community economic development. A central task for development planners is now social capital formationÐ i.e. communitybuilding itself.