Edmondson Ricca
Department of Political Science and Sociology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Soc Sci Med. 2003 Nov;57(9):1723-33. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(03)00011-x.
The idea of social capital is currently being discussed as a source of support for health, though it is often argued that the concept should not be used in an attempt to evolve neutral policy strategies but underlines the need for moral and political debate in health policy. This article, first, supports this argument by indicating the complex and culturally diverse nature of social capital. Its components react with their social contexts to produce a range of variants which differ from each other along several dimensions. Social solidarity and support involve different conventions in different places, with results which need appraisal before they can be supported. The article explores these issues by drawing on ethnographic material illustrating aspects of social relatedness in a variety of settings. Secondly, writers who treat social capital as invariably positive tend to associate it with conditions in the neo-liberal societies of late capitalism, even though they also see it as threatened there. Again examining social contexts, the article locates the reasons for this paradox in the cultures and structures of the societies concerned. Large-scale institutions in the West-including both those required to implement public health measures and those in which the majority of people work-are organised via neo-liberal processes which are not all conducive to the types of social relatedness which the social capital debate seeks to explore. In particular, significant aspects of social trust are difficult to support in neo-liberal organisations. The assumption that social capital can be promoted via social engineering which relies upon these very institutions is thus questionable. This, together with more positive aspects of the debate, draws attention to the need for further research on social relatedness if it is to be supported by public policy.
社会资本的概念目前正作为健康支持的一个来源被讨论，尽管人们常认为该概念不应被用于试图制定中立的政策策略，而是强调了健康政策中道德和政治辩论的必要性。本文首先通过指出社会资本复杂且文化多样的性质来支持这一论点。其组成部分与社会背景相互作用，产生一系列在多个维度上彼此不同的变体。社会团结和支持在不同地方涉及不同的惯例，其结果在得到支持之前需要评估。本文通过借鉴人种志材料来探讨这些问题，这些材料说明了各种环境中社会关系的各个方面。其次，那些将社会资本一概视为积极的作者往往将其与晚期资本主义新自由主义社会的状况联系起来，尽管他们也认为社会资本在那里受到威胁。本文再次审视社会背景，找出这种矛盾在相关社会的文化和结构中的原因。西方的大型机构——包括实施公共卫生措施所需的机构和大多数人工作的机构——都是通过新自由主义过程组织起来的，而这些过程并非都有利于社会资本辩论所试图探讨的那种社会关系类型。特别是，社会信任的重要方面在新自由主义组织中难以得到支持。因此，那种认为可以通过依赖这些机构的社会工程来促进社会资本的假设是值得怀疑的。这一点，连同辩论中更积极的方面，提请人们注意，如果社会关系要得到公共政策的支持，就需要对其进行进一步研究。
