Thursday, April 7, 2016

Collective Efficacy & Social Capital = Regional Impact

Competitive globalism has shifted the focus of how to attract economic revenue. In the past businesses and employment producers have focused on the metropolis itself, but now it is shifting to a metropolitan area approach to determine its location. Social capital and collective efficacy play a key role in determining the attractiveness of a region. At a regional scale we see the impact of collective efficacy from neighborhood to neighborhood and municipality to municipality. Social capital and collective efficacy are partly overlapping and complementary to one another.  They establish and help sustain the community’s social control. These concepts extend from a community image to a regional image.
Collective efficacy is the social cohesion among neighbors combined with their willingness to intervene on behalf of the common good and is linked to reduce violence. Collective efficacy and social capital intertwine with each other to make the region attractive. Social capital is a key component of regionalism. Without social capital nothing can be accomplished. Social capital refers to the features of social organization. A social organization is a social network that has norms and trust which produce coordination and cooperation for mutual gain. Social capital includes the institutions, relationships, the attitudes, values and beliefs that govern interactions among people and contribute to economic and social development. Together collective efficacy and social capital control the regions image on an individual level. If there are high crime rates, it is usually the result of a lack in collective efficacy and social capital.

An increase of collective efficacy leads to an increase in social capital. Civic engagement is a main part of social capital. Without the participation in voluntary associations along with activities like voting, there is a lack of communication. A lack of communication leads to a lack of social capital. The lack of social capital is interpreted as a lack of caring, goodwill, loyalty, sense of belonging, and sense of community leads to violence and economic loss. An improved economic performance does not lead to an increase in social capital. When there is social capital, there is more charitable giving, voting, and involvement in community which helps the region grow. Studies show that social capital or civic engagement are an important independent determinant of economic growth from a city-level and county-level. This indicates the region cannot grow to its potential without harvesting and cherishing social capital at a local scale.

In the future, communities must continually build their collective efficacy and social capital to develop social control of their landscape. Dense local ties promote social cohesion, but can grow negative networks such as gangs. It is a complex process, but can be controlled on an individual level. Shared expectations of social control will help build shared public expectations. Once individuals can trust and rely each other it can multiple to a regional effort of attraction for future investors and innovators. One person can make a difference if they can influence others to follow their vision. From a big picture perspective, collective efficacy plays a vital role in determining the output of a region. Social capital emphasizes on trust and norms in a social network while collective efficacy is a form of social organization that involves social cohesion and trust with expectations of social control. These two concepts build off each other. Regions that will prosper in the future will have the key attribute of a good collective efficacy and social capital mix.


Ansari, Sami. "Social Capital and Collective Efficacy: Resource and Operating Tools of Community Social Control." Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology 5.2 (2013): 75-94. Web. 4 Apr. 2016.
Rupasingha, Anil, Stephan J. Goetz, and David Freshwater. "Social Capital and Economic Growth: A County-Level Analysis." Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 32.2 (2000): 565-72. Web. 

1 comment:

  1. I like how you explained the positive effects social capital can have on a community. However, I would have liked a more detailed example of what it means to have a lot of social capital and how it affects communities. Also, you talked about dense local ties can spur the growth of gangs, which I thought was a really good point, but I would have liked you to expand on that further. Overall this was a very informative post with some good pictures, a few more detailed examples and you're all set.

    ReplyDelete