Introduction

Social capital has been developed in recent years as an analytical tool which explores the nature of social cohesiveness and the value which can be added or subtracted from social life by the contribution arising from social activity and social networks in a given population. It has been broadly defined as based on ‘connections among individuals – social networks and the reciprocity and trustworthiness that arose from them’ (Hall, 1999, p. 417). An alternative definition is given by Robert Putnam as ‘features of social organization, such as networks, norms, and trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit’ (Putnam, 2000, p. 18). L.J. Hanifan, a pioneer of the concept, illustrates how it applies to individuals defining social capital as ‘those tangible substances [that] count for most of the daily lives of people: namely, goodwill, fellowship, sympathy and social intercourse’ (Hanifan, 1916, p. 130).

These definitions, though couched in very general terms, show that human life-chances and general welfare are affected by the quality of social interaction within social institutions, but also relate to the quality of input which individuals subscribe to the ongoing life of their local community.