Conceptualising social capital : case studies of social capital inputs into housing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social capital refers to material and symbolic resources that are accessed through social relationships and used for purposive actions. Conceptualising social capital as having four archetypal forms provides planners with an analytic and heuristic tool for considering the different resources that community and government actors bring to various projects and social endeavours. These forms of social capital are called bonding social capital (based on intra-community relationships), bridging social capital (based on extra-community relationships), institutional social capital (based on relationships established by the formal and informal institutions of society) and synergistic social capital (based on relationships between state and civil society actors). This quadripartite model of social capital was found to be useful in analysing the different socially embedded resources which were applied to housing initiatives for two distinct communities of people in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. One case looked at a seniors care home established for elderly Chinese people by a community-based organisation (CBO) known as the United Chinese Community Enrichment Services Society (S.U.C.C.E.S.S.). The second case examined community housing for adults with developmental disabilities that was supported directly by family members and a CBO called Mainstream Association for Proactive Community Living (MAPCL) and indirectly by an informal group known as the Parents Support Group for Families of Mentally Handicapped Adults. In both cases, the housing initiative relied on resources that were accessed through the intra-community ties of people united by a common ethnicity or interest in supporting adults with developmental disabilities. Necessary inputs for developing and sustaining the housing initiatives were also found in extra-community ties with the wider community and internationally-based professional associations; relationships with government actors at the municipal, provincial and federal levels; and predictable societal relationships established by legislation and norms of behaviour. A four-part model of social capital additionally serves as a planning tool to identify a broader range of resources and possibilities for policy intervention and to remind planners they work with multiple publics, must adopt a critical approach to community involvement and coproduction and should encourage governments to be active in shaping the institutional environment and engaging with individuals and community groups.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".