![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
Social capital has been demonstrated to be a benefit to a community in a variety of ways. However, researchers have begun to point out that social capital does have a downside. Communities that use bonding social capital to mobilise residents to action have the potential to exclude outsiders from their communities. The number of governments in a county could be used as an indicator of bonding social capital within a region. Residents use their local government to create and pass laws that have the potential to exclude others. The current analysis used the number of governments as a proxy for bonding social capital. Findings demonstrate that as the level of bonding social capital (the number of governments) increased the social capital in the county increased. Residents use their bonding social capital to respond to others, which then increases the level of social capital to be able to mobilise in the future.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Matthew Moore
Matthew Moore is an assistant professor of sociology and criminal justice at Grand View University. His research interests are in the areas of cross-national criminology, social capital and segregation. A recent publication in Crime & Delinquency examined how different forms of social capital affected crime.
Nicholas Recker
Nicholas Recker is an assistant professor of sociology at Metropolitan State University of Denver. His research interests include community/regional development and social capital. A recent publication in Applied Research in Quality of Life focused on how bonding versus bridging social capital related with quality of life changes in small Iowa communities.