Dark cloud or silver lining? The value of bonding networks during youth

Abstract

Social capital is fast becoming a salient and exciting area of youth study. While debates about social capital during youth usually focus on its presumed positive consequences, there is a current trend to label certain forms of networking, particularly bonding networks, as ‘perverse’, ‘bad’ or ‘dark’. What is often referred to as the ‘down side’ of social capital? Consequently, certain populations and increasingly young people who rely heavily on bonding networks to ‘get on’ and ‘get ahead’ in life are being labelled as social capital deficient at best or deviant at worst. This demonstrates that little, if any consideration has been given to how this form of networking is tied to resilience or sense of identity. This article examines the role of deviant and strong bonding networks during youth in light of evidence collected as part of a social capital study undertaken in the Wollondilly Shire, Australia, in 2008–2009. I posit that bonding forms of social capital far from being negative of bad are in fact valuable coping mechanism, particularly for disadvantaged and vulnerable youths.

Keywords:

• dark social capital
• rural youth
• youth culture

Notes

1. While it is acknowledged that de Souza Briggs does pose four arguments in his work, only three of these are seen as relevant for discussion on the topic of dark social capital.

2. For a full explanation of ‘ties generators’, see Billett (2011).

3. While open invitations are those in which there is no adult involvement (such as with self-referrals) negotiated invitations are those which are made through adults holding positions of power in a young persons' life (such as school principal or youth worker) and may limit a young persons' sense of agency.

4. Focus groups were used to gain an understanding of general information on a number of social capital indicators such as perception of community. Two generators were used within this research – a Ties and an Assets generator – to measure the type, depth and breadth of networks. A survey was used to gather background information such as age, gender, income and postcode. For further information on these tools, see Billett (2011).