Reforming social capital
Whilst the move towards a market economy has seen encouraging progress from institutions both social and economic, on an individual basis change has been slow. The change has had a profound affect on people in how they access and manipulate their networks of social capital. The drawback here, however, is that the term social capital has a distinctive western democratic understanding that does not fit well within an Eastern context. Examples of such discrepancies are that experts disagree on the level of available social capital of individuals and that trust in authorities is low. Moreover, they cannot agree on the strength of interpersonal networks. Research conducted as part of the IDARI project underlined two greater obstacles to a collective initiative. The first of these was the evident lack of bridging between social capital and individuals. The second involved having an unclear insight as to what the gains of such collective actions would be. The research pointed out that well-connected leaders could provide solutions to both by providing credible information to all and by introducing different actors to one another. The use of social authoritative intermediaries is however contrary to the common understanding of the workings of social capital that usually works without them. There remains a clear indication that a westernised model of social capital would need adaptation to fit into an EEC context. Another drawback that would need to be addressed is the fact that that social capital relies on the 'automatic' participation of interests in a climate where social capital already exists. Again, the reliance of authoritative intermediaries might introduce a climate of conflict where different interests are served. The project's research has produced a number of theses on the implementation of social capital, highlighting the various concepts, challenges and potential solutions.