From a theoretical viewpoint, the consequences of social capital for norms of citizenship are usually perceived as benign. However, empirical evidence indicates that its impact may be detrimental. To investigate this phenomenon further, this article examines the specific nature of the relationships among social involvement, social trust, and four different types of norms of citizenship. Social capital acts on these norms in two different ways. First, it varies with the specific norms of citizenship. Second, the different components of social capital do not necessarily exert similar effects. In this article, the negative and significant relationships between social trust and norms of social order are revealed, indicating the “dark sides” of social capital. This finding challenges the common wisdom about the positive interrelationship between social capital and a citizenry’s public spiritedness in a democratic state.
Albano, R., & Barbera, F., (2009). Social capital, welfare state, and political legitimacy . American Behavioral Scientist, 53(5), 677-690.
2.
Chanley, V.A. ( 2002). Trust in government in the aftermath of 9/11: Determinants and consequences. Political Psychology, 23(3), 469-483.
3.
Dalton, R.J. ( 2008a). Citizenship norms and the expansion of political participation . Political Studies, 56, 76-98.
4.
Dalton, R.J. ( 2008b). The good citizen. How a younger generation is reshaping American politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
5.
Denters, B., Gabriel, O.W., & Torcal, M. ( 2007). Norms of good citizenship. In J. W. van Deth, J. R. Montero, & A. Westholm (Eds.), Citizenship and involvement among the populations of European democracies. A comparative analysis (pp. 87-107). London: Routledge .
6.
Esser, H. ( 2008). The two meanings of social capital. In D. Castiglione, J. W. van Deth, & G. Wolleb (Eds.), The handbook of social capital (pp. 22-49). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
7.
Gabriel, O.W., Kunz, V., Roßteutscher, S., & van Deth, J.W. (2002). Sozialkapital und Demokratie. Zivilgesellschaftliche Ressourcen im Vergleich. [Social capital and democracy. Comparing civil society resources]. Vienna, Austria: WUV Universitätsverlag.
8.
Glover, T.D., Shinew, K.J., & Parry, D.C. ( 2005). Association, sociability, and civic culture: The democratic effect of community gardening. Leisure Sciences, 27, 75-92.
9.
Hooghe, M. ( 2003). Voluntary associations and democratic attitudes: Value congruence as a causal mechanism. In M. Hooghe & D. Stolle (Eds.), Generating social capital. Civil society and institutions in comparative perspective (pp. 89-112). New York: Palgrave.
10.
Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. ( 2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy. The human development sequence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
11.
Maloney, W.A., van Deth, J.W., & Roßteutscher, S. (2008). Civic orientations: Does associational type matter?Political Studies, 56, 261-287.
12.
Marshall, T.H. ( 1950). Class, citizenship, and other essays. London: Cambridge University Press.
13.
Newton, K. ( 1997). Social capital and democracy. American Behavioral Scientist, 40(5), 575-586.
14.
Petersson, O., Hermansson, J., Micheletti, M., Teorell, J., & Westholm, A.1998. Demokrati och medborgarskap. Demokratiradets rapport 1998. [Democracy and citizenship. Report from the council of democracy 1998]. Stockholm: SNS Förlag.
15.
Putnam, R.D. ( 1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16.
Putnam, R.D. ( 2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community . New York: Simon & Schuster .
17.
Putnam, R.D. ( 2007). E pluribus unum: Diversity and community in the twenty-first century. The 2006 Johan Skytte prize lecture. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30(2), 137-174.
18.
Rosenblum, N.L. ( 1998). Membership and morals: The personal uses of pluralism in America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
19.
Roßteutscher, S. ( 2004). Die Rückkehr der Tugend? [The return of virtue?] . In J. W. van Deth (Ed.), Deutschland in Europa. Ergebnisse des European Social Survey 2002-2003 (pp. 175-200). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften .
20.
Theiss-Morse, E., & Hibbing, J.R. ( 2005). Citizenship and civic engagement. Annual Review of Political Science, 8, 227-249.
21.
van Deth, J.W. ( 2007). Norms of citizenship. In R. J. Dalton & H.-D. Klingemann (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political behavior (pp. 402-417). Oxford, UK : Oxford University Press.
22.
van Deth, J. W.,Montero, J. R., & Westholm, A. (Eds.). (2007). Citizenship and involvement in European democracies: A comparative analysis. London: Routledge.
23.
Warren, M.E. ( 2001). Democracy and association. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
24.
Zmerli, S. ( 2002, August). The empirical relevance of bonding and bridging social capital. An East-West German comparison. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association , Boston.
25.
Zmerli, S. ( 2008a). Inklusives und exklusives Sozialkapital in Deutschland. Grundlagen, Erscheinungsformen und Erklärungspotential eines alternativen theoretischen Konzepts. [Inclusive and exclusive social capital in Germany. Foundations, manifestations, and explanatory potential of an alternative theoretical concept]. Baden-Baden, Germany: Nomos.
26.
Zmerli, S. ( 2008b, April). The associational roots of political confidence . Paper prepared for the 66th Midwest Political Science Association Political Science conference, Chicago .
27.
Zmerli, S., Newton, K., & Montero, J.R. ( 2007). Trust in people, confidence in political institutions, and satisfaction with democracy. In J. W. van Deth, J. R. Montero, & A. Westholm (Eds.), Citizenship and involvement among the populations of European democracies. A comparative analysis (pp. 35-65). London : Routledge.
