Universal Access in the Information Society

, Volume 2, Issue 4, pp 315–330 | Cite as

Social capital and access

Long paper

Abstract

Physical access to computers does not guarantee access to the information society. To help ensure that the first type of access translates into the second, it is necessary to pay attention to how computer and Internet use can enhance social capital. Drawing on examples from technology projects in India and other countries, this paper examines the concept of social capital and its relationship to information and communication technology, focusing on the role of both micro-level and macro-level social capital.

Keywords

Access Social capital Community informatics Community development Social development 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Agre PE (1997) Building community networks. In: Agre PE, Schuler D (eds) Reinventing technology, rediscovering community: critical explorations of computing as a social practice, vol 1997. Ablex, Greenwich, Conn. Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agre PE (2001) Networking on the network. http://dlis.gseis.ucla.edu/people/pagre/network.html. Cited 19 October 2001 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alkalimat A, Williams K (2001) Social capital and cyberpower in the African American community: a case study of a community technology centre in the dual city. In: Keeble L, Loader B (eds) Community informatics: shaping computer-mediated social networks. Routledge, London Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alvarez RM, Nagler J (2001) The likely consequences of Internet voting for political representation. Loyola Los Ang Law Rev 34(3):1115–1153 Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barlow JP (1996) Declaration of independence of cyberspace. http://www.eff.org/˜barlow/Declaration-Final.html. Cited 1 July 1999 Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Binns D (2001) Review: the mystery of capital: why capitalism triumphs in the West and fails everywhere else. Leading companies e-zine, January. http://www.fed.org/onlinemag/jan01/reviews.htm. Cited 2 October 2001 Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bourdieu P (1986) The forms of capital. In: Richardson JG (ed) Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education. Greenwood Press, New York Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brown JS, Duguid P (2000) The social life of information. Harvard Business School Press, Boston Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burt RS (1992) Structural holes: the social structure of competition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chambers R (1992) Rural appraisal: rapid, relaxed and participatory, discussion paper no. 311. Institute of Development Studies, Brighton Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Choices (2001) Choices. Bridge.com Inc, Ogdensburg, New York Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cohen D, Prusak L (2001) In good company: how social capital makes organizations work. Harvard Business School Press, Boston Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Coleman JS (1988) Social capital in the creation of human capital. Am J Sociol 94:95–120 Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Collier P (1998) Social capital and poverty (social capital initiative working paper 4). World Bank, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Commission of the European Communities (2001) e-Inclusion practices [background document]. http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/soc-dial/info_soc/esdis/ eincl_1practices.pdf. Cited 10 December 2001 Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    de Soto H (2000) The mystery of capital: why capitalism triumphs in the West but fails everywhere else. Basic Books, New York Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Deibert RJ (1997) Parchment, printing and Hypermedia: Communication in world order transformation. Columbia Univ Press, New York Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Granovetter M (1973) Strength of weak ties. Am J Sociol 8:1360–1380 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gumucio Dagron A (2001) Making waves: stories of participatory communication for social change. Rockefeller Foundation, New York Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gurstein M (2000) Community informatics: enabling communities with information and communications technologies. Idea Group, Hershey, Pa. Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hampton KH (2001) Living the wired life in the wired suburb: Netville, glocalization and civil society. Dissertation, University of Toronto Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hampton KN (2000) Examining community in the digital neighborhood: early results from Canada’s wired suburb. In: Ishida T, Isbister K (eds) Digital cities: technologies, experiences, and future perspectives. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 1765. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hampton KN (2001) Broadband neighborhoods: connected communities. In: Jacko J, Sears A (eds) CHI2001 extended abstracts. The Association for Computer Machinery, New York Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hampton KN, Wellman B (1999) Netville on-line and off-line: observing and surveying a wired suburb. Am Behav Sci 43(3):475–492 Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hampton KN, Wellman B (2001) Long distance community in the network society: contact and support beyond Netville. Am Behav Sci 45(3):476–495 Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kling R (1999) What is social informatics and why does it matter? D-Lib Mag 5(1) Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kling R (2000) Learning about information technologies and social change: the contribution of social informatics. Inf Soc 16(3):1–36 Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kraut R, Kiesler S, Boneva B, Commings J, Hegelson V, Crawford A (2002) Internet paradox revisited. J Soc Issues 58(1):49–74 Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kraut R, Patterson M, Lundmark V, Kiesler S, Mukophadhyay T, Scherlis W (1998) Internet paradox: a social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being. Am Psychol 53(9):1017–1031 Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Krishna A (2000) Creating and harnessing social capital. In: Dasgupta P, Seragaldin I (eds) Social capital: a multifaceted perspective. World Bank, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lin N (2001) Social capital: a theory of social structure and action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass. Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Loader B, Hague B, Keeble L, Eagle D (eds) (2001) Community informatics: shaping computer-mediated social networks. Routledge, London Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mitra S (1999) Children and the Internet: minimally evasive education for mass computer literacy. CSI Commun June:12–16 Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mukherjee N (1993) Participatory rural appraisal: methodology and applications. Concept Publishing, New Delhi Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Nie NH, Erbring L (2000) Internet and society: a preliminary report. Stanford Institute for the Quantitative Study of Society, Stanford. http://www.stanford.edu/group/siqss/Press_Release/Preliminary_Report.pdf. Cited 20 December 2001 Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pershing SB (2001) The voting rights act in the Internet age: an equal access theory for interesting times. Loyola Los Ang Law Rev 34(3):1171–1211 Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pieper M (2001) Sociological issues of HCI design. In: Stephanidis C (ed) User interfaces for all: concepts, methods, and tools. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J. Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Putnam R (1993) The prosperous community: Social capital and pubic life. Am Prospect 13:35–42 Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Putnam R (2000) Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community. Simon and Schuster, New York Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rajora R (2002) Bridging the digital divide: Gyandoot, the model for community networks. Tata McGraw Hill, New Delhi Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Regional Technology Alliance (2001) Mapping a future for digital connections: a study of the digital divide in San Diego County. http://www.sdrta.org/sdrta/aboutsdrta/RTA_Report_0201.pdf Cited 7 September 2001 Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Resnick P (2002) Beyond bowling together: sociotechnical capital. In: Carroll J (ed) Human computer interaction in the new millennium. Addison Wesley, New York Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rheingold H (2000) The virtual community: homesteading on the electronic frontier. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Serageldin I, Grootaert C (2000) Defining social capital: an integrated view. In: Dasgupta P, Serageldin I (eds) Social capital: a mulifaceted perspective. World Bank, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Smith J (2001) Books reviewed: The mystery of capital. The Geonomist 9(3). http://www.progress.org/geonomy/geonom93.htm Cited 2 Ocober 2001 Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Stanley L (in press) Beyond access: psychosocial barriers to computer literacy. The Information Society Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sunstein C (2001) Republic.com. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Turner JH (2000) The formation of social capital. In: Dasgupta P, Seragaldin I (eds) Social capital: a multifaceted perspective. Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Warschauer M (1999) Electronic literacies: language, culture, and power in online education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J. Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Warschauer M (2003) Technology and social inclusion: rethinking the digital divide. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Wellman B, Haase AQ, Witte J, Hampton K (2001) Does the Internet increase, decrease, or supplement social capital?: Social networks, participation, and community commitment. Am Behav Sci 45(3):437–456 Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Wenger E (1998) Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Woolcock M (1998) Social capital and economic development: toward a theoretical synthesis and policy framework. Theor Soc 27:151–208 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dept. of Education and Dept. of Information & Computer ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA

Personalised recommendations