SOCIAL CAPITAL AND ORGANIZATIONS

An organization is a group of persons who satisfy an established membership requirement. Membership requirements may be based on inherited or earned traits. Organizations provide a place for social capital to reside. Organizations exist because they provide the setting in which members can meet their economic, social, validation, and information needs. As the needs of members change, membership requirements and organizational emphasis may also change. Relationships among an organization's members range from antipathetic to sympathetic. Depending on the quality of relationships or social capital within an organization, power will be exercised using a stick, carrot, and hug. Organizations may experience conflict if members perceive they must compete with each other to satisfy their needs. Finally, in a two-person relationship, social capital is likely to be symmetric or exploitation may exist. In more complicated relationships, social capital is likely to satisfy adding up constraints.Institutional and Behavioral Economics,

SOCIAL CAPITAL: SYMPATHY, SOCIO-EMOTIONAL GOODS, AND INSTITUTIONS

This paper summarizes the current state of the social capital paradigm from the viewpoint of the authors. The paper presents and defends a social capital definition based on sympathetic relationships. The paper also summarizes an expanded set of rational preferences that depend on social capital. Then, the paper describes the origin of social capital and its economic consequences, and introduces the concept of socio-emotional goods. Socio-emotional goods may attach themselves to physical goods and services. When this happens, physical goods and services are exchanged on terms different than those values established in an arm's-length market or in exchanges between strangers. It is possible to invest in social capital and this paper reviews several opportunities for social capital investment. Moving from a micro to a macro focus in the study of social capital directs the paper's focus from informal to formal institutions. Finally, the paper summarizes agreed-on social capital principles that suggest that the social capital paradigm is maturing. Key Words: earned kernels, inherited kernels, institutions and networks, social capital, socio-emotional goodsearned kernels, inherited kernels, institutions and networks, social capital, socio-emotional goods, Institutional and Behavioral Economics,

Régimen jurídico-administrativo de las entidades gestoras en la organización de eventos de las universidades españolas. Especial referencia al programa actual de la Universidad de Almeria.

El presente Trabajo Fin de Grado tiene por objeto el diseño e implantación de un nuevo servicio en una Universidad Pública. Podemos definir Servicio desde un punto de vista económico, según la Real Academia Española como “la prestación humana que satisface alguna necesidad social y que no consiste en la producción de bienes materiales”. Deducimos que todo servicio, por lo tanto, responde a una necesidad, a una demanda

IS SOCIAL CAPITAL REALLY CAPITAL?

Social capital in the past two decades has emerged as a dominant paradigm in the various social science disciplines. However, its adoption by the different social science disciplines has led to multiple and often conflicting definitions of social capital. Some differences in the definition of social capital can be explained because scientists have included in the definition expressions of its possible uses, where it resides, and how its service capacity can be changed. This paper defends the social capital metaphor by pointing out that social capital has many important capital-like properties including service potential, durability, flexibility, substitutability, opportunities for decay (maintenance), reliability, ability to create other capital forms, and investment (disinvestment) opportunities. Social capital is compared to other forms of capital including cultural capital and human capital. Keywords: social capital, cultural capital, human capital, physical/financial capital, service potential, durability, flexibility, substitutability, decay (maintenance), reliability, investment (disinvestment)social capital, cultural capital, human capital, physical/financial capital, service potential, durability, flexibility, substitutability, decay (maintenance), reliability, investment (disinvestment), Institutional and Behavioral Economics,

SOCIAL CAPITAL, THE TERMS OF TRADE, AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME

Social capital, a person or group's sympathy or sense of obligation for another person or group, assumes relationships can alter the terms of trade and the likelihood of trades between individuals. Other important economic consequences of social capital result from its ability to internalize externalities. This paper introduces social capital into the neoclassical model to derive forecasts of how relationships will alter the minimum-sell prices of farmland and the likelihood of trades between persons with different relationships. Also deduced in this paper is the effect of social capital on the level and dispersion of benefits from trade. Empirical evidence from a 1,500 farmland owner-operator survey is analyzed and provides support for the social capital paradigm.Institutional and Behavioral Economics, International Relations/Trade,

Biomass partitioning and gas exchange parameters in different Musa cultivars as influenced by natural shade

Poster presented at Tropentag 2011 Development on the Margin. Bonn (Germany), 3-7 Oct 2011

SOCIAL CAPITAL AND POVERTY REDUCTION: TOWARD A MATURE PARADIGM

Introduction The purposes of this paper are: (1) to introduce the social capital paradigm; (2) to present evidence that social capital has an important role in poverty reduction; and (3) to suggest several policy prescriptions for building and using social capital to reduce poverty. The social capital paradigm includes social capital, networks, socio-emotional goods, attachment values, institutions, and power. Social capital is a person or group's sympathy for others. Social capital resides in sympathetic relationships that can be described using networks. One reason to value social capital is because it can produce economic benefits and if neglected, economic disadvantages. Another reason to value social capital is because it can be used to produce socio-emotional goods. Sometimes socio-emotional goods become embedded in objects. When this occurs, the meaning and value of the object change. The change in the value of an object produced by embedded socio-emotional goods is the object's attachment value. Individuals exchange both physical and socio-emotional goods. Institutions are the rules that order and give meaning to exchanges. Institutions with high attachment values are more likely to be observed than those whose compliance depends on economic incentives or threats. Finally, power, the ability to influence others, depends on one's resources, including one's social capital. In most personalized transactions, persons exchange both socio-emotional goods and physical goods and services. Moreover, the relative amounts of socio-emotional goods and physical goods and services exchanged will alter the levels and terms of trade when measured in physical units. Since one's ability to include socio-emotional goods in exchanges for physical goods and services depends on one's social capital, the terms and levels of exchange of physical goods and services will be influenced by the transacting party's social capital. Those with high levels of social capital will have advantages over those who lack social capital because they can exchange both socio-emotional goods and physical goods and services. Furthermore, since social capital alters the terms and levels of trade and the terms and levels of trade influence the distribution of incomes derived from trades, then social capital also has an important influence on the distribution of household income and poverty. Some evidence suggests that the distribution of social capital in networks and the distribution of household incomes are connected.Food Security and Poverty, Institutional and Behavioral Economics,

THE SOCIAL CAPITAL FOUNDATIONS OF TRUST IN GLOBAL AGRI-FOOD SYSTEM TRANSACTIONS

The concept of social capital is defined as a third process (along with individual incentives and authority relationships) for assuring transaction cost efficiency. Social capital is especially relevant to international transactions because cultural differences, large distances, and limited international institutional scope lessen the effectiveness of incentives and authority relationships while social capital can be built within the context of specific international transactions. Methods for building social capital in international settings are explored. A research agenda is articulated as well as a list of managerial implications for using social capital in an international context.Agribusiness,

The response of Musa cultivar root systems to a tree shade gradient

Poster presented at Tropentag 2011 - Development on the Margin. Bonn (Germany), 3-7 Oct 2011