Plan de Comunicación

This section offers a critical engagement with the different types of social capital discussed in this research namely bonding, bridging, and linking social capital and their relationships with each other and application in the study communities. Woolcock (2001), of the World Bank and Harvard University, differentiated each as thus:

Bonding social capital: denotes ties between people in similar situations, such as immediate family, close friends and neighbours

Bridging social capital: which encompasses more distant ties of like persons, such as loose friendships, workmates, associates and colleagues.

Linking social capital: which reaches out to unlike people in dissimilar

situations, such as those who are entirely outside of the community, thus enabling members to leverage a far wider range of resources than are available in the community. (Pp.13-4).

unite people across diverse social cleavages, while bonding social capital is introspective and reinforces exclusive groupings among homogeneous identities (Putnam, 2000). He argues that:

Bonding social capital is good for undergirding specific reciprocity and mobilizing solidarity. While bridging networks, by contrast are better for linkage to external assets and for information diffusion...Bonding social capital constitutes a kind of sociological super-glue, whereas bridging social capital provides a sociological WD-40 (an American lubricant brand). Putnam (pp.21-23)

Putnam continued that, social capital like all other forms of capital is like as a double edged sword that could be used for either positive or negative (antisocial) purposes (Putnam, 2000: 22). He exemplified negative bonding social capital with activities of criminal gangs like the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), and positive social capital bonds with those of groups such as community associations, choirs, cooperative groups, and bowling clubs that create links with people of different backgrounds.

While we discuss the relevance of the positive bonding social capital to this thesis, it is also important that we identify along the negative social capital traits in the various misuse cases of the cooperative pathway in the study area. The Putnamian positive bonds are viewed here as the dense type of networks that provide crucial social and psychological support to close affiliates and group members in a (social) relational setup. In cognizance of the misuse challenges as in all human societies, this research however, argues that such Putnamian bonds do exist among the smallholder cooperative groups of the study area. The practice of this form of social organisation constitutes a model of cultural governance that aid to regulate activities within these Igbo communities. Its structure emanates from the Igbo peoples’ cultural ethos of ‘ugwu’ which inspires cooperative and reciprocal acts that in turn enables cooperative members to work together at addressing common needs. Osaghae, (1999) analysing Ekeh’s (1975) theory of the two publics describes this model as a parallel or shadow state that provides the public goods and services (such as schools, dispensaries, scholarships, and micro credit) that the state have failed to provide, through self-help efforts and resources that are (sometimes expropriated from the state).

From a different angle, Narayan (1999) and many other social ethnographers discussed the benefits of rural social capital and solidarity networking especially in the opening up of economic and employment opportunities within ethnic groups in communities, leading to poverty reduction, and increased equality and general community well-being (Jiobu, 1988; O’Connor, 1990; Zhou, 1992; Waldinger, 1995; Blackwood, 1997; Narayan, 1999; Portes, 2000). But on the other hand, some researchers have presented a denigrated picture of this sort of social capital bond. They associate it with spontaneous instinctual reactions as often observed in rescue missions and recovery supports from natural disaster and conflict situations rather than the enabling sustenance position that it is known for in the local communities (Pelling & High, 2005; Murphy, 2007; Mathbor, 2007). Having said that, therefore this research enquires to know how social capital bonding is operated within the Igbo communities of this study

Among the Igbos in their village-communities, bonding social capital attributes, (norms ,values and beliefs), are lived out daily through various group activities among smallholder cooperative members and in the interpersonal relationships of other community based organisation (CBOs) such as age grades, family leagues, kins, gender groups. These generate the collective stock of support that not only help the participating locals to ‘get by’ their daily life’s challenges but also supports them to ‘get ahead’ and ‘along’ in certain ways (Woolcock, 2004: 227, 232-3). The idea of what ‘getting ahead’ stands for is relative; like the concept of development, it would mean different things to different people in different communities. For Xavier de Souza Briggs, it implies “accessing bridging or linking networks to external assets (such as the government, market and other development agencies) for information diffusion and broader opportunities” (Souza Briggs cited in Putnam, 2000, 21). Mark Granovetter (1973) termed such linkages weak ties “because they constitute the powerful connections to distant dissimilar acquaintances that move in different circles than the strong ties that link relatives and intimate friends who share the same sociological niche” (Granovetter, 1973:1-13).

In this study area’s circumstance, bridging and linking ties with government and these other broad development agencies are considered generally weak. As Rose (2000:45) notes, “The

as in the ‘hourglass’ societies of developing countries”. Development essentials for these communities are compromised in corrupt practices through the collusion of state officials with some conniving locals. State regulatory institutions like the police, judiciary, ministries, commissions and agencies that are supposed to protect and provide services to the people, fall short in their duties (Odigbo, 1998; Smith, 2010). Challenged by these gaping inadequacies, the people resort to their group bonds of social capital in order to advance their common community and individual needs. Therefore, in place of the weak macro-bridging or linking social capital bonds with government and other external development agencies, there exists what I argue as a dilated or elastic micro social capital bond. It is dilated/elastic in the sense that, it goes beyond the argued ordinariness of instantaneity, narrowness, and naivety to portray broader flexibility; thus comprising within its bond, the other two forms of social capital viz. bridging and linking. This dilated or elastic social capital bond originates from the thick ties of the micro bonding link, and interweaves with the powerful but weak ties of the meso-(in-between) and macro-bridging (linking) networks. Since the conventional government bridging and linking social capital bonds with the people in the area is apparently weak, the dilated or elastic bond conveniently fits into the lagging structure with its unique forms of diverse linkage. This is further addressed in the subsequent sub-heading on the Igbo social capital conception. In Smith’s (2010) research among the Ubakala village communities in Igboland, he notes:

When at home in the community, cleavages along the lines of village, hamlet, or lineage tend to be more pronounced. Away from home, when two Ubakala natives meet in Lagos, for example, the sense of kinship is very strong, even if they are not closely related... (p.350).

An Igbo son or daughter resident in the urban city for instance, would naturally seek out to join the nearest home development or diaspora group from his/her natal village community in his/her area of abode. If there are no such indigenous, diaspora groups within the region, he/she would search and join another nearby similar Igbo group in his/her area. But if there are still none, then he/she liaises directly with his/her natal home community through family relatives at his/her country home (Onyeiwu, 1997, 2003; Nwagbara, 2007:105;). The form of bond expressed in these connections is so culturally strong that Igbo indigenes proudly identify and assess the value of their personalities by the solidarity of their interpersonal network.

In this research, I termed this linkage of diaspora group with their natal home community society meso dilated social capital bond; it is comparable to the bridging or inter-connectivity of different groups and associates. The bond graduates to mega when diaspora groups’ social status and achievements attract development connections to the base groups in their home communities. At such times, the immediate diaspora groups usually rally their joint support around the ‘prime’ connector in the delivery of solidarity to their local home community bases. It is interesting that prominent sons and daughters of Igbo origin have attracted development to their various home communities through this model of social capital network structure. Dr Okonja Iweala, an Igbo daughter and a former managing director at the World Bank, Emeka Anyaoku, the former secretary of the Common wealth, eminent Igbo sons and daughters who are athletes in competitive sports in Europe and America, and professionals all over the world, have attracted colleagues and friends to local fund-raising events in their various communities for projects such as a school, hospital, library building, and road construction. Such self-help projects record more resounding success than most development promises made by the political governments and NGO development partners.

Several other researchers approach the social capital distinction question from a completely different dimension. Uphoff and Wijayaratna (2000) developed the dual perception of social capital as either structural or cognitive. They see structural social capital as referring to established social structures, such as networks, associations, and institutions guided by rules, procedures and precedents that facilitate mutually beneficial collective action. Whereas, cognitive social capital is said to comprise the more subjective and intangible elements such as shared norms, values, attitudes, and beliefs, that prompt people to act in mutually collaborative manner (Uphoff, 1999; Krishna & Uphoff, 2002; Hitt, Ho-Uk & Yucel, 2002). In other words, cognitive and structural forms of social capital25 are commonly connected and mutually reinforcing. Both forms of social capital play out in the leadership formation and progression of

25 _{For example, if strong leadership is the reason that a collectively-managed rural project works well in a}

community, this indicates that a key source (s) of efficient leadership in the group or community management and so points to the availability of ‘structural social capital’ background. On the contrary, if the reason for the good result is

some of the smallholder cooperative societies that this study investigates. I will now discuss the practice of social capital and cooperation within the African cultural identity context as preached and propagated by the early pan-African socialist leaders of the post-independence era.