Putnam argues that civil society—citizen activity in organizations—contributes to successful governance, but he does not specify in detail how this occurs. This article spells out how citizens' participation in groups might impinge on the state through both political participation and democratic norms. The authors consider not only Putnam's social capital but add new “political capital” variables. The relationships among civil society and social and political capital are then explored, employing survey data from urban Central America. It is discovered that political context, specifically regime repression, powerfully affects civil society and social and political capital. Furthermore, civil society more clearly affects political capital variables than social capital variables.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Blair, H. (1994, February 24). Civil society and democratic development. Washington, DC: U.S. Agency for International Development—Center for Development Information and Evaluation.
2.
Blaney, D. L. , & Pasha, M. K. (1993). Civil society and democracy in the Third World: Ambiguities and historical possibilities. Studies in Comparative International Development, 28, 3-24.
3.
Booth, J. A. , & Richard, P. B. (1996). Repression, participation, and democratic norms in urban Central America. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 1205-1232.
4.
Booth, J. A. , & Richard, P. B. (1998). Civil society, political capital, and democratization in Central America. Journal of Politics, 60, 780-800.
5.
Booth, J. A. , & Seligson, M. A. (1979). Peasants as activists: A reevaluation of political participation in the countryside. Comparative Political Studies, 12, 29-59.
6.
Booth, J. A. , & Walker, T. W. (1993). Understanding Central America. Boulder, CO: Westview.
7.
Brehm, J. , & Rahn, W. (1997). Individual-level evidence for the causes and consequences of social capital. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 999-1023.
8.
Bulmer-Thomas, V. (1987). The political economy of Central America since 1920. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Carroll, T. F. (1992). Intermediary NGOs: The supporting link in grassroots development. West Hartford, CT: Kumarian.
10.
Clark, J. (1991). Democratizing development: The role of voluntary organizations. West Hartford, CT: Kumarian.
11.
Cohen, J. , & Rogers, J. (1992). Secondary associations and democratic governance. Politics and Society, 20, 393-472.
12.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(Suppl.), S95-S120.
13.
Conway, M. M. (1991). Political participation in the United States. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
14.
Diamond, L. (1992). Introduction: Civil society and the struggle for democracy. In L. Diamond (Ed.), The democratic revolution: Struggles for freedom and democracy in the developing world. New York: Freedom House.
15.
Esman, M. J. , & Uphoff, N. (1984). Local organizations: Intermediaries in rural development. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
16.
Foley, M. W. (1996). Laying the groundwork: The struggle for civil society in El Salvador. Journal of Interamerican Politics and World Affairs, 38, 67-104.
17.
Foley, M. W. , & Edwards, B. (1996). The paradox of civil society. Journal of Democracy, 7, 38-52.
18.
Foley, M. W. , & Edwards, B. (1998). Civil society and social capital beyond Putnam. American Behavioral Scientist, 42, 124-139.
19.
Hirschman, A. O. (1984). Getting ahead collectively: Grassroots experiences in Latin America. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon.
20.
Muller, E. N. , Seligson, M. A., & Turan, I. (1987). Education, participation, and support for democratic norms. Comparative Politics, 20, 19-33.
21.
Nagel, J. H. (1987). Participation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
22.
Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
23.
Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America's declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6, 65-78.
24.
Richard, P. B. , & Booth, J. A. (1995, April 6-8). Sex and repression effects on political participation and support for democratic norms in urban Central America. Paper presented at the Midwest Political Science Association meeting, Chicago.
25.
Rosenstone, S. J. , & Hansen, J. M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.
26.
Seligson, A. L. (1996, April). Civic association and democratic participation in Central America: A test of the Putnam thesis. Paper presented at the meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
27.
Seligson, M. A. , & Booth, J. A. (1993). Political culture and regime type. Journal of Politics, 55, 777-792.
28.
Seligson, M. A. , & Booth, J. A. (Eds.). (1995). Elections and democracy in Central America, revisited. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
29.
Seligson, M. A. , & Gómez, B. M. (1989). Ordinary elections in extraordinary times. In J. A. Booth & M. A. Seligson (Eds.), Elections and democracy in Central America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
30.
Tarrow, S. (1996). Making social science work across space and time: A critical reflection on Robert Putnam'sMaking democracy work. American Political Science Review, 90, 389-397.
31.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (1993). Human development report. New York: Oxford University Press.
32.
Verba, S. , & Nie, N. H. (1972). Participation in America. New York: Harper & Row.
33.
Verba, S. , Nie, N. H., & Kim, J.-O. (1978). The modes of democratic participation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
34.
Williams, P. J. (1994). Dual transitions from authoritarian rule: Popular and electoral democracy in Nicaragua. Comparative Politics, 27, 169-185.
