Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
notion, supported by a number of European institutions, that everyone has
the right to basic tourism provision (EESC, 2006) and the assumption that
'social tourism clearly promotes integration, greater knowledge and personal
development' (EESC, 2006: 76). In the UK and the USA social tourism is not
usually part of public policy and is mostly provided via charitable bodies.
Social and Family Capital in the Disadvantaged Family
The concepts of social and family capital may be useful to theoretically
evaluate the social integration, greater knowledge and personal development
that are claimed to be the outcomes of social tourism by the EESC (2006).
Disadvantage and social exclusion may be caused by a deficiency in
social
capital
. Coleman describes social capital as the benefits people (he refers
to 'actors') accrue through their relationships with others. He contrasts
social capital with two other forms of capital: physical capital (machines,
tools, productive equipment) and human capital (generally the product of
training). If physical capital is wholly tangible, being embodied in observ-
able material form, and human capital is less tangible, being embodied in
the skills and knowledge acquired by an individual, social capital is still less
tangible, for it exists in the '
relations
among persons' (Coleman, 1998: 100,
original emphasis). Coleman defines social capital by its function: 'it facili-
tates certain actions of actors - either persons or corporate actors - within
the social structure. Like other forms of capital, social capital is productive,
making possible the achievement of certain ends that in its absence would
not be possible' (Coleman, 1998: 98). Individuals or social groups, in other
words, benefit from ties and relationships with others - the ties are mutually
beneficial, and through cooperation the different 'actors' achieve goals that
they may not have been able to achieve in isolation. Although there are
a variety of definitions of the concept, a consensus is growing that social
capital stands for the ability of actors to secure benefits by virtue of their
membership of social networks or other social structures (Portes, 1998).
According to Coleman (1998), there are three forms of social capital.
Firstly, there is the form that consists mainly of obligations, expectations and
the trustworthiness of structures. Personal relationships can foster trust and
cooperation between people, resulting in mutual benefits. Connected to this
form is the second one: norms and effective sanctions. This refers to social
rules and the punishment of unacceptable behaviour. The third and last form
of social capital are information channels, as a network of close contacts can
provide access to any information each of these contacts possesses.
As with any form of capital, social capital has positive but also negative
uses. As stated above, one of the forms of social capital is norms and
sanctions, based on obligations and the need for trustworthy structures in a
network. More than once the question has then been asked whether social
capital is at war with liberty and tolerance (Putnam, 2000). This has to do
