Social Capital Worldwide: Potential for Democratization or Stabilizer of Authoritarian Rule?

Abstract

The notion of social capital has gained enthusiastic support from nongovernmental organizations, intergovernmental confederations, and supranational bodies such as the European Union, the World Bank, and the United Nations. They all believe that social capital might be a potent aid for democratization, for repairing defective democracies, and for undermining authoritarian regimes. This article examines whether social capital has such positive effects in countries where democracy is not yet established. Does social capital help in a country’s move toward democratization, or is the link between democracy and social capital more dubious? Does social capital even contribute to the stabilization of nondemocratic regimes? This article analyzes 70 countries that participated in the third wave of the World Values Survey. The results are clear: Social capital functions as a stabilizer of authoritarian rule. Its effects are mainly negative. Social trust, in particular, might be a “key resource for the market economy and democratic politics” (Stolle, 2003, p. 19). In nondemocratic contexts, however, it appears to throw a spanner in the works of democratization. Social participation and trust, specifically, increase the stability of nondemocratic leadership by generating popular support, by suppressing regime-threatening forms of protest activity, and by nourishing undemocratic ideals of governance.