Oral health is projected to be affected by the environment; to provide an understanding to this, the concept of social capital can be used. Social networking appears to be the rational in social capital in which there is ‘connections’ among individuals, a social network guided by a set of values and norms of trustworthiness and reciprocity among peoples’, groups, communities etc of the network. Putnam (1995) defines social capital as “coordination and co- operation for mutual benefit”. Hence it is not only a way of describing social relationships within a group or society, but also adds a social dimension to traditional structural explanations of disease by viewing communities not just as contextual environments, but also as connected groups of individuals. The theory of social capital emphasizes multiple dimensions inside the concept. For example, social capital can be divided into a behavioral/activity component (for example, participation) and a cognitive/perceptual component (for example, trust). These are respectively being referred to as structural and cognitive social capital. . Structural and cognitive social capital can therefore refer to linkages and perceptions in relation to people who are akin to each other; such as people in one’s own community or people of alike socioeconomic status (referred to as bonding social capital), or to people who are poles apart; such as people outside one’s community or with a different social identity (known as bridging social capital). Social capital relations can also occur in ceremonial institutions such as between community and local government structures (termed linking social capital) . Social capital is not a magic pill for improving society’s oral health but, it is a useful concept which focuses our attention on an important set of resources, inhering in relationships, networks and associations, which have previously been given insufficient attention in the social sciences and Dental literature. This is probably partly because they are not easy to categories, study and measure their effects quickly. The social capital perspective therefore broadcast us that if we normatively approve of the goal of enhancing population oral health, we cannot achieve this through material inputs alone, or simply through “technological fixes”, whether “forced” or magnanimously “approved” by those with superior resources. Social capital can contribute towards health promotion, in the extent to which it can be used for its strategic value; the concept can be carefully employed within wider health promotion practices which explicitly draw upon social justice, equity and empowerment principles . Social capital draws on solidarity within groups, communities, societies as well.
Oral health is projected to be affected by the environment; to provide an understanding to this, the concept of social capital can be used. Social networking appears to be the rational in social capital in which there is ‘connections’ among individuals, a social network guided by a set of values and norms of trustworthiness and reciprocity among peoples’, groups, communities etc of the network. Putnam (1995) defines social capital as “coordination and co- operation for mutual benefit”. Hence it is not only a way of describing social relationships within a group or society, but also adds a social dimension to traditional structural explanations of disease by viewing communities not just as contextual environments, but also as connected groups of individuals. The theory of social capital emphasizes multiple dimensions inside the concept. For example, social capital can be divided into a behavioral/activity component (for example, participation) and a cognitive/perceptual component (for example, trust). These are respectively being referred to as structural and cognitive social capital. . Structural and cognitive social capital can therefore refer to linkages and perceptions in relation to people who are akin to each other; such as people in one’s own community or people of alike socioeconomic status (referred to as bonding social capital), or to people who are poles apart; such as people outside one’s community or with a different social identity (known as bridging social capital). Social capital relations can also occur in ceremonial institutions such as between community and local government structures (termed linking social capital) . Social capital is not a magic pill for improving society’s oral health but, it is a useful concept which focuses our attention on an important set of resources, inhering in relationships, networks and associations, which have previously been given insufficient attention in the social sciences and Dental literature. This is probably partly because they are not easy to categories, study and measure their effects quickly. The social capital perspective therefore broadcast us that if we normatively approve of the goal of enhancing population oral health, we cannot achieve this through material inputs alone, or simply through “technological fixes”, whether “forced” or magnanimously “approved” by those with superior resources. Social capital can contribute towards health promotion, in the extent to which it can be used for its strategic value; the concept can be carefully employed within wider health promotion practices which explicitly draw upon social justice, equity and empowerment principles . Social capital draws on solidarity within groups, communities, societies as well.