Durlauf's Review of Putam

           In Steven Durlauf's review of Putnam's "Bowling Alone", he criticizes Putnam's analysis of why social capital has declined and that his essay reflects many of the strengths and weaknesses of the social capital literature.  While Putnam succeeds in describing facts concerning community life in America, his writing suffers from many of the conceptual problems and empirical weaknesses that have plagued the social capital literature (Durlauf).    While Durlauf acknowledges that "Bowling Alone" does a great deal to emphasize the decline in social capital over the last few decades,  it disappoints when judged from the perspective of rigor or analytical depth.  Here is an excerpt from my response that I have written for Monday: 

          There is also question as to whether the decline in voluntary organizations and social relations such as marriage really measure the declines in social capital.  Social pressure plays a large role in why people join certain organizations, such as the Cub Scouts; boys want to prove to be “one of the boys” (Durlauf).  Similarly, rising divorce rates should not be treated as evidence of reduced family social capital and instead treated as a suggestion that there is less social pressure against divorces now than there used to be. Putnam falls short in his study about less involvement in social capital.  In short, “Bowling Alone”  fails to deeply analyze the real causes of a social capital decline, and demonstrates the sloppiness and ambiguity that permeates through much of the social capital literature today.