Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Portes (1998)
Portes (1998)
Portes (1998)
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual Review of
Sociology.
http://www.jstor.org
R WElFZ
-|--:eSH Esatp | is
_ _ESE - ..zg M _vp.
- | At
- - SSg S
* -BiNs-6
S3
_ 11i11111 l | RF!tSBy
_ _ _ * _ .. a.
__ _
_ | Z Or
__ _ | _EI w
__ _
Em _
| *
| a_EI , w
_ _ _
___ _ _ _a . aS _ a .
. SSi
_ _ _ * | ,
_ _ _ * | , =
___ _ _ . * l _
_ _Me _ = * | ,l _
_
_
_ 111 | _g 5
* . ,
I _
_
_ * * | | I
_ - - * I _.
-
|=w::-
Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1998. 24:1-24
Copyright C)1998 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved
ABSTRACT
This paper reviews the origins and definitions of social capital in the writings
of Bourdieu, Loury, and Coleman, among other authors.It distinguishes four
sources of social capital and examines their dynamics. Applications of the
concept in the sociological literatureemphasize its role in social control, in
family support,and in benefits mediated by extrafamilialnetworks. I provide
examples of each of these positive functions. Negative consequences of the
same processes also deserve attention for a balanced picture of the forces at
play. I review four such consequences and illustrate them with relevant ex-
amples. Recent writings on social capital have extended the concept from an
individual asset to a feature of communities and even nations. The final sec-
tions describe this conceptual stretch and examine its limitations. I argue
that, as shorthandfor the positive consequences of sociability, social capital
has a definite place in sociological theory. However, excessive extensions of
the concept may jeopardize its heuristic value.
0360-0572/98/0815-0001 $08.00
2 PORTES
Portes is the authorof some 200 articles and chapterson national devel-
opment, internationalmigration, Latin American and Caribbeanurbaniza-
tion, and economic sociology. His most recent books include City on the
Edge, the Transformationof Miami (winner of the Robert Park award for
best book in urbansociology and of the Anthony Leeds awardfor best book
in urbananthropologyin 1995); TheNew Second Generation(Russell Sage
Foundation1996); Caribbean Cities (Johns Hopkins University Press); and
ImmigrantAmerica, a Portrait. The latterbook was designatedas a centen-
nial publicationby the University of CaliforniaPress. It was originally pub-
lished in 1990; the second edition, updatedand containingnew chapterson
Americanimmigrationpolicy and the new second generation,was published
in 1996.
Introduction
During recent years, the concept of social capitalhas become one of the most
popular exports from sociological theory into everyday language. Dissemi-
nated by a numberof policy-orientedjournals and general circulationmaga-
zines, social capital has evolved into something of a cure-all for the maladies
affecting society at home and abroad.Like other sociological concepts that
have traveleda similarpath, the original meaning of the term and its heuristic
value are being put to severe tests by these increasinglydiverse applications.
As in the case of those earlierconcepts, the point is approachingat which so-
cial capital comes to be applied to so many events and in so many different
contexts as to lose any distinct meaning.
Despite its currentpopularity,the termdoes not embodyany idea reallynew
to sociologists. Thatinvolvementandparticipationin groupscan have positive
consequences for the individual and the communityis a staple notion, dating
back to Durkheim'semphasis on group life as an antidoteto anomie and self-
destructionandto Marx's distinctionbetween an atomizedclass-in-itself and a
mobilized and effective class-for-itself. In this sense, the term social capital
simply recapturesan insight present since the very beginnings of the disci-
pline. Tracing the intellectualbackgroundof the concept into classical times
wouldbe tantamountto revisitingsociology's majornineteenthcenturysources.
Thatexercise would not reveal, however, why this idea has caughton in recent
years or why an unusualbaggage of policy implicationshas been heapedon it.
The novelty and heuristic power of social capital come from two sources.
First,the concept focuses attentionon the positive consequencesof sociability
while puttingaside its less attractivefeatures.Second, it places those positive
consequencesin the frameworkof a broaderdiscussionof capitalandcalls atten-
tion to how such nonmonetaryformscan be importantsourcesof power andin-
fluence,like the size of one's stockholdingsorbankaccount.Thepotentialfungi-
bility of diverse sources of capitalreducesthe distancebetween the sociologi-
SOCIAL CAPITAL:ORIGINSAND APPLICATIONS 3
He seems to have run across the idea in the context of his polemic against or-
thodox laboreconomics, but he mentions it only once in his originalarticleand
then in rathertentativeterms(Loury 1977). The concept capturedthe differen-
tial access to opportunitiesthroughsocial connectionsfor minorityandnonmi-
nority youth, but we do not find here any systematic treatmentof its relations
to other forms of capital.
Loury's work paved the way, however, for Coleman's more refined analy-
sis of the same process, namely the role of social capital in the creationof hu-
man capital. In his initial analysis of the concept, Coleman acknowledges
Loury's contributionas well as those of economist Ben-Porathand sociolo-
gists Nan Lin and Mark Granovetter.Curiously, Coleman does not mention
Bourdieu,althoughhis analysis of the possible uses of social capitalfor the ac-
quisition of educational credentials closely parallels that pioneered by the
Frenchsociologist.1 Coleman defined social capitalby its function as "a vari-
ety of entities with two elements in common: They all consist of some aspect
of social structures,and they facilitate certainaction of actors-whether per-
sons or corporateactors-within the structure"(Coleman 1988a: p. S98, 1990,
p. 302).
This rathervague definition opened the way for relabelinga numberof dif-
ferent and even contradictoryprocesses as social capital. Coleman himself
startedthatproliferationby includingunderthe term some of the mechanisms
that generated social capital (such as reciprocity expectations and group en-
forcement of norms); the consequences of its possession (such as privileged
access to information);and the "appropriable"social organizationthat pro-
vided the context for both sources and effects to materialize. Resources ob-
tained throughsocial capital have, from the point of view of the recipient,the
characterof a gift. Thus, it is importantto distinguishthe resourcesthemselves
from the ability to obtain them by virtue of membershipin different social
structures,a distinctionexplicit in Bourdieubut obscuredin Coleman.Equat-
ing social capitalwith the resourcesacquiredthroughit can easily lead to tau-
tological statements.2
Equally importantis the distinctionbetween the motivations of recipients
and of donors in exchanges mediated by social capital. Recipients' desire to
- NormObervance(Social Control)
- ValueIntrojection
Consummatory - FamilySupport
- BoundedSolidarity \ Benefits
- Network-mediated
Abilityto 0
SecureBenefits
Through
Membershipin Networksandother
Social Structures
Instrumental - ReciprocityExchanges P
- RestrictedAccess to Opportunities
- EnforceableTrust
- Restrictionson IndividualFreedom
- DownwardLevelingNorms
Figure I Actual and potential gains and losses in transactions mediated by social capital
SOCIALCAPITAL:ORIGINSAND APPLICATIONS 9
directly from the recipient but from the collectivity as a whole in the form of
status,honor, or approval.Second, the collectivity itself acts as guarantorthat
whatever debts are incurredwill be repaid.
As an example of the first consequence, a memberof an ethnic group may
endow a scholarshipfor young co-ethnic students, thereby expecting not re-
paymentfrom recipientsbut ratherapprovaland status in the collectivity. The
students' social capital is not contingenton directknowledge of theirbenefac-
tor, but on membershipin the same group.As an example of the second effect,
a bankermay extend a loan without collateralto a member of the same relig-
ious communityin full expectationof repaymentbecause of the threatof com-
munity sanctions and ostracism. In other words, trust exists in this situation
precisely because obligations are enforceable,not throughrecourse to law or
violence but throughthe power of the community.
In practice, these two effects of enforceabletrustare commonly mixed, as
when someone extends a favor to a fellow member in expectation of both
guaranteedrepaymentand group approval.As a source of social capital, en-
forceabletrustis hence appropriableby both donorsand recipients:For recipi-
ents, it obviously facilitates access to resources;for donors, it yields approval
and expedites transactionsbecause it ensures against malfeasance.No lawyer
need apply for business transactionsunderwrittenby this sourceof social capi-
tal. The left side of Figure 1 summarizesthe discussion in this section. Keeping
these distinctions in mind is importantto avoid confusing consummatoryand
instrumentalmotivations or mixing simple dyadic exchanges with those em-
beddedin largersocial structuresthatguaranteetheirpredictabilityandcourse.
3The following review does not aim at an exhaustive coverage of the empiricalliterature.That
task has been rendered obsolete by the advent of computerizedtopical searches. My purpose
instead is to document the principal types of application of the concept in the literatureand to
highlight their interrelationships.
10 PORTES
possible, for example, thatsocial capitalin the form of social controlmay clash
with social capital in the form of network-mediatedbenefits, if the lattercon-
sists precisely on the ability to bypass existing norms.The capacityof authori-
ties to enforce rules (social control)can thus be jeopardizedby the existence of
tight networkswhose function is precisely to facilitate violation of those rules
for private benefit. These paradoxicaloutcomes point to the need of a closer
look at the actual and potential gainers and losers in transactionsmediatedby
social capital. The right side of Figure 1 summarizesthe previous discussion
and that of the next section.
Once in place, however, this normativeoutlook has the effect of helping per-
petuate the very situationthat it decries.
Notice that social capital, in the form of social control, is still present in
these situations, but its effects are exactly the opposite of those commonly
celebratedin the literature.Whereasbounded solidarityand trustprovide the
sources for socioeconomic ascent and entrepreneurialdevelopment among
some groups, among others they have exactly the opposite effect. Sociability
cuts both ways. While it can be the source of public goods, such as those cele-
bratedby Coleman,Loury, and others,it can also lead to public "bads."Mafia
families, prostitutionand gambling rings, and youth gangs offer so many ex-
amples of how embeddednessin social structurescan be turnedto less thanso-
cially desirableends. The point is particularlyimportantas we turnto the more
recent and more celebratoryversions of social capital.
Social Capital as a Feature of Communitiesand Nations7
As seen in previous sections, sociological analyses of social capitalhave been
groundedon relationshipsbetween actorsor between an individualactorand a
group. Throughout,the focus has been on the potentialbenefit accruingto ac-
torsbecause of theirinsertioninto networksor broadersocial structures.An in-
terestingconceptualtwist was introducedby political scientistswho equateso-
cial capitalwith the level of "civicness"in communitiessuch as towns, cities,
or even entire countries.For RobertPutnam,the most prominentadvocate of
this approach,social capital means "featuresof social organizations,such as
networks, norms, and trust, that facilitate action and cooperation for mutual
benefit." The collective characterof this version of the concept is evident in
the next sentence: "Workingtogether is easier in a communityblessed with a
substantialstock of social capital"(Putnam 1993, pp. 35-36).
In practice,this stock is equatedwith the level of associationalinvolvement
and participatorybehaviorin a communityand is measuredby such indicators
as newspaperreading,membershipin voluntaryassociations, and expressions
of trustin political authorities.Putnamis not shy aboutthe expected reach and
significance of this version of social capital:
This insightturnsout to have powerfulpracticalimplicationsfor many issues
on the Americannational agenda-for how we might overcome the poverty
andviolence of South CentralLos Angeles ... or nurturethe fledgling democ-
racies of the former Soviet empire. (Putnam 1993: 36, 1996)
The prospect of a simple diagnosis of the country's problems and a ready
solution to them has attractedwidespreadpublic attention.Putnam's article,
"Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital,"publishedin the Jour-
8The method of analytic induction,popular in American sociology in the 1940s and 1950s,
consisted precisely in this process of seeking to explain all cases and gradually eliminate all
exceptions. It went rapidly out of favor when it was discovered that it basically gave rise to
tautologiesby redefiningthe essential characteristicsof the phenomenonto be explained.The only
way of guaranteeingclosure or zero exceptions turns out to be an explanationthat is a logical
corollary of the effect to be explained. On analytic induction, see Turner(1953) and Robinson
(1951).
SOCIALCAPITAL:ORIGINSAND APPLICATIONS 21
Conclusion
Currententhusiasmfor the concept reviewed in this articleand its proliferating
applications to different social problems and processes is not likely to abate
soon. This popularityis partiallywarrantedbecause the concept calls attention
to real and importantphenomena.However, it is also partiallyexaggeratedfor
two reasons. First, the set of processes encompassed by the concept are not
new and have been studied underother labels in the past. Calling them social
capitalis, to a large extent,just a means of presentingthem in a more appealing
conceptualgarb.Second, thereis little groundto believe thatsocial capitalwill
provide a ready remedy for major social problems, as promised by its bolder
proponents. Recent proclamationsto that effect merely restate the original
problems and have not been accompaniedso far by any persuasive accountof
how to bring about the desired stocks of public civicness.
At the individual level, the processes alluded to by the concept cut both
ways. Social ties can bring about greatercontrol over waywardbehavior and
provide privileged access to resources;they can also restrictindividual free-
doms and baroutsidersfrom gaining access to the same resourcesthroughpar-
ticularisticpreferences.For this reason, it seems preferableto approachthese
9A promising effort in this directionhas been made by Woolcock (1997), who seeks to apply
the conceptof social capitalto the analysisof nationaland communitydevelopmentin ThirdWorld
countries. After an extensive review of the literature,he notes that "definitionsof social capital
should focus primarilyon its sources ratherthan its consequences since long-termbenefits, if and
when they occur,arethe resultof a combinationof different...types of social relations,combinations
whose relative importancewill, in all likelihood, shift over time" (Woolcock 1997, p. 35).
22 PORTES
LiteratureCited
Anheier HK, Gerhards J, Romo FP. 1995. ing Crack in El Barrio. New York: Cam-
Formsof social capital and social structure bridge Univ. Press
in cultural fields: examining Bourdieu's Burt RS. 1992. StructuralHoles, The Social
social topography. Am. J. Sociol. 100: Structure of Competition. Cambridge,
859-903 MA: HarvardUniv. Press
Bailey T, WaldingerR. 1991. Primary,secon- Coleman JS. 1988a. Social capital in the crea-
dary, and enclave labor markets:a training tion of human capital. Am. J. Sociol. 94:
system approach. Am. Sociol. Rev. 56: S95-121
432-45 ColemanJS. 1988b. The creationand destruc-
BakerWE. 1990. Marketnetworksand corpo- tion of social capital: implications for the
rate behavior.Am. J. Sociol. 96:589-625 law. Notre Dame J. Law, Ethics, Public
Blau PM. 1964. Exchange and Power in So- Policy 3:375-404
cial Life. New York: Wiley Coleman JS. 1990. Foundations of Social
Boissevain J. 1974. Friends of Friends: Net- Theory.Cambridge:BelknapPress of Har-
works,Manipulators,and Coalitions. New vard Univ. Press
York: St. Martin's Press Coleman JS. 1993. The rational reconstruc-
Bourdieu P. 1979. Les trois dtats du capital tion of society (1992 Presidential Ad-
culturel.Actes Rech. Sci. Soc. 30:3-6 dress). Am. Sociol. Rev. 58:1-15
BourdieuP. 1980. Le capital social: notes pro- Coleman JS. 1994a. A rational choice per-
visoires. Actes Rech. Sci. Soc. 31:2-3 spective on economic sociology. In Hand-
Bourdieu P. 1985. The forms of capital. In book of Economic Sociology, ed. NJ Smel-
Handbookof Theoryand Researchfor the ser, R Swedberg, pp. 166-80. Princeton,
Sociology of Education, ed. JG Richard- NJ: PrincetonUniv. Press
son, pp. 241-58. New York: Greenwood Coleman JS. 1994b. The realization of effec-
Bourgois P. 1991. Search of respect: the new tive norms. In Four Sociological Tradi-
service economy and the crack alternative tions: Selected Readings, ed. R Collins.
in Spanish Harlem. Presented at Conf. pp. 171-89. New York: Oxford Univ.
Poverty, Immigr. Urban MarginalityAdv. Press
Soc., Maison Suger, Paris, May 10-11 Doeringer P, Moss P. 1986. Capitalism and
Bourgois P. 1995. In Search of Respect: Sell- kinship: do institutions matterin the labor
SOCIALCAPITAL:ORIGINSAND APPLICATIONS 23
market? Indust. Labor Relat. Rev. 40: American students in a California high
48-59 school. Am. J. Educ. 95:233-55
Durkheim E. 1984. (1893). The Division Matute-BianchiME. 1991. Situationalethnic-
of Labor in Society. New York: Free ity and patterns of school performance
Press among immigrant and non-immigrant
Ferrnndez-Kelly MP. 1995. Social and cul- Mexican-descent students. In Minority
tural capital in the urban ghetto: implica- Status and Schooling: A Comparative
tions for the economic sociology of immi- Study of Immigrant and Involuntary Mi-
gration. See Portes 1995, pp. 213-47 norities, ed. MA Gibson, JU Ogbu, pp.
Geertz C. 1963. Peddlers and Princes. Chi- 205-47. New York: Garland
cago: Univ. Chicago Press McLanahan S, Sandefur G. 1994. Growing
Gold SJ. 1995. Gender and social capital Up with a Single Parent: What Hurts,
among Israeli immigrantsin Los Angeles. What Helps. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Diaspora 4:267-301 Univ. Press
GranovetterMS. 1974. Gettinga Job: A Study Nee V, SandersJM, SernauS. 1994. Job tran-
of Contacts and Careers. Cambridge,MA: sitions in an immigrantmetropolis: ethnic
HarvardUniv. Press boundaries and the mixed economy. Am.
GranovetterMS. 1995. The economic sociol- Sociol. Rev. 59:849-72
ogy of firms and entrepreneurs.See Portes Parcel TL, Menaghan EG. 1994. Parents'
1995,pp. 128-65 Jobs and Children's Lives. New York:
Hagan J, Merkens H, Boenhke K. 1995. De- Aldine de Gruyter
linquency and disdain: social capital and Parcel TL, Menaghan EG. 1994a. Early pa-
the control of right-wing extremism rental work, family social capital, and
among East and West Berlin youth. Am. J. early childhood outcomes. Am. J. Sociol.
Sociol. 100:1028-52 99:972-1009
Hagan J, MacMillan R, Wheaton B. 1996. Perez L. 1992. Cuban Miami. In Miami Now,
New kid in town: social capital and the life ed. GJ Grenier, A Stepick, pp. 83-108.
course effects of family migration in chil- Gainesville: Univ. Press Fla.
dren.Am. Sociol. Rev. 61:368-85 Pollitt K. 1996. For whom the ball rolls. The
Hao L. 1994. Kin Support, Welfare,and Out- Nation 262(April 15):9
of- WedlockMothers. New York: Garland Portes A. 1987. The social origins of the Cu-
Homans GC. 1961. Social Behavior: Its Ele- ban enclave economy of Miami. Sociol.
mentary Forms. New York: Harcourt, Perspect. 30:340-72
Brace & World PortesA. 1995, ed. TheEconomic Sociology of
LemannN. 1996. Kicking in groups. Atlantic Immigration.New York: Russell Sage
Mon. 277(April):22-26 Portes A, Landolt P. 1996. The downside of
Light I. 1984. Immigrantand ethnic enterprise social capital. Am. Prospect 26:18-22
in North America. Ethn. Racial Stud. 7: Portes A, SensenbrennerJ. 1993. Embedded-
195-216 ness and immigration:notes on the social
Light I, Bonacich E. 1988. ImmigrantEntre- determinants of economic action. Am. J.
preneurs: Koreans in Los Angeles Sociol. 98:1320-50
1965-1982. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press Portes A, Stepick A. 1993. City on the Edge:
Lin N, Ensel WM, Vaughn JC. 1981. Social The Transformationof Miami. Berkeley:
resources and strength of ties: structural Univ. Calif. Press
factors in occupationalattainment.Am. So- PortesA, Zhou M. 1993. The new second gen-
ciol. Rev. 46: 393-405 eration: segmented assimilation and its
Loury GC. 1977. A dynamic theory of racial variants among post-1965 immigrant
income differences. In Women,Minorities, youth. Ann.Am.Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 530:
and EmploymentDiscrimination, ed. PA 74-96
Wallace, AM La Mond, pp. 153-86. Lex- Putnam RD. 1993. The prosperous commu-
ington, MA: Heath nity: social capital and public life. Am.
Loury GC. 1981. Intergenerationaltransfers Prospect 13:35-42
and the distribution of earnings. Econo- PutnamRD. 1995. Bowling alone: America's
metrica 49:843-67 declining social capital. J. Democr.
Marx K. 1967. (1894). Capital, Vol. 3. New 6:65-78
York: International Putnam RD. 1996. The strange disappear-
Marx K, Engels F. 1947. (1848). The German ance of civic America. Am. Prospect 24:
Ideology. New York: International 34-48
Matute-Bianchi ME. 1986. Ethnic identities Robinson WS. 1951. The logical structureof
and patterns of school success and failure analytic induction. Am. Sociol. Rev. 16:
among Mexican-descent and Japanese- 812-18
24 PORTES
RumbautRG. 1977. Ties that bind: immigra- achievement of Mexican origin and anglo
tion and immigrantfamilies in the United adolescents. Soc. Sci. Q. 75:18-36
States. In Immigrationand the Family: Re- WacquantLJD, Wilson WJ. 1989. The cost of
search and Policy on US Immigrants,ed. racial and class exclusion in the inner city.
A Booth, AC Crouter, N Landale, pp. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 501:8-26
3-45. Mahwah,NJ: Erlbaum Waldinger R. 1986. Through the Eye of the
Sassen S. 1995. Immigrationand local labor Needle: Immigrantsand Enterprise in the
markets. See Portes 1995, pp. 87-127 New York's Garment Trade. New York:
Schiff M. 1992. Social capital, labormobility, New York Univ. Press
and welfare. Ration. Soc. 4:157-75 Waldinger R. 1995. The "OtherSide" of em-
Simmel G. 1964. [1902]. The metropolis and beddedness: a case study of the interplay
mental life. In The Sociology of Georg between economy and ethnicity. Ethn. Ra-
Simmel, ed./transl.KH Wolff, pp. 409-24. cial Stud. 18:555-80
New York: Free Press Waldinger R. 1996. Still the Promised City?
Skocpol T. 1996. Unravelingfrom above. Am. African-Americans and New Immigrants
Prospect 25:20-25 in Post-Industrial New York.Cambridge,
SmartA. 1993. Gifts, bribes, and guanxi: a re- MA: HarvardUniv. Press
considerationof Bourdieu's social capital. WatersM. 1994. West Indianimmigrants,Af-
Cult. Anthropol.8:388-408 rican Americans, and whites in the work-
Smith A. 1979. (1776). The Wealth of Na- place: different perspectives on American
tions. Baltimore, MD: Penguin race relations. Presentedat Meet. Am. So-
Stack C. 1974. All Our Kin. New York: ciol. Assoc., Los Angeles
Harper& Row Weber M. 1965. (1922, 1947.) The Theoryof
Stanton-SalazarRD, Dornbusch SM. 1995. Social and Economic Organization. New
Social capital and the reproductionof ine- York: Free Press. Originally published as
quality: information networks among Wirtsch.Ges., PartI
Mexican-origin high school students. So- Weede E. 1992. Freedom,knowledge, and law
ciol. Educ. 68:116-35 as social capital. Int. J. Unity Sci. 5:
Stepick A. 1989. Miami's two informal sec- 391-409
tors. In TheInformalEconomy: Studies in Wilson WJ. 1996. When WorkDisappears.
Advanced and Less Developed Countries, The Worldof the New Urban Poor. New
ed. A Portes, M Castells, LA Benton, pp. York: Knopf
111-34. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Wilson WJ. 1987. The TrulyDisadvantaged:
Univ. Press TheInner-City,the Underclass,and Public
Stepick A. 1992. The refugees nobody wants: Policy. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
Haitians in Miami. In Miami Now, ed. GJ Woolcock M. 1997. Social capital and eco-
Grenier, A Stepick, pp. 57-82. Gaines- nomic development: towards a theoretical
ville: Univ. Fla. Press synthesis and policy framework. Theory
Suarez-Orozco MM. 1987. Towards a psy- Soc. In press
chosocial understandingof hispanic adap- Wrong D. 1961. The oversocialized concep-
tation to American schooling. In Success tion of man in modem sociology. Am. So-
or Failure? Learning and the Languages ciol. Rev. 26:183-93
of Minority Students, ed. HT Trueba, pp. Zhou M. 1992. New York's Chinatown: The
156-68. New York: Newbury House Socioeconomic Potential of an Urban En-
Sullivan ML. 1989. Getting Paid: Youth clave. Philadelphia:Temple Univ. Press
Crime and Workin the Inner City. Ithaca, Zhou M, Bankston CL. 1996. Social capital
NY: Cornell Univ. Press and the adaptationof the second genera-
TurnerR. 1953. The quest for universalsin so- tion: the case of Vietnamese youth in New
ciological research. Am. Sociol. Rev. 18: Orleans. In The New Second Generation,
604-11 ed. A Portes, pp. 197-220. New York:
Valenzuela A, Dornbusch SM. 1994. Famil- Russell Sage Found.
ism and social capital in the academic