Social capital, all that is good?

In the late 1990's the idea of 'social capital' was embraced by politicians and academics in many Western democracies and in 1997 the idea was adopted by the then Prime Minister of New Zealand. Social capital's attraction was in its apparent association with concepts of well being, social cohesion, democracy and economic prosperity. Why was 'social capital' so appealing at this particular moment in history? What features in the New Zealand environment encouraged the proponents of social capital to overlook the flaws in the theoretical basis and research of Putnam, Fukuyama and other major proponents of social capital? Why did a theory that was so ill defined and undeveloped become so popular? This thesis traces the history of an idea and its diffusion. It identifies the historical legacy of social capital theory including its roots within both economic and social theories. It argues that social capital was nothing new, but that it simply enscribed in new terminology many of the ideas that have been. part of Western intellectual heritage for a long time. Finally the thesis examines how social capital theory was applied in New Zealand and questions whether its adoption was simply a matter of political or personal expedience