2005 Volume 5 Pages 141-153
Traditional studies of civil society and recent social capital theory explore the relationship between good governance and vigorous civil society. In his book Making Democracy Work, Robert Putnam provided the impressive evidence that regional government performance in Italy is influenced by social capital, such as networks, trust, and norms. This view gets worldwide popularity. However, theoretical sophistication and more quantitative empirical evidences are still needed.
This article analyzes the impact of social capital or some features of civil Society on local government performance in Japan, and challenges Putnam’s social capital theory. Using various quantitative data in prefecture level, this study reveals that social capital is unrelated to local government performance in Japan, and that the good local governance is explained by “civic power”, which is some kinds of citizen’s actions and attitudes, or organized civic groups that support, criticize, demand, and monitor their government adequately. The relationship between civic power and good local governance remains strong even after controlling for some socioeconomic factors.
Furthermore, the results show that some aspects of civic.power, such as organized civic groups or claims free access to administrative information, are much more important than other aspects of civic power, such as voting or civic culture. This suggests that activities and potentials of “civic elites”, not ordinary citizens, are the main element of civic power. This finding challenges conventional views of political culture studies and participatory democratic theories. If the findings are correct, then we need not to be afraid of “Bowling Alone” at least in politics.
In Japan, it is civic power, not social capital, that is the true key to making democracy work. The findings have relevant implications on studies of social capital, civil society, and local governance.