by Muhammad Sulton Fatoni (Lecturer Sociology at Unusia.ac.id)
Pondok pesantren’s community is a cultural movement that has abilities in social, culture and economy. The abilities then become a capital to carry out productive activities that lead to a dignified and independent society. According to Robert Lawang (2006), an independent and dignified society is a manifestation of civil society.
The Pesantren’s community compositions above are then required to examine the types of capital existed in the community, for example, social capital. The social capital is originally conceived as a form in which the public put their trust on communities and individuals as part therein. They make rules of the collective agreement as a value in the community. Here, the aspirations of the people will be accommodated; communities, and local networking are adapted as a development capital and society’s empowerment.
Robert D. Putnam describes the social capital as parts of a social organization, such as trust, norms and networks that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions. Putnam sees that the community needs social networks and norms that encourage the productivity of the community (Putnam, 1993). It also implies that it is necessary to have social networks exist in the community and norms encouraging community’s productivity.
The World Bank defines social capital in two versions; first, social capital refers to the norms, institutions and social relations that shape the quality of social interaction in society. Second, social capital refers to the norms, institutions and social relations that enable people to work together (Robert Lawang, 2004). Fukuyama formulates social capital with a series of informal values or norms shared among members of a group that allows the establishment of cooperation between them (Fukuyama, 2002).
Jonathan H. Turner says that social capitals are forces that increase the potential for economic development in a society by creating and maintaining social relationships and patterns of social organization (Turner, in Dasgupta and Serageldin, 2000).
James S. Coleman (1999) has a different point of view, according to him; social capital is defined from the function. The social capital is not a single entity but different varied entities with two similar elements, such as some aspects in the social structure; and it facilitates certain actions, both individuals and groups in the structure (Coleman, by Dasgupta and Serageldin, 2000).
While Robert Lawang describes it by concerning at the community’s social forces constructed by individuals or groups with reference to the social structure by rating them that they can achieve individual goals or groups efficiently and effectively with other capitals (Robert Lawang, 2004).
The author conducted research at pesantren’s community with the social capital analysis concept of Robert D. Putnam, a sociologist born in Rochester New York, January 9, 1941. Putnam is currently working at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Cambridge, USA. In his writing, Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital, published in the Journal of Democracy Volume 6 Number 1 (January 1995) says that social capital includes aspects of values, norms, social networks, and trust. The aspects allow those who have to make a profit (mutual benefit).
Therefore, in this writing, there are five things that writer needs to explore, the ‘values’, norms, trust, social networks and organizations. The values (values) by Horton and Hunt’s idea is what t experience means or not.
The nature value is a person’s behavior and consideration, but it does not judge whether a certain behavior is wrong or right. It is categorized as an essential part of the culture. (Elly M and Usman, 2013). Therefore, it indicates one’s choice in certain cultures, what they think is important and right (or wrong) morally.
The values influence people’s behavior and serve as criteria to evaluate the behavior of others (Richard T Schaefer, 2012). Strictly speaking, the value of the degree to which a certain behavior is supported or punished (Doyle Paul Johnson, 1990). While according to Fraenkel (1977) its meaning is the value is any idea, a concept, about what some one thinks what is important in life. In the context of Pesantren, one’s ideas and concepts are derived from something that inspires. In the next section, the author will give details what form of ‘something that inspires’. That is, a person may think about something important in social life. Only at pesantren, the form of critical thinking should refer to authentic sources.
Next, is the norm, which is the standard of behavior created and maintained in a society. Norms must be adhered to and understood together so that they become significant. Formal norms are usually written and have clear penalties for noncompliance. While the informal norms are more on mutual understanding and they are not written.
Someone’s need to norms related to their interests. The norms for the sake of public welfare are called mores. Society needs to adhere to the mores and the violation of the mores of course led to severe punishment (Richard T Schaefer, 2012).
Norms prevailing in the society regulates social life with the aim of achieving orders (Soerjono Soekanto, 2007). Norms and values are closely related to the human effort in protecting themselves against other forces exist in society. Soerjono calls it as Karsa (Soerjono Soekanto, 2007). Norms embodied in human relations are called ‘social organization’. In the development, the norms are in groups on various basic needs of human life (Soerjono Soekanto, 2007). Among pesantrens, the norms are not only concern with value but it also a form of sacred text implementation.
While social networks, Robert Lawang (2005) in the course description of social capital said that ‘network is translation of the word network that consists of two syllables, the ‘net’ and ‘work’. The word ‘net’ means ‘net’, ie the bow that are connected between each other. If depicted, it is as fishing nets, or net used for Volleyball. While the word ‘work’ means ‘work’. When assembled, the network means that networked work system or interconnected work. Social networking is also interpreted as a series of social relationships that connect a person with others directly and to others indirectly (Richard T Schaefer, 2012).
A person’s social network, according to the writer, is a self-contact and communication as an absolute element of social interaction. Therefore, the strength of an individual’s social network depending on how far he performs dynamic social relations with other individuals, between groups and between individuals and groups. Forms of social interaction could be cooperation (cooperation) competition (competition) even shaped contention (conflict) and accomodation (a temporary dispute settlement).
‘Cooperation’ is a joint effort between individuals or groups of people to achieve one or several common goals. The sociologists assume that the form of ‘cooperation’ is the principal form of social interaction. While other sociologists assume that cooperation is the main process, meaning all sorts of forms of social interaction can be restored on cooperation. In the study of pesantren, in social networks part, writer sees more on the social interaction in the form of ‘cooperation’ despite some occasions also shaped competition (See Soerjono Soekanto,Sociology, an Introduction, Jakarta: Eagle Press, 2007).
Social networks formed widening to a functional unity when organized well. The organization is the articulation of the parts of a unity of functional constitutes. Like the life in the city, there are activities to clean the city, a highway for the purposes of transport, restaurants, recreation, schools, houses, and so on. If one part of the city is not functioning then arises incompatibility (Soerjono Soekanto, 2007).
The organizational concept in this paper is a continuation of the social networks. That is, the institutionalizations of social networks belong to pondok pesantren to achieve one or more objectives. ”Organization” in the context of social capital in pondok pesantren, the author interprets as an institutionalization trust, values, norms and social networks process owned by pondok pesantren to achieve goals in society. While the social capital in the form of trust is related to one’s social network, the trust can be achieved as the result of a direct relationship between two or more people, which are associative. It can be arisen from the relationship of a personal nature but will probably be evolved in an organization or society at large (Soerjono Soekanto, 2007).
It is not easy to have social trust because one must strive with sustained values and norms of a group. Therefore, social trust is the result of someone normative conformity with the community. For the pesantren’s community, ‘trust’ is a priority. It is as the ethical foundation of society, aligned with honesty, intelligence and transparency.
Moreover, social capital has two dimensions, bonding and bridging. Bonding is an internal bond, such as a bond in a religious group, which is formed because of shared values, norms, social networks, and trust, while bridging is an external bond, for example, bonding a religious group with other religious groups. Thus, the bonding is internally oriented and usually grows into an exclusive group. Conversely, bridging is externally oriented and producing an inclusive group.
A positive social capital is able to balance the bonding and bridging. Both bonding and bridging are operating at a horizontal level (between members or groups of people) or vertically (society and state).Putnam formulation of social capital is more explicit, clear, and is constructed of a wider reference library. Putnam explicitly says that social capital is productive, something that allows to be used for certain goals, without the contributions the goal will not be achieved (Robert Lawang, 2004).