Toda investigación empírica muestra que el capital social es un factor esencial para producir y preservar los bienes públicos, pero las teorías difieren en cuanto al papel desempeñado por las relaciones sociales. Algunos piensan que los bienes públicos no necesitan redes sociales, mientras que otros argumentan que, sin redes sociales, el capital social no se crea y, por lo tanto, los bienes públicos no se valoran. El presente trabajo mantiene que la comparación entre estas teorías opuestas, o al menos divergentes, (...) solo se puede resolver demostrando si, o no, y bajo qué condiciones, las redes de relaciones sociales producen el valor social añadido (VSA) que se traduce en el capital social necesario para apoyar bienes públicos. Adoptando la perspectiva de la sociología relacional podemos ver y medir el valor social añadido de las relaciones sociales en redes primarias y secundarias, conduciendo a la emergencia de los bienes públicos.Although empirical research reveals that social capital is an essential factor to produce and preserve public assets, theories differ as to the role that social relations play. Some believe that public assets do not require social networks, while others argue that social capital without social networks cannot be created and, therefore, public assets are not valued. This paper mantains that a comparison between these opposing, or at least diverging, theories can only be made by demonstrating whether, and under what conditions, social relation networks produce social added value (SAV) or not, which becomes the social capital needed to support public assets. From the relational sociology perspective, we can see and measure the SAV of social relations in primary and secondary networks that lead to public assets emerging. (shrink)

Is there a circular relationship between trust and ethics? Is it possible to alter their relationship, changing the perception that social actors have of them? How has trust changed in the transition from modernity to post-modernity and how does it change in times of crisis? Starting from the epistemological assumption that progress in the social sciences is determined by the change in the theoretical horizon produced by “a reformulation of metaphysical assumptions” [1] and combining this path with the relational perspective, (...) according to which “not the facts, but the relationship between the facts is what requires analysis” [2], we will examine definitions, meanings, functions and relationships between trust and ethics. Following the theoretical logical method, we will understand that trust and ethical behaviour are particular forms of gift [3] that co-own each other. As such, they are ambivalent in nature and their circle can also produce dysfunctional outcomes that depend on the ability of social systems to modify collective perceptions through forms of communication, in the awareness that distrust constitutes an ineliminable and, paradoxically, preparatory element for the restoration of the trust circle. The relational circle between gift, trust, collective ethics and personal morality does not end with distrust, but changes in a contingent way, determining perverse effects: correct behaviour could produce, unintentionally, a disaster; incorrect actions could generate unforeseen positive effects.The perverse effects cannot be defined as exceptional - as is believed in the theory of rational choice - but recurrent because daily practices are marked by an intuitive, emotional and moralistic trust circle that prevails over logical reasoning, as ascertained by both relational theory and behavioural economics. Functionalist paradigms cannot engineer and optimise the performance of trust. [1] See J. Alexander's strong programme in S. Segre, Le teorie sociologiche contemporanee, Carocci, Rome, 2019, p. 12. It is not enough to observe reality, it is necessary to interpret it, taking into account theories and traditions whose foundations have a metaphysical character. [2] F. Ferrarotti, La sociologia come analisi critica della società, in R. Cipriani, Nuovo Manuale di Sociologia, Maggioli, Sant’Arcangelo di Romagna, 2018 p. 24. [3] The classical meaning in M. Mauss, Essai sur le don. Forme et raison de l'échange dans les sociétés archaïques, 1ª ed. 1925, revisited by G. Satta, L’ambiguità del dono. Note su dono, violenza e potere nell’ Essai di Mauss, in V. Rasini, Aggressività. Un’indagine polifonica, Mimesis, Milano 2011. (shrink)

In today's societies relationships between near relatives and friends appear to be somewhat paradoxical. Some accounts present them as the social ideal, exalting the solidarity and altruism represented by proximal relationships. By contrast, others point to the social dangers in such relationships when they are conducted in the public sphere. In order to grasp the coexistence of these opposite views, this article attempts to place proximal relationships in the explanatory context of a gift economy, a concept with a long history (...) in anthropology and which has lately been the focus of interest of a significant group of social thinkers. (shrink)

The fact that sociology was born during the period of the Industrial Revolution does not authorize us to consider its discourse as lacking in philosophical elements that are rooted in a previous age. Neither can we consider as fully accomplished its role for modernity, nonetheless today, in an after-modern climate (in the sense of Donati 2009), sociology is trying to escape the prejudice of modern ethics to go beyond the clichés of postmodernity (Ardigò 1989). Filled with self-reflexivity and reductionist dichotomies, (...) the twenty-first-century sociologist feels the need to ?own factual reality again? and to rediscover ?a new metaphysics of the social world? (Donati 1993). If self-consciousness is in the world, sociology, perhaps, has to go beyond science and turn into ?globology? (Arnason 1990), or into a sociology on a global scale, which looks at how world unification has occurred. In order to accomplish this, it has to be careful about what it was able to do best in the past: ?to foresee and to enhance sustainable change,? to be aware of the ?relational connections,? which no mathematics will ever be able to show, to build new ?memes,? and to decide to accelerate or to go against the phenomena it encounters in its observation. Society in the twenty-first century will go beyond postmodern stagnation and turn into something new (After-modernity? Hyper-modernity? Trans-modernity?) if it is to be helped by the interpretations of sociology. Notwithstanding the endeavors to change, most Westernized countries are trapped in the lib-lab model, while China argues for a complete reconfiguration of the concepts of public and private, states and market, freedom and controls, copyright and copyleft. What is going to happen in the future? Are we going to fall into a technocratic and authoritarian form of neo-modernization? Are we going to rediscover the system of exchanging gifts? Are we going to create a fully ?relational? society, going beyond the Hegelian categories of right and left? It will be the role of a ?strong and relational? sociology to identify all the ?viable? scenarios and to prepare its advent in symbolic terms. (shrink)

David Lockwood's distinction between System Integration and Social Integration is brought together with the Morphogenetic Approach to account for the current societal fragmentation experience...

The article deals with the issue of solidarity in health care,with particular reference to the Italian context. It presents thedifficulties of the Italian NHS and assesses the current proposalto counter the crisis of the Welfare State by giving upinstitutional arrangements, in order to favour the so-called`social private'. Moreover, it addresses the question ofprioritisation and targeting in the context of health care,arguing for the insufficiency of the standard approach of neutralliberalism, and showing how the concept of solidarity might helpto develop a (...) different account. Lastly, it discusses the case oforgan transplantion in Italy, as an example ofsolidarity-inspired health care policy. (shrink)

In my view, we need a sociological analysis to show how the crisis stemmed from a certain set-up of the so-called global society. Such a set-up is the product of a long historical development, which goes beyond the financial crisis? outbreak in 2008. The question I ask is the following: from a sociological standpoint, why did this crisis break out? And what remedies can be put in place? The measures adopted these days cannot solve the crisis, but, for a number (...) of reasons, they can at most provide temporary stoppers and remedies. (shrink)