産業能率大学紀要

第29巻

日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：
制度化の影響に関する実証研究

Nonprofit Organisations and Social Capital in Japan :An Empirical Study of the Impact of Institutionalisation

2009年 2月

中島

智人

Tomohito Nakajima

第2号（別刷）Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：
制度化の影響に関する実証研究
Nonprofit Organisations and Social Capital in Japan: An Empirical1
Study of the Impact of Institutionalisation

中島智人

Tomohito Nakajima

Abstract:
Nonprofit organisations (NPOs) are an important part of social capital generation in acommunity. They provide intra-organisational as well as inter-organisational ties for theparticipants. In Western countries, however, it is argued that the capacity of NPOs togenerate social capital has been undermined because of institutional pressure both fromthe state and the market. This paper intends to find the impact of institutionalisation on
the capacity focusing on organisations providing care for elderly people in a suburban
city in Tokyo, Japan. This research indicates that the institutionalisation of NPOs has
impact on bonding type of social capital only. It also finds that the impact depends onthe characteristics of organisations in terms of the relationship with existing social
capital in their community. The findings suggest that institutionalisation does not necessarily undermine the capacity of NPOs to generate social capital as existing literatureassumes, but it transfers the capacity as for an organisation to reduce negative aspect ofsocial capital and to foster more positive aspect of the capital.
Key words : nonprofit organisation(NPO), social capital, institutionalisation, Long-Term Care
Insurance, Japan2008年10月6日
1

受理

 his paper is based on a presentation at the 7th annual conference of Japan NPO Research Association held on 20th March 2005 at
TKansai Gakuin Univerisity.

1日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

1. Introduction
Nonprofit organisations (NPOs) have capacity to contribute to the health of a community.
The appetite for participation in voluntary associations is an essential aspect of a community.
Voluntary associations mediate between citizens and state agencies, mobilise people, and thensolve the problems of a community outside the state’s responsibility (Smith and Lipsky, 1993;
van Deth, 1997). Social capital theories have indicated the significance of NPOs in the political,
economic and social development of the society emphasising on the community building ordevelopmental role of these organisations. Because social capital is not just a private good but
also a public good which ‘inheres in the relations between actors and is drawn upon to facilitate
collaborative actions (Maloney, et al., 2000, p.213)’, it is assumed that voluntary associations
generate social capital effectively in offering people cross-cutting ties and social networks(Putnam, 1993a).
One of the major changes in terms of the role of NPOs is that they have become recognised
as an important part of social ser vice provision. NPOs are expected to be ef fective andefficient agencies and assumed to have comparative advantages over the state and the market(Weisbrod, 1977; Hansmann, 1980). It is argued that NPOs have become a part of the welfaremix (Evers, 1995). The boundaries between the nonprofit sector and other sectors havebeen blurred through contracting as well as competition in social service provision and therelationship of NPOs and the state and the market has become much closer. Consequently,
NPOs have been institutionalised (Kramer, 1994, p.52).
In Western countries, especially in the United States and the United Kingdom where theinstitutional pressure on NPOs are much evident, institutionalisation of NPOs often havenegative connotation. Institutional theories argued that it is difficult for institutionalisedorganisations to balance between external pressure and organisational strategy or mission. As
a result of institutionalisation, organisations may become healthier and they are more likely
to survive (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). In contrast, the community where the organisations
are based may become unhealthier (Backman and Smith, 2000). Therefore, it is assumed that
institutionalisation of NPOs may undermine their capacity to contribution to the community(Smith and Lipsky, 1993; Alexander et al., 1999; Backman and Smith, 2000).
In Japan, the institutional environment of NPOs has changed drastically within several
years. For instance, community-based organisations, which are relatively small and used to
be unincorporated but have been contributing to our social, economic and political life in acommunity apart from the state and the market, find the way to be incorporated under the Law

2

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

to Promote Specific Nonprofit Activities [Tokutei Hieiri Katudou Sokushin Hou] (so-called the
NPO Law) in 1998. The Long-Term Care Insurance Law [Kaigo Hoken Hou] in 2000 makes
it possible for NPOs to be a registered service provider of welfare service for elderly people.
Currently, NPOs collaborate with the public sector organisations. At the same time, NPOs
compete with public as well as private for-profit organisations in providing social ser vices.
Institutional pressure on NPOs from other sectors has become evident in Japan.
According to Western experience, it could be assumed that the capacity of NPOs tocontribute to their community would be undermined as the institutionalisation of theirenvironment progresses; however, few empirical evidences addressed this assumption in Japan.
Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of institutionalisation on NPOs’capacity to generate social capital in a community. This paper intends to fill the gap between
the assumptions of Western literature and the current state of Japanese NPOs in terms of the
impact of institutionalisation.
It is difficult to measure the capacity of NPOs to generate social capital itself, this research
focuses on the level of social capital within organisations. A questionnaire survey was used tomeasure the level of social capital at individual level. The questionnaire was developed Toshio
Yamagishi and his colleagues and designed to measure the extent of different types of trust at
individual level (Yamagishi and Yamagishi, 1994; Yamagishi, 1998). In addition, interviews forthese organisations were done in order to supplement the findings of questionnaire survey. In
this research, both quantitative and qualitative approaches were used for the data collection.
Four organisations, which were engaged in social service provision for elderly people ina suburban city in Tokyo, were selected in accordance with their level of institutionalisation
as well as the relationship with their community. In order to find out the impact of
institutionalisation of NPOs, organisations registered as a provider of the Long-term Care
Insurance scheme were selected in this research as highly institutionalised organisations. Also
this research considered the level of existing social capital in each community where theseorganisations were based.
Fist, this paper reviews existing literature on social capital and institutionalisation and theirrelationship with NPOs. Current situation of social capital as well as the environmental changesof NPOs in Japan is also shown. Second, the research approach is revealed in order to explore
the extent of the impact of institutionalisation on NPOs. Third, the research findings in termsof the level of social capital in four organisations are discussed with implication for further
research.

3

日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

2. Theories of social capital and institutionalisation
2.1. Nonprofit organisations and social capital
2.1.1. Definitions of social capital
Defining the concept of social capital is not an easy task. Some argue that the concept is still
underdeveloped (Onyx and Bullen, 2000) while others find that a number of definitions havebeen developed with their particular ‘nuances’ (Adler and Kwon, 2002, p.19). One of the mostimportant definitions of social capital has been presented by Coleman (1988, 1990). He definessocial capital as aspects of structure which facilitate social action. Social capital is considered
to be found in any social relationships which provides resources for the action. According
to Coleman, social capital is ‘embedded in the relationship among persons, an group whose
members manifest trustworthiness and place extensive trust in one another will be able toaccomplish more than a comparable group lacking trustworthiness and trust (Coleman, 1990,
p.304)’.
Putnam (1993a, p.167) defines social capital as ‘features of social organisation, such as trust,norms and networks, that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinatedactions’. He social also recognises social capital as ‘features of social life – networks, norms andtrust – which enable participants to act together more effectively to pursuer shared objectives(Putnam, 1995a, pp.664-5)’. In this sense, social capital can solve the problems of collective
action. Social capital, according to Putnam (1993a; 1993b), is considered not to be a private
good but a public good which would not be provided sufficiently by private agents and shouldbe created as a by-product of other social activities. It is argued that Putnam’s concept of social
capital has become the dominant idea of the debate (Foley and Edwards, 1999; Schuller et al.,2000).
2.1.2. Types of social capital
Several researches have revealed that social capital exists in several forms (Onyx andBullen, 2000). Portes (1998) identifies different types of social capital with regard to human
motivations, namely consummatory and instrumental social capital. Similarly, Krishna (1999)
differentiates relational social capital from institutional social capital. The former is based on
norms and beliefs regarding appropriate behaviour within a bounded community whereas thelatter refers to clear rules and behaviour which provide guidance for people. Narayan (1999)
recognises relational social capital as endowments and institutional social capital as sources
which contribute to generate social capital.

4

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

Putnam (2000) makes a clear distinction between ‘bonding’ and ‘bridging’ social capitalfollowing the idea of ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ ties (Granovetter, 1973) as well as ‘thick’ and ‘thin’
trust (Williams, 1988). Bonding social capital is associated with strong ties and thick trust
in traditional communities and refers to inward-looking forms of social capital generated
by intensive, daily contact between people and reinforces exclusive identities within ahomogeneous group. Although bonding social capital may be beneficial especially for poor
people (Woolcock and Narayan, 2000; Warren et al., 2001), some negative aspects should beconsidered (Portes and Landolt, 1996; Portes, 1998). Strongly established norms within abounded community may bring about negative consequences in several ways. Portes (1998,p.15) summarises it as follows: ‘exclusion of outsiders’, ‘excess claims on group members’,‘restriction on individual freedoms’ and ‘downward levelling norms’. Therefore, the purpose of
the organisation is important in making use of social capital (Boix and Posner, 1996).
In contrast, bridging social capital is outward-looking and includes people from diverse socialgroups (Putnam, 2000). This form of social capital is associated with less dense ties based onthin trust among heterogeneous people across certain boundaries. Bridging social capital may
raise the capacity of people to gain access to information and resources lacking within theirsociety (Granovetter, 1985). Bridging type of ties, as well as some social cohesion, is required
for a society to be developed (Woolcock, 1998; Narayan, 1999). The existence of generalised
trust or social trust is considered to be an important aspect of civil society where people
confront risks (Giddens, 1990; Beck, 1992; Seligman, 1992; Newton, 2001).
This paper defines social capital as ‘features of social life which enable participants to
act together more effectively and efficiently in order to pursue shared objectives’ following
Putnam’s definition (Putnam, 1993a; 1995b). According to Putman, social capital can be foundin different forms in a society such as norms, trust and networks. In order to operationalise
the concept, this paper focuses on trust at individual level rather than norms or networks
and different types of trust, namely bonding and inward-looking type as well as bridging andoutward-looking type are considered.
2.1.3. Social capital and nonprofit organisations
NPOs are important part of social capital generation. For a community to address social
problems, it is important to have connections among members of neighbourhood and ties
with people outside the community (Granovetter, 1973). NPOs are considered to have capacity
to generate these intraorganisational as well as interorganisational ties. These organisations5日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

contribute to cross-cutting ties and social networks and generate social bonds within a certain
group as well as between different groups (Newton, 2001).
Putnam (1995b, p.67) argues that ‘networks of civic engagement foster sturdy normsof generalised reciprocity and encourage the emergence of social trust’. He emphasises
the importance of horizontal associations characterised by mutuality rather than verticalorganisations associates with dependence in social capital generation. He argues that horizontal
associations ‘bring together agents of equivalent status and power’ while vertical associations‘link unequal agents in asymmetric relations of hierarchy and dependence (Putnam, 1993a,p.173)’. He points out that the decline in membership in voluntary associations indicates thedisappearance of social capital (Putnam, 1995a).
Backman and Smith (2000) recognise that NPOs are critical part of social capital generation
in a community. They point out that these organisations provide oppor tunities for local
residents to interact formally as well as informally because NPOs are not subject to themotivation of the state and the market but rely on voluntary participation.
The important aspect of the relationship between NPOs and social capital is the causality.
The relationship is not linear but circular. Putnam (1993a, p.177) points out that the ‘stock ofsocial capital … tend to be self-reinforcing and cumulative. Virtuous circles result in social
equilibrium with high levels of cooperation, trust, reciprocity, civic engagement and collective
well-being’. Therefore, on one hand NPOs have capacity to generate social capital in acommunity, the stock of social capital in a community facilitates the involvement in voluntary
associations on the other.
2.2. Institutionalisation of nonprofit organisations
2.2.1. Theories of institutionalisation
The relationship between NPOs and other sector organisations has become much closer thanever. The state and the market sectors now have significant control over the capacity of NPOs
caring resources (Wuthnow, 1991; Gronbjerg, 1998). In order to meet the requirements fromthe sate as well as the market, it is argued that NPOs have been institutionalised (Kramer,1994).
A number of institutional theories (or neo-institutionalism) have focused on nonprofit
organisations such as day care centres and child care service organisations (Baum and Oliver,1991; 1992), art museums (DiMaggio, 1991), colleges (Brint an Karabel, 1991; Kraatz andZajac, 1996), and associations (Halliday, Powell and Granfors, 1987). One of the main ideas

6Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009of institutional theories is that organisational structures and practices reflect the expectationof institutional environment. Emphases are on factors which contribute to legitimacy.
Meyer and Scott (1983) make distinction between technical environments and institutional
environments. On one hand, technical environments are defined as ‘those in which a productor service is produced and exchanged in a market such that organisations are rewarded for
effective and efficient control of their production systems (Scott and Meyer, 1991, p.123)’.
Institutional environments, on the other, refer to ‘those characterised by the elaboration ofrules and requirements to which individual organisations must conform if they are to receive
support and legitimacy (ibid.)’. A number of types of nonprofit organisations, especially thoseof professional service organisations, including schools, welfare agencies and churches, areconsidered as subject to strong institutional environments but weaker technical environments,
while organisations providing personal services such as child care operate in weak technical aswell as weak institutional environments (Scott, 1992).
Meyer and Rowan (1977) argue that the myths of environments rather than work activities
determine the formal structure of organisations. Among the several sources of institutionalised
myths such as relational networks and organisational practices, they recognise that publicorganisations are important part of the generation of myths. They argue that ‘many myths also
have official legitimacy based on legal mandates. … Legislative and judicial authorities create
and interpret legal mandates; administrative agencies … establish rules and practice; andlicenses and credentials become necessary in order to practice occupations (ibid., p.347)’. A
understand that a common legal environment has influence upon behaviour and structure of anorganisation (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983).
Organisations in strong institutional myths acquire new structure in order to accommodate
with the institutional pressures. The consequences of institutional pressures are isomorphismof organisations with external environments. Meyer and Rowan (1977, pp.348-9) argue thatorganisations ‘incorporate elements which are legitimated externally, rather than in termsof efficiency, … employ external or ceremonial assessment criteria to define the value ofstructural elements, … and dependence on externally fixed institutions reduces turbulence
and maintains stability’. DiMaggio and Powell (1983) identify three mechanisms of institutional
isomorphism: coercive isomorphism, which stems from political influence and the requirementof legitimacy, mimetic isomorphism, which results from standard response to uncertainty andrefers to modelling or imitating other organisations, and normative isomorphism, which is
associated with professionalisation.

7

日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

Institutional isomorphism may bring about the higher levels of success and sur vivalof organisations; however, institutionalised organisations find it dif ficult to balance therequirements from ceremonial elements and efficiency of day-to-day practices. As a result,organisational str ucture may be decoupled from activities (Meyer and Rowan, 1977).
Organisations will react to accommodate themselves to external pressure to be legitimate
rather than behave in accordance with their strategies or organisational mission.
2.2.2. Impacts of other sectors and organisational changes of nonprofit organisations
Institutional pressures both from the state and the market influence the structures andpractices of NPOs. The relationship between NPOs and the state is not necessarily zero-sum.
Some argue that their relationship could be mutually beneficial and interdependent (Salamon,
1987; Lipsky and Smith, 1989-90; Saidel, 1991; Gronbjerg, 1998). Gronbjerg (1998) describes
the relationship as mutual. She argues that accepting funding from the government opens up
new opportunities for NPOs. Saidel (1991) finds that the NPOs and the governmental agencies
exchanges substantial resources such as information, capacity and legitimacy and the exchange
results in symmetrical resource interdependence between NPOs and the government. Salamon(1987) points out that although NPOs have several advantages over statutory organisationsin providing collective goods, they inherit voluntar y failure. He identifies four sources ofthe failure, including philanthropic insufficiency, philanthropic particularism, philanthropic
paternalism and philanthropic amateurism. These weaknesses of NPOs are the strengths ofthe government and NPOs have some strengths which are the weaknesses of the government;
therefore, their relationship is collaborative.
One of the remarkable changes in terms of funding relationship between the nonprofit andthe state sector is shift from grant to contract-based service agreements in providing social
services, especially in the United States and the United Kingdom (Wolch, 1990; Smith and
Lipsky, 1993; Kramer, 1994; Lewis, 1996). It is argued that adopting contracts and using publicmoney requires NPOs to be accountable to the government. Lipsky and Smith (1989-90) points
out that contracts with the government have influences on NPOs’ staffing, clients, programmes,
facilities and mission because of government’s heavy emphasis on equity. Therefore, there areconsiderable arguments and anxieties over the independence and autonomy of NPOs. Becauseof the inherently unequal power distribution between NPOs and the government, NPOs havelost their distinctiveness and become public agents.
NPOs have increasingly engaged in the commercial market competing with for-profit

8

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

organisations. They compete with for-profits in order to cross-subsidise the nonprofit activities
because of the gap between growing social needs they recognise and financial resources theyutilise (Schiff and Weisbrod, 1991; Weisbrod, 1998) as well as they provide social ser vices
in the market or quasi-market. Weisbrod (1998, pp.48-9) describes NPOs as ‘multiproductorganisations’ generating three types of goods with regard to their mission; they are a ‘preferredcollective good’, a ‘preferred private good’ and a ‘nonpreferred private good’. NPOs may
produce preferred collective goods, which are related to their mission, with financial losses andthen use profits from preferred private goods or unpreferred goods.
Engaging in commercial activities, however, would not be an easy task for a lot of NPOs. It
requires businesslike expertise as well as management skills (Rochester, 1996). It could be
difficult for NPOs to balance the provision of mission-related preferred goods with the act ofraising funds by provision of unpreferred goods. Using same resources in providing different
types of goods makes boundaries of these goods unclear and the provision of unpreferredgoods may distort their mission (Rochester, 1996; Young, 1998). Dees (1998) recognises
importance of funding from market-based activities for nonprofit organisations; however,
he points out that commercialisation changes the relationship between nonprofits and theirbeneficiaries in charging fees, and undermines the role of nonprofit in a community in limiting
opportunities for voluntary participation.
2.3. Social capital and nonprofit organisations in Japan
2.3.1. Social capital in Japan
Japanese society is considered to have rich social capital. It could be argued that the existenceof social capital has allowed Japanese society to achieve economic growth as well as to foster
democracy outside the Western countries after the complete defeat of the Second World
War. Fukuyama (1995) makes a comparison between different types of trust cross-nationally.
According to him, Japan, together with the United States and Germany, is characterised asa high-trust society, whereas China, as well as France, Italy and Korea, is considered to bea low-trust society. He claims that trust in Japan is broader than in China because of weakerfamily ties. In a high-trust society like Japan, it is easy for an organisation to move across theboundaries of family or kinship because the existing trust reduces transaction costs and thenincreases economic efficiency.
Several studies have investigated in the state of social capital in Japan. Inoguchi (2000; 2002)
give an overview of social capital in Japan using national surveys such as the Establishment9日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

Census, the Time-Budget Sur vey and the National Character Sur vey, as well as following
Putnam’s concept of social capital. Tsujinaka (2002) shows the cultural dimension in measuringsocial capital from the perspectives of Japanese society in OECD context. Yamagishi and hiscolleagues (Yamagishi and Yamagishi, 1994; Yamagishi, 1998) have conducted comparative
studies between Japan and the United States focusing on the levels of trust. They have foundthat the level of trust in Japan is lower than in the United States. They argue that trust inJapan is closed and restricted in a small group, while trust in the United States is generalised
and open to the society at large. Trust in Japan is described as mutual assurance rather than
generalised trust.
2.3.2. Nonprofit organisations in Japan
Salamon and Anheier (1998) categorise Japan as a ‘statist’ model with the small scale of thenonprofit sector and low social welfare spending by the government. This is attributed to thedominant power of the state in welfare policy and substantial corporate welfare which do notleave much space for the nonprofit in Japan.
It could be a difficult task to define nonprofit organisations in Japan. Amenomori (1997)
investigates the Japanese nonprofit by applying the structural-operational definition of
Salamon and Anheier (1997). He finds that considerable portions of the sector failed to meetthe criteria. On the one hand, most of NPOs are so close to the government that they are
2

considered to be quasi-governmental organisations . On the other, there are a wide variety of
3

community-based organisations . They have very limited or no legal status and protection but
are free from statutory authorities. Deguchi (2001) describes the latter type of organisations
as non-institutional nonprofit organisations compared to the former type which he calls
institutionalised organisations.
These community-based organisations have considerable influence on Japanese society.
Vogel (1979) attributes the success of Japanese welfare without dependency on the state to‘communitarian ideals’ (p.203). Thranhardt (1990) points out the importance of traditional
4neighbourhood associations in the Japanese welfare system arguing that these organisations
2

 hese organisations include koueki houjin (charitable organisations or public benefit organisations) such as zaidan houjin (incorT
porated foundations) and shadan houjin (incorporated associations) established under the Article 34 of the Civil Code, and otherorganisations established under specific legal provision such as shakaifukushi houjin (social welfare corporations), gakko houjin(private school corporations), shuukyou houjin (religious corporations), iryou houjin (medical corporations), tokushu houjin (special public corporations), koueki shintaku (charitable trusts) and kyoudou kumiai (cooperatives).

3

They are called nin-i dantai or jinkaku naki shadan (unincorporated associations).

4

They are called jichikai (self-governing associations) or chounaikai (urban ward associations).

10

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

allow local people to have face-to-face connections and form ‘the fabric or social life (p.351)’. In
addition, neighbourhood organisations also provide channels between the local people and thegovernment (Amenomori, 1997). These community-based organisations, which provide social
needs and opportunities of volunteering and lobbying, are important parts of social, economic
and political life of local people (Thranhardt, 1990).
2.3.3. Environmental changes of nonprofit organisations in Japan
Japanese NPOs have been experiencing drastic environmental changes in the last several
years. One of the important changes is the enactment of the Law to Promote Specific Nonprofit
Activities (so-called the NPO Law) of 1998. This law allows a lot of unincorporated associations
pursuing public interests to have incorporated status and possibly tax privileges. Under thislaw, a new legal status entitled specified nonprofit corporations (tokutei hieiri katsudou houjin
or commonly known as NPO houjin) is given to the groups engaged in nonprofit activities suchas health and welfare and community development as specified by the law .
The implementation of the Long-Term Care Insurance Law in 2000 also has been
considerable impacts on Japanese NPOs. This law intends to promote community care for
elderly people. Those who need caring services are financed by insurance and can purchaseservices from any registered service providers, including public, private for-profit and nonprofit
organisations. Local community organisations can be registered providers if they have legal
status as a specified nonprofit corporation.
For a local community organisation, becoming a registered service provider of the LongTerm Care Insurance scheme is problematic. Ohwa (2003) highlights a dilemma associatedwith the system. If a local community organisation adopts the insurance scheme, theorganisation will be reimbursed by the government for the services but, on the other hand,the services will be regulated by the government at the same time. It could be possible for theorganisation to provide services in accordance with the needs of the community without being
registered; however in this case the organisation will lose the financial support. Furthermore,
Kawashima (2003) points out the possible competition arising between for-profit and nonprofit
organisations in the Long-Term care market.
As has been pointed out, the level of existing social capital is thought to be high in Japan.
Fukuyama (1995) recognises that Japan is a high-trust society having broader type of trust. In
contrast, Yamagishi (1998) finds that trust in Japan is closer than that in the United States as11日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

it is restricted in a small group. It could be argued that community-based organisations, which
provide opportunity to have face-to-face connections to each other and facilitate everyday life of
local people, have capacity to generate social capital in Japanese society; therefore, the existingsocial capital in Japan is more likely to be that of bonding type which is associated with inwardlooking, thick and strong ties within a relatively small group.
Japanese NPOs have been experiencing institutional pressure. Literature in Westerncountries, especially those in the United States and the United Kingdom where the institutionalpressure from the state and the market are evident, assumes that institutionalisation ofNPOs undermines the capacity of NPOs to generate social capital. As has been shown, someliterature in Japan points out the danger for Japanese NPOs to become a formal part of social
ser vice provision. Few empirical studies, however, have addressed this issue in Japan. In
addition, because the type of existing social capital in Japan is different from that in Westerncountries, the assumption of Western literature in terms of the impact of institutionalisation on
NPOs’ capacity to generate social capital would not be applicable to Japanese NPOs. Therefore,
the purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of institutionalisation on NPOs and to fill thegap between the assumption derived from West literature and empirical evidence in Japanesesociety. Focuses are on the extent of institutionalisation of NPOs and the levels and types ofexisting social capital in a community on which NPOs are based.
3. Research approach
3.1. Measuring social capital
Measuring social capital is still in the process of development. Dif ferent approaches ofconceptualisation and operationalisation make it a difficult substance to measure (Schuller etal., 2000; van Deth, 2003). This difficulty is attributed to the multidimensional aspect of theconcept, and so, its ‘contextualisation’ determines its validity (Schuller et al., 2000, p.28; Onyx
5and Bullen, 2000 ). The operationalisation of the concept should be determined in accordancewith its focal issues (Schuller et al., 2000). In addition, the multidimensional characteristics
of social capital mean that it requires multiple indicators to measure it (van Deth, 2003). He
recommends the use of multiple-item measurement rather than procedures based on only
6

single-item .
5

For example, Onyx and Bullen (2000) find eight distinct dimensions of social capital empirically using factor analysis.

6I n addition to this, van Deth (2003) points out another five possible ‘pitfalls’ in measuring social capital, namely using proxies
from existing data sets, using perceptions instead of observations, using aggregate measures for collective phenomena, using
inverse measures as proxies, and using identical indicators in different settings (ibid., pp86-8).

12

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

Another difficulty stems from the circularity of the concept (Boix and Posner, 1996; Portes,
1998; Schuller et al., 2000). Portes (1998) describes social capital as ‘simultaneously a cause
and effect (ibid., p.19)’. In order to avoid this problem, a research is required to clarify its
dependent and independent variables and to study factors that may have effects on thesevariables. Foley and Edwards (1999) identify two different approaches in the social capital
literature: one treating social capital as an independent variable, the other considering it as adependent variable.
With these arguments in mind, this research uses both quantitative and qualitative
approaches. The individual level of social capital, including both bridging and bonding types,
is considered as a dependent variable. In this research, a questionnaire survey measured thelevel of social capital in organisations and interviews supplemented the findings of the survey.
3.2. Organisations
This research focused on NPOs providing care for elderly people within a municipal
government located in suburban area in Tokyo, Japan. In order to control the possible effectsof outside factors, only NPOs from a single field and in a single local government wereconsidered. Within the geographical area of the local government, four NPOs, which had
the legal status of specified nonprofit corporations, were selected with regard to these two
independent variables.
First independent variable was the level of institutionalisation. In this study, being a
registered provider of the Long-Term Care Insurance scheme was considered as a proxy of
institutionalisation because the scheme creates an institutional environment in a couple ofways. First, the scheme regulates several aspects of services and practices, including quality
as well as quantity of services, qualification of staff, and the reporting and accounting systemof registered providers. Second, the scheme creates the long-term care market because it
gives recipients right to select providers. NPOs providing services based on the scheme haveto compete with public and for-profit organisations in the market. Consequently, NPOs haveadopted formal structure rather than informal, become relied on professionals rather than
volunteers, and accepted business-like practices.
Second independent variable was the extent of existing social capital to which theorganisations are based on their community. Social capital theories point out the circular
relationships between existing social capital and the capacity of NPOs to generate social
capital. In this research, the community-based aspect of organisations was evaluated how the13

日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

organisations were established and to what extent the organisations had relationships with thelocal community.
These organisations were categorised in four independent categories described as a two by
two matrix (Figure 1). Organisation A and B were considered to be highly institutionalised asregistered providers of the Long-Term Insurance scheme, while Organisation C and D wereless institutionalised. The community-based aspect of Organisation A and C was high because
these organisations were formed by local residents in order to address their own problems
in the community. Organisation B as well as D were considered to be less community-based
because they were formed and organised not necessarily by the local residents but by those
who shared particular principles or needs.
Profiles of the organisations were summarised as follows:•• Organisation A was rooted in a community group and established by several community
leaders in order to improve the welfare in their community. Most members camefrom local residents. The composition of members was diverse in terms of their social
status and demographic features. This organisation had connections with other localorganisations in the community, including neighbourhood associations, local merchants’
association and PTAs. This organisation was a registered provider of the Long-TermCare Insurance scheme.
•• Organisation B was a workers cooperative. Three workers cooperatives had merged toform this organisation. Most members were female. This organisation, as a cooperative,
formed and managed by the people shared the idea of mutual-help. When the originalorganisations were established, some local residents ware reluctant to be a member ofthese cooperatives because they thought that the organisation had particular ideologicalbackground. Those who provided as well as received ser vices had to be a memberof the organisation in principle; however, after becoming a registered provider of theLong-term Insurance scheme, they provided ser vices to non-members to meet therequirement of the scheme. This organisation was under the umbrella of a collective
body of workers cooperatives in the region.
•• Organisation C was founded in order to provide mobility services for those who had

14

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009difficulty in going out on their own. Those who were aware of the limitation of existing
services by the local government formed this organisation as a volunteer group. The
ser vice was dependent totally on volunteers. Users and volunteers lived across thegeographical area of the local government and some volunteers lived in out side thearea. This organisation did not provide any ser vices based on the Long-Term Care
Insurance scheme at that point.
•• Organisation D was based on a community group. The group also established a social
welfare corporation (Shakaifukushi houjin) which provided care for elderly people
based on the Long-Term Care Insurance scheme. This organisation decided not to be aregistered provider of the Long-Term Care Insurance scheme; rather, the organisation
provided ser vices beyond the scope of the insurance scheme to local people on a
voluntary basis. Most members were local residents and they were diverse in nature.
Figure 1 Categorisation of four organisations

15

日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

3.3. Data collection
A questionnaire-based survey was conducted on July 2003 in order to measure the level ofsocial capital in each organisation at individual level. The items were comprised of questions
taken from the questionnaire sur vey developed by Toshio Yamagishi and his colleagues

7(Yamagishi and Yamagishi, 1994; Yamagishi, 1998). Yamagishi’s questionnaire is designed tomeasure trust related scales, including ‘General Trust Scale’, ‘Utility of Relations Scale’ and8‘Relational Trust Scale’ (Yamagishi, 1998, pp.89-109) . These scales have been proved to be9

independent through performing a factor analysis (Yamagishi and Yamagishi, 1994).
General trust is ‘a belief in the benevolence of human nature in general and thus not limited
to particular objects (Yamagishi and Yamagishi, 1994, p.139)’. General Trust Scale is calculated
as a mean of the six items from the questionnaire; ‘most people are basically honest’, ‘mostpeople are trustworthy’, ‘most people are basically good and kind’, ‘most people are trustful ofothers’, ‘I am trustful’ and ‘most people will respond in kind when they are trusted by others’.
This scale is considered to measure bridging type of social capital (Yamagishi, 1998).
Utility of relations is ‘“in-group bias” or preferential treatments to insiders (Yamagishi andYamagishi, 1994, p.153)’ and refers to the belief that ‘one receives special treatment by using
personal relations and in-group favouritism (Yamagishi, 1998, p.95) ’. This scale is calculated
as a mean of the three items related to the expectation of ‘in-group favouritism’ (ibid., p.95).
They are; ‘if I were going to buy a used car, I would feel more comfortable buying it from asalesperson whom a friend had introduced me to in person rather than from a salesperson who
is a total stranger’, ‘when negotiating over an important issue with a total stranger it is very
important to have a personal introduction by someone you know well’, ‘a doctor examines apatient more carefully than usual if the patient has been referred by a personal acquaintance’.
Utility of relations is considered to describe one of the aspects of bonding type of social capital.
Relational tr ust refers to the belief that ‘intimately related people are tr ustwor thy(Yamagishi, 1998, p.95) ’. It is based on knowledge about a person. Four items are used to
calculate Relational Trust Scale, including ‘I trust a person I know well more than one whom I
don't know’, ‘whatever work I have to perform, I feel more secure when I work with someone
7I n this research, items of the questionnaire were provided in Japanese. Translation from English to Japanese was based on
Yamagishi (1998).

8 lthough the questionnaire developed by Yamagishi and his colleagues includes item of other scales, this research adapts theseA
three scales in order to measure the levels of social capital. In Yamagishi and Yamagishi (1994), the Relational Trust Scale is as
the Knowledge-based Trust Scale.

9

Yamagishi and Yamagishi (1994) explain the development of the questionnaire in detail.

16

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

I know well than with someone I don't know’, ‘generally, a person with whom you have had alonger relationship is likely to help you when you need it’ and ‘the people I trust are those withwhom I have had long-lasting relationships’. This type of scale refers to interpersonal trust baseon knowledge. Although both are considered to be bonding type of social capital, Yamagishi(1998) finds that the Utility of Relations Scale and the Relational Trust Scale is mutuallyindependent.
The questionnaire was delivered to possible respondents of each organisation by theinter viewees of the qualitative research. Questionnaire respondents were required to rateeach items on five-point Likert-type scale (i.e. from 1: No, not at all, to 5: Yes, definitely). The
questionnaire also contained items related to respondents’ profiles, including the types of their
participation, the frequency of their involvement, the length of their involvement, and their age
and sex.
Semi-structured interviews were conducted in order to collect information related to therequired independent variables. Interviewee in each organisation was a chairperson, a board
member or an administrative officer who was involved in the establishment of the organisation.
Each interview lasted around ninety minutes and was recorded with the permission of theinterviewee and transcribed.
The profile of the interviewees from each organisation was described as follows:•• Organisation A: A board chairperson who was involved in the establishment of thisorganisation as one of the local community leaders•• Organisation B: A board chairperson, a vice-chairperson and a board member who were
all involved in the establishment of this organisation•• Organisation C: A chief administrative officer who was involved in the establishment of
this organisation•• Organisation D: A board chairperson who was involved in the establishment of thisorganisation.
3.4. Data analysis
A total of 152 individual questionnaires were collected from four organisations (Organisation A:
50, Organisation B: 34, Organisation C: 28, Organisation D: 40).
The respondents’ age range was 27 to 82 with a mean age of 56.2. 39.5% of respondents17日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

were in their fifties and 25.7% were in their sixties. Types of participation with the organisation
were fairly diverse. A quarter of respondents were volunteers and another quarter werepar t-time staf f. 9.9% of respondents were board members. In Organisation C, 53.6% ofrespondents recognised that they were volunteers, while 60.0% were clients in Organisation
D. In Organisation A and B, the number of part-time staff was most significant with 38.0% in
Organisation A and 52.9% in Organisation B. A number of respondents participated in theactivities on a regular basis. Across the organisations, 31.6% answered that they participatedalmost every day and 44.1% 1-2days a week. In addition, a lot of respondents answered thatthey had been involved in the organisation for more than 5 years (41.4%). The majority of
respondents were female with 77.6%.
Table 1 describes the basic statistics of each scale across the organisations.
Table 1 Basic statistics of each scale across organisations

In order to make comparison of the scores of the General Trust Scale, the Utility of Relations
Scale and the Relational Trust Scale across the organisations, Kruskal-Wallis Rank Sum Test10

was used . This test is one of the nonparametric techniques of hypothesis-testing and is used
to compare the scores of more than two groups (Bryman and Duncan, 2000). The reasons for

10 SPSS ver 11.0 for Windows was used for statistical analyses.

18Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

using nonparametric techniques were twofold. Firstly, the original data was measured using
ordinal scales (i.e. Likert-type scales) and secondly, it could be wrong to assume that the
sample population was normally distributed because of the procedure used in distributing andcollecting the questionnaire.
Table 2 shows a comparison of each scale across the organisations based on the KruskalWallis Ranks Sum Test. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean rank of thelevel of the General Trust Scale among these organisations with the non-significant Chi-Squarevalue (Chi-Square value=.561, df=3, significance level=.905). This result means that there is nodifference in terms of general trust level among organisation.
In contrast, both in the Utility of Relations Scale and the Relational Trust Scale, statisticallysignificant differences were found as a result of the test. With a Chi-Square value of 10.212(df=3), there was a significant difference among the mean rank of the Utility of Relations Scaleacross these organisations at a significance level of .017 (<.05). As can be seen in Table 2,
Organisation D had the highest mean rank of 95.05, then Organisation A: 71.34, Organisation
B: 71.28, Organisation C: 65.55; therefore, it was safe to say that Organisation D was highest interms of the level of the Utility Trust Scale.
Similarly, a significant difference among the mean rank of the Relational Trust Scale wasfound. The Chi-Square value was 8.431 (df=3) and an asymptotic significance level of .038(<.05). Organisation D again was considered to have the highest level of relational trust with amean rank of 93.31, while Organisation B had the lowest mean rank of 66.75. The mean rank of
Organisation A was 71.70, and that of Organisation C was 72.89.

19

日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

Table 2 Comparison of each scale across organisations

On the Utility of Relations Scale and the Relational Trust Scale, multiple comparisons wereconducted among the organisations. Table 3 describes the results. The Mann-Whitney U Test
was chosen in order to compare the score of each scale among the organisations. Confidence
11intervals were adjusted based on the Bonferroni procedure . As a result, only two pairs ofcomparisons showed a statistically significant difference. On the Utility of Relations Scale, thescore between Organisations A and Organisation D was statistically different with a significancelevel of .006 <.05/6 (two-tailed). Further, on the Relational Trust Scale, it was revealed that thescore between Organisation B and Organisation D had a significant difference with a level of.007 < .05/6 (two-tailed).

11 The probability is divided by the total number of pairewise comparisons. In this study, it is (k(k-1)/2)=6. Therefore, a significant
level of .05 equals to .0083 here.

20

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

Table 3 Multiple comparisons of each scale between organisations

4. Discussion
4.1. Institutionalisation and existing social capital
The result indicates that the impact of institutionalisation of NPOs on social capital inorganisations was found at least in part. Organisation D, which was not a registered providerof the Long-Term Insurance scheme and was characterised as less institutionalised and highly
community-based, showed having statistically significant level of bonding type of social capital,
utility of relations and relational trust, compared to other organisations. Therefore, it cold beargued that institutionalisation of NPOs has negative impacts on bonding type of social capital.
In contrast, no statistically significant dif ference was found among the scores of theGeneral Trust Scale across the organisations. This result suggests that institutionalisation oforganisations did not influence on bridging type of social capital in organisations regardless totheir relationships with the community.
Multiple comparisons of the scores of each scale suggest, however, complex relationships
between institutionalisation of organisations and community-based characteristics of NPOs. The
scores of the General Trust Scale again showed no difference between any possible pairs oforganisations. In terms of the Utility of Relations Scale, the score of Organisation D was higher
than that of Organisation A but there was no difference between the score of Organisation21日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

D and Organisation B. Both Organisation A and Organisation D were characterised ashighly community-based and the difference between these organisations was the extent ofinstitutionalisation. Less institutionalised Organisation D had higher score of the Utility ofRelations Scale than highly institutionalised Organisation A. Utility of relations is bonding
type of social capital associated with in-group favouritism; therefore, the result suggests thatthe level of bonding type of social capital is lower in a highly institutionalised organisation.
Furthermore, the score of the Relational Trust Scale was higher in Organisation D than in
Organisation B while there was no difference between Organisation D and Organisation A.
This result indicates that the level of relational trust which refers to trust based on knowledgeof the people in institutionalised organisation could be significant if the organisation is notbased on community social capital.
The findings here suggest that the level of social capital is lower in highly institutionalisedorganisations; however, the impact of institutionalisation is not necessarily described negatively
as existing literature in Western countries assumes. The result shows that the Utility ofRelations Scale was lower in highly institutionalised organisations. Utility of relations is inwardlooking and tightly bound social capital. This type of relationship is based on expectation
as well as obligation to other members in a group. It could be argued that a strong sense of
mutuality constrains the activity of participants. At the same time, strong norms of reciprocity
may exclude those who are outside the group and hinder generalised trust. Therefore, a highlevel of utility of relations may have a negative aspect on both insiders and outsiders of thegroup.
In Organisation A, the score of the Utility of Relations Scale was lower than in Organisation
D. This result implies that the level of in-group favouritism or inward-looking type of social
capital was lower. Participants could be freed from too strong ties of obligation and expectationin highly institutionalised organisations. In this sense, institutionalisation reduces the negative
aspects of social capital. Therefore, it could be argued that institutionalisation does notundermine the capacity of NPOs to generate social capital; rather, it changes the capacity togenerate more positive type of social capital rather than negative one.
Compared to utility of relations, the level of relational trust in Organisation A was not low.
Relational trust refers to a belief that well-known people are trustworthy. This type of trust is
considered to be bonding type of social capital but not necessarily associated with the negative
aspect of social capital. Unlike utility of relations, relational trust is not based on expectation
or obligation and the ties of relational trust may be weaker than that of in-group favouritism.

22

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

People will expand their connections beyond the boundaries if they have an opportunity to haveknowledge about other people. In an institutionalised organisation compared to a traditional
community-based organisation, ties among participants may be weaker and broader. In thecase of the organisations of this research, registered providers of Long-Term Care Insurance
had employed professional staf f and accepted users beyond the boundar y of their local
community. In this sense, participants had opportunities to interact with more diverse people.
This experience made it possible for people to expand their ties beyond the community towhich they are based and learn to trust each other.
In Organisation B, the score of the Relational Trust Scale was lower than in Organisation
D, whereas there was no difference for the Utility of Relations Scale. In contrast to the case of
Organisation A, relational trust rather than utility of relations was low in Organisation B. Thissuggests that institutionalisation may reduce the negative aspect of social capital only if theorganisation is based on the existing stock of social capital in a community. If the organisation
does not utilise the existing stock of social capital, the effect of institutionalisation may bedifferent.
In order to explain the different consequence of the level of social capital in Organisation
A and Organisation B, it is worth considering the foundation on which these organisations
are based. Organisation A, characterised as highly community-based, was based on ageographically defined community. The founders were community leaders and had strong
networks with existing community organisations such as neighbourhood associations, local
merchants’ association and PTAs. Most members of the organisation were local residents
with fairly diverse composition in terms of their social and demographic status. In contrast,
Organisation B, which was considered less community-based, was a workers cooperative inwhich members shared the principle of mutual help. Organisation B was more homogeneousthan Organisation A in terms of member composition as most members of Organisation B
were women. It could be argued that Organisation A opened up or expanded their boundaries
using existing social capital while Organisation B tightened their boundary using their sharedprinciple when these organisations faced institutional pressures.
Organisation C was not a registered provider of the Long-Term Insurance scheme
nor a community-based organisation in the sense that their members and users were notlived in geographically bounded area, and characterised as less institutionalised as wellless community-based. Organisation C could have high level of social capital compared toOrganisations B, which was characterised less community-based but highly institutionalised.

23日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

Multiple comparisons of scales, however, showed that Organisation C had no significant
difference in terms of scores of each scale compared to other organisations. Instead, thescore of the Utility of Relations Scale of Organisation C was the lowest among organisations.
This result could be understood from the fact that Organisation C was not based on thick andstrong community ties and this aspect remained unchanged because of the absence of strong
institutional pressure.
4.2. Influence of other factors
Several other factors could have influenced the results of this study. First factor to note is how
the organisations recognise the influence of institutionalisation. The result suggests that the
impact could be recognised more positively by the organisations studied in this research thanthe Western literature assumed. Despite the fact that the organisations registered as a providerof Long-Term Care Insurance were dependent heavily on the public funding, interviews onthese organisations revealed that they recognised the law as an opportunity that expanded theirability to provide services rather than a threat. They thought that income from the insurance
had stabilised their financial status and did not feel that they were controlled or co-opted by thestate system.
Although the insurance has created a level playing field of care for elderly people in which
private organisations, including for-profit and nonprofit organisations, as well as publicorganisations compete with each other, the market is still immature in terms of both supply anddemand and the current competition would not have negative impacts as being assumed (see,for example, Rochester, 1996; Young, 1998). As a consequence, the networks and connectionsof organisations, including volunteers’ participation, governance structure, paid-staff andvolunteer relationships have not been so undermined as have Backman and Smith (2000)
assumed.
The relationship between these organisations and the local government might have an
influence on the social capital generation as well. Interviews found that every organisationin this study described the relationship with the local government as a ‘par tnership’ or‘interdependence’. These organisations felt that they shared same goals with the local
government as a provider of public services. Their relationship with the government could becooperative (Najam, 2000). In providing public goods, being legitimised by the government isa crucial aspect in Japan because of the pubic-private dichotomy in Japanese society (Iokibe,1999). In this case, the government compensates the voluntar y failure aspects (Salamon,

24

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 20091987). Futhermore, having good relationships with a local government may have expanded the
networks of an organisation.
4.3. Bridging social capital in Japan
Across the organisations, no evidence of influence of institutionalisation on bridging social
capital was found. There was no significant difference in the score of the General Trust Scale.
Therefore, the impact of institutionalisation was limited to the bonding social capital.
Social capital theories assume that a NPO effectively generates the bridging social capitalsuch as generalised trust or social trust (Putnam, 1993a; 1995b). The existence of generalised
trust is considered to be one of the essential aspects of civil society (Seligman, 1992) and it
is associated with the idea of modernisation (Giddens, 1990; Beck, 1992). In comparison, thesociety in which organisations in this study were located, or possibly Japanese society as awhole, was described as traditional. Existing social capital could be rich but the social capital
was bonding type rather than bridging type. Therefore, it was difficult for these organisations
to generate bridging type of social capital against this background.
5. Conclusion
Research findings suggest that the institutionalisation of NPOs has some impacts on
their capacity to generate social capital. Although it is assumed in Western literature that
institutionalisation undermines the capacity of NPOs, the research findings shows that
institutionalisation does not damage the capacity but it transfers the capacity as for an
organisation to reduce negative aspect of social capital and to foster more positive aspect ofsocial capital. Therefore, it could be argued that institutionalised NPOs may have ability togenerate new types of social capital in Japanese society in offering broad and diversified ties forthe participant of the organisations and to provide an alternative way of organising society to
traditional thick and strong ties.
There are some implications of this paper for related theories. First, the findings suggestthat both types of social capital need to be considered. Social capital theories assume that
NPOs can generate social capital effectively, especially bridging type. Although some point out
the importance of the bonding social capital in the developing world (for example, Woolcock
and Narayan, 2000; Warren et al., 2001), a lot of empirical studies, including both macro andmicro level researches, use only generalised trust or social trust to measure social capital(for example, Stolle, 1998; Dekker and van den Broek, 1998; Wollebaek and Selle, 2002).

25

日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

If this paper took only generalised trust into account, the complex relationship between
institutionalisation and the existing stock of social capital would not be found. The relationshipbetween social capital and a NPO is said to be circular. Theories assume that existing stockof social capital facilitates voluntary participation, and vice versa. If this mechanism works
properly in a community where bonding social capital is more affluent than bridging social
capital, a NPO is more likely to generate bonding type of social capital rather than bridging
type.
Second, this research found that the relationship with the other sectors was not necessarilya threat for NPOs that undermined their contribution to community needs; rather it was anopportunity to expand the organisations’ capacity to achieve their goals. Having relationshipwith the state may expand the networks of a NPO vertically. It may legitimise the activities ofNPOs. Providing public goods as a legitimate provider makes participants feel confident about
what they are doing. Similarly, the market may expand a NPO’s networks and make it possible
for the organisation to reach the potential clients. If a NPO utilises the existing stock of social
capital, the relationship between social service provision and community development would
not be trade-off nor would the organisation lose its comparative advantage.
Third, this research presented a picture of current NPOs in Japan. The questionnaire surveyof this research found the evidence of the impact at least at the subjective level of participants.
Further research is needed in order to investigate the impact on the different level, especiallythe level of an organisation or a community as a whole. Although it revealed the complex
relationship between institutionalisation and the existing social capital, it was just a snapshot.
The mechanism how a NPO generates social capital and how institutionalisation affects thecapacity remains unanswered. A longitudinal research is needed to examine this question. This
research has found that a NPO may broaden the social capital and should contribute to thedevelopment of civil society in Japan.

References
Adler, Paul S. and Kwon, Seok-Woo (2002) ‘Social capital: Prospects for a new concept’, Academyof Management Review, 27(1), pp.17-40
Alexander, Jennifer, Nank, Renee and Stivers, Camilla (1999) ‘Implications of welfare reform:
do nonprofit survival strategies threaten civil society?’, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector
Quarterly, 28(4), pp.452-475

26

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

Amenomori, Takayoshi (1997) ‘Japan’ in Salamon, Lester M. and Anheier, Helmut K. (eds)
Defining the Nonprofit Sector: A Cross-national Analysis, Manchester: Manchester
University Press, pp.188-214
Backman, Elain V. and Smith, Steven R. (2000) ‘Healthy organizations, unhealthy communities?’,
Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 10(4), pp.355-373
Baum, Joel A.C. and Oliver, Christine (1991) ‘Institutional linkage and organizational mortality’,
Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(2), pp.187-218
Baum, Joel A.C. and Oliver, Christine (1992) ‘Institutional embeddedness and the dynamics oforganizational populations’, American Sociological Review, 57(4), pp.540-559
Beck, Urich (1992) Risk Society: Toward a New Modernity, London: Sage
Boix, Carles and Posner Daniel N. (1996) ‘Making social capital work: a review of Robert
Putnam’s Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy’, Harvard University
Paper, 96(4), pp.1-22
Brint, Steven and Karabel, Jerome (1991) ‘Institutional origins and transformations: The case of
American community colleges’ in in Powell, Walter W. and DiMaggio, Paul J. (eds) The
New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press,
pp.337-360
Bryman, Alan and Duncan, Cramer (2000) Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS Release 10 for
Windows: A Guide for Social Scientists, London: Routledge
Coleman, James S. (1988) ‘Social capital in the creation of human capital’, American Journal of
Sociology, 94(Supplement), pp.S95-S120
Coleman, James S. (1990) Foundation of Social Theory, Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press ofHarvard University Press
Dees, Gregory (1998) ‘Enterprising Nonprofits’, Harvard Business Review, 76(1), pp.54-67
Deguchi, Masayuki (2001) ‘The distinction between institutionalized and noninstitutionalized
NPOs: new policy initiatives and nonprofit organizations in Japan’ in Anheier, Helmut K.
and Kendall, Jeremy (eds) Third Sector Policy at the Crossroads: An International Nonprofit
Analysis, London: Routledge, pp.153-167
Dekker, Paul and van den Broek, Andries (1998) ‘Civil society in comparative perspective:
involvement in voluntary associations in North America and Western Europe’, Voluntas,
9(1), pp.11-38
DiMaggio, Paul J. (1991) ‘Constructing an organizational field as a professional project: U. S.
art museums, 1920-1940’, in Powell, Walter W. and DiMaggio, Paul J. (eds) The New27日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press,
pp.267-292
DiMaggio, Paul J. and Powell, Walter W. (1983) ‘The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism
and collective rationality in organizational fields’, American Sociological Review, 48, pp.147160
Evers, Adalbert (1995) ‘Part of the welfare mix: the third sector as an intermediate area’, Voluntas,
6(2), pp.159-182
Foley, Michael and Edwards, Bob (1999) ‘Is it time to disinvest in social capital?’, Journal of
Public Policy, 19(2), pp.141-173
Fukuyama, Francis (1995) Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity, New York,
NY: Free Press
Giddens, Anthony (1990) The Consequences of Modernity, Cambridge: Polity Press
Granovetter, Mark S. (1973) ‘The strength of weak ties’, American Journal of Sociology, 78(6),pp.1360-1380
Granovetter, Mark S. (1985) ‘Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness’,
American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), pp.481-510
Gronbjerg, Kirsten A. (1998) ‘Markets, politics, and charity: nonprofits in the political economy’in Powell, Walter W. and Clemens, Elisabeth S. (eds) Private Action and the Public Good,
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, pp.137-150
Halliday, Terence C., Powell, Michael, J. and Granfors, Mark W. (1987) ‘Minimalist organisations:
Vital events in state bar associations, 1870-1930’, American Sociological Review, 52(4),pp.456-471
Hansmann, Henry (1980) ‘The role of nonprofit enterprise’ Yale Law Journal, 89(3), pp.835-901
Inoguchi, Takashi (2000) ‘Social capital in Japan’, Japanese Journal of Political Science, 1(1),pp.73-112
Inoguchi, Takashi (2002) ‘Broadening the basis of social capital in Japan’ in Putnam, Robert D.
(ed) Democracy in Flux: The Evolution of Social Capital in Contemporary Society, New
York, NY : Oxford university Press, pp.359-392
Iokibe, Makoto (1999) ‘Japan’s civil society: an historical overview’ in Yamamoto, Tadashi (ed)Deciding the Public Good: Governance and Civil Society in Japan, Tokyo: Japan Center forInternational Exchange, pp.51-96

28

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

Kawashima, Nobuko (2003) ‘Business and the NPO sector in Japan: development and prospects’in Osborne, S. P. (ed) The Voluntary and Non-Profit Sector in Japan: The Challenge of
Change, London: Routledge, pp.102-117
Kraatz, Matthew S. and Zajac, Edward J. (1996) ‘Exploring the limits of the new institutionalism:
The causes and consequences of illegitimate organisational change’, American Sociological
Review, 61(5), pp.812-836
Kramer, Ralph M. (1994) ‘Voluntary agencies and the contract culture: “Dream or nightmare?”’,Social Service Review, 68(1), pp.33-60
Krishna, Anirudh (1999) ‘Creating harnessing social capital’ in Dasgupta, Partha and Serageldin,
Ismail (eds) Social Capital: A Multifaceted Perspective, Washington, D. C.: The International
Bank for Reconstruction and Development (The World Bank), pp.71-93
Lewis, Jane (1996) ‘What does contracting do to voluntary agencies?’ in Billis, David andHarris, Margaret (eds) Voluntary Agencies: Challenges of Organisation and Management,
Hampshire: Macmillan, pp.98-112
Lipsky, Michael and Smith, Steven R. (1989-90) ‘Nonprofit organizations, government, and thewelfare state’, Political Science Quarterly, 104(4), pp.625-648
Maloney, William A., Smith, Graham and Stoker, Gerry (2000) ‘Social capital and associational
life’ in Baron, Stephen, Field, John and Schuller, Tom (eds) Social Capital: Critical
Perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.212-225
Meyer, John W. and Rowan, Brian (1977) ‘Institutionalized organisations: Formal structure andmyth and ceremony’, American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), pp.340-363
Meyer, John W. and Scott, Richard W., with the assistance of Brian Rowan and Terrence E. Deal
(1983) Organizational Environments: Ritual and Rationality, Beverly Hills: CA, Sage
Najam, Adil (2000) ‘The four-C’s of the third sector-government relations: cooperation,
confrontation, complementarity, and co-optation’, Nonprofit Management and Leadership,
10(4), pp.357-396
Narayan, Deepa (1999) Bonds and Bridges: Social Capital and Poverty (Policy Research Working
Paper 2167), Washington, D. C.: The World Bank
Newton, Kenneth (2001) ‘Trust, social capital, civil society, and democracy’, International
Political Science Review, 22(2), pp.201-214
Ohwa, Mie (2003) ‘The voluntary and non-profit sector and the community in Japan: making
links and responding to needs’ in Osborne, Stephen P. (ed) The Voluntary and Non-Profit
Sector in Japan: The Challenge of Change, London: Routledge, pp.199-20729日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

Onyx, Jenny and Bullen, Paul (2000) ‘Measuring social capital in five communities’, The Journalof Applied Behavioral Science, 36(1), pp.23-42
Portes, Alejandro (1998) ‘Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology’, Annual
Review of Sociology, 24, pp.1-24
Portes, Alejandro and Landolt, Patricia (1996) ‘Unsolved mysteries: the Tocqueville files II: thedown side of social capital’, The American Prospect, 7(26), pp.18-21
Putnam, Robert D. (1993a) Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy, Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press
Putnam, Robert D. (1993b) ‘The prosperous community: social capital and public life’, The
American Prospect, 4(13), pp.11-18
Putnam, Robert D. (1995a) ‘Tuning in, tuning out: the strange disappearance of social capital in
America’, Political Science and Politics, 28(4), pp.664-683
Putnam, Robert D. (1995b) ‘Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital’, Journal of
Democracy, 6(1), pp.65-78
Putnam, Robert D. (2000) Bowling Alone: the Collapse and Revival of American Community, New
York, NY : Touchstone
Rochester, Collin (1996) ‘The impact of funding changes on the voluntary sector’ in Commission
on Future of the Voluntary Sector (ed) Meeting the Challenge of Change: Voluntary Action
into the 21st Century. Summary of Evidence and Selected Papers, London: National Council
for Voluntary Organisations Publications, pp.24-41
Saidel, Judith R. (1991) ‘Resource independence: the relationship between state agencies andnon-profit organisations’, Public Administration Review, 51(6), pp.543-553
Salamon, Lester M. (1987) ‘Partners in public service: the scope and theory of governmentnonprofit relations’ in Powell, Walter W. (ed) The Nonprofit Sector: A Research Handbook,
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, pp.99-117
Salamon, Lester M. and Anheier, Helmut K. (1997) ‘The challenge of definition: thirteen realities
in search of a concept’ in Salamon, Lester M. and Anheier, Helmut K. (eds) Defining theNonprofit Sector: A Cross-national Analysis, Manchester: Manchester University Press,
pp.11-28
Salamon, Lester M. and Anheier, Helmut K. (1998) ‘Social origins of civil society: explaining
nonprofit sector cross-nationally’, Voluntas, 9(3), pp.313-248

30

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

Schiff, Jerald and Weisbrod, Burton A. (1991) ‘Competition between for-profit and nonprofit
organizations in commercial markets’, Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 62(4),pp.619-639
Schuller, Tom, Baron, Stephen and Firld, John (2000) ‘Social capital: a review and critique’ in
Baron, Stephen, Field, John and Schuller, Tom (eds) Social Capital: Critical Perspectives,
Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.1-38
Scott, Richard W. (1992) Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems (3rd Edition),Englewood Cliffs: NJ, Prentice Hall
Scott, Richard W. and Meyer, John W. (1991) ‘The organization of societal sectors: Propositions andearly evidence’, in Powell, Walter W. and DiMaggio, Paul J. (eds) The New Institutionalismin Organizational Analysis, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp.108-140
Seligman, Adam B. (1992) The Idea of Civil Society, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
Smith, Steven R. and Lipsky, Michael (1993) Nonprofits for Hire: The Welfare State in the Age ofContracting, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Stolle, Dietlind (1998) ‘Bowling together, bowling alone: the development of generalized trust involuntary associations’, Political Psychology, 19(3), pp.497-525
Thranhardt, Anna M. (1990) ‘Traditional neighborhood associations in industrial society: the caseof Japan’ in Anheier, Helmut K. and Seibel, Wolfgang (eds) The Third Sector: Comparative
Studies of Nonprofit Organizations, Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter, pp.347-360
Tsujinaka, Yutaka (2002) ‘The cultural dimension in measuring social capital: perspectives
from Japan’, Social Capital: The Challenges of International Measurement paper 5, Paris: OECDvan Deth, Jan W. (1997) ‘Introduction: social involvement and democratic politics’ in van DethJan W. (ed) Private Groups and Public Life: Social Participation, Voluntary Associations
and Political Involvement in Representative Democracies, London: Routledge, pp.1-23
van Deth, Jan W. (2003) ‘Measuring social capital: orthodoxies and continuing controversies’,
International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 6(1), pp.79-92
Vogel, Ezra F. (1979) Japan as Number One: Lessons for America, Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press
Warren, Mark R., Thompson, J. Phillip and Saegert, Susan (2001) ‘The role of social capital incombating poverty’ in Saegert, S., Thompson, J. Phillip and Warren, Mark R. (eds) Social
Capital and Poor Communities, New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation, pp.1-28

31

日本における非営利組織とソーシャル・キャピタル：制度化の影響に関する実証研究

Weisbrod, Burton A. (1977) The Voluntary Nonprofit Sector, Lexinton, D.C.: Heath andCompany
Weisbrod, Burton A. (1998) ‘The nonprofit mission and its financing: growing links between
nonprofits and the rest of the economy’ in Weisbrod, Burton A. (ed) To Profit or Not toProfit: The Commercial Transformation of the Nonprofit Sector, Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, pp.1-22
Williams, Bernard (1988) ‘Formal structures and social reality’ in Gambetta, Diego (ed) Trust:
Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp.3-13
Wolch, Jennifer R. (1990) The Shadow State: Government and Voluntary Sector in Transition,
New York: NY, The Foundation Center
Wollebaek, Dag and Selle, Per (2002) ‘Does participation in voluntary associations contributeto social capital?: the impact of intensity, scope and type’, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector
Quarterly, 31(1), pp.32-61
Woolcock, Michael (1998) ‘Social capital and economic development: toward a theoreticalsynthesis and policy framework’, Theory and Society, 27, pp.151-208
Woolcock, Michael and Narayan, Deepa (2000) ‘Social capital: implications for development
theory, research, and policy’, The World Bank Research Observer, 15(2), pp.225-249
Wuthnow, Robert (1991) ‘The voluntary sector: legacy of the past, hope for the future?’ in
Wuthnow, Robert (ed) Between Stats and Markets: The Voluntary Sector in Comparative
Perspective, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp.3-29
Yamagishi, Toshio (1998) Shinrai no Kouzou: Kokoro to Kokoro no Shinka Gemu [The Structureof Trust: The Evolutionary Games of Mind and Society], Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press
Yamagishi, Toshio (2003) ‘Trust and social intelligence in Japan’ in Schwartz, Frank J. and Pharr,
Susan J. (eds) The State of Civil Society in Japan, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
pp. pp.281-297
Yamagishi, Toshio and Yamagishi, Midori (1994) ‘Trust and commitment in the United States
and Japan’, Motivation and Emotion, 18(2), pp.129-166
Yamamoto, Tadashi (1999) ‘Emergence of Japan’s Civil Society and Its Future Challenges’ inYamamoto, Tadashi (ed) Deciding the Public Good: Governance and Civil Society in Japan,
pp.97-124
Young, Dennis R. (1998) ‘Commercialism in nonprofit social service associations: its character,significance, and rationale’ in Weisbrod, Burton A. (ed) To Profit or Not to Profit: The

32

Sanno University Bulletin Vol.29 No. 2 February 2009

Commercial Transformation of the Nonprofit Sector, Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press, pp.195-216

33