CESES FSV UK Praha 2006 - Centrum pro sociální a ekonomické ...

nisms and, consequently, economic growth (Matějů and Vitásková, in press). It is also claimed
that different types of capital are important in different contexts. Matějů (2002) compares the
situation in CEE and Western Europe and concludes that in CEE generalized trust is not as important
as in the West. While in advanced countries, social capital is being used to contribute
to the explanation of cross-national variance in economic growth and overall well-being, in
the post-communist context social capital is particularly useful in understanding the process of
social change and its consequences for peoples‘ career mobility and life chances (Matějů and
Vitásková, in press).
The negative thing about the parcelling of social capital is that researchers only tend to focus
on several aspects of the concept and ignore others. Several important topics seem to have
been neglected in the Czech context. We have seen that social capital is mostly connected to the
transformation of society, and is associated with clientelism. Because social capital has been
mostly conceptualized at individual levels and its perception has been largely negative, we lack
knowledge about the positive role that social networks can play (their effect on health, social
support, friendship etc.). In sharp contrast to foreign literature, and to the best of our knowledge,
there is no contribution describing the positive effect of social networks on health in general
and mental health in particular and on individual well-being (for a review of foreign literature
see Cullen and Whiteford, 2001). In other words, we lack information on the positive role that
social support and social networks can play in the specific context of the Czech Republic. Thus
a lot of work lies ahead.
17