According to Nan Lin, Duke University, North Carolina, USA, there are four reasons forinvesting in social capital:‣ It facilitates the flow of information and can provide the individual with access to usefulinformation about opportunities and choices otherwise not available;‣ It provides social ties which can be influential in affecting decisions that can impact onthe individual;‣ It provides the individual with social credentials, giving the possibility of access toresources through relationships and social networks;‣ Social relations reinforce identity - as a member of the social group the individualshares similar interests and resources. 9Where does LLL fit into these two scenarios? Is it purely an investment in human capital,with the objective of increasing the skills and qualifications of the labour force or is it aninvestment in social capital which provides for the wider social development of individuals,networks and communities?The national projects fit into both the human and social capital theories. In the Danish case,for example, the focus of the LLL study was on the labour market integration and educationof immigrants, or the Hungarian project which looked at policies for unemployed personsin rural areas. On the other hand, it could be argued that the ‘social capital’ scenario isfound in the two Polish studies on a) the small schools initiative; and b) for the inclusion ofrural youth. The Swedish study was of particular interest, as it addressed both the humancapital objectives of providing the skills for employment to immigrants but also had a focuson social integration through language training and an understanding of Swedish culture, soas to avoid the development of immigrant ‘ghettoisation’.4. Resources for LLLTo implement any policy area, there are four main resources required, financial input,qualified and skills personnel, the facilities to provide the actions or programmes arisingout of the policy and sufficient time to deliver the policy. These four resource issues arerelevant to LLL in both the social inclusion of immigrants and those living in marginalisedrural communities.9 Building a Network Theory of Social Capital by Nan Lin, Dept of Sociology, Duke University, Connections 22 (1)(1999)5
With regard to the funding of LLL a number of issues arise from the national studies. Forexample, where should the main support come from – the State or should it be dependenton other resources? What would be the reason for the State investing in LLL - is it a socialinvestment or an economic investment? Should the State only invest in education andtraining programmes which will be of value to the economy by providing the workforcewith the skills for employability, or should this investment have wider societal objectives?If programmes are State funded, will that funding be sustainable in terms of planning andstability, in the long-term?In the national studies funding was mainly from the State, as in the Danish and UK cases,but other projects identified funding from a number of other sources. In Greece, forexample, the European Social Fund was a source of funding for the project on theintegration of immigrants and in Hungary the study identified a mix of funding sources,such as the state (44%), the European Social Fund (28%) and local and other contributions(also 28%).In Poland the small schools programme is funded, in part, by the local authorities, while thelocal communities contributed to the refurbishment and financial up-keep of the schools.These schools provide a range of both formal education for children and young people andalso adult education courses for farmers and unemployed people and they are also socialand economic centres in the villages.Many of the projects identified accessing sufficient and continuing funding as a majorbarrier to the success of LLL. This lack of funding restricts the development and expansionof the LLL programmes. In the UK, for example, the challenge of securing funding for LLLfor people living in rural areas is ‘a frustration and it is short-term and has narrow targets’and funding is often linked to numbers and outcomes. In the Polish project for the trainingof rural young people the lack of adequate funding and the poor use of the funds availablewere identified as key difficulties.For LLL programmes to be successful, teachers, trainers and experts are required in theright place at the right time. Even if ‘unlimited’ financial resources are available for aparticular programme but there is a shortage of trained personnel to provide a training or aneducational module, the success of that programme will be impeded. In Spain, for example,the State funded programme for the integration of immigrants includes capacity buildingfor trainers.Third, good quality facilities, including IT and other equipment relevant to the delivery ofthe training/education programmes, are essential for the success and repeating ofprogrammes. Clients will not attend poor quality, unattractive facilities and they will not beencouraged to return, as was demonstrated in the small schools project in Poland.6