قابل توجه نویسندگان محترم، مقالاتی که از تاریخ 1404/07/13 برای نشریه ارسال می شوند، شامل پرداخت هزینه بررسی نخواهند شد.
Volume 10, Issue 2 (Semi-Annual 2025)
CIAUJ 2025, 10(2): 83-104 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Esmaeili Sangari H, Parvin R. (2025). Fluid Social Capital: A Theoretical Explanation of Soft Ties within the Context of Intangible Cultural Heritage (Application of Spatial Density Analysis). CIAUJ. 10(2), 83-104. doi:10.61882/ciauj.10.2.634
URL: http://ciauj-tabriziau.ir/article-1-634-en.html
URL: http://ciauj-tabriziau.ir/article-1-634-en.html
1- Department of Building and Structure Research Institute, National Cultural Heritage Research Institute, Tehran, Iran , h.esmaeeli@richt.ir
2- Department of Architecture, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
2- Department of Architecture, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
Abstract: (1361 Views)
Social ties play a fundamental role in cohesion and collective action in contemporary societies. However, a significant portion of these ties emerges through informal and cultural forms that are often difficult to analyze within conventional theoretical frameworks. In the literature on social capital, most approaches focus on institutional structures and formal participation, while soft and context-based relationships have received less attention. This study aims to provide a theoretical explanation of the concept of fluid social capital within the framework of intangible cultural heritage by identifying and analyzing the soft ties that evolve in ritualistic, symbolic, and lived spaces—ties that have the potential to transform into mechanisms of trust, cohesion, and social engagement.To address the central research question—How does fluid social capital manifest through soft ties in cultural contexts?—this research adopts a mixed-methods approach (qualitative–quantitative) in three stages. In the qualitative phase, through comparative content analysis of theoretical texts and the use of MAXQDA software, four core components were identified: social trust, social participation, cultural memory, and contextual dynamics. In the quantitative phase, these qualitative concepts were converted into measurable indicators and, through the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Kernel Density Estimation, conceptual maps were generated to illustrate the distribution and intensity of these components within cultural spaces. Findings indicate that soft ties, despite their apparent instability, possess meaningful structures. Hence, fluid social capital necessitates a reevaluation of conventional theories and encourages interdisciplinary approaches to better comprehend the cultural complexities of informal contexts.
Type of Study: Original Article |
Subject:
Conceptualization of theorizing in Islamic architecture and urban ism
Received: 2025/05/6 | Accepted: 2025/10/5 | ePublished: 2025/12/30
Received: 2025/05/6 | Accepted: 2025/10/5 | ePublished: 2025/12/30
References
1. Aldrich, D. P., & Meyer, M. A. (2015). Social capital and community resilience. American behavioral scientist, 59(2), 254-269. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214550299 [DOI:10.1177/000276421455029.]
2. Bauman, Z. (2013). Liquid modernity. John Wiley & Sons.
3. Bitektine, A., Gillespie, N., & Lange, D. (2025). From the Evaluator's Perspective: A Functional Approach to Social Judgments. Academy of Management Review, (ja), amr-2020. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2020.0405 [DOI:10.5465/amr.2020.0405.]
4. Bourdieu, P. (2011). The forms of capital. (1986). Cultural theory: An anthology, 1(81-93), 949.
5. Campbell, D. E. (2023). Social Capital in a Divided America: The Relationship between Economic Bridging and Affective Polarization. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 708(1), 102-120. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1177/00027162241228121 [DOI:10.1177/00027162241228121.]
6. Chen, F., Yi, Y., & Zhao, Y. (2023). The effect of social capital at the community and individual levels on farmers' participation in the rural public goods provision. Agriculture, 13(6), 1-17. DOI: 10.3390/agriculture13061247. [DOI:10.3390/agriculture13061247]
7. Claridge, T. (2018). Criticisms of social capital theory: and lessons for improving practice. Social capital research, 4(2), 1-8. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.8008320.
8. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American journal of sociology, 94, S95-S120. DOI: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2780243. [DOI:10.1086/228943]
9. Council of Europe. (2019). Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/1680083746.
10. De Luca Picione, R., De Fortuna, A. M., Balzani, E., & Marsico, G. (2025). Trajectories of the notion of liminality: Identity, border, threshold, affectivity, and spatio-temporal processes of transformation. Culture & Psychology, 1354067X251315735. DOI: 10.1177/1354067X251315735. [DOI:10.1177/1354067X251315735]
11. Fuhse, J. A., & Gondal, N. (2024). Networks from culture: Mechanisms of tie-formation follow institutionalized rules in social fields. Social Networks, 77, 43-54. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2021.12.005 [DOI:10.1016/j.socnet.2021.12.005.]
12. Gondal, N. (2025). Relational meaning in social network analysis. In Handbook of Culture and Social Networks (pp. 239-250). Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.4337/9781803928784.00026 [DOI:10.4337/9781803928784.00026.]
13. Granvotter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American journal of sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. [DOI:10.1086/225469]
14. Hahn, I. S., Scherer, F. L., & Lebioda, L. (2024). Social Responsibility and Businesses at the Base of the Pyramid in Brazilian Multinational Companies: Intersection in a Meso-level Perspective. BBR. Brazilian Business Review, 21(3), e20221270. DOI: [DOI:10.15728/bbr.2022.1270.en.]
15. Hall, S. (1992). The Question of Cultural Identity. Modernity and its Futures.
16. Kim, Y. C., & Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (2006). Civic engagement from a communication infrastructure perspective. Communication Theory, 16(2), 173-197. DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00267.x. [DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00267.x]
17. Lefebrve, H. (1991). The production of space. Basil Backwell.
18. Li, M., Zhang, J., & Jin, L. (2025). Opinion Dynamics Considering Matthew Effect With Time Delays and Stubborn Influence in Social Networks. IEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineering. DOI:10.1109/TNSE.2024.3389741. [DOI:10.1109/TNSE.2024.3389741]
19. Ligocki, D. T. (2019). Bauman's Theory of Liquid Modernity. Research Methods for Social Justice and Equity in Education, 81-89. DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-05900-2_7. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-05900-2_7]
20. Lombardinilo, A. (2025). "Society at Large Is Heteronomous": Cornelius Castoriadis and the Poietic Creation. Italian Sociological Review, 15(1), 129-129.
21. LOPEZ SANTOS, J. O. N. A. T. H. A. N., & Ramírez Hernández, J. J. (2025). Social Network Analysis as a Methodological Resource for the Study of Territorial Sustainability. Redes, revista hispana para el análisis de redes sociales, 36(2), 163-177. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/redes.1068 [DOI:10.5565/rev/redes.1068.]
22. Maalouf, L., & Napolitano, R. (2025). Community agency and heritage recovery in climate-vulnerable historic districts: lessons from Riverine Montpelier, Vermont. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 1-25. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2025.2484689 [DOI:10.1080/13527258.2025.2484689.]
23. McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual review of sociology, 27(1), 415-444. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415 [DOI:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415.]
24. Mottershead, R., Subu, M. A., Habeb, M., Alonaizi, N., Bani-Issa, W., Dias, J. M., ... & Harrison, C. (2025). A Social Constructionist Influenced Scoping Review of Addictions, Deviance and Crime: Biopsychosocial Perspectives for the Emerging Forensic Mental Health Nursing and Healthcare Services of the Middle East. F1000Research, 14, 120. DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.160802.1. [DOI:10.12688/f1000research.160802.1]
25. Narayan, D., & Cassidy, M. F. (2001). A dimensional approach to measuring social capital: development and validation of a social capital inventory. Current Sociology, 49(2), 59-102. DOI:10.1177/0011392101049002006. [DOI:10.1177/0011392101049002006]
26. Pan, Y. (2024). Strategies for the Preservation and Sustainable Development of Huayin Laoqiang Opera as Urban Intangible Cultural Heritage. Cultura: International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology, 21(2), 330-360.
27. Pasquariello Mariano, K. L., Nitsch Bressan, R., & Theodoro Luciano, B. (2025). Liquid Regionalism: A Conceptualisation. In Liquid Regionalism in the Americas: An Analysis of Contemporary Regional Developments (pp. 35-62). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-031-83799-9_3]
28. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon and Schuster. [DOI:10.1145/358916.361990]
29. Schüßler, A., Holler, C., & Hill, Y. (2025). Do you prefer to collaborate with students pursuing the same goals?-A network analysis of physical education classes. British Journal of Educational Psychology. DOI:10.1111/bjep 12757. [DOI:10.1111/bjep.12757]
30. Sciolla, L. (2015). Rileggere Putnam: Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Parolechiave, 23(2), 69-78. DOI: 10.7377/82309.
31. Šuriņa, S., & Mārtinsone, K. (2020, May). Conceptualization of social capital in cross-sectional design studies: Rapid review of literature. In Society. Integration. Education. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference (Vol. 7, pp. 177-186). DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2020vol7.4973 [DOI:10.17770/sie2020vol7.4973.]
32. Tricarico, L., Lorenzetti, E., & Morettini, L. (2023). Crowdsourcing intangible heritage for territorial development: a conceptual framework considering Italian inner areas. Land, 12(10), 1843. DOI:10.3390/land12101843. [DOI:10.3390/land12101843]
33. UNESCO. (2021). Operational directives for the implementation of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Retrieved from https://ich.unesco.org/en/directives.
34. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2020). Strengthening social cohesion: Conceptual framing and programming implications. Retrieved from https://www.undp.org/publications/strengthening-social-cohesion-conceptual-framing-and-programming-implications.
35. Wesselow, M. (2023). Not All Social Capital Is Equal: Conceptualizing Social Capital Differences in Cities. Urban Science, 7(2), 49. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci7020049 [DOI:10.3390/urbansci7020049.]
36. Wulf, C. (2024). Handbook on Intangible Cultural Practices as Global Strategies for the Future. Springer Nature. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-031-72123-6]
37. Zembylas, M. (2020). Emotional capital and education: Theoretical insights from Bourdieu. In Bourdieu and Education (pp. 41-61). Routledge. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-8527.2007.00390.x. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-8527.2007.00390.x]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
