(CRICOS) #00212K BOURDIEU AND FORMS OF CAPITAL Prof David Marsh Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis University of Canberra AUG 2015

It is in fact impossible to account for the structure and functioning of the social world unless one reintroduces capital in all its forms and not solely in the one form recognized by economic theory. 3 forms: economic; social and cultural.

Economic: Money, Property, Shares etc, which are immediately and directly convertible into money Social: Social obligations and ‘connections’, think ‘old boys networks’), which is convertible, in certain conditions, into economic capital Cultural: Education, Culture, Habits - which is convertible, on certain conditions, into economic capital Forms of Capital

Similar to how it is used in mainstream analysis. Money and things easily converted to money – Property, shares etc. In a crucial way, this is the dominant form and a crucial question is how other forms are converted into it. Economic Capital

“a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition”. Crucial are size, depth and utility of social networks Social Capital

3 Forms: Embodied – long-lasting dispositions of mind and body Objectified - Goods – eg, pictures, books, instruments Institutionalised - eg educational qualifications Cultural Capital

Mainstream approach – rooted in employment location Bourdieusian turn but different takes on it Crucial for Bourdieu is that class is a relational concept – not a categorical one Access to forms of capital is the basis of one’s class location Class position is in part ‘field’-related Class as an Example

Bourdieu’s concept of habitus, discussed earlier, can be utilised to better conceptualise 3 rd face, because it acts in a pre-conscious realm. Habitus relates to class and, thus, reflects access to forms of capital Faces of Power Revisited