ABSTRACT
This chapter discusses two network structures that have been argued to create social capital. The closure argument is that social capital is created by a network of strongly interconnected elements. The structural hole argument is that social capital is created by a network in which people can broker connections between otherwise disconnected segments. Structural holes separate nonredundant sources of information, sources that are more additive than overlapping. There are two indicators of redundancy: cohesion and equivalence. Cohesive contacts are likely to have similar information and therefore provide redundant information benefits. Structurally equivalent contacts have the same sources of information and therefore provide redundant information benefits. Structural holes and network closure can be brought together in a productive way. The integration is only with respect to empirical evidence. The mechanisms remain distinct. Closure describes how dense or hierarchical networks lower the risk associated with transaction and trust, which can be associated with performance.
