 So, in this session we are going to discuss the historical perspective regarding the development of social capital. The conceptual growth is basically, we have to understand because it is a new born concept and the research in this context is at initial stages that there are many different versions, there are many different definitions given by various philosophers regarding the concept of social capital. Because it is a really potential and promising concept, so therefore there is a great need to understand this concept. Because the literature on the subject grew at an almost two decades ago when there is a solid effort regarding the conceptual growth of this concept and in the intellectual history of the concept of social capital can be traced back to Karl Marx, then Darkheim, then Max Weber, they are the big names, those have tried to give the new concept regarding the social capital philosophy. Why we can say that these philosophers have contributed a lot when we are claiming that this is a new concept? Because they have their emphasis that the growth of a society, the growth of an individual, it is dependent on the growth of a culture and the economic status, that how people's standards of life can be forgotten when people focus on their economic growth, or along with that they can reach their culture, now how will the culture reach, with norms and values practice, but along with that, if the culture is so strong that it reaches that other people should follow it, then what is the need for that, for that we need collective effort. So after long disappearance of the concept, the concept of social capital was reinvented by the team of Canadian sociologists, in 1956 there was a lot of work around it, specifically the Canadian sociologists were focused on how to relate that with the modern time period, then definitely the social interaction theory came and then the urban life started to happen and along with that, why not the economic distribution, it should be studied that if the economic, the income distribution, if it is in a proper way, it should not be a focused class, in fact if it is distributed among people, then the ultimate outcome would be that all the people's lives would start to get better, so we can say that it is, this concept has a various dimension, it does not base on any specific dimension, and the concept has a lot of dimensions, so it becomes quite harder to have a single definition regarding that concept, then different authors they have tried to define social capital in their own perspective and in their own ways, but one, the contribution we have seen in the modern time period, that Francis Fukuyama's definition, where on one side he has a lot more of his philosophies on which there is a debate, but in the context of social capital, he said that if in people, people were not made part of the society collectively, then ultimately what will happen in the world, it will end in its phases, and within history there will be such a time period that it will be a revival, on new norms, on new traditions, so we can say that the concept of social capital has various phases, but within each phase, the common point we see, which is very interesting, is the concept of collective benefit, collective betterment, where philosophers give the name of democracy, where they give the name of the growth of society, but we are discussing this collective betterment under the concept of social capital.