Health capital: toward a conceptual framework for understanding the construction of individual health

Abstract

Emerging perspectives of health as individualized and privatized capital seem promising to shed light on the construction of individual health in the face of the growing individualization of healthcare. This article reviews extant perspectives of health as capital, reflecting upon how a conceptualization of health capital might be conceived by two of the main contrasting traditions: human capital theory affiliated with the Chicago School of Economics and Bourdieusian concepts of social field and capital. Arguing that a Bourdieusian perspective is potentially more fruitful to capture the importance of social and cultural dimensions in the construction of individual health, this article arrives at a conceptualization of health capital as the aggregate of the actual or potential resources possessed by a given agent that have the capacity to affect the position of agents in the social field of health. Drawing on Bourdieu’s conceptualization of forms of capital, this article discusses the efficacy, the legitimation, and the positioning of health capital, uncovering its potential for understanding contemporary trends in health practices and health discourse.

Individual Capital Structure and Health Behaviors among Chinese Middle-Aged and Older Adults: A Cross-Sectional Analysis Using Bourdieu’s Theory of Capitals

“…In this regard, stay-up behavior may help to show a sense of superiority compared to friends who have nothing to do, making oneself recognized as a “legitimate sufferer”. As such, status, based on perceptions of superiority, outcompetes concerns for health, leading to counterproductive health practices such as stay-up [ 43 ]. In addition, it should also be noted that cultural capital was not evidently associated with stay-up behavior in female and rural samples.…”

“…As argued by Schneider-Kamp, the construction of individual health has already become increasingly dependent on the availability and forms of personal disposable resources. As such, by embracing a Bourdieusian perspective, public health researchers are able to focus on the synergy of various forms of "health capital" and then understand "the social and cultural embeddedness of contemporary health practices" [ 43 ]. Following this line of thought, we insist that Bourdieu’s theoretical framework can be applied to delineate the heterogeneity of health in non-European contexts, such as Chinese society.…”

New Perspective on Why Women Live Longer Than Men: An Exploration of Power, Gender, Social Determinants, and Capitals

“…We aim to combine theoretical insights from gender theory with insights from Bourdieu’s [ 32 ] theory of the relationship between economic, cultural, social and symbolic capitals in order to explore how gendered power dynamics relate to social position [ 28 ]. Over the last few decades, researchers have begun to apply Bourdieu’s capitals to health and gender experiences and inequities as the theory accommodates both individual agency and social structures [ 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 ]. Turner [ 39 ] suggests that Bourdieu’s conception of social capital explains how social structures can influence quantity and quality of a person’s social relationships, which play an important part in the maintenance of health, and, at the same time, provide resources for recovery from illness.…”

Core Values that Influence the Patient—Healthcare Professional Power Dynamic: Steering Interaction towards Partnership

“…These repertoire of skills, knowledge, cognitive capacities, attitudes, behaviours, and interactional styles, cultivated and applied by patients and HCPs during their interactions, can be considered prerequisites for the implementation of patient partnership in healthcare. Also known as cultural health capitals (CHC) [ 21 , 27 , 29 , 30 , 31 ], these values are leveraged to optimise the healthcare relationship. The conceptualisation of CHC relies on the Bourdieusian theory of social structure as a multidimensional field, which highlights how a purely economic approach would fail to address the fundamental hierarchical link of division between culturally dominant agents’ and the dominated ones.…”

“…We posit that to remain pertinent, core values representative of the patient—HCP interaction, must undergo an evolution from a paternalist to a partnership culture within the same healthcare system [ 32 ] (p. 16). For example, culturally-deprived patients show passive attitudes before HCPs, are more reluctant to express their choices, and are less active in the search for health strategies [ 30 ], whereas patients’ with increasing knowledge of their health condition and treatment and an ability to effectively communicate that knowledge [ 21 ] possess increased negotiation power. When HCPs demonstrate a willingness to apply this knowledge and discuss treatments options with patients, they are indicating an openness to share power with them.…”