In discussing a community’s “social capital,” it’s easy to get lost inside social science gibberish, as the field of measuring community interconnectedness is an ambitious exercise in quantifying the unquantifiable.

This is what makes it so frustrating, and so intriguing.

Social capital in Lewiston-Auburn was assessed in 2000 and 2006, the latest study released this week. In brief, here’s what the study, sponsored by the Maine Community Foundation and conducted by Harvard University, found.

As citizens, our engagement with faith-based entities has risen since 2000. We volunteer more, and give more to charity. We vote more. Diversity within our social circles is unchanged, but we have raised our accumulation of “interracial friendships.”

Trust between races, however, decreased. We interact with our neighbors less, and prefer television as our primary entertainment 15 percent more than 2000. Parental involvement with children’s schooling has fallen precipitously, a decrease of 5 percent since the first study.

Authors are quick to describe these findings as “snapshots,” not conclusions. Some interpreters see the results as indicative of L-A’s failings, while others see them as proof of L-A’s successes. The results are delightfully vague, open to interpretation through a variety of prisms, startling and satisfying at the same time.

And, by being inconclusive, the findings are an ideal diving board for leaders to leap into a probing and refreshing examination of the Twin Cities. Just as the problems identified by the survey transcend explanation, the solutions also transcend narrow boundaries of responsibility.

Improving social capital is a church problem. It’s a government problem. It’s a youth problem, and an elderly problem. It’s a school problem. It’s a parent problem. It’s an economic problem. It’s a white problem. It’s a black problem. It’s a native problem. It’s an immigrant problem.

No group can be exempted from the process, because exemption destroys the social capital that needs to be built. For the survey to have maximum impact, all segments of L-A society must buy into the proceedings, and have a desire to make a difference. In other words, it takes creation of social capital to build social capital.

This is easy to say, but as the survey findings have shown, hard to do.

Social capital is omnipresent, which flaws the findings somewhat. The survey relied on traditional measures of community, like voting and church attendance, without acknowledging new, innovative societal fabrics being woven.

The noisy scrapes and slashes emanating from the skateboarder’s haven in Kennedy Park is the best example. A nontraditional amenity, the park’s popularity has created new social capital in downtown Lewiston, through remarkably engaging a demographic renowned for its disenfranchisement.

Only by recognizing the new bonds of community, while strengthening the old, can a complete portrait of Lewiston-Auburn’s social capital be painted. It should be done.

The community foundation now wants to spur discussions about social capital, an invitation accepted by the Androscoggin County Chamber of Commerce, whose existence relies on the interconnectedness of its community.

Similar words could be said, as well, about Lewiston-Auburn.