SOCIAL CHANGE

1.1 Introduction
This essay attempts to discuss the concept of Social Change. It will define the concept of social change, describe factors for the social change and review different theories for the social change. The essay has been organized into three major sections. The first part, which follows after this introduction defines the concept of Social Change. The second section discusses factors for the Social Change, which is followed by the review of various theories of social change. The last part of the essay is conclusion and reflections on the concept.

2.1 The Concept Social Change
The term ‘social change’ is a term used within sociology and applies to modifications in social relationships or culture. All societies are involved in a process of social change; however, this change may be so incremental that the members of the society are hardly aware of it. People living in very traditional societies would be in this category. Societies are characterized by change: the rate of change, the processes of change, and the directions of change.[1]

2.2 Causes of the Social Change
(i) The actions of individuals, organizations and social movements have an impact on society and may become the catalyst for social change. The actions of individuals, however, occur within the context of culture, institutions and power structures inherited from the past, and usually, for these individuals to effect dramatic social change, the society itself is tripe' for change.
(ii) Broad social trends, for example, shifts in population, urbanization, industrialization and bureaucratization, can lead to significant social change. In the past, this has been associated with modernization, the process whereby a society moves from traditional, less developed modes of production (like small-scale agriculture) to technologically advanced industrial modes of production. Trends like population growth and urbanization have a significant impact on other aspects of society, like social structure, institutions and culture. Nineteenth and early Twentieth Century social theorists focused fairly extensively on modernization, but they tended to present on oversimplified "grand narrative" which resulted from heavily ideological interpretations of the contrast between tradition and modernization. They also attempted to externalize absolutes, "social laws" as they saw them, and they argued that these social laws were operative in structurally similar societies.

3.1 Theories of Social Change
(i) Early Evolutionary Theory. This theory of social change was based on the assumption that all societies develop from simple, ‘small-scale’ beginnings into more complex industrial and post-industrial societies. This development process was thought to be unilinear, that is, there was one line of development from simple to complex. It also assumed that the changes inherent in this development were all 'progress'. This theory emerged around the time Charles Darwin was publishing his theories on the origin of species; that biological species evolved from the simple to the complex and that there was 'survival of the fittest'. Evolutionary theorists applied these ideas to societies - a concept which fitted very comfortably with this colonial era when Britain and other colonizing countries were heavily involved in bringing their "superior" advanced form of society to more "primitive" societies, in exchange for their raw materials, trade goods, etc.
Evolutionary theorists reflected the prevailing ideology, legitimizing, through their theoretical explanation of social change, the political and economic ambitions of the colonial powers. Early evolutionary theory described change, rather than explained it and ignored the many patterns of development which were occurring - which were, in reality, as diverse as the countries themselves.[2]
(ii) Functionalist Theory (often called Structural Functionalism): Functionalist theory assumes, on the whole, that as societies develop, they become increasingly more complex and interdependent. Functionalist theory emphasizes social order rather than social change. Talcott Parsons viewed society as consisting of interdependent parts which work together to maintain the equilibrium of the whole, rather like the human body with its interdependent organs working for the health of the entire organism. Key concepts of this theory are those of differentiation and integration. Differentiation occurs as society becomes more complex but the new institutions must be integrated with each other into the whole. In other words, change occurs (differentiation of institutions, for example, to take over functions of previously non-differentiated institutions) but structures within society change or emerge to compensate. The new structures are integrated to ensure the smooth functioning of society. Social order requires that members of society work towards achieving order and stability within the society and Functionalist
Limitations of this theory are that it really only attempts to explain institutional change. During the decades of the 1940s and 1950s the functionalist view of society as a balanced system that integrated small but necessary changes was quite consistent with the times. However this social theory quickly lost credibility because it proved inadequate to explain the rapid upheaval and social unrest of the late 50s and 60s. Like Early Evolutionary theory, it assumes that change is progress, although there are disagreements between Functionalist theorists.

(iii) Conflict Theory - Marxism (Marx and Engels). Marxism also saw itself as offering a 'scientific account' of change but, in opposition to Functionalism, this focused on the premise that radical change was inevitable in society. Marxism argued that the potential for change was built into the basic structures of society, the relationships between social classes, which Marx saw as being intrinsic to the social relations of production. According to Marx, eventually society reaches a point where its own organization creates a barrier to further economic growth and at that point, crisis precipitates a revolutionary transformation of the society, for example, from feudalism to capitalism or from capitalism to socialism.
Marxists believed that social order was maintained through socialization, education and ideology. Thus control is maintained to suit the vested interests of powerful groups and as the interests of these groups change, so does society. Change is therefore ongoing until crisis point is reached and transformation occurs. While Marx focused on class conflict specifically, modem conflict theorists have broadened their explanation of change to social conflict generally. While Conflict Theory is useful in explaining significant events in history and ongoing changing patterns of race and gender relations, it struggles to adequately explain the dramatic impact of technological development on society or the changes to family organisation.

(iv) Post-Modernist Social Theory (also called Post-Structuralism). Post-Modernism argues that both social reality and knowledge is socially constructed. Post-Modernism rejects 'general' or overarching explanations of change, which rely on the premise of a single total social system or assumptions about class or gender power. Postmodernists see power as dispersed and localised, rather than hierarchical and directed from the top down. For Post-Modernists, there are many 'knowledges' and 'ways of knowing', multiple sets of moral rules and ethics, which people in society tap into at their local level. Authority structures may attempt to assert their knowledge and way of doing things) but they do this, not from any intellectual or moral authority, but through political strategies of coercion (ridicule, exclusion), leading to the use of their definition of 'normal' to define what is 'abnormal'. At the micro-level, the out-group is defined by definition of the in-group. Micropower is located within institutions, which use language and practices to control people. Post-Modernists view society, therefore, not as a total system but as an aggregation of fragments. They see post-modern society as the next phase after modern, post-industrial society, so in this sense Post-Modernists are viewing social change in terms of stages that societies go through. In terms of social theory, they confine their analysis to post-industrial societies and rarely attempt to analyse the whole of society, preferring to focus on its component parts, such as institutions like the family, prisons, hospitals etc.
Recent social theorists, for example, Anthony Giddens (1990), see a crucial distinction between pre-modern and modern societies based on our dependence on increasingly complex and extended social relationships. These rely on 'expert systems' with which we have no face-to-face relationship. In the past, people relied on, or were dependent on, the people with whom they had the closest relationships, for example, spouses, family etc.

4.0 Conclusion
This essay has discussed the concept Social change. It has identified factors for the social change and reviewed some of the theories of the Social Change. It has argued that some recent trends in global change are that the world population has become more concentrated in the less developed world and in cities, there has been a tremendous growth in internet use, infant mortality rates have declined, illiteracy has declined, more people are living in freedom, GDP per capita has increased in some areas of the world, and poverty has declined in some areas of the world. Western society changing values on trends such as the birth control pill, voting rights for non-land holders, and the ups and downs of acceptance of homosexuality are also examples of social change.

REFERENCES
Beilharz, P. (ed.): Social Theory Guide to Central Thinkers Allen & Unwin, NSW, 1892Bessant, J. & Watts, R.: Sociology Australia Allen & Unwin, NSW, 1999
Christine Preston (Nagle College) for Society and Culture Inservice, 12th August 2000.
Giddens, A. The Consequences of Modernity Polity Press, Cambridge, 1990Polanyi, K. The Great Transformation Octagon Books, New York, 1973


[1] See Christine Preston (Nagle College) for Society and Culture Inservice, 12th August 2000.

[2] Ibid.