Directed social and cultural change;

Social movements, directed social

change

Social movement

Social movement, loosely organized but sustained campaign in support of a social goal, typically
either the implementation or the prevention of a change in society’s structure or values.
Although social movements differ in size, they are all essentially collective. That is, they result
from the more or less spontaneous coming together of people whose relationships are not
defined by rules and procedures but who merely share a common outlook on society.

Collective behaviour in crowds, panics, and elementary forms (milling, etc.) are of brief duration
or episodic and are guided largely by impulse. When short-lived impulses give way to long-term
aims, and when sustained association takes the place of situational groupings of people, the
result is a social movement.

Characteristics Of Social Movements

A movement is not merely a perpetuated crowd, since a crowd does not possess organizational
and motivational mechanisms capable of sustaining membership through periods of inaction and
waiting. Furthermore, crowd mechanisms cannot be used to achieve communication and
coordination of activity over a wide area, such as a nation or continent. A movement is a mixture
of organization and spontaneity. There is usually one or more organizations that give identity,
leadership, and coordination to the movement, but the boundaries of the movement are never
coterminous with the organizations. For example, although organizations such as California’s
Sierra Club are influential in the movement to preserve the natural environment, anyone who
works for the cause and interacts with other workers for this purpose is a member of the
conservationist movement. The famous John Brown was not a member of any major abolitionist
organization, but his martyrdom made him a leader and symbol for the movement, even though
organizational leaders were reluctant to recognize him.

Social movements and social change All definitions of social movement reflect the notion that
social movements are intrinsically related to social change. They do not encompass the activities
of people as members of stable social groups with established, unquestioned structures, norms,
and values. The behaviour of members of social movements does not reflect the assumption
that the social order will continue essentially as it is. It reflects, instead, the faith that people
collectively can bring about or prevent social change if they will dedicate themselves to the
pursuit of a goal. Uncommitted observers may regard these goals as illusions, but to the
members they are hopes that are quite capable of realization. Asked about his activities, the
member of a social movement would not reply, “I do this because it has always been done” or
“It’s just the custom.” He is aware that his behaviour is influenced by the goal of the movement:
to bring about a change in the way things have “always” been done or sometimes to prevent
such a change from coming about.
The quixotic efforts of bold, imaginative individuals do not constitute social movements. A social
movement is a collectivity or a collective enterprise. The individual member experiences a sense
of membership in an alliance of people who share his dissatisfaction with the present state of
affairs and his vision of a better order. Like a group, a social movement is a collectivity with a
common goal and shared values.

The sense of membership suggests that the individual is subject to some discipline. In addition
to shared values, a social movement possesses norms. These norms prescribe behaviour that
will symbolize the member’s loyalty to the social movement, strengthen his commitment to it,
and set him apart from nonmembers. The norms prohibit behaviour that may cause
embarrassment to the movement or provide excuses for attacks by opponents. Commitment is
strengthened by participation in group activities with other members and by engaging in
actions, individual or collective, that publicly define the individual as a committed member.

A social movement also provides guidelines as to how members should think. Norms of this kind
constitute something resembling a “party line”—a definition of the “correct” position for
members to take with regard to specific issues. There is subtle pressure on the individual to
espouse this position even in the absence of personal knowledge of the arguments for it. Not
every member can be expected to study and think through the philosophy that justified the
movement and its values. Ideology provides him with a ready-made, presumably authoritative
set of arguments.

Directed social change

Social change may result from goal-directed large-scale social planning. The possibilities for
planning by government bureaucracies and other large organizations have increased in modern
societies. Most social planning is short-term, however; the goals of planning are often not
reached, and, even if the planning is successful in terms of the stated goals, it often has
unforeseen consequences. The wider the scope and the longer the time span of planning, the
more difficult it is to attain the goals and avoid unforeseen or undesired consequences. This has
most often been the case in communist and totalitarian societies, where the most serious efforts
toward integrated and long-term planning were put into practice. Most large-scale and long-term
social developments in any society are still largely unplanned, yet large-scale changes resulting
from laws to establish large governmental agencies, such as for unemployment insurance, old-
age pensions, or guaranteed medical care, have produced significant institutional changes in
most industrial societies.

Planning implies institutionalization of change, but institutionalization does not imply planning.
Many unplanned social changes in modern societies are institutionalized; they originate in
organizations permanently oriented to innovation, such as universities and the research
departments of governments and private firms, but their social repercussions are not controlled.
In the fields of science and technology, change is especially institutionalized, which produces
social change that is partly intended and partly unintended.

Acculturation, the processes of change in artifacts, customs, and

beliefs that result from the contact of two or more cultures. The
term is also used to refer to the results of such changes. Two major
types of acculturation, incorporation and directed change, may be
distinguished on the basis of the conditions under which cultural
contact and change take place.

Incorporation refers to the free borrowing and modification of

cultural elements and occurs when people of
different cultures maintain contact as well as political and social
self-determination. It may involve syncretism, a process through
which people create a new synthesis of phenomena that differs
from either original culture; adoption, in which an entirely new
phenomenon is added to a cultural repertoire; and adaptation, in
which a new material or technology is applied to
an extant phenomenon. Religious beliefs are often incorporated in
a syncretic manner, as with synthesis of indigenous and Roman
Catholic beliefs in much of Mexico. Technology is often subject to
adoption, as with the rapid diffusion of new metalworking
techniques and weapon types that marked the transition from
the Stone Age to the Bronze Age, and later to the Iron Age in Asia,
Africa, and Europe. Ornamentation is often subject to adaptation,
as when Native American groups replaced heavy stone pendants
with metal ornaments in the period between Columbian contact
and military conquest; such ornaments are readily visible in
historical portraits of important indigenous personages. Because
incorporation is a product of free choice, the changes it engenders
are often retained over the long term.

Cultural imperialism, in anthropology, sociology, and ethics, the

imposition by one usually politically or economically
dominant community of various aspects of its own culture onto
another nondominant community. It is cultural in that the customs,
traditions, religion, language, social and moral norms, and other
aspects of the imposing community are distinct from, though often
closely related to, the economic and political systems that shape
the other community. It is a form of imperialism in that the
imposing community forcefully extends the authority of its way of
life over the other population by either transforming or replacing
aspects of the nondominant community’s culture.

While the term cultural imperialism did not emerge in scholarly or

popular discourse until the 1960s, the phenomenon has a long
record. Historically, practices of cultural imperialism have almost
always been linked with military intervention and conquest. The
rise and spread of the Roman Empire provides some of the earliest
examples of cultural imperialism in the history of Western
civilization and highlights both negative and positive aspects of the
phenomenon. During a period known as the Pax Romana, the
Romans secured a fairly long period of relative peace and stability
among previously war-torn territories through a unified legal
system (see Roman law), technological developments, and a well-
established infrastructure. However, this peace was secured, in
part, by the forced acculturation of the
culturally diverse populations Rome had conquered.

Later, cultural imperialism became one of the primary instruments

of colonization. While colonization was almost always initiated by
some kind of military intervention, its full effects were achieved
through practices of cultural imperialism. Fueled by a belief in the
superiority of their own way of life, colonizers used law, education,
and/or military force to impose various aspects of their own culture
onto the target population. Motivated, in part, by a desire to purge
local populations of allegedly barbaric, uncivilized customs and
mores, colonizers also knew that the best way
to mitigate resistance by the colonized was to eradicate as far as
possible all traces of their former way of life.

One of the clearest examples of the forced acculturation of a

colonized population was the Spanish influence in Latin America,
beginning with the conquest of the Aztec empire by Hernán
Cortés during the early 16th century. After securing their physical
presence in the region, the Spanish suppressed Mesoamerican
culture, forbidding the Indians to learn and transmit their culture
while simultaneously requiring them to read and write Spanish and
convert to Christianity. This kind of behaviour was certainly not
unique to the Spanish; other examples include the influence of the
British in India, the Dutch in the East Indies, and the French in
Africa.

During the 20th century, cultural imperialism was no longer so

closely linked with military intervention but rather with the
exertion of economic and political influence by some powerful
countries over less powerful countries. Many observers viewed
the Soviet Union’s forceful attempts to impose communism on
other countries as a form of cultural imperialism. Charges of
cultural imperialism have been aimed at the United States by
critics who allege that cultural-imperial control was being sought
economically by creating a demand for American goods and
services in other parts of the world through aggressive marketing.
This “Americanization” of other cultures is said to occur when the
mass exportation of American films, music, clothing, and food into
other countries threatens to replace local products and to alter or
extinguish features of the traditional way of life. Some countries
have attempted to thwart this cultural threat through various kinds
of legal action—for example, by banning the sale of certain
products. See also cultural globalization.

Assimilation, in anthropology and sociology, the process whereby

individuals or groups of differing ethnic heritage are absorbed into
the dominant culture of a society. The process
of assimilating involves taking on the traits of the
dominant culture to such a degree that the assimilating group
becomes socially indistinguishable from other members of the
society. As such, assimilation is the most extreme form
of acculturation. Although assimilation may be compelled through
force or undertaken voluntarily, it is rare for a minority group to
replace its previous cultural practices completely; religion, food
preferences, proxemics (e.g., the physical distance between people
in a given social situation), and aesthetics are among the
characteristics that tend to be most resistant to change.
Assimilation does not denote “racial” or biological fusion, though
such fusion may occur.

Attempts to compel minority groups to assimilate have occurred

frequently in world history. The forced assimilation
of indigenous peoples was particularly common in the
European colonial empires of the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries. In
North and South America, Australia, Africa, and Asia, colonial
policies toward indigenous peoples frequently compelled their
religious conversion, the removal of children from their families,
the division of community property into salable, individually owned
parcels of land, the undermining of local economies and gender
roles by shifting responsibility for farming or other forms of
production from women to men, and the elimination of access to
indigenous foodstuffs. Forced assimilation is rarely successful, and
it generally has enduring negative consequences for the recipient
culture.

More From Britannica

India: Assimilation of foreigners

Voluntary assimilation, albeit usually effected under pressure from

the dominant culture, has also been prevalent in the historical
record. One such case dates to the Spanish Inquisition of the late
14th and 15th centuries, when many Muslims and Jews responded
to religious persecution by voluntarily converting to Roman
Catholicism. Known as Moriscos and Marranos, respectively, they
secretly continued to practice their original religions.

Another example of voluntary assimilation occurred during the

18th and 19th centuries, when millions of Europeans moved to
the United States. In this case, being able to “pass” as a member of
the dominant Anglo-Protestant culture was an important hedge
against violent nativist groups such as the Know-Nothing
Party (see United States: The people). Although popular notions
generally presume that complete assimilation occurred among
immigrants of European descent, research in the late 20th and
early 21st centuries advocated a more nuanced and pluralistic view
of historical culture change among American ethnic groups.
 Socialplannning and social change

Introduction
Social planning and social change are important concepts that have the potential to significantly
impact society. Social planning refers to the process of developing and implementing strategies and
policies to address social issues, while social change refers to the transformation of society over time.
In recent years, there has been a growing recognition of the importance of social planning and social
change in promoting a more equitable and just society.

The purpose of this article is to explore the relationship between social planning and social change.
The article will begin by providing an overview of social planning and social change and why they are
important. It will then delve into the components of social planning and the factors contributing to
social change. The article will also examine the relationship between social planning and social change
and how they can be integrated to achieve positive outcomes.

Furthermore, the article will provide examples of successful social planning and social change
initiatives in different sectors. Additionally, the article will examine the challenges faced by social
planning and social change and the role of stakeholders in overcoming these challenges. The article
will conclude by discussing the future of social planning and social change and the importance of
adapting to a changing world. Overall, this article seeks to provide a comprehensive understanding of
social planning and social change and their impact on society.

Understanding Social Planning

Social planning is a process of developing and implementing strategies and policies to address social
issues and promote social well-being. It involves a collaborative effort among various stakeholders,
including government officials, community leaders, and other members of society. Social planning is
aimed at creating positive social change by addressing societal problems such as poverty, inequality,
and social exclusion.

The goals of social planning are multifaceted and may vary

depending on the context in which it is being implemented.
Some of the common goals of social planning include:

 Identifying and addressing social issues: Social planning aims to identify social issues such as poverty,
inequality, and social exclusion and develop strategies to address them.
 Creating social equity: Social planning aims to create a more equitable society by promoting access to
resources, opportunities, and services.
 Enhancing social well-being: Social planning aims to improve the quality of life for individuals and
communities by promoting access to health care, education, and other services.
 Promoting social justice: Social planning aims to promote social justice by addressing issues of
discrimination, marginalization, and exclusion.

The components of social planning include:

 Needs assessment: This involves identifying the social issues and needs that require attention.
 Goal setting: This involves setting specific and measurable goals that the social planning process aims
to achieve.
 Strategy development: This involves developing strategies and policies to address the identified social
issues.
 Implementation: This involves putting the strategies and policies into action.
 Monitoring and evaluation: This involves assessing the effectiveness of the social planning process and
making necessary adjustments to achieve the desired outcomes.
 The steps in social planning process are as follows:

 Problem identification: This involves identifying the social issues that require attention.
 Needs assessment: This involves gathering data to better understand the problem and its underlying
causes.
 Goal setting: This involves setting specific and measurable goals that the social planning process aims
to achieve.
 Strategy development: This involves developing strategies and policies to address the identified social
issues.
 Implementation: This involves putting the strategies and policies into action.
 Monitoring and evaluation: This involves assessing the effectiveness of the social planning process and
making necessary adjustments to achieve the desired outcomes.

Overall, social planning is an essential tool in promoting positive social change and creating a more
equitable and just society.

Understanding Social Change

Social change is a term used to describe the changes that occur in society over time. It encompasses a
wide range of changes in social institutions, behaviors, and relationships among individuals and
groups. Social change can be gradual or sudden and can be driven by a variety of factors, including
technological advancements, economic development, political movements, cultural shifts, and
environmental factors.

There are different types of social change, each with its own characteristics. Evolutionary change is a
type of social change that occurs gradually over a long period of time. This type of change is
characterized by small changes that accumulate over time, resulting in significant transformations. On
the other hand, revolutionary change is a sudden and dramatic shift that often involves a significant
shift in power or social structure and is often driven by political or social movements.

Planned change is an intentional and purposeful type of social change that involves a deliberate effort
to achieve specific goals, such as reducing poverty or promoting equality. In contrast, unplanned
change is unexpected and often occurs as a result of external factors such as natural disasters,
economic crises, or technological advancements.

Several factors contribute to social change. Technological advancements often lead to changes in the
way people live, work, and interact with each other. Economic development can also lead to changes
in social structures and relationships among individuals and groups. Political movements can drive
social change by challenging existing power structures and advocating for social justice and equality.
Cultural shifts, such as changes in cultural norms and values, can lead to changes in social behavior
and relationships. Environmental factors, such as climate change, can also lead to social change by
affecting the way people live and work.

Social change is important because it can help to address social issues and create a more equitable
and just society. It can also lead to improvements in the quality of life for individuals and communities
and promote economic development and growth. Furthermore, social change can help to address
issues such as poverty, inequality, and social exclusion, which are major challenges facing societies
around the world.

Relationship Between Social Planning and Social

Change
ocial planning and social change are closely related concepts. Social planning involves the deliberate
and intentional effort to bring about social change by identifying social problems, setting goals and
objectives, and developing strategies and programs to achieve those goals. Social change, on the
other hand, refers to the transformation of society over time.

Social planning plays a critical role in promoting social change by providing a framework for identifying
social problems and developing solutions to address them. The process of social planning involves
analyzing the current social conditions and identifying areas that need improvement. This analysis can
help identify the root causes of social problems and provide insights into potential solutions. Social
planning also involves developing strategies and programs that are designed to achieve specific goals
and objectives.

Social planning and social change are interconnected in that social planning can lead to social change,
and social change can drive social planning. Social planning can be used to promote planned change,
which involves intentional efforts to bring about social change. Social planning can also help to identify
 areas where unplanned change is occurring, allowing organizations and communities to adapt to these
changes.

Social change, on the other hand, can drive social planning by highlighting the need for change and
creating a sense of urgency around social issues. Social change can also create opportunities for social
planning by opening up new possibilities for action and providing a platform for advocacy and social
movements.

Social planning and social change are interconnected concepts that play a critical role in promoting
social development and addressing social problems. Social planning provides a framework for
identifying social problems and developing solutions, while social change creates the impetus for
action and drives social planning efforts. Both social planning and social change are necessary for
creating a more equitable and just society.

Examples of Social Planning and Social Change in

Practice
There are many examples of social planning and social change in practice. Here are a few examples:

 Social Planning: Community Development Programs

Community development programs are an example of social planning in action. These programs are
designed to promote social change by identifying and addressing the needs of a specific community.
They often involve community members in the planning process, and can include initiatives such as
affordable housing, job training programs, and community gardens.

o Social Change: Civil Rights Movement

The civil rights movement in the United States is an example of social change driven by a social
movement. The movement aimed to promote equality and end racial segregation and discrimination.
Through protests, civil disobedience, and legal action, the movement helped to bring about significant
social change, including the passage of civil rights legislation and the desegregation of schools and
public spaces.

 Social Planning: Environmental Planning

Environmental planning is an example of social planning that aims to address environmental issues
and promote sustainable development. This can include initiatives such as green energy programs,
waste reduction strategies, and conservation efforts.

o Social Change: Climate Change Activism

Climate change activism is an example of social change driven by a growing awareness of
environmental issues. Activists are calling for changes in government policies and individual behaviors
to address climate change and promote sustainability. This movement has led to the adoption of
renewable energy sources, the development of green technologies, and increased public awareness of
the need for environmental action.

 Social Planning: Poverty Reduction Programs

Poverty reduction programs are an example of social planning that aims to address economic
inequality and promote social justice. These programs can include initiatives such as job training,
income support, and access to education and healthcare.

o Social Change: Labor Movements

Labor movements are an example of social change driven by the need to improve working conditions
and promote economic justice. Through collective bargaining, strikes, and other actions, labor
movements have helped to secure better wages, benefits, and working conditions for workers around
the world.

Social planning and social change are important for promoting social development and addressing
social problems. There are many examples of social planning and social change in practice, from
community development programs to environmental planning to poverty reduction programs. These
efforts are critical for creating a more equitable and just society.

Challenges Faced by Social Planning and Social

Change
While social planning and social change can bring about positive outcomes for society, they also face a
range of challenges. Here are some of the key challenges faced by social planning and social change:

Resistance to Change
One of the main challenges of social planning and social change is resistance to change. Many people
may resist efforts to change existing social structures, systems, and norms, even if they are
detrimental to certain groups in society. Resistance can come from various sources, including those
who benefit from the status quo or those who fear the consequences of change.

Lack of Resources
Social planning and social change initiatives require resources such as funding, expertise, and
infrastructure. However, often such resources are limited, and social planners and change-makers
must work within budgetary constraints and seek out alternative funding sources. This can make it
challenging to implement comprehensive programs and initiatives.

Complex Social Problems

Social problems such as poverty, inequality, and discrimination are complex and multifaceted. Finding
effective solutions to these problems requires a nuanced understanding of the issues at hand, and
requires the involvement of multiple stakeholders across different sectors and levels of government.

Short-Term Thinking
Social planning and social change initiatives often require a long-term perspective, yet many
policymakers and community leaders are focused on short-term outcomes and results. This can lead to
a lack of investment in long-term strategies and programs that could bring about sustainable change.

Lack of Political Will

Social planning and social change initiatives often require political will and leadership to bring about
change. However, political leaders may prioritize other issues or be reluctant to take on controversial
topics that could affect their political standing. This can make it challenging to enact meaningful
change.

Lack of Public Support

Social planning and social change initiatives often require public support to be successful. However,
gaining public support can be challenging, especially if the issue at hand is complex or controversial.
Without public support, initiatives may not have the momentum to bring about significant change.

Social planning and social change face a range of challenges that can make it difficult to achieve
meaningful outcomes. These challenges include resistance to change, lack of resources, complex
social problems, short-term thinking, lack of political will, and lack of public support. Despite these
challenges, social planners and change-makers must work to address these issues and continue to
push for positive social change.

The Future of Social Planning and Social Change

As we move towards the future, the landscape of social planning and social change will be affected by
a multitude of factors. There are several key considerations that will shape the future of these fields.

First, technological advancements will play a major role in shaping the future of social planning and
social change efforts. Social media platforms and data analytics tools, for example, can be harnessed
to mobilize social movements and identify social problems for targeted solutions.

Second, demographic changes will require social planning and social change efforts to adapt to meet
the needs of different populations. A more nuanced understanding of cultural differences and a focus
on social justice and equity will be necessary.
 Third, climate change and environmental concerns have become critical issues and must be addressed
through sustainable development policies that prioritize environmental protection and reduce carbon
emissions.

Fourth, the impact of globalization and economic interdependence on social issues will require greater
collaboration across countries and regions, as well as a focus on economic justice and inequality.

Fifth, political and social polarization has become prevalent in many countries around the world, which
makes achieving consensus and enacting meaningful social change more difficult. To overcome this,
greater dialogue and collaboration between different groups and perspectives is necessary.

Sixth, the changing role of government in society will impact social planning and social change efforts.
Greater collaboration between government and non-governmental organizations and a focus on
public-private partnerships and community-based initiatives will be necessary.

Social planning and social change will be shaped by a range of factors in the future, including
technological advancements, demographic changes, climate change and environmental concerns,
globalization and economic interdependence, political and social polarization, and the changing role of
government. In order to address these challenges, social planners and change-makers will need to be
adaptable, innovative, and committed to promoting positive social change

Conclusion
In conclusion, social planning and social change are essential processes that help to address a wide
range of social problems and promote positive social transformation. Social planning involves
identifying social issues and developing strategies to address them, while social change refers to the
process of enacting these strategies and transforming society for the better.

Throughout history, social planning and social change efforts have led to significant improvements in
areas such as public health, education, and civil rights. However, these efforts also face a range of
challenges, including resistance to change, inadequate resources, and political and social polarization.

Looking towards the future, social planners and change-makers must be adaptable, innovative, and
committed to promoting positive social change. This will require addressing a range of pressing issues,
such as climate change and environmental concerns, demographic changes, technological
advancements, and political and social polarization.

Overall, social planning and social change will continue to play a vital role in shaping the future of our
societies. By working together and prioritizing social justice and equity, we can build a more just and
equitable world for all.

Reference

1. Baum, H. S., & Specht, H. (2018). Planning for social change. Columbia University Press.
2. Blakely, E. J., & Snyder, M. G. (2015). Fortress America: Gated communities in the United States.
Brookings