Essay on Social Planning – Social planning reveals a movement which has assumed tremendous significance nowadays. There is some degree of social planning in almost all modern societies. It was once felt that societies were at the mercy of impersonal cosmic forces and trends.
It is now thought that man can to a great extent decide and plan the direction of social change. This change in attitude is because of the great advances in knowledge and technology, as well as existence pf large and powerful organisations.
Modern societies have now capacities to-make and implement collective social decisions. “The new attitude towards ‘social change reveals that people have chosen social planning’ as a tool to help achieve common goals and values”. What then is meant by social planning?
Image Source:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
1. Kimball Young: “Planning is a programme aimed at sociocultural change in a particular direction with a given aim or goal in mind”.
2. Sumner and Keller. Social Planning “is the development of non-instinctive foresight that distinguishes the man”.
3. Merrill and Eldredge: “Social planning is merely organised foresight aimed at accepted goals and based on existing knowledge of skills”.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
In the broadest sense, planning is one of the rational activities most characteristic of human beings. Individuals are forever planning their lives. Planning requires analysis, foresight, and willingness to sub-ordinate the present to the future.
It is the basis for social action in the alleviation of social problems. It differs from reform in various respects. “While reform is remedial and corrective, planning is preventive and constructive.
A plan is laid out as an achievement to be made in a certain length of time. The emphasis is on the practical side rather than on aspirations of the fantasy type”-(Ogburn and Nimkoff). It is more so in the case of successful planning.
The idea of social planning is probably as old as Plato who had depicted an ideal society in which social planning was to be done by the greatest minds in the society. The idea of social planning has challenged men for centuries. “Spencer thought that the social heritage grows according to fixed, ineluctable laws and that interference usually makes things worse.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Comte, on the contrary believed that man had the power to look ahead and to control his destiny. Later this idea was brilliantly developed by L.F. Ward, who used the phrase ‘social telesis’, meaning societal self-direction”—(Ogburn).
Ward, was, of course, unduly impressed with man’s intellectual power and exaggerated very much man’s capacity to control things. Nevertheless he did perform a valuable service in stressing the possibility and importance of looking and planning ahead. In fact, planning has the virtue of looking ahead, which is essential in a changing society.
Efforts to direct social change through some type of coordinated planning have been quite numerous. Many of them have been quite successful too. Men have found that they could exercise some degree of rational control over such diverse developments as — planning city recreational facilities, patterning residential zones, exploitation and conservation of wild life and natural resources, development of harbours, integration of school systems, setting new areas, rural improvement schemes, etc.
Indian and Russian Five Year Plans are good examples here. Social planning in this sense is not only possible but practicable. But the controversy is with regard to the costs involved in it and ideological considerations.
Objectives of Social Planning:
The general goal of all social planning is to “improve” society, but the definition of improvement differs, depending upon the underlying values of the social system.
Example:
(i) Assuring justice and providing equal socio-economic opportunities to all and achieving economic progress and political stability can be said to be the meaning of ‘improvement’ in the Indian context,
(ii) Achieving increase in efficiency and widening democracy may mean improvement in the American context.
The short-range objective of social planning is to manipulate the social environment in some way that will enhance or change some designated value. Men can plan to change the structure of some important institutions.
Example:
A society can alter the bureaucratic system of the government so that it becomes more responsive to the needs and problems of the people. It may intend to make change in the laws governing marriage, property, divorce, punishment for crime, family planning, abortion, removal of untouchability, etc.
Social planning may also try to manipulate the material goods of society. Thus, it may provide for housing on the basis of need rather than ability to pay, or by putting more desks in elementary schools. Social planning also increasingly deals with social as well as environmental concerns — poverty, education, family welfare and mental health.
Merril and Eldredge have prepared a list of values which the peoples of most of the societies respect and consider to be the objectives of social planning. They are as follows—
(i) Physical Values that consist of food, clothing, shelter, relaxation and sexual satisfaction.
(ii) Cultural Values that comprise of procreation, education, recreation, artistic development, technological development and satisfactory social change.
(iii) Social Values that include protection and security, co-operation and competition.
Societies are selective in pursuing and cherishing these values. Some societies prefer to pursue one or the other and lay more emphasis on that. For example, America, England and other countries give more importance to competition while Russia and China stress the importance of the value of co-operation.
The Pre-requisites to Effective Planning:
As Ogburn and Nimkoff have mentioned, the pre-requisites to effective planning include the following—
(i) the existence of a modern as opposed to a traditional society, including a monetised economy, considerable urbanisation, a technical and scientific intelligentia, and a well ordered system of information gathering and analysis,
(ii) The existence of an adequate system of information-gathering and analysis,
(iii) The existence of favourable public attitudes towards planning.
(iv) The existence of progressive economic and political leadership,
(v) More important at first are the development of responsible organs of public administration and an educated elite followed by popular enlightenment,
(vi) To carry out a plan successfully, a high degree of organisation (as in the case of army) with good discipline is required,
(vii) Concentration of authority is needed for the successful formulation and prosecution of a plan. Otherwise, the programme is likely to be subject to fluctuations and modifications due to the pressure of diverse interests.
Limitations of Social Planning:
Social planning has its limitations also. Social planning activities emanating from centralised government evoke many negative responses. This is true in democracies where the great concentration of power may be misused.
Example:
America. In such democratic countries social planning may serve to further the interests of elite individuals or groups, rather than the common good of society.
There is traditional suspicion often exploited for political reasons. In a highly competitive society dominated by private groups and individuals with private interests, it is difficult to develop techniques for voluntary and co-operative planning.
Further, the planners may try to demonstrate that “for their own good” people should cooperate in this or that programme only. Still, the people who would be benefited from the plans may show their indifference and apathy or even resistance.
When the entire people of a community undertake planning on their own, they often lack the technical skill to develop a practical scheme. They may even fail to face the challenges at the hands of more alert and better-informed vested interests.
The experience of some societies such as Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia, has shown that social planning can serve the interests of a totalitarian state also. Here it is more used to curtail individual freedom of choice.
Elite direction of social planning is characteristic of communist societies. “Decision-making has been highly centralised and plans have been exceedingly intricate and detailed”. Recently there has been some decentralisation of decision-making in Russia. Less attempts are made to specify all details.
“Planning which attempts to programme practically all the activities of a society is less successful than planning that is limited to only one or a small number of activities or goals”.
Obstacles of Social Planning:
Social planning has been there in all the countries. But it is not free from obstacles. Three related factors make the task of social engineering very difficult. They are: (i) the complexity of modern culture and society, (ii) the rapidity of contemporary social and cultural change, (iii) the large number of people in interlocking relationship.
(i) Complexity of Modern Society and its Culture:
Modern technology has made the present- day society more complex. Changes that take place in any one of the institutions such as political, economic, social, etc., would affect the other. Due to the development in the means of transport and communication people’s world view has changed a great deal.
Science and technology have been helping man to lead a pleasurely life. “Pleasure-seeking” has become a “life-policy” of many. Such people look towards planning only as a means for enjoyment and not as a means for improvement with concerted efforts.
Everyone tries to look at planning from individual point of view and not from the view point of the entire group or community. Further, due to the interdependence of various social institutions, it is difficult to tackle any one with planning without affecting the other.
(ii) The Rapidity of Socio-Cultural Change. The modern complex society is undergoing fast change. A single change is capable of bringing about a series of changes. A change in one aspect of culture may also lead to changes in other aspects also. Radical changes have taken place in values. The speed of socio-cultural change in general has vitally affected stability of society. In a state of instability and rapid social change, social planning is difficult to be made, if not, impossible.
(iii) An Increase in Population. Social planning is quite easier and more effective in small communities with limited population than big communities with vast population. In many Asian and African countries population is increasing at a very fast rate. At the same rate of growth means of subsistence are not growing.
Hence social planning has become quite challenging in such countries. This is particularly true in countries such as China, India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, etc. Similarly, planning in cities where population is increasing beyond control is also difficult.
Applications of Social Planning:
It has been observed that the tools and concepts of planning have so far had their greatest impact in the private business sector. Almost every large business corporation or firm has a man or a department in charge of planning the company’s future. The planners devise alternate course of action, collect required knowledge about the possible effects of each course, and suggest choices.
After a decision has been made, they collect feedback on its success and effectiveness. It could be said that partly in response to this development in private business sector planning has now spread to government agencies. This is especially true in democratic nations. Despite the opposition to planning from vested interests the planning movement has been gaining ground.
“The great debate about planning is no longer concerned with the question as to whether it is possible or whether it can be reconciled with democracy, but rather with the question of how planning may be improved. Planning is inherent in the conception of modern society”— Ogburn and Nimkoff.
Sociology in Action:
Social planning, in a way can be understood as the application of social scientific knowledge to help solve social problems. In the studies of early sociologists such as Comte, there was a great stress on the application of sociological knowledge.
In the 19th and early 20th centuries a good number of sociologists distinguished themselves as social reformers and tried to change society through their knowledge of its workings. Neither did they have sufficient knowledge of the society nor could they attain success in their efforts.
Sociologists with this point of view got discouraged and in turn, switched over to research and to the development of sociology as a science. “In the last several decades, sociology has once again begun to seek practical applications of its knowledge and the pure and applied branches of the discipline work more closely together to contribute to the solution of social problems”.—David Popenoe.
It is true that overall planning of all social development is beyond the ability of people to accomplish in the present state of development of social sciences. Ogburn writes:”Planning is likely to be more effective where it is most needed, at the level of social problems on which practical social engineering can be brought to bear”.
