Social Development Theory
By Garry Jacobs and Harlan Cleveland
12. Development
and value creation in Independent India
In Human Choice: the Genetic Code for Social
Development , we described the development process as one that releases,
organizes and converts human energy into social capacity and material results.
In summary, the process consists of pioneering individuals who consciously
conceive and initiate new forms of activity which give expression to the
subconscious aspirations and preparedness of the society. These pioneers are
imitated by others so that the new activity gets replicated and diffused.
Gradually, the general population comes to recognize, accept and support the
new activity by formally organizing it through laws, policies, programs,
systems, organizations and education. Eventually, the activity may become so
fully integrated with the society that the need for formal structures gives way
to non-formal social institutions and still later becomes assimilated as
cultural values of the society.
Although we describe the process as a clean
linear progression, its actual occurrence is more complex. Each stage of the
process interacts with those that come earlier and later to effect a general
movement in a certain direction. And while the underlying process remains the
same, the external results and strategies employed to achieve those results may
vary significantly from one place and time to another, even within the same
society.
Both the stages and the complexity of the
process can be observed by examining two remarkable development accomplishments
of Independent India—the Green Revolution in Indian agriculture and the high
tech revolution that is making India an international software powerhouse.
The starting point for free India was a value
base molded by centuries of social stagnation and foreign rule. During the
British Raj, the predominant values espoused by the subject Indian population
were respect for age and tradition, submission to authority, and acceptance of
one’s assigned place and role in society. Fear and insecurity were powerful
social motives. Ambition was frowned upon. Security was cherished. Industrial
and commercial activities were severely restricted by the foreign rulers. Few
had the means or opportunity to acquire education. Those that did invariably
sought employment in the British administration or British firms, the twin
seats of power and prestige in Indian society.
After Indian Independence in 1947, the values
of submissiveness and obedience persisted for several decades, even though they
became increasingly inadequate concepts to meet the nation’s needs or respond
to its opportunities. In the 1950s and 1960s, educated Indian youth sought the
security and prestige of government employment, when what was really needed was
entrepreneurial initiative to build the national economy. Having achieved
Independence, the leaders of India’s freedom fight turned to the challenge of
developing the country, but found the same lack of awareness and responsiveness
from the population that the earlier freedom fighters had encountered at the
turn of the century. Waging a war on poverty without the active support and
participation of the people proved even more challenging than waging a war on
foreign rule without an army.
Until the mid 1960s, India’s economic progress
was almost completely overshadowed by the explosive growth of its population,
the combined effect of a release of national energies from the suppressed
condition of foreign domination and the introduction of modern medical
technology which drastically reduced mortality rates. Beneath the surface, the
spread of democratic voting rights, implementation of legislation to eradicate
caste privileges, and rising levels of education were breaking down traditional
barriers, generating national pride and releasing fresh social energy, creating
awareness of possibilities and preparing the society for the next stages of its
collective effort. These new attitudes
could be observed primarily among the youth born after Independence, often
taking on the appearance of assertiveness and crude self-seeking, rather than
of noble values.
This preparedness was called into action by
the sudden impact of two successive years of severe drought in the mid 1960s,
which threatened the country with famine on an unprecedented scale. The
challenge of widespread famine—estimated by the UN to be threatening the lives
of 10 million people—led to the launching of India’s Green Revolution. With the
support of large food imports, the country averted the immediate threat of
famine. Then in response to a concerted government action to implement a
comprehensive, integrated development strategy, within a very short period of
five years, millions of India’s farmers adopted new cultivation practices, the
nation increased its food grain production by 50% and achieved food
self-sufficiency. Within ten years grain production had doubled. Within a
quarter century it had quadrupled.
The pride and confidence generated by this
remarkable achievement helped spur a dramatic change in India’s social values
that was reflected in many walks of life. Areas in which agriculture had become
prosperous began to industrialize. There was a marked increase in demand for
education and for consumer products. Indian society became more active and
dynamic.
In the 1970s the preference of educated youth
shifted to employment in private companies. Then in the 1980s a generation born
after Independence established itself in the nation’s workforce, people who had
never known a foreign master or experienced subjection or feared famine. New
values began to emerge among the younger generation. Talented youth began
starting businesses in increasing numbers. Many sought education and work
experience overseas, then returned to India to establish companies of their
own. The value of security gave way to an aspiration for accomplishment. The
sense of knowing one’s proper place gave way to an urge for higher levels of
achievement, status and enjoyment. A fundamental change in social values
underpinned a fundamental shift in the direction and expression of India’s
national energies from minimum survival to maximum development. This shift has
been by no means uniform, universal or entire. It has occurred at different
rates and to different extents in different communities, classes and parts of
the country, but the change in general direction became increasingly evident.
The development process that led to India’s
Green Revolution differed in its external expression from that which has more
recently led to India’s extraordinary achievements in the global software
industry. The very notion that India could achieve international fame in a high
technology industry was inconceivable to the national consciousness 20 years
ago. As recently as 1983, India was employing fewer than 10,000 software
engineers generating about $10 million a year in software exports. Sixteen years
later, India’s software export revenues are approaching $4 billion. Most major
US and many other large foreign computer firms have established companies or
joint ventures in India to develop software for export. The country’s two
largest software training companies educate more than a quarter million
programmers annually, roughly five times the total number of computer graduates
produced by all US colleges and universities. New software companies and
training institutions are sprouting up in every urban area. State governments
are competing with each other for dominance in high technology. And Microsoft’s
Bill Gates recently christened India as “the Silicon Valley of Asia”.
This phenomenal accomplishment was made
possible by and has further contributed to a general shift in social values
that is evidenced in the behavior of people at all levels and in all parts of
the society, including youth, students, women, farmers, lower castes,
minorities and entrepreneurs.
Viewed from the perspective of the traditional
values that had characterized India during centuries of foreign occupation,
this shift appears to some as a degradation of social values (a decline in
respect for age, tradition and authority; a loss of deference, humility, and
the spirit of idealistic self-sacrifice) in much the same way that the advent
of democratic values in Europe seemed abhorrent to those who embraced the
values of the feudal, aristocratic society that was disappearing. Attention has
focused on the vulgar self-seeking, greed, crass materialism and corruption
associated with India’s economic and social awakening -- so much so, that the
positive values that have been responsible for the country’s recent
accomplishments and form the infrastructure for its future progress are often
overlooked. The essential knowledge India has derived from five decades of
development experience has been distilled into a new set of social values based
on national self-confidence, self-reliance, boldness, insistence on one’s
rights, greater social tolerance and social equality, and aspiration for higher
accomplishment.
13. Same
process, different strategies
The challenge for development theorists is to
discover in India’s recent experiences fundamental principles and processes
that are common to these two distinctly different instances of rapid social
advancement, as well as to other instances of development in other countries,
periods, and fields of activity.
At first glance, the differences are far more
apparent than the similarities. Green Revolution was the result of a conscious,
planned initiative by government which passed legislation, established new
organizations, widely disseminated information and skills, introduced programs
and offered financial incentives to spur India’s agricultural community to action.
In contrast, the software revolution was the result of initiatives by
individual entrepreneurial pioneers which were not planned by government and
were not part of a conscious national strategy. The role of government was
largely confined to removing administrative and tax barriers that discouraged
import of computer equipment and to investment in the essential
telecommunications infrastructure required to support this industry.
Yet on closer inspection, India’s progress in
agriculture and software conform to a common process. Both achievements were
made possible by a general social readiness and awakening of the population
resulting from rising levels of education, public awareness, social freedom and
national confidence. Achievement of Independence and self-government prepared
the ground for the Green Revolution. The breakthrough in agriculture prepared
the ground for industrialization. Advances in engineering and science
education, drawing on an historical
Indian endowment in mathematics, the exposure of large numbers of Indians
seeking higher education in the USA to the latest information technology, and
the emergence of a thriving entrepreneurial business culture in India, prepared
the ground for the country’s active participation in the Information Revolution.
India’s agricultural achievements were very
largely the result of conscious initiatives taken by visionary political
leaders with the support of the scientific community. The early pioneers of
India’s Green Revolution were public leaders, not private individuals as in the
case of software. But in both cases the acceptance and spread of the new
activity crucially depended on the willingness of the population to respond to
the opportunity.
In the case of Green Revolution, India’s
planners faced the seemingly impossible task of persuading millions of
illiterate, traditional farmers to adopt new agricultural technology based on
new varieties of wheat and rice, which required heavy investments in hybrid
seeds, fertilizers and pesticides. The organization of more than 100,000
demonstration plots of the new varieties on farmers’ fields, which proved that
the hybrids would not only grow but would also generate many times higher
yields and profits, spurred extremely rapid diffusion of the new cultivation methods
in progressive agricultural regions of the country.
In the case of software, the demonstration
effect was informal and private, but equally dramatic. The spread of
information about young Indian engineers who had found high paying jobs as
programmers in the USA, and about Indian software export companies that were
growing rapidly, generated widespread interest and spurred others to imitate
these successful practices. Examples spread by word of mouth from family to
family about a son or daughter who had been recruited on campus for a job
overseas at ten or twenty times the equivalent Indian salaries. The business
press reported the export achievements of every new software startup. State
governments announced ambitious plans to promote high tech industry.
Politicians vied with each other to appear most in tune with the high tech
culture.
In both cases the initiatives of pioneers
released an explosion of energy and initiative from the general population.
Within less than half a decade in the late 1960s, millions of uneducated
traditional farmers rushed to embrace the new production technology for food
grains. Within a similar period in the mid-1990s, hundreds of thousands of
educated youth throughout the country have been inspired to enlist in computer
programming courses and seek employment in the burgeoning software industry.
For the initiative of pioneers to diffuse
through society requires the active support of formal organizational
mechanisms. Government had a role to play in organizing both India’s agricultural
and its software activities, but its role in the two instances differed
markedly. In the mid 1960s, India lacked dynamic private initiative capable of
responding rapidly to challenges and opportunities. An adult population born
under foreign rule and slow to believe in its own greater potentials, moved
hesitantly to embrace change. India also lacked the social organization needed
to support rapid change. Markets were undeveloped and inefficient, so that
surplus food production in one region of the country was not efficiently
channeled to meet the needs of markets in food deficit regions. Information
flowed slowly. Agricultural education and scientific research, almost
exclusively government activities at the time, had to be restructured and upgraded
to support the new production technologies. Financial institutions were
undeveloped and most wealth was in the form of tangible assets such as land
that could not be readily converted into new forms of investment. As a
result, the government had to play a very major role in supporting and
promoting the Green Revolution through public agencies. Food Corporation of
India, Warehousing Corporation, National Seeds Corporation, Fertilizer
Corporation, Agricultural Price Commission and countless other agencies were
established to provide the social infrastructure for modernization of
agriculture.
So prominent was the role of government, that
it led many to the conclusion that the government’s administrative efforts were
responsible for the Green Revolution and that similar results could be achieved
in other fields through administrative mandate. The fallacy in this thinking
was a major reason for India’s slow progress in other fields following the
success of Green Revolution. The country had achieved, but it had not yet drawn
the essential lesson from its achievement.
The real key to the success of Green
Revolution was the response of the rural population to the opportunity. India’s
leaders astutely recognized that unless the farmer was confident of not only growing
more but also selling more grain at a profitable price, there would be no
motivation to adopt the new technology. In the absence of established national
markets for food grain, bumper harvests in the past resulted in falling prices
and little financial benefit to the farmer. To overcome this problem, the
Government instituted a guaranteed floor price for food grains and established
Food Corporation to market surpluses in food deficit regions.
The importance of these formal institutions
has diminished significantly over the past few decades as the new methods have
become standard practice among farmers and as private firms, markets, and
research organizations have grown in capacity to carry out with greater
efficiency the work initially undertaken by government. Development through
formal organization has gradually matured into an informal social institution
in this field.
In contrast, the principal agencies of the
software revolution have been private companies. The role of government in
India’s software revolution focused primarily on providing a conducive policy
framework to encourage the spread of technology and on investment in upgrading
the telecommunications infrastructure to support a global information industry.
While government did broaden the availability of computer education in
government colleges, the dramatic increase in availability of programmers was
primarily the result of private initiative. Software export companies recruited
and trained their own staff. Software education and training centers
proliferated. Investment in the software industry also came almost exclusively
from private sources—banks, public stock offerings, venture capital and some
foreign investment—with little government support.
Despite these differences, development in both
fields has followed a similar course. The initiative of pioneers led to
widespread imitation and adoption. Society accepted the new activity and
established formal organizations (in one case public, in the other private) to
support the new activity on a wide scale. The knowledge and skills needed for
modern agriculture and computer programming have been incorporated in the
educational curriculum at higher and lower levels. The social attitudes and
expectations of the population have been powerfully influenced by the country’s
success. Progressive rural farming families teach their youth the values of
modern agricultural production. Educated middle class urban families encourage
their offspring to pursue careers in high technology.
14. Determinants
of Development
We have described social development as the
release and channeling of social energies through more complex social
organization to enhance productive capacity and achieve greater results. This
process depends upon mechanisms to direct and channel the collective energies
of the society into new and more productive forms of activity. We can identify four distinctly different
levels or types of mechanism that serve this function—social aspirations,
government authority, social-cultural structure, and social know-how in the
form of science, technology and productive skills.
تعليقات: 0
إرسال تعليق