[Neo]Chapter 1

1STRUCTURAL PROCESSES OF CHANGE

CHAPTER 1

Structural Process of Change

Change is a fact of human life. We maynot be aware of it in our day-to-dayexperience but it continues to affect usin one way or the other. A hundred andthousand years might be a moment inthe life of rocks and mountains but inhuman society changes take place inthe course of merely a generation or two.Think of a situation in which yourgrandmother was living in a villagewhere a large number of familymembers were staying together in onehousehold. She had to maintain purdahand was not allowed to come out of thefour walls of the house till she hadbecome old. Now compare it with thecondition of your mother. Do you notfind a change in the structure of yourown family, now when only a fewmembers are staying together ? Youruncle is living in another householdwith his wife and children. Likewise,your grandfather was an agriculturistbut your father might have shifted tothe urban area to take up a job in agovernment office. You will noticeseveral corresponding changes even inthe life-style of your own family. Thesealterations have occurred merely in ageneration or two. A close look will

reveal changes both in the structureand function of family and in patternsof occupations.

It is this dimension of change thatwe intend to study in the presentcourse. Our focus will be on the natureand extent of social change incontemporary Indian society. Thestudy of social change in India isimportant for several reasons. It tells ushow contemporary Indian society istransforming from a traditional societyto a modern developed society. It showshow changes are occurring in our socialinstitutions and what are the factorsbringing about such changes. It alsoindicates our achievements as a nationand identifies problems and setbacksin certain areas of our life.

Social change is a process, in thesense that it involves a series of eventsover a period of time. The idea ofcontinuity is implied in it and shows asequence of operations that bring aboutchange. Thus, the notion of processindicates two major dimensions of socialchange—its nature and direction. Whilethe nature of change reveals content ofchange, the direction speaks about theline in which it is moving. We intend to

2 SOCIAL CHANGE IN INDIA

discuss here both the substance andthe factors of change.

Sociologists in India have analysedthe process of social change under twobroad categories—structural processesand cultural processes. Structuralprocesses of change are due to atransformation in the network of socialrelationships. Caste, kinship, familyand occupational groups constitutesome of the structural realities. Changein these relationships is a structuralchange. When the traditional agrariansystem based on family labour istransformed into agrarian systembased on hired labour with a view toproduce for the market, we may call ita structural change. The transfor-mation of joint family to nuclear familybrings about change in structure andfunction of family. It is through theprocess of differentiation of roles thatstructural change takes place. To putit differently, role of a social institutionchanges due to specific sequence ofevents making it more effective in thechanged situation. In fact, structuraldifferentiation of roles leads tofunctional specialisation. Reverting toour earlier example, in addition toprocreation and rearing of children,joint family performed numerous rolesin traditional society in the fields ofeducation, occupation and socialsecurity . But after its transformationinto nuclear family most of thesefunctions have been taken over byspecialised agencies such as schools,economic organisations, governmentdepartments and other institutions.Structural change as a result of role

differentiation is noticed in almost alldomains of social life.

You are already familiar with thefactors of social change. Therefore, weshall focus on structural processes ofsocial change namely, industrialisation,Westernisation and modernisation.

INDUSTRIALISATION

Science is an important element ofhuman heritage that produces asystematic knowledge of nature.Technology, on the other hand, is thatelement which contains the applicationof this knowledge. In this sense,technology has a utilitarian goal. It hasdeveloped mainly due to a desire toapply it for the advantage of commonpeople. This goal has been realised inalmost every sphere—industry,agriculture, transport, communicationand such other areas. The rapidchanges that we experience in our day-to-day life are related to thedevelopment of new techniques, newinventions and new modes ofproduction. The application of moderntechnology in industry has influencednot only our economic life but also oursocial and cultural system.

Industrialisation is a process oftechnological advancement fromdomestic production with simple toolsto large-scale factory based production.However, sociologically, the term impliesa process of economic and socialchanges arising out of the change in thestructure of industry. Industrialisationinvolves a broad range of social factorsthat deeply affect the character of social


life. For instance, factories give rise toelaborate division of labour, new workculture, etc.

Industrialisation in India

A wide network of domestic and cottageindustries was existing in India evenprior to British colonial rule. Butmodern large-scale industry came onlyduring the later part of the nineteenthcentury after the Industrial Revolutionin Europe. Between the 1850’s whenthe first major industries started, and1914 India had established the world’slargest jute manufacturing industry,the fifth largest cotton textile industryand the third largest railway network.In this manner, India had almost acentury of industrial development onthe eve of the independence.

After independence, the pace ofindustrialisation was significantlyaccelerated during the periods of Five-Year Plans. It saw the expansion anddiversification of the industrialstructure with the establishment ofseveral new units. In 1951, there wereonly two major units producing ironand steel. The number of such majorsteel plants increased to six by 1980swith the installed capacity of 80 lakhtonnes. The country has madeconsiderable progress in the field of newindustries, agricultural tractors,electronics, fertiliser etc., which werepractically nonexistent in 1951. Thetextile industry is no longer confined tocotton and jute textiles but to a largenumber of units producing differenttypes of synthetic fibres. An important

feature of industrial growth afterindependence has been the rapidexpansion of the public sectorenterprises. These produce diverseproducts such as steel, coal, heavy andlight engineering goods, locomotives,aircraft, petroleum products andfertilizers. A brief sketch of industrialgrowth in India may give us an idea ofthe extent of industrialisation that hastaken place in the country sinceattaining independence.

Social Consequences ofIndustrialisation

We may now turn our attention to theeconomic and social consequences ofindustrialisation. Our economic life haswitnessed tremendous structuralchange in the wake of industrialisation.Production has been broughtsubstantially to the factory. Elaboratedivision of labour, specialisation oftasks and the growth of a class ofindustrial workers have resulted fromchanges in the industrial system.Similarly, the nature of agriculturalproduction has also changed becauseof change in agricultural practices.With the alteration in agriculturalpractices, alterations have alsooccurred in agrarian relations and thelife-styles of farm households.

Moreover, industrialisation haschanged the family mode of productionand women are increasingly found infarms, firms and factories to performdifferent tasks. The new economic rolehas placed women in the new


environment where they experience achanged social status. This new role ofwomen in turn has brought greaterparticipation of women in decisionmaking in the family. These changeshave occurred due to occupationaldiversification that has been broughtabout by industrialisation. Forexample, it cannot be expected that allworking members of a family will getjobs in similar occupations andprofessions and will be posted at thesame place. One member, for example,may be engaged in the cultivation offamily land in Uttar Pradesh and theother may take up an employment asan engineer in Chennai. Under thesecircumstances, the break-up of a jointfamily into small nuclear families isnatural. Such structural changes arealso accompanied by functionaldistinctive-ness. For example, thetraditional joint family as mentionedearlier, was a multifunctionalinstitution. It had innumerableeconomic, educational, recreational,socialisational and biological functions.Now, except for the biological andsocialisational functions of the family,most of the other functions have beentaken over by formal economicorganisations, associations and thestate.

Development of transport andcommunication have resulted in farreaching consequences. Railways,automobiles and marine transporta-tions have not only increased spatialmobility but have also quickened therate of internal and external migration.A large number of people are migrating

from rural to urban areas to take upnew occupations. Similarly, both skilledand unskilled women and men aretravelling out of the country in searchof better careers.

Changes are also witnessed in thesystem of social stratification.Significant changes are observed in thecase of caste system, which is animportant structural reality of Indiansocial system. The separation betweencaste and occupation is a significantchange that has taken place. Theoccupational diversification has madeseveral occupations ‘caste free’. It is,however, more in towns than in villagesand even greater in the largeindustrialised cities. A considerablenumber of people located earlier at thelower levels of caste hierarchy andengaged in caste-based occupationsare now entering into new occupations.Likewise, castes considered higher inthe hierarchy are coming forward foroccupations not preferred earlier. Themembers of lower castes dispensed withtraditional occupations primarilybecause they were considered ‘impure’and were endowed with low statusbesides being less profitable. On theother hand, members of upper castessuch as Brahmin, Rajput and Kayasthin North India were compelled to takeup work like manual labourers, peonsin offices and such other low statusjobs. In addition to modifications inoccupational structure and mobility,changes are seen in the inter-castepower structure.

We have so far analysed thesocio-economic consequences of


industrialisation but we should notoverlook one basic fact in this regard.The way in which a society responds tothe industrial changes depends on itsown creative genius and socialenvironment. We, therefore, find asubstantial difference between onesociety and another in the degree towhich changes take place as a result ofindustrialisation.

URBANISATION

Urbanisation is a process by whichpeople instead of living in villages startliving in towns and cities. It involves amode by which agriculture-basedhabitat is transformed into non-agricultural urban habitat. The growthof urban centres is the result ofaccelerated industrial and servicefunctions. An increase in the size oftowns and cities leading to growth ofurban population is the most significantdimension of urbanisation. Thesecentres are essentially non-agriculturalin character.

Urbanisation as a structuralprocess of change is related toindustrialisation but it is not always theresult of industrialisation. In certaincases, urbanisation has taken placeeven without industrialisation.Industrialisation is always connectedwith economic growth but we cannotsay the same about urbanisation.

Urban environment produces aparticular kind of social life whichLois Wirth, a core member of theChicago School, calls urbanism. Sociallife in cities is more formal and

impersonal. The relationship is basedon a complex division of labour and iscontractual in nature.

Urbanisation in India

India is a land of villages and will remainso for decades to come. However, it doesnot mean that cities have been absentfrom this vast sub-continent. Existenceof cities in India can be traced back toas early as third millennium B.C.Archeological excavations reveal oldertraces of urbanisation. Historians tell usthat a truly urban civilisation emergedin the Indus Valley with Mohenjodaroand Harappa as important urbancentres. In addition to these two cities,several other urban settlements such asKalibangan in northern Rajasthan,Lothal in Gujarat and Banwali inHaryana also emerged as the majorcentres. In the subsequent period,urbanisation was not confined to aparticular area. This phase ofurbanisation finds mention in the post-Vedic literature in the north and Sangamliterature in the south. The Buddhisttexts also mention the existence ofthe urban centres. Furthermore,urbanisation during the medieval timeswas spread out from Srinagar in thenorth to Madurai in the south. Thisperiod was marked more by the revivalof old cities than the establishment ofnew cities and towns. These pre-industrial cities, however, existedprimarily as centres of pilgrimage, asroyal capitals and as trading centres.

Cities with modern industrialcharacter grew in India only after the


contact with the West. The process ofurbanisation was accelerated duringthe British colonial regime. The BritishIndian administration promotedurbanisation on a large scale. Themajor port towns of Kolkata, Mumbaiand Chennai owe their beginning,growth and importance to the colonialefforts. Similarly, regional summercapitals were established in remotemountainous areas like Srinagar,Shillong and Shimla. The princely statesdid not develop as fast but even theyhad capital towns. Some of the princelystates like Hyderabad, Indore, Jaipurand Mysore had population exceedingone lakh.

The urban scenario changedremarkably after independence. Theproportion of urban population to thetotal population increased from 17.6per cent in 1951 to 25.7 per cent in1991. The number of cities withpopulation of one million or moreincreased from 5 to 23 during the sameperiod. According to the census of 2001urban population stands at 27.78 percent and number of cities havingpopulation more than one million hasincreased to 35. The noteworthygrowth of urban population afterindependence has been largely due tothe rapid increase in population, rural-urban migration, city-centredindustrialisation and the over allneglect of villages.

The emerging trends ofurbanisation in India reveal that urbanmigration is fairly significant. A largenumber of people from rural areas areshifting not only to big cities but even

to medium-sized cities and smalltowns. Distance is not a barrier. Onereadily finds villagers moving from far-flung areas of north Indian state to thecities in south India. Migrants aremainly employed in manufacturing andservice occupations. Besides, theseasonal migration of unskilledlabourers, too, has become common.We find labourers from AndhraPradesh, Bihar and Orissa working inagricultural farms of Punjab, Haryanaand western Uttar Pradesh. Labourersbegin with seasonal migration and lateron start settling permanently in areasof their choice.

Social Effects of Urbanisation

Let us now turn to the social effects ofaccelerated urbanisation. Urbanisationhas altered the structure of joint familyas a result of occupational diversi-fication. Consequently, the functions offamily and kinship have declinedconsiderably. The traditional familynorms are relaxed and interpersonalrelationships have become more formal.An urban child now grows within muchsmaller world. No kinsmen are availablein nuclear family to take care of her/him. The child has to select playmatesoutside the family. In this manner, thechild develops a new type of personalitycharacterised by ideas of freedom andinnovation. Such a situation isremarkably different from theenvironment of dependence found in ajoint family. The nature of love andaffection in interpersonal relationshiphas also changed. While children and


their mothers receive considerableattention, sentiments and attachmenttowards other relatives have weakened.Likewise, the division of domestic dutiesbetween wife and husband is changingin the urban settings. They both sharedomestic duties, as there is no otheradult member available to sharethe burden.

Thus, social life in urban areasfaces isolation due to diminishingkinship obligations. Several ties thatformerly bound members of the familyto group and community life are nowbroken. Consequently, the quality ofhuman relationships tends to becomemore formal and impersonal.

Another visible change is in thedomain of caste identity. Urbandwellers participate in networks thatinclude persons of several castes.Individual achievement and modernstatus symbols have become moreimportant than caste identity. Castenorms are not strictly maintainedwhich is manifest in commensalrelations, marital alliances and inoccupational relations. It is, thus,possible to suggest that urban way oflife has made people think more asindividuals than as members of aparticular caste. The importance ofascription as the basis of social statusis declining and the significance ofachievement is taking its place. Thelevel of education, nature of occupationand the level of income are now majorindicators of one’s achievement in anurban setup. Therefore, peoplerecognise education, occupation andincome as prerequisites for higher

social status. It does not mean that theachieved status has completelyreplaced ascribed status and class hasfully overshadowed caste.

It is, however, necessary to clarifythat changes brought about byurbanisation have not altogetherreplaced the traditional patterns offamily, kinship and caste. They gothrough adaptations and theirfunctions are not completely eroded.

Urban Problems

We have already seen how urbanisationis proceeding at a considerable pace inIndia. It has affected different domainsof people’s life. The expansion of urbancentres has also given rise to a varietyof problems. The physical space isdingy, quality of life is poor and urbangovernance is unimaginative. Over-crowding and pollution, sub-standardhousing and slums, crime anddelinquency, alcoholism and drugabuse are a few of them. We shalldiscuss some of them which have farreaching consequences for the country.

Urban overcrowding is the result ofthe massive size of India’s urbanpopulation. Its impact is visible indeclining services in the areas ofhousing, water supply, sanitation,transport, power supply andemployment opportunity. Increasingnumber of homeless people, high rateof rent and a scramble for the fewavailable houses are commonly foundin most of the cities and towns. Thedensity of urban population in Indiaworks out to be around 3,500 persons


per square kilometre in 1991. This ismore than the accepted norm of 400per square kilometre. Thus, urbanareas have more people than they cansupport with the available infrastructure.

Related to the problem of housingand overcrowding is the problem ofslums. The slum is an area of dingyneglected houses where people live inpoverty without minimum civicamenities. The estimates of India’surban population living in slums varywidely. However, according to anestimate, not less than 45 million peoplewere living in slums in 1995 and as theurban population is increasing fast,their number must have had increasedby now. It is said that the Indianpopulation living in slums is more thanthe total population of about 107countries of the world. Generally, thelarger a city, the more the people live inslums. Naturally, metros like Mumbai,Delhi and Kolkata have more slumsthan the small and medium size towns.In 1991, slum-dwellers formed 45 percent of the population in Mumbai, 44per cent in Delhi and 42 per cent inKolkata. The situation is no better inother metropolises like Chennai,Bangalore, Hyderabad, Ahmadabadetc. In reality, the problems of slumsare multiplying in the wake of city’sincapacity to meet the rising demandsof growing population.

Pollution is another major problemof cities. There are several sources ofrising pollution. Cities discharge 40to 60 per cent of their entire sewageand industrial effluents into theadjoining rivers. The smaller towns

dump garbage and excreta into thenearest waterways through their opendrains. Likewise, urban industriespollute the atmosphere with smoke andgases from their old chimneys.Vehicular emission in Delhi accountsfor 64 per cent of its air pollution. Infact, Delhi has the dubious distinctionof being one of the most polluted citiesin the world. The poison that we put inthe environment comes back to usthrough air, water and food. Itgradually causes diseases anddisorders making life miserable andhazardous.

The issue of environmentalpollution in urban areas has beenrecognised and steps have been takento ease the situation. Even the SupremeCourt of India intervened and orderedclosure of polluting industrial units inDelhi. Recently, the use of non-polluting Compressed Natural Gas(CNG) has been made mandatory forbuses and three-wheelers in Delhi asper the order of the Supreme Court.

There are a number of otherproblems faced by urban centres whichare not discussed here for the sake ofbrevity. Important among them are theproblems of urban poverty, urbanplanning and urban governance.

MODERNISATION

Modernisation is both an idea and aprocess. As it is an idea, there is noagreement among social scientists onits meaning and interpretation. In thedecades after the Second World War itwas believed in industrial capitalist


countries such as Britain and theUnited States that the key to economicdevelopment in the Third World wasmodernisation. The concept ofmodernisation, thus, emerged as anexplanation of how these societiesdeveloped through capitalism. Byproviding such an explanation Westernscholars desired to convince theunderdeveloped countries like Indiathat economic development waspossible under capitalism.

According to this approach,modernisation depends primarily onintroduction of technology and theknowledge required to make use of it.Besides, several social and politicalprerequisites have been identified tomake modernisation possible. Some ofthese prerequisites are:

1. increased levels of education,2. development of mass media,3. accessible transport and

communication,4. democratic political institutions,5. more urban and mobile

population,6. nuclear family in place of

extended family,7. complex division of labour,8. declining public influence of

religion, and;9. developed markets for exchange

of goods and services in placeof traditional ways of meetingsuch needs.

Modernisation is, thus, supposed tobe the result of the presence of theseprerequisites in the social system. It is

clear that the term modernisation hasbeen used here in a very broad sense.We, therefore, find different views aboutthe scope and area to be covered by theconcept of modernisation.

Some sociologists limit moderni-sation to its structural aspect, othersemphasise its cultural dimension. A fewstudies highlight the issue of politicalmodernisation and still others analyseits psychological meaning. Of course,the treatment of the concept in terms of it being a process of social changeis found in Learner’s writing.Daniel Lerner in his essay on‘Modernisation’, included inEncyclopaedia of Social Sciences,explains modernisation in these words:“Modernisation is the current term foran old process — the process of socialchange whereby less developedsocieties acquired characteristicscommon to more developed societies.”He further writes, “Modernisation,therefore, is the process of social changein which development is the economiccomponent.” Obviously this under-standing of the term corresponds withthe meaning which we have given to theterm at the beginning of our discussion.Accordingly, modernisation is a processof change, which takes a country fromunderdevelopment to development. Itproduces social environment foreconomic development. The growth inindustrialisation, urbanisation,national income and per capita incomeare taken as criteria of development.

However, while accepting theeconomic criteria of development, somesociologists have added non-economic


criteria to judge development. Theyargue that rising output alone is notsufficient to assess the level ofdevelopment. A society has to move fromrising output to self-sustaining growth.Therefore, non-economic criteria suchas the level of education, function ofmedia, growth of communication andsocial norms conducive to change haveto be taken into consideration.

The meaning of modernisationgiven above incorporates primarily,structural aspects of change. In otherwords, with modernisation structuraltransformation takes place in economy,polity and social institutions. It is to benoted here that the concept ofmodernisation has also been explainedin cultural terms. In this sense,modernisation implies change in valuesand attitudes. Modernity involvesvalues and norms that are universal innature. Explaining this aspect ofmodernisation Yogendra Singhsuggests that modernisation implies arational attitude towards issues andtheir evaluation from a universalviewpoint. Thus, technologicaladvancement and economic growth arenot the sole criterion to judge the levelof modernisation of a society. Thecommitment to scientific world-viewand humanistic ideas are equallyimportant.

Moreover, the idea of modernisationhas also been analysed in terms of thepaired concepts of tradition andmodernity. It has been argued thatmodernity stands as opposite oftradition. In this sense, all theunderdeveloped societies are

characterised as traditional and thedeveloped societies as modern.Modernisation, thus, implies a changefrom tradition to modernity. Changeoccurs, according to this view, inpredictable direction. In other words,in order to modernise, every society hasto follow the same direction and adopta similar path. All the existing valuesand structures have to be replaced bythe new values and structures.

Nonetheless, sociologists from thedeveloping countries are critical of thisunderstanding of modernisation. Theymaintain that modernisation does notstand as a polar opposite to tradition.Traditional values and institutions arenot necessarily discarded while takingup new values in the process of change.Society adopts new values because theyare considered more efficient andrewarding. In view of this, thesesociologists hold that modernisationwould develop typical forms in differentsocieties. Patterns of modernisation,thus, may vary from society to society.The discussion shows that processes ofmodernisation involve both structuraland cultural dimensions. However,given the present context, we shall dealwith modernisation primarily as astructural process of change.

Modernisation in India

Some sociologists make a distinctionbetween social change andmodernisation in order to assess thenature of change in the traditionalIndian society. Though, social changeoccurred in traditional India, it wasessentially pre-modern in nature. One


traditional institution was just replacedby the other and no basic structuralchange took place in social system andculture.

Historically, modernisation in Indiastarted from the establishment of theBritish rule and has continued evenafter independence. The nature anddirection of modernisation during thesetwo phases have been different.Therefore, it is appropriate to examinethe processes of modernisation undertwo distinct phases — the colonialphase and the post-colonial phase.

As has been mentioned earlier,modernisation in India commencedafter the arrival of the British rule. Thecontact with the West brought about farreaching changes in social structureand cultural institutions. Changes werewitnessed in almost all important areasof life. The British administrationintroduced new arrangements inlegal, agrarian, educational andadministrative domains. Most of theseled to structural modernisation.For instance, the bureaucratic systemof administration and judiciaryintroduced by them were based onmodern rational norms, which replacedthe traditional Indian legal norms,based on the principle of hierarchy andascription. A similar transformationtook place in the system of educationand agrarian structure. The Westernsystem of education was introducedtowards the middle of the nineteenthcentury and expanded significantlythereafter. New patterns of landsettlements such as Zamindari,Raiyatwari and Mahalwari covering

the whole of British India resulted insystematisation of revenueadministration. Some other areasexperiencing modernising trends wereindustrialisation, urbanisation,transport and communication, armyand the emergence of industrialworking class and so forth. Theemergence and growth of a nationalistpolitical leadership was also the resultof growing modernisation of Indiansociety. In fact, the nationalistleadership became so strong towardsthe early part of the twentieth centurythat freedom movement itself generateda new culture of modernisation.

It is apparent from the above thatthe colonial phase of modernisationcreated a wide network of structure andculture which was modern and had anall-India appeal. However, it isimportant to point out here that duringthe colonial phase the local regionalstructures of family, caste and villagecommunity remained more or lessunaffected by the forces ofmodernisation. At these levels, theBritish, by and large, followed a policyof least interference. Consequently, wedo not find much change in thestructures of family, caste and village.

Let us, now, briefly examine theprocess of modernisation in the post-colonial India. Modernisation processhas undergone some fundamentalchanges after the Independence. Everydomain of social system is under theactive influence of modernisingprocess. Modernisation has, now,become an integral part of thedevelopmental strategy.


The political system has assumeda new shape after the adoption of aparliamentary form of governmentbased on adult franchise. Politicalparties have emerged as powerfulorgans of the system. Thus, democraticpolitical structure has effectively led toincreasing political consciousnessamong people. The process ofpoliticisation has, further, beenaccelerated through the Panchayati Rajinstitutions.

The foundations of traditional familystructure have come under theinfluence of legal reforms in marriageand inheritance. The family introducedegalitarian norms in family leading toraised status of women. Similarly, castehas assumed new functional roles. Ithas acquired an associationalcharacter. New consciousness hasemerged among dalits. Increasing roleof caste in politics is a pointer to thistrend. Moreover, land reforms, too, havebrought structural transformation inagrarian social structure.

However, it is pertinent to callattention to the fact that modernisationin India has not been a uniformlyprogressive movement. Two crucialissues may be pointed out in thisregard. First, in the process of

modernisation several traditionalinstitutions and activities have beenreinforced. For example, religiouspreachers are using modern media tospread their ideas. Now, there aretelevision channels in India exclusivelydevoted to religious preaching. Casteassociations are using new modes ofcommunication to consolidate theirposition. Second, inconsistencies arevisible in the patterns of modernisation.Though structural change iswitnessed in family, joint familyloyalties and norms still prevail.Democratic participation is increasingdespite increase in caste conflicts.

What we wish to point out is thatmodernisation in India has notthoroughly dispensed with traditionalinstitutions. Yogendra Singh has,appropriately highlighted this fact in hisstudy titled Modernisation of IndianTradition. He writes, “The form oftraditional institutions may remainintact but their substance mightundergo major transformationsincorporating modernisation.” In thissense modernisation process in Indiahas acquired a typical form. Traditionalinstitutions have displayed theirpotential for adaptations in courseof change.

GLOSSARY

CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP. It is a formal agreement between two or more partiesin which the parties entering this relationship must give up theirpart of the bargain without abusing the terms of the agreement.


SEASONAL MIGRATION. The movements of agricultural labourers from one placeto other during harvest time in search of employment.

EXERCISE

1. What is meant by structural change?

2. What are the significant changes in the sphere of industry afterIndependence?

3. Explain the social and the economic consequences of industrialisation.

4. Distinguish between urbanisation and urbanism.

5. Discuss the impact of urbanisation on Indian society.

6. What is modernisation?

7. Explain the process of modernisation in India.

SUGGESTED READINGS

1. Rao, M.S.A. (ed.), Urban Sociology in India, Orient Longman, New Delhi,1974.

2. Singh, Yogendra, Modernisation of Indian Traditions, Thomson Press Ltd.,New Delhi,1973.

3. Srinivas, M.N., Social Change in Modern India, Orient Longman,New Delhi,1972.

4. Srinivas, M.N., The Dominant Caste and Other Essays, Oxford UniversityPress, New Delhi, 1987.

5. Singh, Yogendra, Essays on Modernisation in India, Manohar Publications,Delhi, 1978.

6. Mishra, R.P., Urbanisation in India : Challenges and Opportunities,Regency Publications, New Delhi, 1998.

[Neo]Chapter 1

Documents

Transcript of [Neo]Chapter 1