The necessity of social structural change
Editorial
Kaieteur News
November 29, 2006
Political conflicts involving ethnic groups locked in conflict often spring from breakdowns of old arrangements. These often result in calls for new or revised political constitutions and social structures. For example, in 1994, South Africa abandoned its racial system of apartheid in favour of a modified majoritarian constitution. This is a prime example of social structural change. Recently, there has been a spate of letters in the press calling for such changes in Guyana.
Social and political institutions set the context for individual and group behaviour, and are meant to provide the resources individuals need to survive. How people act and live are shaped in large part by the social structures in which they find themselves. Social justice is, in part, a matter of ensuring that these structures and institutions do in fact satisfy basic human needs.
In some cases, however, a society's social institutions are characterised by exploitation, political exclusion, and unequal access to resources. These structural forces often create a system of winners and losers in which people become trapped in a particular social situation. Structural violence often results, in the form of power inequity, poverty, and the denial of basic human rights. Basic human needs go unmet, and groups suffer from inadequate access to resources, and exclusion from institutional patterns of decision-making. Unjust structural forces and divisions also contribute to discrimination, lack of education, and inadequate employment opportunities. An example of this sort of structural violence that has been claimed in the letters' column in Guyana is the effect of “streamlining” of the Public Sector on the African Guyanese community.
It is unlikely that processes within the system can be effective in dealing with the injustice and inequality that arise out of the system's fault. Because these processes are designed to support the existing institution, conflicts that stem from unmet human needs may be contained by the existing system, but are unlikely to be resolved. There may be protracted conflict until there are changes made to these basic social structures. And in many cases, if social structural changes are not made, eventually change (oftentimes for the worse) will occur by means of violence. This, we must avoid in Guyana.
Since instituting fundamental social structural changes is extremely difficult, these structural and systemic problems are often a main cause of protracted, intractable conflicts. Indeed, any set of institutions and social relationships that deny identity, social recognition, autonomy, or preconditions for human development create an environment of conflict. Structural conflict is likely to result whenever patterned social relationships fail to satisfy basic needs or secure vital human interests. Any society that aspires to meet the needs of its citizens, deal with serious social problems, and avoid violent conflict must address these issues.
Contrary to what some may believe, social structural changes are an integral part of transitioning to a stable peace, as well as addressing the injustice that may have fuelled conflict in the first place. Indeed, many note that peace building must involve systemic change that helps create and sustain a new social reality. An integral part of minimising violent conflict is transforming those structures and dynamics that govern social and political relations, as well as access to power and resources. These sorts of systemic changes typically involve policy or institutional adjustments, as well as the creation of new institutions to meet basic political and socio-economic needs. These social structural reforms aim to ameliorate some of the conflict's underlying causes and conditions, and restructure the system of social relationships that has broken down.
Social structural change is also crucial in preventing further protracted conflict. John Burton wrote of conflict "prevention" or the prevention of conflict by removing its underlying causes and creating conditions under which it need not occur. Addressing injustice before it provokes conflict often requires far-reaching changes in the existing structures and institutions of society. Suppose, for example, that research discovered that a major societal problem, such as drugs or teenage pregnancy, could be prevented by a redistribution of resources and the provision of more rewarding jobs. If such social structural changes were made, this might ensure that all members of society had sufficient opportunities for individual development and social bonding, and thus alleviate the structural conditions that contribute to these social problems.