Different Models of Social Action
The literal meaning of ‘Model’ is the modality or style or pattern of doing a particular thing, which is replicable. Conceptually, a model is an aid to complex theoretical activity and directs our attention to concepts or variables and their inter-relationships. A ‘model’ of social action means a peculiar way or process of achieving set goals with certain identifiable stages and characteristics. Stated differently, social action, in its process of achieving its objectives, adopts a certain manner or modality, which is termed as a ‘model of social action’.
There are two main models of social action as given by Britto (1984). They are:
1) Elitist Social Action
It is the action initiated and conducted by the elites for the benefit of the masses. In this model of social action, the general public or the target group is not involved. The three sub-models of elitist social action are:
a) Legislative Social Action Model
It is a process in which elite groups conduct studies on the gravity, extent, and urgency of the problems, create public opinion, and lobby to try to modify the social policy. Here, the general population or the target group is not involved directly in the process. Some elites either themselves or along with like-minded individual’s take-up the social issues, which they think can be related to the pressing problem. They do lobby and other similar activities in order to achieve some benefits for the entire segment of people or prevent some maladies from affecting their clientele or to remove some problem that is hindering their growth. How is such type of social action conducted?
The elites set up or be a part of commissions and conduct studies on the social problem they consider crucial. After conducting studies on the gravity, extent and urgency of the problem, they chalk out scientific, feasible interventions, create public opinion and do lobbying. Following this, they discuss the matter with the concerned officials and Ministers and persuade them to take up appropriate interventions. In this way the elites get the rule, law and appropriation approved. They also assist in proper implementation of the new policy.
By following the structured process of advocacy, coalition-building, and legislative action, meaningful change can be achieved in areas ranging from gender equality and education to environmental protection and human rights.
b) Economic Sanction Model
In this type of social action, the elites, by gaining control over some economic, social, political or religious weapon try to obtain benefits for the society. In this process, the elites gain control over some economic resources and use it as a threat to obtain benefits for their clientele.
The Economic Sanction Model (ESM) in Nepal includes several instances where economic measures have been employed for political purposes. For example, the 2015 blockade by India, following protests over the new constitution, severely restricted essential goods, leading to accusations of economic sanctions. During the Maoist insurgency (1996-2006), the Nepalese government-imposed sanctions on Maoist leaders to weaken their influence and support the peace process. Additionally, the U.S. has targeted individuals with sanctions for human rights abuses, while international donors have conditioned aid on governance reforms, effectively using economic pressure as a sanction. Local protests against Chinese investments have also led to calls for boycotts, impacting trade relations. Collectively, these instances illustrate how economic strategies are utilized in Nepal’s complex political landscape.
c) Direct Physical Model
It is a process where elites take the law in their own hands and punish those responsible for the cause of injustice and thus try to bring about benefits to their clientele.
In Nepal, the Direct Physical Model (DPM) as a Social Action Model emphasizes tangible actions that lead to measurable social change. Examples include community health campaigns that promote maternal and child health through direct interventions like free health check-ups and vaccination drives, significantly improving health outcomes. Environmental initiatives such as tree planting and river clean-up events engage local populations in restoring ecosystems and fostering community pride. Educational programs provide hands-on learning experiences for children in rural areas, enhancing literacy and school attendance. Urban development projects involve local residents in the construction of public facilities, improving community infrastructure and accessibility. Additionally, social movements advocating for marginalized groups leverage physical demonstrations and community engagement to raise awareness and influence policy changes. Collectively, these initiatives showcase how direct physical actions can effectively address social issues and promote sustainable development in Nepal.
2) Popular Social Action
It is the second type of social action model given by Britto. In the popular social action model, a large section of people with or without elite participation is involved. They aim their confrontational/conflictive action against the unjust and dehumanizing structures, agencies, policies, procedures or oppressive agents. The direct mobilization model, dialectical model and the conscientization models are the sub-types of social action. These models differ from each other in some respects and they have some common features, as mentioned below:
a) Conscientization Model
It is based on Paulo Freire’s concept of creating awareness among masses through education. Paulo Freire developed the concept of conscientization, which means educating the people about the oppression, oppressed and the oppressor (their own position in the two groups), their inter-relationship, the power structure and ways to liberate from the oppressed or oppressor class. Freire maintains that the situation when the oppressed and/or oppressor are conscientized, there exists motivating possibilities for the true liberation of mankind as well as for the most efficient domestication of man. He believed that education can be a tool for re-education and social action. Conscientization process results not merely in learning of literary skills, but it is intended to assist the participants to liberate themselves from all structures, which inhibit the realization of their full humanity through action-reflection-action. This form of social action involves maximum participation of the concerned population. People are given opportunity to analyze and understand the social structures, which circumscribe their life. To know is to change; and so, they are invited to transform the structures through the means of their choice. As a result of humanization, it is hoped that the oppressed do not become oppressors in their turn. In the present situation, this model of social action is being extensively used in several countries.
In Nepal, the Conscientization Model as a social action model is exemplified through various initiatives that empower communities via education and critical reflection. For instance, adult literacy programs not only teach reading and writing but also promote discussions on gender equality and local governance, while community health initiatives educate rural populations on maternal and child health. Environmental education programs raise awareness about climate change, leading to tree planting and clean-up campaigns. Women’s empowerment initiatives facilitate discussions on rights and legal protections, and youth leadership development programs encourage critical thinking and civic engagement. Participatory action research involves communities in identifying local issues, fostering a sense of agency, and encouraging active participation in decision-making processes. Collectively, these efforts aim to address social injustices and promote sustainable development in Nepal.
b) Dialectical Mobilization Model
It helps in promoting conflict to exploit the contradictions in a system, with the belief that a better alternative system will emerge as a result. Dialectic means the art of logical disputation. This process involves an initial proposition (thesis), which is inadequate and generates a counter proposition (antithesis) and the rational context of both are taken up into the synthesis. In other words when individuals or groups take up extreme positions and argue, the position of one may be taken as the thesis and that of the other as antithesis. The result of their argumentation, a certain conclusion acceptable to both, may be termed synthesis. Thus, the posing of contradictory positions and arriving at a better conclusion is termed dialectics in logic. Actionists who follow a dialectical process take the logical to the ontological. They assume that all forces in nature and human institutions, clash and develop. Every institution and every social force contain in itself the element of its own disintegration. They expose the contradictions within a system, promote conflicts and expect a higher-order-result in the social-economic-political structures.
The Dialectical Mobilization Model in Nepal is exemplified through various social movements that leverage dialogue and collective action to address inequalities and advocate for marginalized communities. For instance, the Madhesi Movement has mobilized for better political representation, while indigenous groups like the Tharu and Tamang have asserted their cultural rights through negotiations with the government. Women’s rights organizations have facilitated discussions around gender-based violence and inequality, leading to legal reforms, and labor unions have organized strikes for fair wages and working conditions. Youth-led initiatives engage young people in advocating for employment and political accountability, and environmental movements challenge harmful policies affecting local ecosystems. Additionally, the LGBTQ+ rights movement has raised awareness about discrimination, pushing for legal reforms and social acceptance. Collectively, these movements illustrate how dialectical interactions within society serve as catalysts for social change in Nepal.
c) Direct Mobilization Model of Popular Social Action
In direct mobilization model, specific issues are taken up by the social actionists and the masses are mobilized to resort to protests and strikes to achieve the objectives. In this process, the leaders or elites pick up specific grievances or issues that are affecting the people at large. They analyze the causal factors, which are at the root of the injustice. They formulate the alternative policies and procedures and mobilize the masses for protest activities for the purpose of achieving the set objectives.
The Direct Mobilization Model of Popular Social Action in Nepal is exemplified through various grassroots initiatives that address social issues directly and collectively. Following the 2015 earthquake, communities mobilized for immediate relief by organizing food distribution and shelter construction. The Save the Chure campaign demonstrates direct action for environmental protection against deforestation and illegal mining. The Madhesi community’s protests for equal rights and representation highlight mass mobilization for political change, while women’s collectives in rural areas advocate against domestic violence and promote economic empowerment. Additionally, youth-led environmental campaigns and agricultural cooperatives illustrate direct action to foster sustainability and improve livelihoods. Caste-based activism among marginalized groups, like the Dalits, showcases efforts to challenge systemic discrimination. Collectively, these examples underscore the effectiveness of direct mobilization in driving social change and community empowerment in Nepal.