**2. Social engineering and relevant concepts**

The definition and clarification, in this section, of concepts such as **social engineering, awareness, innovations, attitude, appropriation and mindset (change)** will inform subsequent discussions of the issues relevant to the proposed model.

#### **2.1 Social engineering**

456 Social Sciences and Cultural Studies – Issues of Language, Public Opinion, Education and Welfare

the question seem to have considered awareness or sensitisation campaigns to be the answer with the result that UN and governments have together with NGOs spent huge amounts of resources on *awareness campaigns* with varying results. In some cases, there is no commensurate measurable impact to justify the enormous resources spent on awareness campaigns. It is therefore important to better understand what is involved in **appropriation**  since this holds promise for, *inter alia,* improving the implementation of the MDGs and other development initiatives crucially relevant to the process of social and economic transformation in the enterprise of national development. There is a need to institute a culture of the **effective use** of innovations in development endeavours in terms of appropriation or adoption of new and innovative ideas that constitute solutions to identified

In human interaction, accepting new ideas is not automatic. New ideas may meet with doubts, scepticism or apathy from the target audience and may ultimately receive a general disapproval, refusal or rejection which may be overt or covert, direct or indirect, veiled or unveiled. Faced with a novelty, reactions from interlocutors may vary from positive to negative, sometimes going through a neutral state of voluntary or involuntary indecision. The variation in attitudes and behaviours towards new ideas and new technologies from positive to negative is a fact of social reality irrespective of the validity, veracity or scientificity of the innovation. This state of affairs becomes critical and galling when evidence-based scientific and technological innovations in science and technology crucially relevant for personal and public health, food security, poverty reduction and national development are rejected by a preponderance of negative attitudes and negative responses from the targeted communities. Nowhere is this more evident than in the implementation of the millennium development goals (MDGs) in Africa and some areas of Latin America. The Global Monitoring Report (GMR) of the World Bank shows (with abundant statistics) that "*Sub-Saharan Africa lags behind on all MDGs including the goal for poverty reduction, though many countries in the region are now experiencing improved growth performance (GMR 2008:3)… On current trends, most African countries are off track to meet most of the MDGs"* (GMR 2008: 20- 21). It has been shown that beyond glaring economic factors responsible for this state of affairs in part, the implementation of innovations in the enterprise of national development is hampered by socio-cultural factors and language and communication factors which negatively influence the rate and especially the degree of appropriation of innovations (See

A study of the implementation of the Health MDGs (reduction of infant and maternal mortality, reduction of the incidence of HIV/AIDs and 'roll back malaria') in Cameroon shows that there was an overall reduction of less than 2% in five years from 2001-2006, despite the Ministry of Health's efforts on awareness campaigns by teams of field workers armed with information guidelines to the population (Kayum 2012). This raises the fundamental question 'what does it take for innovations to be effectively appropriated by the target population?' This paper situates and elucidates this and related questions, squarely in the domain of **social engineering** as an Applied Social Science by proposing a

problems.

**1.1 Research problem** 

Chumbow 2009, 2010 and Bodomo1997 among others).

model of appropriation informed by previous works and experience.

Social Engineering is the application of principles, techniques, methods and findings of social sciences to the solution of identified social problems, especially with respect to effecting change. Thus, social engineering concerns for example, the application of Karl Popper's 1945 methods of 'critical rationalism' in science to the problems of the 'open society'. **Social Engineering** is therefore an **Applied Social Science** in that knowledge in science is used to solve societal problems in the same way that knowledge of Mathematics, Physics etc. is used to solve problems in the domain of Engineering and knowledge of Biology and Chemistry used to solve health problems in the field of Medicine or Pharmacy.

From all considerations, a **social engineer** is one who tries to influence popular attitudes, social behaviours, and resource management on a large scale. Social engineering is the application of the scientific method for social concern. In other words, social engineers use the objective and principled methods of science to dissect, analyse, synthesize and understand social systems, so as to arrive at appropriate decisions from the view point of scientists, rather than as politicians. Thus, the major difference between politicians and social engineers is that scientists base decisions on careful evaluations and objectivity without differential advantage.

Concretely, the practice of social engineering as an **applied science** requires determining (by way of objective, scientific method or critical rationalism) certain 'engineering' specifications as ultimate values or ideal targets that must be met by individuals or collectivity/society and then proceeding to an orientation of attitudes and behaviours of individuals or groups in the direction of the desired specifications.

It is noteworthy that the term social engineering is polysemic in that it has other meanings and pejorative connotations. Social engineering in an entirely different meaning or semantic reading refers to *technological fraud,* such as internet scam, hacking tactics, etc. with an abundance of literature and scholarship on the subject. Secondly, a pejorative connotation is often introduced by some in the use of the term **'social engineering'** by considering the enterprise as a '**manipulation'** of individuals and/or groups to adopt alien attitudes and behaviours. However, Social Engineering as an applied social science, the object of the discussion in this chapter has nothing to do with these two derogatory concepts or shades of meaning.

The second reading of social engineering with the pejorative connotation of 'manipulation' may correctly describe and underscore observed practices involving the misuse of social engineering theory and practice. All engineering involves manipulation of some sort. However, manipulation to serve selfish interests, making individuals and society victims rather than beneficiaries of the social engineering process would, in the context of genuine social engineering, be a case of **malpractice.** Thus, the existence of such cases does not, to

Social Engineering Theory: A Model

**2.5 Attitude** 

**2.6 Mindset** 

established.

and interpretation of situations

are called upon to contribute.

for the Appropriation of Innovations with a Case Study of the Health MDGs 459

appropriation entail? Put differently, (in terms of our initial research question above) 'how does the target audience or population consider, accept, adopt and possess (or appropriate) the

**Attitude** is a well-known concept in the social sciences in general and in psychology in particular. The term takes a variety of different shades of meanings depending on whether one is in clinical psychology, social psychology or educational psychology, etc. (See for instance, Gardner 1984). However, the various semantic readings have a common core of shared features. From the literature we provide below a *practical definition* which highlights fundamental properties of 'attitude' derived from theories as experienced and practiced by

Attitude is a propensity, predisposition or tendency to respond positively or negatively towards a certain idea, object, person or situation. Implicit in this definition is the fact that attitude influences an individual's choice of action and responses to stimuli (challenges, incentives, and rewards). Four major components or dimension of attitude are **affective**  (emotions or feelings), **cognitive** (beliefs or opinions held consciously), **conative** (inclination for action) and **evaluative** (positive or negative response to stimuli). A**ttitude according to some psychologists is a readiness or predisposition of a psyche to act in a certain way**  (See, for instance, Carl Jung [1921] (1971). Attitude is therefore a psychological construct that represents an individual's degree of like or dislike for something. For Jung, these reactions are binary and come in pairs. They may be conscious or unconscious, implicit or explicit,

A mindset is a set of established assumptions, methods or notions held by one or more people or groups of people that determine their action and compel them to think and act in line with, or adopt and accept prior behaviour choices or tools. A mindset can thus be envisaged as a fixed mental attitude or disposition that determines a person's responses to

Clearly therefore, the key qualitative terms in the characterization of mindset are **'established'** and **'fixed'**. While attitudes are virtual predispositions in a state of **effervescence**, a mindset is a disposition that has crystallized and hence is fixed and

Ultimately, the task of social engineering as an applied social science with the rights, privileges and responsibilities of an applied science, is to cope with the challenge of **change of mindset** in a direction that is desirable, beneficial to the individual(s) and morally appropriate. In the age of knowledge economy, **mindset change** should not be and can no longer be the wishful thinking speculations of populist writers of 'success' books, but the object and subject of scientific investigation and empirical evidence predicated on a worthwhile theory or model. That is the task to which we have sought to place a stone for the edifice, that is the task to which social scientists of various disciplines and persuasions

innovation? This work will contribute to answering this important question.

psychologists, and other social and applied scientists.

rational or irrational, extraversions or introversions, etc.

my mind, militate against the emergence of a genuine social engineering theory and practice but simply underscores the need (as in the case of other applied sciences e.g. medicine), for the concomitant development of a code of ethics or a viable deontology of social engineering that will regulate both research and practice of social engineering to stigmatize and outlaw social engineering malpractice.

#### **2.2 Awareness**

Awareness is the perception or consciousness of some reality (concrete or abstract). Awareness, in other words, is thus the state or ability to perceive, to feel or to be conscious of events, objects or sensory patterns. Awareness, as a level of consciousness comes across as one where sense data can be confirmed by an observer without necessarily implying understanding. Awareness, according to the Oxford dictionary, is a 'state of elementary undifferentiated consciousness (http:www.oxforddictionaries.com). This, in effect, means that **awareness** can be overt or covert (subconscious) in the sense of knowing something without knowing it. Efforts to describe consciousness in neurological terms have focused on describing networks in the brain that develop awareness of the *qualia* developed by other networks. Interesting details of the biological (neuro-physiological) correlates of consciousness are not crucially relevant to this work. In ordinary language use, **awareness** may refer to the public or common knowledge (perception) of a social or political issue such as 'AIDS awareness', 'multicultural awareness', etc. **Awareness movements** proliferate in the form of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) financed and encouraged by the consideration of **awareness** as an important factor in the solution of and mitigation of social ills and political problems. But to what extent is awareness a solution to social problems?

#### **2.3 Innovation**

'Innovation systems,' techno poles and technological parks constitute a significant pillar for the development of and propagation of science and technology in the present era of knowledge economies and knowledge societies (Chumbow 2011b). However, innovation in this paper refers to **the creation of new knowledge and better or more effective ideas, products, processes and technologies that are acceptable to society or government; more specifically, new knowledge in science and technology that is potentially beneficial to the community.** Innovations derive their pre-eminent value from their problem-solving capability and the possibility of effecting positive change, enhancing quality, efficiency, productivity and providing a competitive advantage. The competitive edge characteristic of innovations may be in the form of reduction of labour cost and environmental damage, or achievement of low energy consumption, etc.

#### **2.4 Appropriation**

This again is a polysemic word with many semantic readings or meanings and definitions. Appropriation may be envisaged as the process of taking possession of ideas principles, techniques or technologies or assigning renewed purpose to properties in knowledge, science and technology. The key words here are *'taking possession of'* (taking possession of something that is new and foreign). This definition is appropriate but not adequate. It does not go far enough to elucidate and illuminate the concept of appropriation. Indeed, what does appropriation entail? Put differently, (in terms of our initial research question above) 'how does the target audience or population consider, accept, adopt and possess (or appropriate) the innovation? This work will contribute to answering this important question.

#### **2.5 Attitude**

458 Social Sciences and Cultural Studies – Issues of Language, Public Opinion, Education and Welfare

my mind, militate against the emergence of a genuine social engineering theory and practice but simply underscores the need (as in the case of other applied sciences e.g. medicine), for the concomitant development of a code of ethics or a viable deontology of social engineering that will regulate both research and practice of social engineering to stigmatize and outlaw

Awareness is the perception or consciousness of some reality (concrete or abstract). Awareness, in other words, is thus the state or ability to perceive, to feel or to be conscious of events, objects or sensory patterns. Awareness, as a level of consciousness comes across as one where sense data can be confirmed by an observer without necessarily implying understanding. Awareness, according to the Oxford dictionary, is a 'state of elementary undifferentiated consciousness (http:www.oxforddictionaries.com). This, in effect, means that **awareness** can be overt or covert (subconscious) in the sense of knowing something without knowing it. Efforts to describe consciousness in neurological terms have focused on describing networks in the brain that develop awareness of the *qualia* developed by other networks. Interesting details of the biological (neuro-physiological) correlates of consciousness are not crucially relevant to this work. In ordinary language use, **awareness** may refer to the public or common knowledge (perception) of a social or political issue such as 'AIDS awareness', 'multicultural awareness', etc. **Awareness movements** proliferate in the form of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) financed and encouraged by the consideration of **awareness** as an important factor in the solution of and mitigation of social ills and political problems. But to what extent is awareness a solution to social problems?

'Innovation systems,' techno poles and technological parks constitute a significant pillar for the development of and propagation of science and technology in the present era of knowledge economies and knowledge societies (Chumbow 2011b). However, innovation in this paper refers to **the creation of new knowledge and better or more effective ideas, products, processes and technologies that are acceptable to society or government; more specifically, new knowledge in science and technology that is potentially beneficial to the community.** Innovations derive their pre-eminent value from their problem-solving capability and the possibility of effecting positive change, enhancing quality, efficiency, productivity and providing a competitive advantage. The competitive edge characteristic of innovations may be in the form of reduction of labour cost and environmental damage, or

This again is a polysemic word with many semantic readings or meanings and definitions. Appropriation may be envisaged as the process of taking possession of ideas principles, techniques or technologies or assigning renewed purpose to properties in knowledge, science and technology. The key words here are *'taking possession of'* (taking possession of something that is new and foreign). This definition is appropriate but not adequate. It does not go far enough to elucidate and illuminate the concept of appropriation. Indeed, what does

social engineering malpractice.

**2.2 Awareness** 

**2.3 Innovation** 

**2.4 Appropriation** 

achievement of low energy consumption, etc.

**Attitude** is a well-known concept in the social sciences in general and in psychology in particular. The term takes a variety of different shades of meanings depending on whether one is in clinical psychology, social psychology or educational psychology, etc. (See for instance, Gardner 1984). However, the various semantic readings have a common core of shared features. From the literature we provide below a *practical definition* which highlights fundamental properties of 'attitude' derived from theories as experienced and practiced by psychologists, and other social and applied scientists.

Attitude is a propensity, predisposition or tendency to respond positively or negatively towards a certain idea, object, person or situation. Implicit in this definition is the fact that attitude influences an individual's choice of action and responses to stimuli (challenges, incentives, and rewards). Four major components or dimension of attitude are **affective**  (emotions or feelings), **cognitive** (beliefs or opinions held consciously), **conative** (inclination for action) and **evaluative** (positive or negative response to stimuli). A**ttitude according to some psychologists is a readiness or predisposition of a psyche to act in a certain way**  (See, for instance, Carl Jung [1921] (1971). Attitude is therefore a psychological construct that represents an individual's degree of like or dislike for something. For Jung, these reactions are binary and come in pairs. They may be conscious or unconscious, implicit or explicit, rational or irrational, extraversions or introversions, etc.

#### **2.6 Mindset**

A mindset is a set of established assumptions, methods or notions held by one or more people or groups of people that determine their action and compel them to think and act in line with, or adopt and accept prior behaviour choices or tools. A mindset can thus be envisaged as a fixed mental attitude or disposition that determines a person's responses to and interpretation of situations

Clearly therefore, the key qualitative terms in the characterization of mindset are **'established'** and **'fixed'**. While attitudes are virtual predispositions in a state of **effervescence**, a mindset is a disposition that has crystallized and hence is fixed and established.

Ultimately, the task of social engineering as an applied social science with the rights, privileges and responsibilities of an applied science, is to cope with the challenge of **change of mindset** in a direction that is desirable, beneficial to the individual(s) and morally appropriate. In the age of knowledge economy, **mindset change** should not be and can no longer be the wishful thinking speculations of populist writers of 'success' books, but the object and subject of scientific investigation and empirical evidence predicated on a worthwhile theory or model. That is the task to which we have sought to place a stone for the edifice, that is the task to which social scientists of various disciplines and persuasions are called upon to contribute.

Social Engineering Theory: A Model

**3.2 Discussion of stages** 

**3.2.2 Stage II: Awareness** 

appropriation paradigm is the object of this section.

**3.2.1 Stage I: Presentation of Innovation** 

when one aims further and beyond awareness.

this and other relevant concepts further).

**3.2.3 Stage III: Comprehension** 

therefore deserves special attention.

for the Appropriation of Innovations with a Case Study of the Health MDGs 461

**event but a process** that starts with the presentation of the innovation as **comprehensible input** in a language medium best understood by the target population and goes through varying phases from **awareness** of the innovation through, **comprehension, knowledge,** spontaneous **judgement** (evaluation), to adoption or appropriation. Each of these stages will be discussed in detail, each with a compendium of indicators postulated for each stage to characterise the stage and enable anyone to monitor at what stage the potential adopter is,

A discussion of the mental processes and activities involved in each stage of the

The innovation is presented to the target population in a language they can understand. If the object of the communication is to elicit a response from the population or trigger a reaction in a desired direction, it will serve no purpose to present the innovation in a language they cannot **comprehend** (from Latin *cum-prendre*: take along, take with). Translation and interpretation may be used but these have considerable limitations. (See for

The contact with the novelty following its presentation, initially occasions, at least, an awareness of the innovation which is a superficial consciousness of the existence of the innovation. Although awareness is important as the gateway to the appropriation process, it is nevertheless only a superficial or a surface consciousness of the innovation as a new reality. Information that does not penetrate beyond the awareness level may produce indifference or superficial reaction of acknowledgement of the innovation only. The implication is that *awareness campaigns a*re important but results can be guaranteed only

The exact nature of Indicators of awareness may not be fully understood now but on the basis of what we know, they may be assumed to include: recall of the innovation in its general gestalt or holistic form, a synthetic perception or vague recall of the existence of some reality. (Further work is required from clinical and social psychologists to elucidate

This is patently the most central and the most significant level in the appropriation process in the sense that there is no chance of an innovation being accepted and adopted spontaneously and consciously if it has not been understood or comprehended. This stage

Comprehension itself is a process which can be modelled as presented below:

instance Kayum's 2012 findings on the limitations of translation as input medium).

in the appropriation process (to what extent the objectives are being achieved).
