INTRODUCTION

Social change is a continuous process which searches alternatives to stable man's culture and
their lives too. It is another thing its pace varies from age to age, culture to culture and from one
area of culture to that of another. Social change leads to a new social structure within a group.
Social change on one hand produces new traits and on the other hand it ends the traditional
customs. Thus social changes may come through education, acculturation and sanskritisation. It
has also been observed that many fctors such as natural, geographical, biological, demographic,
technological, economic, psychological, political, military, cultural, ideological and role of great
man etc. too effect social change. But for a variety of reasons the pace of social change has been
rather slow in some cultures. It is well known that every cultural group is a part of nation/state
which is governed by some law and legislature. There is a reciprocal relationship between law
and social change. Law is both an effect and cause of social change and provides strategy for
social change.
In the broadest sense law includes all customs and rules, whose observance is required and
enforced by a recognized authority. However, for sociological purposes it is better to limit the
term law to formally enacted and recorded norms by legitimate authority.
Laws are enacted by legislatures. The law making system in every society produces
Legislations concerning various aspects of life. Some of them are framed to maintain law and
order in the society and some are applied to remove social evils and change the conservative
faiths and beliefs. The term social legislation is used to depict these legislations. Social
legislation plays a dynamic role in society. They are effective instruments of social change.
Income redistribution, nationalization of industries, land reforms and provisions of free
education are examples of the effectiveness of law to initiate change.
Law brings about social change both directly and indirectly. In many cases law interacts
directly with social institutions and brings about obvious changes. A law prohibiting Polygamy
has a direct influence on society. It alters the behavior of individuals. On the Other hand, law
plays an indirect role by shaping various social institutions which in turn have a direct impact on
society. For example, the system of compulsory education enables the functioning of educational
institutions which in turn leads to social change.

1|Page
 Law also brings social change by redefining the normative order and creates the possibility
of new forms of social institutions. It provides formal facilities and extends rights to individuals.
The law against untouchability has not only prohibited the inhuman practice but has also
given formal rights to those who suffered from such disabilities to protest against it. Thus law
not only codifies certain customs and morals but also modifies the behaviour and values existing
in a particular society.
Thus law entails two interrelated processes- the institutionalisation and the internalisation
of patterns of behaviour. Institutionalisation means the creation of norms with provisions for its
enforcement, whereas internalisation means the incorporation and acceptance of values implicit
in a law. When the institutionalisation process is successful it in turn facilitates the
internalization of attitudes and beliefs.
In our quest to discover the effect of law on social change, we generally tend to ignore the
reverse, i.e., the effect of social change on law. That legal change reflects wider social change
often seems too obvious to require discussion. For example, technological change is one
important direct cause of legal change: the development of the internal combustion engine, the
motor car and later of air transport produced vast areas of new or reshaped legal doctrine to
regulate these new features of life with their attendant possibilities, risks and dangers.
In addition, law can adapt to change in ways that may not be readily apparent on the face of
legal doctrine. Legal concepts can remain in the same form while fundamentally changing their
social functions. Law can adapt to changed social circumstances without necessarily changing its
form or structure.
In this project, it has tried to study the interplay between law and social change – the role of law
as an instrument of social change, and the impact of social developments on the development of
legal principles.

OBJECTIVES

2|Page
  To study the theory of law and social change in sociological context,
 To study the reciprocal relationship between law and social change,
 To critically analyze the role of law in social change.
 To critically analyze the role of social change while framing the law.
 To analyze the role of law in changing of society by the example of India.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The present study is empirical one and qualitative in approach. It has equally focused on
qualitative methods of research. Apart from Primary data, Secondary and published documented data
has also been collected through various sources and analyzed accordingly.
To make the study more meaningful and policy oriented available literature and studies have
been consulted and reviewed apart from this field observations and open ended discussion have also
been equally considered and incorporated in the present study. The filled in questionnaires were
thoroughly scrutinized and processed in computer for drawing out inferences, patterns, trends and
conclusions. The secondary data interpreted and analyzed while critical appreciation of pertinent
literature has been ensured in the project wherever required.
Books and other reference as guided by Faculty of Sociology have been primarily helpful in
giving this project a firm structure. Websites, dictionaries and articles have also been referred.

MEANING OF LAW IN SOCIOLOGICAL CONTEXT

3|Page
Law is a social phenomenon and has been of interest to sociology since the early days of the
discipline. However, much discussion of law has been and remains monopolized by legal
practitioners and legal theorists who primarily focus on legal doctrine; they are concerned to
analyze patterns, directions and inconsistencies in judicial thinking and decision making. They
attend to social factors in discussing the kinds of values reflected in judicial statements and the
ways in which judges resolve practical, everyday dilemmas in deciding cases. The enduring
emphasis is on analyzing appellate cases. Indeed, the sociology of law is more often taught in
law schools by law academics (albeit with a strong interest in the social sciences and/or social
science training) than in sociology departments. For many sociologists, law is derivative of
broader (or more authentic) sociological concerns, for example social control and deviance, or is
treated within other substantive areas such as labor relations, the welfare state and social policy,
crime, bureaucratic organizations or contemporary family relations. Many sociological
definitions of law stress its normative character and are concerned with the responses to
behaviour that violates laws.
Sociological discussions of law are often limited to discussions of the criminal law,
its operation and administration. Law and sociology are often presented as two distinct
disciplines and bodies of knowledge. For example, Cotterrell – a socio-legal theorist – seeks to
understand ‘the nature and effects of confrontations between such different fields of knowledge
and practice as those of law and sociology ... [that have] quite different historical origins or
patterns of development, social and institutional contexts of existence, and social and political
consequences. Another commentator disagrees that the common law can be considered a social
science because of the two disciplines’ different epistemological approaches: the former relies on
adjudication to discern ‘facts’ and on precedent to resolve present disputes, while the latter relies
on ‘positivity’, the constitution of knowledge via empirical research and the deployment of
statistical analyses.
Certainly, the development of law and sociology in western societies occurs within different
institutions and bodies of knowledge (as professionally defined). However, they have very
similar subject matters: both are concerned with social relationships, values, social regulation,
obligations and expectations arising from particular social positions and roles, and the linkages
between individuals and society. Almost any aspect of social life can be subject to legal
regulation and judicial statements do have similarities with social theory (and often read like

4|Page
social theory). Nonetheless, the substance of law in western democratic societies primarily deals
with the regulation of property relationships and the enunciation and protection of property
rights.
Sociology is more interested in a wider array of social relationships and investigates
inequality and power at both structural and interpersonal levels. While jurists are concerned
primarily with the activities of courts, especially the process of legal reasoning, sociologists are
more interested in the interconnections between law and changing social institutions, political
structures and economic conditions and the relationships between legal institutions and other
forms of dispute resolution, social control or regulation. At a more individual or micro level,
social researchers investigate how various actors – including lawyers, judges, social activists and
people in everyday life – experience, use, interpret, negotiate and confront law, legal institutions
and legal discourse.
Law is rooted in social institutions, in socio-economic network. These social factors
influence the course of law or the direction of legal change. This is the outcome of personal and
social interactions which are variable and often unpredictable. At the same time, law may itself
change social norms in various ways.
For example, in free India, legal abolition of untouchability is an attempt to change a long-
standing social norm. Yet it has not succeeded much due to inadequate social support. Thus there
is a reciprocal relationship between law and society.

THEORY OF SOCIAL CHANGE

5|Page
Social change is a term sociologists use to describe usually large scale transformations, such as
industrialization and the shift from rural agrarian, feudal or traditional societies to modern,
industrial societies, the emergence of capitalism, democratization, and most recently
globalization. These changes are associated primarily with economic conditions and market
forces and have consequences for political, social and cultural activities. Indeed, the formative
period of sociology as a distinct discipline was characterized by large-scale economic, political
and social transformation. Key nineteenth century social theorists focused on social change at a
macro level such as capitalism and its contradictions (Karl Marx), rationalization (Max Weber),
and the increasing division of labour (Emile Durkheim). More specific theories of social change
address the implications of overall, abstract changes for human social relations, the lives and
experiences of individuals and their everyday social environments, school, work/employment,
families, social control and so on. Especially during the twentieth century, governments often
relied on the law as a route, or resource, to implement desired social change. In part this reflected
aspirations for the welfare state and its social reform agenda, including the statutory
Implementation and bureaucratic administration of social programmes.
In thinking about societies and social change, an analytical distinction between structure and
action is often made. Social structures are patterns of actions and behaviour that exist over and
beyond the activities and purposes of individuals but in turn depend on individual action for their
reproduction and continuation. The idea of structure suggests a fixed, observable, enduring
entity, such as a whole society or part thereof, for example the legal system, or the system of
inequality. Social structure constrains human activity limiting the scope for human agency,
individual choice, responsibility, motivation or intention. This image of structure is most obvious
in structural-functionalist accounts that conceptualise society or social organization as
constituted by different parts undergirded by the logics of integration and stability. Any change
seems to be the natural process of evolution and progress, often toward modern societies
characterized by the replacement of tradition and custom by science and rationality. Either way,
social change can bring about instability; conflict and dislocation.

CHARACTERSTICS OF SOCIAL CHANGE

6|Page
 Any alternation, difference or modification that takes place in a situation or in an object
through times, can be called change. The term 'social change' is used to indicate the change that
takes place in human inter-relation. The dictionary meaning of the term 'change' is inter-personal.
According to H.M. Jonson, "Social change refers to the change in social structure."
According to K. Davis, "By social change is meant only such alternation, that occurs in the
society, that is, the structure and function of society." In the view of Jones, "Social change is a
term used to describe variation in or modification of any aspect of social process, social pattern,
social interaction or social organization."
According to Merrill and Eldredge. "Social change means, that a large number of persons are
engaging in such activities that differ from those which they or their forefathers engaged in
sometime before."
(1) Social change is universal
It means that social change is not confined to a particular society or group. It occurs in every
society, sociologically, speaking an unchangeable society is considered as a dead society. Thus,
no society is free from the impact of social change.
(2) Speed of social change is related to time factor
The speed of social change is not uniform. It differs from period to period. In modern society the
speed of social change is rapid or faster than traditional society.
(3) Speed of social change is unequal and comparative
We can argue that speed of social change is more or less similar in each society. It is slow in
traditional society whereas it is rapid in modern society. In urban areas the speed of social
change is faster than the rural areas.
(4) Social change is an essential law
Essential law means a law which occurs and over which we have no control. It may be planned
or not, it must occur.

(5) Social change may be planned or unplanned

Planned changes are those which occur by some deliberate or conscious effort. On the other
hand, unplanned change refers to the change which occurs without any deliberate effort like

7|Page
earth-quake, war, political revolution and other natural calamities. Thus, social change occurs
both in planned and unplanned manner.
(6) Social change may be short term or long term
Some change brings immediate change which is known as short term change, like fashion,
behavior of the individual etc. But other changes take years to produce result which is known as
long term change. Custom, tradition, folkways, mores etc. are long term changes.
(7) Social change lacks definite prediction
Prediction means 'foretelling' in case of social change we are well aware of various factors but
we cannot predict although it is a law. Definite prediction of social change is not possible,
because what will the result of social change we cannot say.
(8) Social change is a community change
Social change does not refer to the change which occurs in the life of an individual or life pattern
of individuals. It is a change which occurs in the entire community and that change can be called
social change which influences a community form.
(9) Social change is the result of the interaction of variousfactors
A single factor can trigger a particular change but never causes social change. It is always
associated with other factors such as Cultural, Biological, Physical, Technological and others. It
is due to the material interdependence of social phenomena.

TYPES OF SOCIAL CHANGE

The three types of change articulated below are not prescriptions of social change but rather
descriptions of different kinds of social change that already exist and are inherently a part of the

8|Page
developing state of a social being. If used to accurately read the nature of change in a social
being then they suggest certain approaches working with change that are more likely to respond
successfully to unfolding realities on the ground. But the first task must be to understand what is
already there before anything is done in response.

1. EMERGENT CHANGE
Emergent change describes the day-to-day unfolding of life, adaptive and uneven processes of
unconscious and conscious learning from experience and the change that results from that. This
applies to individuals, families, communities, organizations and societies adjusting to shifting
realities, of trying to improve and enhance what they know and do, of building on what is there,
step-by-step, uncertainly, but still learning and adapting, however well or badly.
This is likely the most prevalent and enduring form of change existing in any living system.
Whole books, under various notions of complex systems, chaos theory and emergence, have
been written about this kind of change, describing how small accumulative changes at the
margins can affect each other in barely noticeable ways and add up to significant systemic
patterns and changes over time; how apparently chaotic systems are governed by deeper,
complex social principles that defy easy understanding or manipulation, that confound the best-
laid plans, where paths of cause and effect are elusive, caught in eddies of vicious and virtuous
circles. Emergent change is paradoxical, where perceptions, feelings and intentions are as
powerful as the facts they engage with.
Emergent change processes take two forms:
(I) Less conscious emergent change
This kind of emergent change tends to occur where there are unformed and unclear
identities, relationships, structures or leadership, under shifting and uncertain
environments, internally and externally, with no crises or stucknesses being evident
and being unfavourable for conscious development Projects. Being less conscious it
may be less predictable, more chaotic and haphazard than more conscious emergent
change.
(II) More conscious emergent change.

9|Page
 Conditions for more conscious emergent change occur where identity, relationships,
structures and leadership are more formed, the environment relatively stable and less
contradictory. Conditions for emergent change can also materialise after resolution of a crisis
(transformative change) or after a period of projectable change (described below). The
conditions or even need for emergent change, rather than more organised projectable change,
may stem from a number of factors – perhaps change fatigue after a period of transformative or
of projectable change, perhaps to consolidate gains made or a need to grow more steadily, a step-
at-a-time.
2. TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE
Crisis or stuckness sets the stage for transformative change. Unlike emergent change, which is
characterized as a learning process, transformative change is more about unlearning, of freeing
the social being from those relationships and identities, inner and outer, which underpin the crisis
and hold back resolution and further healthy development.
Crisis or stuckness can come in many forms and expressions with deep and complex histories
and dynamics. They may be “hot” surfaced experiences of visible conflict or “cold” hidden
stucknesses which cannot be seen or talked about. Left alone, crises do get unconsciously
resolved over time, tragically or happily or somewhere in-between. But they can also be more
consciously and proactively resolved through well led or facilitated transformative change
processes.
For practitioners, understanding existing transformative change processes or change
conditions demands a surfacing of relationships and dynamics that are by their nature contested,
denied or hidden and resistant to easy reading. This reading can take time, effort and require
patience and an openness to sudden shifts of perspective as layers of the situation and its story
are peeled away. The real needs for change very rarely reveal themselves upfront. When they are
revealed they can provoke real resistance to change and require the people to let go deeply held
aspects of their identity, both collective and individual.

3. PROJECTABLE CHANGE
Where the internal and external environments, especially the relationships, of a system are
coherent, stable and predictable enough, and where unpredictable outcomes do not threaten

10 | P a g e
desired results, then the conditions for projectable change arise and well-planned projects
become possible.

Two orientations where projectable change dominate:

One is characterised by a problem-based approach, essentially identifying problems and seeking
a fix. A broken tap is identified and a fix found. A problem-based approach works logically with
plans from the present into the future.
Another is characterised by a creative approach of people imagining or visioning desired results,
not as a direct solution but as a new situation in which old problems are less or no longer
relevant – a leap of imagination into the future. Rather than looking for a direct fix, a new source
of water may be created or looked for, rendering the broken tap an irrelevant problem. A creative
projectable change begins in the future, plans backwards to the present, devising stepping-stones
to the desired results.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAW AND SOCIAL CHANGE

For decades now law and society theorists have been preoccupied with attempts to explain the
relationship between legal and social change in the context of development of legal institutions.
They viewed the law both as an independent and dependent variable (cause and effect) in society
and emphasized the interdependence of the law with other social systems.
In its most concrete sense, social change means large numbers of people are engaging in group
activities and relationships that are different from those in which they or their parents engaged in
previously. Thus, social change means modifications in the way people work, rear a family,
educate their children, govern them, and seek ultimate meaning in life. In addition to law and
social change there are many other mechanisms of change, such as technology, ideology,
competition, conflict, political and economic factors, and structural strains.
Law is rooted in social institutions, in socio-economic network. These social factors
influence the course of law or the direction of legal change. This is the outcome of personal and
social interactions which are variable and often unpredictable. At the same time, law may itself
change norms in various way. For example, in free India, legal abolition of untouchability is an
attempt to change a long-standing social norm. Yet it has not succeeded much due to inadequate
social support. Thus there is a reciprocal relationship between law and society. The term ‘social

11 | P a g e
change’ is also used to indicate the changes that take place in human interactions and inter-
relations. Society is a ‘web-relationship’ and social change obviously means a change in the
system of social relationship where a social relationship is understood terms of social processes
and social interactions and social organizations. Thus, the term, ‘social change’ is used to
indicate desirable variations in social institution, social processes and social organization. It
includes alterations in the structure and the functions of the society. Closer analysis of the role of
law vis-à-vis social change leads us to distinguish between the direct and the indirect aspects of
the role of law.

LAW AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SOCIAL CHANGE

Law plays an important indirect role in regard to social change by shaping have a direct impact
on society. For example: A law setting up a compulsory educational system.
On the other hand, law interacts in many cases indirectly with basic social institutions in a
manner constituting a direct relationship between law and social change. For example: A law
designed to prohibit polygamy.
Law plays an agent of modernization and social change. It is also as and indicator of the nature
of societal complexity and its attendant problems of integration. Further, the reinforcement of
our belief in the age old panchayat system, the abolition of the abhorable practices of
untouchability, child marriage, sati dowry, etc are typical illustrations of social change being
brought about in the country trough law.
Law is an effective medium or agency, instrumental in bringing about social change in the
country or in any region in particular. Therefore, we rejuvenate our belief that law has been
pivotal in introducing changes in the societal structure and relationships and continues to be so.
As of today, the decisions of the Court are not just being tested on the touch stone of social
justice, but indeed they are being cited of as precursors to ‘social rights’. The Court has pro-
actively and vigorously taken up to cause of social justice and has gone to the extent of
articulating newer social rights such as the right to food, right to health, right to education Thus,
the march of law is clearly in favour of Supreme Court having performed a pro-active role in
social change of the languishing masses. It certainly has acted as a catalyst in the process of
social transformation of people wherein the dilution of caste inequalities, protective measures for

12 | P a g e
the weak and vulnerable sections, providing for the dignified existence of those living under
unwholesome conditions, etc, are the illustrious examples in this regards.
The law, through legislative and administrative responses to new social conditions and ideas, as
well as through judicial re-interpretations of constitutions, statutes or precedents, increasingly
not only articulates but sets the course for major social change. Attempted social change, through
law, is a basic trait of the modern world. Many authors consider law as a desirable necessary and
highly efficient means of inducing change, preferable to other instruments of change. In present-
day societies, the role of law in social change is of more than theoretical interest. In many areas
of life such as education, race relations, housing, transportation, energy utilization, protection of
the environment, and crime prevention, the law and litigation are important instruments of
change. Law plays an important indirect role in social change by shaping various social
institutions, which in turn have a direct impact on society. [eg. Mandatory school attendance
upgraded the quality of the labor force, which in turn played a direct role in social change by
contributing to an increased rate of industrialization. The law interacts in many cases directly
with basic social institutions, constituting a direct relationship between law and social change].
AN EXAMPLE OF INDIA
The intervening nineteenth century was pivotal in that it saw the initiation of this process that
brought about an enormous transformation in the religious, social, economic, political and
cultural spheres of Indian society. Many interrelated factors where in what in this transformation.
The British Raj influenced Indian life through many channels: administration, legislation, treads,
new systems of communication, inchoative industrialisation and urbanisation, all has great
influence of the society as a whole, because every measure in some way interfered with some
traditional patterns of life.
The sum total of these influences on the life and ideas of the people forced them to adjust their
patterns of life to the new circumstances thus affecting a continuum of social change.
In pre independence period some legislations were made in relation to prevailing conservative
and orthodox social practices such as untouchability, degrading position of women, infanticide,
sati, widow hood and child marriage which acted towards social reform.
Prevention of Sati Act,1829; Widow Remarriage Act,1856; Native Marriage Act,1872; Age of
Consent act,1891;the Factory Act,1881; Bengal Tenancy Act,1885 and Press Act,1878 not only

13 | P a g e
advanced the cause of socio-cultural change but also contributed towards the transformation of
agrarian structure.
However, the nature and extent of social change in India have been influenced largely by radical
social legislation introduced after independence.
Our Constitution provides certain basic rights(Articles 14-32)to every citizen irrespective of
religion, race, sex, caste, place of birth etc. ensuring justice socio-economic and political, liberty
of thought, expression, belief faith and worship, equality of status and opportunity and fraternity
assuring the dignity of the individual. It also ensures protection against exploitation and protects
cultural and educational rights.
Articles 36 to 51 lays down certain directive principles of the state policy to secure
(a) adequate means of livelihood for all citizens;
(b) control and distribution of wealth so as to serve the common good;
(c) equal pay for equal work;
(d) health and strength for all from economic avocations;
(e) protection from child labour;
(f) right to work and to education;
(g) uniform civil code;
(h) promotion of educational and economic interests of the scheduled castes, scheduled
tribes and of other weaker sections.
The Untouchability (Offences)Act, 1955 amended as protection of Civil Rights Act, 1976 has
definitely attacked caste prejudice, though has not been fully able to eradicate it. A number of
laws have been enacted for the upliftment of women. The Special Marriage Act, 1954; Hindu
marriage Act, 1955; Hindu succession Act, 1956 and Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961; Prevention
of Immoral Traffic Act, 1956; Sati Prevention Act, 1987; Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence, 2005 have created favourable situation regarding the status of women, whereas Hindus
Adoption and maintenance Act,1956; Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986;
Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation, Act,
1996; the Juvenile Justice Act 2000 amended in 2005 have safeguarded and protected rights of
the children. These illustrative legislations demonstrate that in a democratic state like ours,
legislation can be effectively used as an instrument of social change.

14 | P a g e
 SOCIAL CHANGE AS A CAUSE OF LEGAL CHANGE

In a broad theoretical framework, social change has been slow enough to make custom the
principal source of law. Law could respond to social change over decades or even centuries.
Today the tempo of social change accelerated to a point where today’s assumptions may not be
valid even in a few years from now. The emergence of new risks to the individual as a result of
the decrease of the various family functions, including the protective function, has led to the
creation of legal innovations to protect the individuals in modern society. Eg provisions of
workers compensation, unemployment insurance, old-age pensions. Many sociologists and legal
scholars assert on the basis of a large amount of accumulated data that technology is one of the
great moving forces for change in law in ways. The computer and easy access to cyberspace,
especially internet, also have inspired legislation on both the federal and the state levels to
safeguard privacy, protects against abuse of credit information and computer crime. Change in
law may be induced by a voluntary and gradual shift in community values and attitudes.
[eg. People may think that poverty is bad, and laws should be created to reduce it in some way.]
Alternations in social conditions, technology knowledge values, and attitudes then may induce
legal change in such cases law is reactive and follows social change. However, changes in law
are only one of many responses to social change. Additionally, laws can be considered both as
reactive and proactive in social change.

MAJOR FINDINGS
 Meaning of law (in sociological context)
For many sociologists, law is derivative of broader (or more authentic) sociological concerns, for
example social control and deviance, or is treated within other substantive areas such as labor
relations, the welfare state and social policy, crime, bureaucratic organizations or contemporary
family relations1. Many sociological definitions of law stress its normative character and are
concerned with the responses to behavior that violates laws.

15 | P a g e
  Theory of Social change
Social change is a term sociologists use to describe usually large scale transformations, such as
industrialization and the shift from rural agrarian, feudal or traditional societies to modern,
industrial societies, the emergence of capitalism, democratization, and most recently
globalization. These changes are associated primarily with economic conditions and market
forces and have consequences for political, social and cultural activities.
There are three types of Social Change in society.
1. EMERGENT CHANGE
Emergent change describes the day-to-day unfolding of life, adaptive and uneven processes
of unconscious and conscious learning from experience and the change that results from that.
2. TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE
Transformative change is more about unlearning, of freeing the social being from those
relationships and identities, inner and outer, which underpin the crisis and hold back
resolution and further healthy development
3. PROJECTABLE CHANGE
Where the internal and external environments, especially the relationships, of a system are
coherent, stable and predictable enough, and where unpredictable outcomes do not threaten
desired results, then the conditions for projectable change arise and well-planned projects
become possible.

 Characteristics of Social Change

There are many characteristics of Social Change as
1. Social change is universal
2. Speed of social change is related to time factor
3. Social change is an essential law
4. Social change may be planned or unplanned
5. Social change lacks definite prediction
6. Change is the result of the interaction of various factors

16 | P a g e
  Relationship Between Law And Social Change
There is deep relationship between law and social change.
1. Law as an instrument of Social Change
Law plays an important indirect role in regard to social change by shaping have a direct
impact on society. For example: A law setting up a compulsory educational system.
2. Social Change causes legal change
Laws framed often take their origins form prevalent social customs and when there is a
drastic change in these customs and prevalent practices then the laws also faces a different
approach and often new laws are formed given the present social scenario, for example when
social networking sites were introduced it caused a major change in the interaction amongst
people and thus arose the need of protection of people’s privacy which in turn led to
formation of new laws dealing with cyber crime.

CONCLUSION
The history of mankind reveals that human wisdom has devised different methods and means to
meet the structural changes in the social system which take place with the advancement of
knowledge, culture and civilization. Law has always been considered as one of the important
instruments of affecting social change. Though there are several devices to bring about a change
and reformation in society, but reformation through law is perhaps one of the most effective and
safest methods to achieve this end.

17 | P a g e
A change in the established pattern of social relations between racial or ethnic groups in a
society would constitute social change, but a general increase or decrease in the amount of
economic wealth in a society would not.
In our quest to discover the effect of law on social change, we generally tend to ignore the
reverse, i.e., the effect of social change on law. That legal change reflects wider social change
often seems too obvious to require discussion. For example, technological change is one
important direct cause of legal change: the development of the internal combustion engine, the
motor car and later of air transport produced vast areas of new or reshaped legal doctrine to
regulate these new features of life with their attendant possibilities, risks and dangers.
It is a fact that the tendency of the society is to look for stability and certainty, as the society
is conversant with the existing practices. They would be sure that the law of yesterday would
still be the law of tomorrow. But stability and certainty alone, however, are not sufficient to
provide us with an effective, vital system of law. Progress also has a justified claim upon the
law. In the contemporary scenario, law needs to play a proactive role in bringing about social
change.

18 | P a g e
19 | P a g e