118 
Helmut Heisler 
Approaches to the Study of Social Change and Zambia’" 
By Helmut Heisler 
Introduction 
Rarely are research findings initially prepared to illuminate or add to 
any theory of social change. Yet most research can contribute to this if 
reconceptualised or presented differently. It is not uncommon for many 
studies which are explicitly and primarily about social change to be 
derived from data and ideas originally collected for other purposes. To 
some extent, then, the facts for a sociology of social change already 
exist in situations which have been amply investigated. What is needed 
is the interest and energy to rework the knowledge extant, but as this 
does not seem very novel it is not often done and so the sociology of 
social change remains a relatively unexplored terrain. By contrast there 
are areas such as Wales for which much necessary baseline data does 
not exist and in which a close examination of the strategy and pro 
gramme for social enquiry is overdue. 
Though the theory of social change is no more sophisticated than the 
technology of the Third World it is sometimes assumed that certain 
theoretical issues have been resolved and do not merit further exami 
nation. Currently, it may be concluded that sociology is an aspect of 
Western culture and as such its concepts and theory are inapplicable to 
Africa (Middleton, 1966:7). Some younger students consider the roles 
of ideologies, classes, race and neocolonialism to be no longer proble 
matic in sociology and the explanation of social change. They tend to 
assert that the nature of social action is immediately apparent when 
the existence of any of these facts is detected, and there is no reason 
why we should wonder if these facts have different meanings in dif 
ferent circumstances. Unfortunately, the explanation of change in given 
circumstances often reveals a determinancy in the minds of social in 
vestigators which does not square with the evidence. Too frequently 
we employ but one mode or level of analysis when our discipline would 
be better served by using more. 
These remarks introduce and explain the restricted tasks of this 
paper. First, to show how information originally gathered and presented 
with little intention to reflect on the sociology of social change can be 
reworked for our present purpose. Second, to reveal once again the dan 
gers inherent in overreliance on any single doctrine as a clue to the 
* This paper was prepared for the Gregynog Colloquium on Social 
Change in Wales, 13—15 April, 1970.