Concept of Social Problems

Some event or condition becomes a problem when reality doesnt live up to our expectations, when theres a gap between expectation and reality.

For a problem to exist, someones expectation has to be disappointed, thwarted, etc. Problems only exist when theres a gap. No gap, no problem. We have expectations about how the social world should work. They are our images of the good society. Social problems emerge when social reality does not live up to these expectations about quality of life, health, opportunity, prosperity, security, etc. Social problems, then, are social conditions that have been identified as negatively impact peoples lives. Things would be simple if everyone agreed about what constitutes a good society but no such consensus exists. Therefore, no consensus exists about what is or is not a social problem or how problems should be defined and framed. As a comparison, think about engineering problems. When it comes to machinery we can usually muster a consensus about running properly vs. broken down. Its clear whats expected from an air conditioner how much air at what temperature so we can easily agree when one is broken. Most people could easily identify a properly running car moves when gas pedal gets pressed, rides smoothly, gets good gas mileage, etc. and most would agree that car broken down on the side of the road is a problem. Unfortunately we dont have such clear cut standards of running properly when it comes to social problems. Not only do different individuals and groups have very different notions of how society should be and should work, processes of power decide which of these notions carries the day. Winners in the struggle for power get to define which standards are applied and, therefore, what social conditions are considered social problems. To grasp this further, compare social problems to the medical concept of disease. A disease is something that disturbs normal, optimal body functioning, a pathology resulting in identifiable symptoms. Social problems can be seen as symptoms indicating an underlying social disease. But in medicine there is a socially-recognized group of professionals (physicians) that set standards for optimal functioning and disease (officially its called the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)) and we give them the social power to interpret situations as disease according to these professionally-established standards and apply solutions (clinical medicine) based upon these standards. We dont have an ICD for social problems or socially-recognized experts with legitimate power to interpret when social problems occur and prescribe how to fix them. Instead, all we have are messy, inconclusive processes of labeling, struggle, and power. People struggle mightily over the power to make claims about whether social conditions are problems and how problems should be framed. Social problems are socially constructed (we will call claims-making and framing). Studying social problems means studying these processes of social construction. Before moving on we need to explore one other dimension of social problems. Sometimes a social condition or behavior may be labeled as a social problem because it threatens important values, even if it doesnt actually disrupt the social order. When is abortion a social problem? Not when a large number of abortions occur but when the very idea of abortion is proposed as socially acceptable.

Again, compare this to medicine and engineering. Medicine talks about health risks as conditions that may not present symptoms right now but over the long run increase the likelihood of disease and illness. Engineering defines optimal performance as a machines full potential, e.g., gas mileage or tread wear, so that a car thats not getting its best gas mileage or with tread wear below a defined safety standard (usually within 1/16th of an inch of the surface of the tire) would be defined as a problem. Like medical risk factors, suboptimal performance, or safety standards, social problems can be defined as threat to values even if the social order hasnt broken down.

Constructing a Social Problem

Social problems are constructed when an influential group asserts (claims) that a certain social condition negatively affects a large number of people and may be remedied by some kind of policy, law, therapy, or other intervention. Notice two key terms used here: Asserts: Social problems are constructed out of and during communication, usually a mixture of mass communication, public relations, and political lobbying Influential group: Social problems are constructed by people with power making claims that certain objective conditions constitute problems worthy of social attention and political remedy Constructing a social problem means controlling the public agenda and mobilizing political resources to remedy the social condition labeled (framed) as problematic. This process is highly competitive, as various claims-makers seek to have their problem definition rather than that of a competitor accepted by the media and political decision makers. Components of the public agenda - What people are talking about - Policy goals of organizations - Allocation of resources (money and people) in organizational budgets Not all social conditions negatively impacting peoples lives become elevated to the status of "social problem." Some are ignored. Others are treated as natural, inevitable, resulting from personal or moral failure, or unimportant. A select few social conditions get highlighted by public attention and become transformed from personal trouble to social problem. Common pattern of this transformation 1. People perceive a gap between their expectations for a good society and actual social reality Some social condition or pattern of behavior seen as incompatible with the quality of life expected to exist in society (the condition or behavior results in undesirable outcomes or consequences for themselves or others) Some social condition or behavior seen as incompatible with values or ideology that, for them, describe the good society [e.g., flag burning, gay marriage] Sometimes the perception emerges more or less spontaneously and other times it is orchestrated by specific groups or organizations To qualify as a candidate as a social problem, the social condition or behavior must satisfy three necessary conditions: A. Negatively affects large number of people (extent) Two qualifications on this condition: If the people impacted are powerful or important or from a morally sensitive (e.g., the disabled, children), then the number of people impacted can be smaller B. Impacts persist over a long period of time (duration)

C. People believe its possible to solve the problem through collective action (capability)
This is why the weather or death arent considered a social problems, at least not at our present level of technology, or why

2. The gap is labeled a social problem and framed using values, language, assumptions, and evidence supporting the expectations for a good society Framing has four parts: a. An image (vision) of the good society b. Causal explanations for why the society deviates from the path to the good society c. Descriptions of how the social problem negatively impacts on peoples lives d. Solutions for getting the society back to the path to the good society 3. The problem receives public attention, becomes part of the public agenda, and enters into the public dialogue/debate Public agenda and dialogue take place in the political arena and the media Some attention and dialogue occurs more or less spontaneously while other gets orchestrated by groups and organizations Part of the dialogue is moral (what constitutes a good society) and part is practical (how the social problems impact on peoples self-interests) The public agenda is a highly competitive arena so each claim must fight for attention. Some claims wither on the vine, never making a significant ripple in the public agenda, and, therefore, dont become social problems. 4. Groups and organizations advocating for claims about the social problem struggle for resources in the political arena The political arena is highly competitive so each claim must fight for scarce resources. Some claims lose the fight and, therefore, dont become social problems. This struggle has three dimensions a. Struggle to set and control the public agenda b. Mobilization of supporters c. Formation of coalitions and negotiations over compromises

Conditions Amplifying or Dampening the Construction of Problems

Certain factors amplify or dampen the degree to which something gets perceived as a social problem. Power Adverse effects on influential or powerful people When a condition begins to affect whites or upper and middle classes, particularly those able to influence government policy, or the content of the mass media, the chances of it being considered a social problem increase substantially, compared to impacts on minorities or lower classes. Example Hard drug addiction had been a lower class, black problem for some time before it reached the suburban white middle class. But when it began to affect middle class kids, we see the emergence of a new social problem! Extent Adverse effects on a large segment of society for long period of time The more people affected and the longer the duration, the more likely the condition or behavior will be labeled as a problem. Example Poverty among Native Americans has received much less attention than the poverty of Black Americans.

Strong or Sudden Trend Rapid increase in the number of people affected The more the condition or behavior is unexpected, a surprise, or seen as a sudden surge in a scary trend, the more likely it will be considered a problem Examples People become accustomed to the prevailing levels of crime, pollution, and urban congestion, but a sharp increase in the intensity of any of these leads to elevated public concern. One airline crash every year is grounds for concern, but not for the definition of a social problem. But, five crashes in one month will get the public's attention! Dangerous or Immoral Conditions or behaviors that seem to pose a serious danger or are seen as immoral are more likely to be labeled as problems. Dangerous Conditions or behavior seen as threatening to life and limb, personal safety and security, or a major disruption of social order Examples crime, terrorism, global warming Immoral Conditions or behavior seen as violating important values or seriously threatening the moral order Examples prostitution, child abuse, fraud of the elderly Publicity Attention by mass media Conditions or behaviors that grab the headlines are more likely to be considered problems. Example Monica Lewinsky affair. The liberal press lamented it, but maintained that the larger issue was the quality of the job that the President was doing. The conservative press saw it as a basic flaw in the moral fabric of the presidency and counter to the values of the larger society. Political Fit Championed by groups with political power Conditions or behaviors that fit the political agenda or ideology of powerful interest groups are more likely to be considered problems. Example Poverty Conservatives: Poverty = caused by personal characteristics of those who are poor (stupid, lazy, instant gratification, etc.); defend the system, dismantle the "welfare state" Liberals: lack of opportunity and structural factors in the system; system must be reformed adjusted or overthrown Availability of mechanism and resources Solutions that fit easily into the goals or budgets of existing organizations are more likely to be considered problems.

Role of Science in Social Problems

After all this about social construction of social problems you may wonder What happened to science? Arent we a society that relies on science for analysis and decision-making? Whats the role of sociology and the other social sciences when it comes to social problems? Science can play a role but not one of advocacy. The rhetoric of advocacy is very different from rhetoric of science. Advocacy can use scientific evidence to back its claims but science can't use the assumptions of advocacy as evidence. Scientists as citizens can participate in advocacy but when don their scientific hats scientists must suspend the passion of advocacy and take on the critical stance of science.

Science can legitimately contribute four things to the construction of social problems: 1. Investigate the social conditions and processes that produce (cause) the conditions and behaviors considered problematic More specifically, science can test the various causal claims put forth by advocates about what brings about social problems. 2. Document the conditions and processes that shape claims, claims-making, agenda-setting, and political mobilization More specifically, science can analyze what tactics are successful in asserting claims and mobilizing support. 3. Document how social problems impact on lives and the distribution of those impacts More specifically, science can test the consequences predicted by claims-makers. 4. Analyze the effectiveness of proposals put forth to deal with social problems and the unintended consequences of these proposals More specifically, science can test whether the proposed solutions actually bring about the proposed changes. In this way, science can test the assertions of claims-makers against evidence collected scientifically and document causes and outcomes missed (either accidentally or intentionally) by claims-makers. Whether or not this evidence makes a difference in the debate over social problems is a matter for advocacy, not science, although science can investigate the conditions under which scientific evidence does have an effect on the outcome.