Cultural Lag

Cultural Lag

William F. Ogburn (1886-1959) introduced the concept of cultural lag in his book, Social Change with Respect to Culture and Original Nature (pp. 200-212), published in 1922, formulated the hypothesis of ‘cultural lag.’ This rapid change in modern times raises the important question of social adjustment. Problems of social adjustment are of two sorts. First is the adaptation of man to culture or, perhaps, the adapting of culture to man. The second is the adjustment between the different parts of culture is the immediate subject of our inquiry.

The central idea of cultural lag is that different aspects of contemporary culture evolve at varying speeds, with some undergoing rapid transformations while others remain relatively stable. Because these elements of culture are interconnected and influence each other, swift changes in one aspect necessitate corresponding adjustments in other related facets of culture. For instance, industry and education are correlated, hence a change in industry makes adjustments necessary through changes in the educational system. Industry and education are two variables, and if the change in industry occurs first and the adjustment through education follows, industry may be referred to as the independent variable and education as the dependent variable. Where one part of culture changes first, through some discovery or invention, and occasions changes in some part of culture dependent upon it, there frequently is a delay in the changes occasioned in the dependent part of culture. The extent of this lag will vary according to the nature of the cultural material but may exist for a considerable number of years, during which time there may be said to be a maladjustment. It is desirable to reduce the period of maladjustment, to make the cultural adjustments as quickly as possible.

The foregoing account sets forth a problem that occurs when there is a rapid change in a culture of interdependent parts and when the rates of change in the parts are unequal. The discussion will be presented according to the following outlines. First, the hypothesis will be presented, examined and tested by a rather full consideration of the facts of a single instance, followed by several illustrations. Next, the nature and cause of the phenomenon of cultural maladjustment in general will be analyzed. The extent of such cultural lags will be estimated, and the significance for society will be set forth.

Let us examine Ogburn, hypothesis of the cultural lag concept, more critically. Material conditions such as buildings, machines, and food shape our surroundings and cultural heritage. We interact with these through various methods, from simple tools to customs and laws. The government plays a role in adapting the population to these conditions. Some adjustments are called ‘mores,’ but cultures respond to material constraints in many ways, including through folk customs and social structures. These adaptations constitute what we term ‘adaptive culture’ within non-material culture. For instance, rules for using technical appliances are entirely adaptive, while religion is only indirectly so. Families adapt to changing material conditions, although some functions remain constant. However, changes in adaptive culture do not always synchronize with material culture changes, resulting in delays that can last for years.

For the above, Ogburn illustrates how to serve and make the hypothesis clearer. One class of material objects is the forests. At one time, the forests were quite plentiful for the needs of the small population. There was plenty of wood easily accessible for fuel, building and manufacture. The forests were sufficiently extensive to prevent soil washing in many large areas, and the streams were clear. In fact, at one time, the forests seemed to be too plentiful, from the point of view of the needs of the people. Food and agricultural products were at one time the first need of the people and the clearing of land of trees and stumps was a common undertaking of the community in the days of the early settlers. In some places, the quickest procedure was killing and burning the trees and planting between the stumps. When the material conditions were like these, the method of adjustment to the forests was characterized by a policy which has been called exploitation. Exploitation in regard to the forests was indeed a part of the mores of the time, and describes a part of the adaptive culture in relation to forests.

As time went on, however, the population grew, manufacturing became highly developed, and the need for forests increased. But the forests were being destroyed. This was particularly true in the Appalachian, Great Lakes and Gulf regions. The policy of exploitation continued. Then rather suddenly, it began to be realized in certain centres of thought that if the policy of cutting timber continued at the same rate and in the same manner, the forests would, in a short time, be gone and very soon indeed, they would be inadequate to supply the needs of the population. It was realized that the custom in regard to using the forests must be changed and a policy of conservation was advocated. The new conservation policy means not only a restriction on the amount of trees cutting down but also a more scientific method of cutting and reforestation. Forests may be cut in such a way, by selecting trees according to their size, age and location, as to yield a large quantity of timber and yet not diminish the forest area. Also, by the proper distribution of cutting plots in a particular area, the cutting can be so timed that by the time the last plot is cut the young trees on the plot first cut will be grown. Some areas, when cut, leave a land which is well adapted to farming, whereas such sections as mountainous regions, when denuded of forests, are poorly suited to agriculture. There, of course, are many other methods of conservation of forests. A new adaptive culture, one of conservation. It is therefore suited to the changed material conditions.

We may say, therefore, that the old policy of exploitation has hung over longer than it should have before the institution of the new policy. In other words, the material conditions in regard to our forests have changed, but the old customs of the use of forests, which once fitted the material conditions very well, have hung over into a period of changed conditions. These old customs are not only not satisfactorily adapted, but are really socially harmful. These customs, of course, have a utility, since they meet certain human needs; but methods of greater utility are needed. There seems to be a lag in the mores in regard to forestry after the material conditions have changed. Or translated into the general terms of the previous analysis, the material conditions have changed first; and there has been a lag in the adaptive culture, that is, that culture which is adapted to forests. The material conditions changed before the adaptive culture was changed to fit the new material condition.

Another point to note is that changes in material culture often precede changes in adaptive culture. However, it’s essential to understand that this isn’t an absolute rule. In some cases, adaptations may be developed concurrently with or even before material changes, but this would require significant planning and control. The analysis will primarily focus on cases where adaptive culture changes follow material culture changes. It’s worth mentioning that changes can also occur in non-material culture (e.g., art or education) even when material culture remains constant. This underscores the complex relationship between material and non-material aspects of culture and the varying timing of their changes.

Still another point in the analysis is that the old, unchanged, adaptive culture is not adjusted to the new, changed, material conditions. It may be true that the old adaptive culture is never wholly unadjusted to the new conditions. There may be some degree of adjustment. But the thesis is that the unchanged adaptive culture was more harmoniously related to the old than to the new material conditions and that a new adaptive culture will be better suited to the new material conditions than was the old adaptive culture. Adjustment is, therefore, a relative term, and perhaps only in a few cases would there be a situation which might be called perfect adjustment or perfect lack of adjustment.

References

OGBURN, W. F. (2022). SOCIAL CHANGE: WITH RESPECT TO CULTURE AND ORIGINAL NATURE. Gyan Publishing House.

Read from page 200-213