Assignment

On
Agents of Social Change and Development: Role of Elite, Bureaucracy and
Military
Course No: PAD-483
Date of submission: 15th September 2015
Supervised By:
Mohammad Samiul Islam
Assistant professor,
Department of Public Administration
Prepared By:
Name
Md. Amdadul Haque Sharif
Ria Begum
Sabbir Ahmed
Md. Abdullah Al MAmun
S.M. Abdullah Al Mamun
Bupendra Sarkar

Reg.no
2010237022
2010237041
2010237056
2010237066
2010237078
2005237030

Shahjalal University of Science & Technology Sylhet,

Bangladesh.
Introduction
Society continually experiences processes of social change and disruption, toppling old power
structures and creating new ones. Societal changes are associated with transformations in various

spheres of human life. Many countries have undergone tremendous changes over recent decades
with implications including economic restructuring, changes in societal value systems, the spread
of media technology, and changes in educational systems or population composition. Such
effects of distal societal events (e.g., German Reunification) or rapid social change (e.g., in
China) can influence the lives of children, adolescents, and adults through, for example,
changing family dynamics, changes in the exposure to opportunities and risks for positive
psychosocial development, or lower social control in neighborhoods. Also, trust in institutions,
school, and family may decline. Military plays important roles in social change and
development. Militaries should be strongly considered for complementing civilian development
organizations, both private and public, due to several comparative advantages in state capacity
enhancement that most militaries have culture of expedience and order-taking; vast resource
availability for money, manpower, infrastructure, and technology; partnership possibilities for
technology transfer and support from international powers and for regional coordination on
transnational issues with regional partnerships and human capital in a variety of skill sets since
militaries are societies within societies. If civil-military relations are properly controlled,
militaries can be a domestic source of capital that can catalyze socioeconomic development.
There are another actors including role of elites plays important role in social change and
development. Discussions of social change initiated by elites often leads to cries of conspiracy
theory, expressing a belief that social change comes from numerous areas of society that cannot
be reduced to simplified assumptions of social control. Moreover, the definition of elites itself
can become confusing, as elites are not hardly uniform, nor do they conform to a single ideology
or belief system. Regardless, while social change may emanate from any sector of society, elites,
defined as those who get the most of what there is to get, have the greatest ability to adapt,
shape, and confront social change.

Definition of Social Change:

Social change is the transformation of culture and social organization/structure over time. In the
modern world we are aware that society is never static and that social, political, economic and
cultural changes occur constantly.
According to MacIver and Page, social change is a change in social relationship. It is a process
responsive to many types of changes, to changes in man-made conditions of living, to changes in
attitudes and beliefs of men and to changes that go beyond human control to the biological and
physical nature of things.
To Lundberg, Social change refers to any modification in established patterns of inert-human
relationships and standards of conduct. In a similar vein, Judson R. Landis writes, Social
change refers to change in the structure and functioning of the social relationships of society.
Koenig feels Social change refers to the modifications which occur in the life patterns of
people.
According to M.E. Jones, Social change is a term used to describe variations in or modifications
of any aspect of social processes, social patterns, social interaction or social organisation. No
doubt change identifies a wide canvas or contour for development, progress transformation,
growth, mobilization and soon.
Social change is the alteration of patterns of culture, social structure, and social behavior over
time. It involves the complex interaction of environment, technology, culture, personality,
political, economic, and religious.
There are four main characteristics of social change (Macionis 1996): It happens everywhere, but the rate of change varies from place to place.
For example, the United States would experience faster change, than a third world country that
has limited access to technology and information.
Social change is sometimes intentional but often unplanned.
For example, when the airplane was invented people knew that this would increase and speed
travel. However, it was probably not realizedhow this invention would affect society in the
future. Families are spread throughout the country, because it is easier to return for visits.

Companies are able to expand worldwide thanks to air travel. The numerous crashes and deaths
related to airplanes was not predicted either.
Social change often generates controversy.
For example, the move over the recent years to accept homosexual rights has caused controversy
involving the military, religion, and society overall.
Some changes matter more than others do.
For example, the invention of personal computers was more important than Cabbage
Patch dolls.
Bureaucracy: Meaning and Definition
Bureaucracy or the Civil Service constitutes the permanent and professional part of the executive
organ of government. It is usually described as the non-political or politically neutral, permanent,
and professionally trained civil service.
(1) Bureaucracy means the civil servants, the administrative functionaries who are
professionally trained for the public service and who enjoy permanency of tenure, promotion
within service-partly by seniority and partly by merit. -Garner
(2) In its broad larger sense the term Civil Service is used to describe any personnel system
where the employees are classified in a system of administration composed of a hierarchy,
sections, divisions, bureaus, departments and the like. -Willoughby
(3) Civil Service/Bureaucracy is a professional body of officials permanent, paid and skilled.
-Finer
Bureaucracy: Main Features
1. Permanent Character: The civil servants hold permanent jobs in government departments.
They mostly join their services during their youths and continue to work as government servants
till the age of retirement which is usually 58 to 60 years.
2. Hierarchical Organization: Bureaucracy is hierarchically organised in several levels. Each
official is placed at a particular level of hierarchy and he enjoys the privileges and powers which

are available to his co-level officials. He is under his immediate higher level officials and is
above his immediately lower level officials.
3. Non-partisan Character: The members of the Bureaucracy are not directly involved in
politics. They cannot join political parties and participate in political movements. They are not
affected by the political changes which keep on coming in the political executive.
4. Professional, Trained and Expert Class: The Bureaucracy constitutes the educated and
professionally trained class of persons which helps the political executive in carrying out its
functions. The members of civil service are recruited through competitive examinations for
appearing in which they have to possess some minimum educational qualifications. Before their
appointments, they get special trainings.
5. Fixed Salaries: Each member of the Bureaucracy receives a fixed salary. Right at the time of
appointment he is allotted a scale of pay, which depends upon the nature and level of his jobresponsibility. All the civil servants belonging to a particular class of administrative hierarchy are
placed in one scale of pay. Each job also entitles them to some allowances.
6. Bound by Rules and Regulations: The Bureaucracy always works in accordance with rules
and regulations. Strict obedience to rules, Through Proper Channel, Decision-making after
satisfying the rules, are the principles which always guide, direct and regulate the working of
bureaucracy. Each official works only within the sphere prescribed for him by the rules of his
department.
7. Class Consciousness: The Civil Servants are highly class conscious. They jealously work to
protect and promote the interests of their class of civil servants. They are called the white-collar
class because of their faith in their superior status as government officials.
8. Public Service Spirit as the Ideal: Modern Bureaucracy identifies itself with public service
spirit. It always tries to project itself as the civil servants devoted to the promotion of public
welfare through the satisfaction of public needs. They are expected to behave as officers
responsible for public welfare, with service as their motto.
9. Bound by a Code of Conduct: The civil servants have to follow a code of conduct. They
have to act in a disciplined way. Their rights, duties and privileges stand clearly defined. The

procedure of work is definite and settled. In short, Bureaucracy is characterised by political

neutrality, professional competence, permanent/ stable tenure, fixed salaries and strict obedience
to rules.
Role of Bureaucracy
Bureaucracy or Civil Service plays an important role by performing the following functions:
1. Implementation of Governmental Policies and Laws: It is the responsibility of the
bureaucracy to carry out and implement the policies of the government. Good policies and laws
can really serve their objectives only when these are efficiently implemented by the civil
servants.
2. Role in Policy-Formulation: Policy-making is the function of the political executive.
However, the Bureaucracy plays an active role in this exercise. Civil Servants supply the data
needed by the political executive for formulating the policies. In fact, Civil servants formulate
several alternative policies and describe the merits and demerits of each. The Political Executive
then selects and adopts one such policy alternative as the governmental policy.
3. Running of Administration: To run the day to day administration in accordance with the
policies, laws, rules, regulations and decisions of the government is also the key responsibility of
the Bureaucracy. The political executive simply exercises guiding, controlling and supervising
functions.
4. Advisory Function: One of the important functions of the Bureaucracy is to advise the
political executive. The ministers receive all the information and advice regarding the
functioning of their respective departments from the civil servants. As amateurs, the ministers
have little knowledge about the functions of their departments. They, therefore, depend upon the
advice of bureaucracy. As qualified, experienced and expert civil servants working in all
government departments, they provide expert and professional advice and information to the
ministers.
5. Role in Legislative Work: The civil servants play an important but indirect role in lawmaking. They draft the bills which the ministers submit to the legislature for law-making. The

ministers provide all the information asked for by the legislature by taking the help of the civil
servants.
6. Semi-judicial Work: The emergence of the system of administrative justice, under which
several types of the cases and disputes are decided by the executive, has further been a source of
increased semi-judicial work of the bureaucracy. The disputes involving the grant of permits,
licenses, tax concessions, quotas etc. are now settled by the civil servants.
7. Collection of Taxes and Disbursement of Financial Benefits: The civil servants play a
vitally important role in financial administration. They advise the political executive in respect of
all financial planning, tax-structure, tax-administration and the like. They collect taxes and settle
disputes involving recovery of taxes. They play a vital role in preparing the budget and taxation
proposals.
8. Record-Keeping: The Civil Service has the sole responsibility of keeping systematically all
government records. They collect, classify and analyses all data pertaining to all activities of the
government. They collect and maintain vital socioeconomic statistics which are used for the
formulation of Public policies and plans.
9. Role in Public Relations:The era of modern welfare state and democratic politics has made it
essential for the government to keep close relations with the people of the state. The need for
maintaining active and full public relations is a vital necessity of every state. The civil servants
play an active role in this sphere.
They are the main agents who establish direct contacts with the people. They serve as a two way
link. On the one hand, they communicate all government decisions to the people, and on the
other hand, they communicate to the government the needs, interests and views of the people.
Thus, Bureaucracy plays a vigorously active and highly important role in the working of the
government.
Control over Bureaucracy:
The rise of modern welfare state and increase in its functions has been a source of big increase in
the powers and role of Bureaucracy. It has, therefore, given rise to an additional need for
exercising control over bureaucracy. An effective control system has become essential both for

preventing the civil servants from abusing their powers as well as for ensuring their active and
positive role. In fact, every state maintains a system of internal and external control over
Bureaucracy.
(A) Internal Control:
It means control applied from within the organization i.e. by the administrative machinery. The
administrative organization is hierarchical and is divided into wings, divisions, branches and
sections. There are present some internal controls in its every section. The tools of control are
budgeting, accounting, auditing, reports, inspections, efficiency surveys, personnel control, code
of conduct, and discipline and leadership control.
In particular, regular internal inspections, auditing of accounts and evaluation of the performance
of each civil several act as main means of internal control over Bureaucracy Internal control is
necessary for keeping the bureaucracy efficient and productive of desired results.
(B) External Control:
External control is that which flows from outside agencies. These agencies are the people, the
legislature, the executive and the judiciary.

Roles of Elites in social change

Elites and social distinction
Elite is a selected and small group of citizens and/or organizations that controls a large amount of
power. Based on the social distinction with regard to other groups of lower strata (Daloz, 2010),
most of these selected groups are constantly searching differentiation as well as separation from
the rest of society. Normally the concept of lite is used to analyze the groups that either control
or are situated at the top of societies.
Several groups are constantly seeking different social resources in order to define their
specificity. Elites and social distinction have a long vibrant history. Since the beginning of the
Greeksociety and the Roman Empire social status has been relevant. Whereas Greek society

wasmainly broken up between free people and slaves, the social structure of ancient Rome was
based on property, wealth, citizenship and freedom, with a significant importance of heredity.
Even though in both societies social stratification existed, in the case of the latter social
statuswas established through objective norms (Grantt, 1978). Later on, in both middle Ages
andin Modern Times this form of distinction through the social status prevailed, and probablyit
could be considered as the main principle of social organization currently. Research in social
sciences has emphasized the tendency of elites to persist and reproduce their power over time at
political and economic levels, potentially undermining the effectiveness ofinstitutional reforms.
For instance, one specific form of lite persistence is illustrated by theexistence of dynasties, a
particular form of lite persistence in which a single or few familygroups monopolize either
political and/or economic power.
Political elites and social class
A political lite is a group of people, corporations, political parties and/or any other kind of civil
society organization who manage and organize government and all the manifestations of political
power: elites may defined as persons who, by virtue of their strategic locations in large or
otherwise pivotal organizations and movements, are able to affect politicaloutcomes regularly
and substantially (Higley, 2008: 3).
The most influential perspectives in sociological research historically have been provided from
Marxism and Functionalism (Wright, 2005). Max Webers sociology developed a strong
theoretical framework for understanding the connection between social strata and political action
in modern societies. Influenced by Marxs ideas, Weber created a theory of social stratification
arguing that power could take a variety of forms in the social interplay. He emphasized the idea
that besides class, there were other sources of power in modern societies, such as the status,
which was defined by consumption. Since the 1970s, a wide range of sociological empirical
research has mainly focused on explaining social determinants on ruling elites. Considering
topics such as social origins, type of education, socioeconomic status, social and political capital
among others, several scholars have analyzed what factors explain the creation of elites as well
as how they evolve in time.

The main principle of this kind of research was the Weberian sociological concept of elective
affinity (Weber, 1958), which define the association between certain variables defined bybeliefs,
actions, and/or unknowing or unexpected consequences of social action (Howe, 1978).
Why is important to consider this concept of elective affinity? There is a link between the
Bourdieuian theory of distinction and of the social uses of values and this Weberian concept. As
political elites are constantly struggling for power and also they share social origins and interests,
they are different since their origins.
Elites

Conflict

Legitimacy

Mass

Authority

Figure: Political elites and mass

Source: http://www.facso.uchile.cl/publicaciones/sociologia/articulos/28/2802-Garrido.pdf
As showed in Figure, political elites are constantly controlling power resources over the mass.
The elites have power over the state, the civil organization of political power. Even though they
could have conflicts with the mass, which certainly can affect political decisions from top
down to bottom up (Easterly, 2008), the possession of multiples forms of capital (social,
cultural, economic, politic, among others) allows to elites to ensure their social reproduction as
well as the cultural reproduction of the ruling
Elites and political representation
Political elites and representation are often related due to the fact that these groups are constantly
searching to control government. In modern democracies, political authorities have to represent
the interests of citizens. For winning elections, politicians must succeed inconvincing electors:
political life is not merely the making of arbitrary choices, nor merely the resultant of
bargaining between separate, private wants. It is always a combination of bargaining and
compromise where there are irresolute and conflicting commitments and common deliberation

about public policy, to which facts and rational arguments are relevant(Pitkin, 1967: 212).
Politicians are frequently dealing between the mandate of the post and the interests of people
that represent. Currently, these interests are expressed by public opinion polls.Political
representation in most Western democracies depends of political parties. The functioning of
democratic systems is determined not only by either for the action of citizens or the performance
of political system, but also by the behavior of political actors. Decision-makers in public
institutions are political elites and they operate through political parties. What is in permanent
tension in current societies is the relationship among power, conflict and authority (Lass well and
Kaplan, 1950). Political elites have to deal with power institutions and shape the political
system. In some cases the elites elaborate strong rules in order to maintain their power avoiding
political competition. In other cases, the elite must compete among them and/or with others
citizens.
Elites, democracy and social change
What does social science have to say about social change? Social sciences have developed a
wide range of theoretical framework as well as empirical methods for studying the evolution of
modern societies. Among them, political science and sociology have made important
contributions concerning the analysis of power, conflict and authority. At the empirical level, a
great volume of this line of investigation has focused on the social basis of democracy and
consensus. Using social stratification categories many scholars have studied the dynamics of
voting and mass electorates as well as the performance of political parties. Regarding the
relationship between democratic consolidation and social change, Morlino(1989) argued that
stability in democracies was determined by the behavior of the political elites and non-political
elites, i.e. the degree of commitment of elites with the maintenance of the political regime of
representative democracy. A crucial theoretical contribution to the concept of consolidation of
democracy came up from Linz and Stephan (1996), who claimed that modern consolidated
democracies do necessarily require the acceptance of a series of rules, institutions and
regulations, socially and politically constructed and accepted, which introduced the tension
among political economy and democratic theory, because not always political and economic
incentives are socially accepted.

Elites and power structure

The main issue regarding the link between democratic consolidation and social change is how
societies define its power structure. Most social scientists consider that power can bestudied
either as collective power, which is the capacity to perform effectively in pursuing its common
goals, or regarding the ability of a group within a community to be successful in conflicts with its
rivals. Both dimensions are intertwined, but the second prevails for studying political elites. The
theoretical starting point for elites and power structure research is that in modern societies the
basis of power, authority and conflict is in the human organizations (Domhoff, 2006). As they are
conformed to accomplish a set of purposes, they often develop rules, specific roles and routines.
They frequently must compete among them. In political sociology five theories have attempted
from different perspectives and models to explain and to analyze power structure.

Military roles in social change

A military role in development also has the potential to harm the credibility of the aid and
development operation, as well as make it difficult for civilians to trust in the operation. This can
also blur the line between humanitarian and security work and threaten the neutrality that has
traditionally helped to protect many aid workers.
This resource guide seeks to provide key resources on both sides of the debate, highlighting the
pros and cons of military involvement with development and development strategies being
interlinked with security policy.
Key resources on the military and development
1) Counterinsurgency Center (COIN) is an example of military doctrine combined with
development strategy. Counterinsurgency works to develop and ensure stability in areas that
affect the security of the country. It is representative of the changing military doctrine throughout
the world following the idea that development contributes to stability, especially in post-conflict
areas.

2) 3D Security DC based NGO that focuses on development and security with a belief that
security requires efforts by both government and civil society. Development and diplomacy
should be the first resort for preventing violent conflict, ensuring that human security-oriented
defense strategies are truly a last resort.
3) Military Involvement in Humanitarian Aid Operations It identifies general problems with
aid and also problems specific to the militarys involvement. The article defines both ethical and
practical issues that arise out of military involvement in aid and development.
4) Interaction is an aid and development network that summarizes the NGO perspective on
military involvement in development. Interaction believes that the militarys operations often
blur the line between NGOs acting in accord with humanitarian principles, and the militarys
pursuit of political and security objectives. The report also highlights the issues with military
trainings effectiveness in accomplishing the goals set out by development experts.
5) Militarization of Humanitarian Aid is a website created by the International Peace Bureau
that answers common questions about the militarys involvement in aid and development. It
discusses possible roles for the military, uses/misuses of aid, and the ethical dilemma posed by
the acceptance of a military role in aid and development. It also discusses the implications of the
militarization of aid on peace and security.
6) Between Reluctance and Necessity: The Utility of Military Force in ... is an article by
Robert Angell that examines the pros and cons of military involvement in development. It
discusses issues affecting the effectiveness of the combined efforts between humanitarian aid
organizations and the military.

Ultimately, the paper decides that the benefits of military

involvement outweigh the issues with it, as long as coordination improves between the military
and civil society. Currently, peace and development operations are complex issues that require
increased cooperation and communication between all parties involved, including the military.
7) Humanitarian and Military Efforts Must Not Be Confused is an article that is strongly
against military involvement in aid and development. The author, Per By man, is of the opinion
that being affiliated with the military harms the credibility of aid operations and interferes with
its ability to foster relationships with civilians. Involvement could also endanger the aid workers

if they are seen as part of the military and therefore a target for enemy military operations.
Humanitarian work should be independent, neutral and impartial.
8) A bridge too far: aid agencies and the military in humanitarian res... is a report produced by
the Overseas Development Institute that presents both the pros and cons of military involvement
in humanitarian aid and development.

On one side, experts believe this merging of

humanitarian, political and military roles and goals inevitable, practical and desirable, but
others believe that, in the attempt to bring political, military and humanitarian objectives within
the same framework, there is a danger that humanitarian objectives and principles will be
compromised; as a result, the capacity to alleviate suffering will be diminished. A third
perspective takes a pragmatic approach to civilmilitary cooperation, establishing policy and
negotiating the more contentious grey areas on a case-by-case basis.
9) Do the Military and Development Mix? is an article written by Todd Diamond and hosted on
the Foreign Policy in Focus website. It examines two major problems with the militarys
involvement in development. Though the article acknowledges that the military can provide
development practitioners with access to areas where only the military can reach, it also states
that the trust that development professionals gain by working with Afghan professionals and
beneficiaries can erode when they're seen as an extension of the military. The second problem
is that including development success as a factor in "winning the war" can create an impression
among congressional overseers that military success and development can be measured
according to the same standards. Both issues may outweigh the possible benefits of military
involvement in development.
Over the past few decades, the linkages between security and development have increased
significantly. Governments throughout the world have begun to adapt their military strategies to
include plans for development. This change is due to the increasing acceptance of the idea that
development brings peace and stability. There is a significant debate surrounding this change in
strategy. More specifically, those against military involvement in development think that the
humanitarian principles guiding the use of aid and development will be overshadowed by
political and security goals. Development for the benefit of the people may be forsaken for
development that accomplishes specific government priorities. This potential for a warped sense
of priorities makes some shy away from supporting military involvement in development.

Socioeconomic development, the missions of militaries can also be when few external conflict
threats exist. Militaries can thus serve as direct development project/program implementers to
enhance state service delivery capacity and to modernize the population.
Militaries should be strongly considered for complementing civilian development organizations,
both private and public, due to several comparative advantages in state capacity enhancement
that most militaries have:
(1) Culture of expedience and order-taking;
(2) Vast resource availability for money, manpower, infrastructure, and technology;
(3) Partnership possibilities for technology transfer and support from international powers and
for regional coordination on transnational issues with regional partnerships;
(4) Human capital in a variety of skill sets since militaries are societies within societies;
(5) Direct line to the countrys head of state for ease of coordination and funding; and
(6) Few limits on areas of operation since militaries have security training and weaponry for
insecure places along with adequate transportation vehicles for remote locations.
Along with these advantages, militaries are significant sources of modernization in the following
ways: (1) Source of hope and social-climbing for lower classes through a meritocracy;
(2) Social solidarity effects of forging a national identity;
(3) International exposure for soldiers that increases idea-sharing; and
(4) Source of education and skills-training, especially when military skills relate to the
socioeconomic realm so that soldiers find related work after demobilization.
However, the importance of strong civil-military relations cannot be overlooked before any of
these comparative advantages can be realized, especially considering the coups dtat so
prevalent in the recent history of many developing countries. Civil-military relations based in
norms of military subordination to civilian authority is the only sustainable means of any policy
regarding the militarys function. Especially for this recommended policy that could be

considered outside the traditional role and operations of militaries, strong civil-military relations
are a prerequisite, with a professionalized armed forces and a civilian leader who respects the
military and does not abuse his or her authority by using the military for inappropriate means. If
civil-military relations are properly controlled, militaries can be a domestic source of capital that
can catalyze socioeconomic development.

Conclusion
The importance of strong civil-military relations cannot be overlooked before any of these
comparative advantages can be realized, especially considering the coups dtat so prevalent in
the recent history of many developing countries. Civil-military relations based in norms of
military subordination to civilian authority is the only sustainable means of any policy regarding
the militarys function. Militaries can thus serve as direct development project/program
implementers to enhance state service delivery capacity and to modernize the population. The
rise of modern welfare state and increase in its functions has been a source of big increase in the
powers and role of Bureaucracy. It has, therefore, given rise to an additional need for exercising
control over bureaucracy. An effective control system has become essential both for preventing
the civil servants from abusing their powers as well as for ensuring their active and positive role.
On the other hand, Elite are the most influential and prestigious stratum in a society. The elite are
those persons who are recognized as outstanding leaders in a given field. To sum up, we maintain
that unless the behavior of the present political elite is motivated more by altruistic values rather
than by the mundane or pragmatic considerations, the goals of modernization will not be
achieved and the struggle for social change will continue to be hampered.

Reference
Elites, political elites and social change in modern societies, 2013. Available from:
<http://www.facso.uchile.cl/publicaciones/sociologia/articulos/28/2802-Garrido.pdf

>

[Accessed on: 14/09/2015]

Social

change,

Available

from:

<http://husky1.stmarys.ca/~evanderveen/wvdv/social_change/sc_course_documents.html
>

[Accessed on: 14/09/2015]

Available

from:

<https://www.academia.edu/6094332/Social_Change_through_Control_How_Elites_Sha
pe_Society> [Accessed on: 15/09/2015]
Available from: <http://works.bepress.com/lina_buchely/1/> [Accessed on: 14/09/2015]
Available

from:

<http://worldanimal.net/documents/2_Social_Change_Introduction.pdf>

[Accessed on: 15/09/2015]

Available from: <http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/politics/political-elite-concept-orientationsand-role-in-social-change/39204/> [Accessed on: 14/09/2015]
Available from:

<http://snation.org/2010/02/23/the-role-of-the-military-as-a-socioeconomic-

development-implementer/ >[Accessed on: 15/09/2015]

Available from:

<http://www.eajournals.org/journals/international-journal-of-asian-history-

culture-and-tradition-ijahct/vol-1-issue-1-december-2013/political-role-bureaucracysocial-change-khairpur-1947-1980-2/ >[Accessed on: 14/09/2015]