	What is Social Engineering
	Address and Contacts
	Campus Map
	Faculty

Links
	International Human Economic Science Special Course
	Graduate School of Decision Science and Technology
	Tokyo Institute of Technology

What is Social Engineering

Maybe you have not heard of term “Social Engineering” before. Perhaps you may guess that it is just application of engineering to the society, using science and technology to improve security or a simple combination of civil engineering and architecture.
“Social Engineering” is completely different from those concepts.
It is a field of study to solve social issues using philosophy and other various fields, thus it is fundamentally different from just application of technology to social issues.

What is the target of “Social Engineering”?
The focus of most engineering studies is on physical goods. For example, mechanical engineering focuses on machines such as robots, and architecture concentrates on buildings. In contrast, “Social Engineering” focuses on the society; organisations such as communities, NPOs, corporations and governments, and environments like nature and land are all researched in “Social Engineering”.

What is the methodology of “Social Engineering”?
Most engineering studies are concerned with dynamics, electromagnetism or other theories in natural science. However, “Social Engineering” is not based on natural science; it is based on the humanities and social sciences such as philosophy, psychology, and, especially, economics, and thus deals with theories concerning the basic laws of humans and society.

What is the method of “Social Engineering”?
Human and social science concerns observing objects, while engineering is more concerned with making tangible goods or objects. In “Social Engineering”, in addition to observation of objects, experiments or social examinations are performed, which are a distinctive feature of natural science. Moreover, the theory of “Social Engineering” is based on economics and psychology, which makes it more mathematical than other social sciences such as sociology and political science, and leads to a rigorous discussion about the phenomenon of human beings and the society. In “Social Engineering” theories are also verified by experiments or other investigations. or by creating new methods which can be mathematical models, institutions, policies, or even artwork such as drawings and paintings. We try to learn from success and failure during the process of creation, which appeals to the society, and feed it back into the theory.

Requirements to solve modern issues.

Due to rapid improvements in science and technology, modern society has things that are good on the one hand but bad on the other. As an example, it is possible to say that technological progress has improved our daily life, but has also lead to problems with climate change and reduced biodiversity. Furthermore, technology is complicating our freedom and dignity. For example, security CCTV cameras are very common nowadays, and there is even an idea of implanting microchips into humans. Therefore, it seems to be necessary to rethink synthetically and generally about this world with the modern common knowledge. However, this is difficult using the knowledge of engineering or humanities and social sciences because they are subdivided into too many fields and divided vertically.

Three perspectives of “Social Engineering”.

Think mathematically.

Modern human and social science is based on game theory, economics, and psychology in which mathematical logic is applied. Understanding these fields will help you to apply theories to reality.

Be philosophical

To think about things without preconceived notions, we need basic ideas that do not merely follow those of the authorities, and we also need courage to review them.

Express yourself

Discussing things clearly and in depth often requires various channels of communication and means including linguistic and mathematical expressions, figures, diagrams or tables. After improving your usage of these communication tools, it will be possible for you to become a social engineer who is not only a knowledgeable generalist but also a person who can deliver using skills like integrity, flexibility, and expertise.

If you are interested in a more concrete and detailed concept of social engineering, please read the following.

A deeper understanding of “Social Engineering”

“Social Engineering”, in short, is about engineering the society. In other words, it is a field of study to solve various problems in the society through practical approaches, as in engineering.

History of “Social Engineering”

The second edition of the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) defines “Social Engineering” as “the application of sociological principles to specific social problems; social engineer, a specialist in the field.” However, this definition only mentions the sociology aspect of “Social Engineering”, and is thus defined too narrowly.
According to the OED, it is possible to say that “Social Engineering” was established under conditions of social democracy; it says that Edward C. Tolman said that social engineering is needed to reform working conditions. Moreover, the OED also states that there was already a program in 1899 called “Social Engineering” for discussing the social problems, and that the Fabian Society tried to establish an association for “Social Engineering”. At the same time, Beatrice Webb introduced the idea about social technology in the American Sociological Review in 1901, as a technology to compute the appropriate amount or rate of health, wealth, beauty, knowledge, sociality, correctness, and desires of the society.
Apart from these dictionary examples, Karl R. Popper argued about “Social Engineering” in his literature in the 1940s. Popper defined holism (utopism) as an idea that the ultimate objective of politics is to make an “ideal” society, and to change the whole society once and for all in a way to realize such a society. Then he denied the existence of holism for four reasons: (1) it is impossible for human beings to understand the whole society; (2) changing the whole society requires constant change, and falls into an infinite regress; (3) it is difficult to predict the effects of policies, and moreover, the actions of the society vary when different policies are introduced, thus it is impracticable to make rational adjustments in policies; (4) it is not possible to create a workable model for the whole society due to lack of scientific and practical knowledge; and he said that normally the only thing which can be done is to apply social technology piecemeal. He claimed that it is wise to fight against the urgent and practical social abuses by removing avoidable suffering such as poverty or unemployment.
Furthermore, Popper thought that the method of research in “Social Engineering” could be reformed continuously and progressively by applying the concept of falsifiability, i.e., a theory should be testable. Therefore, it seems that Popper added the word ”piecemeal” to eliminate images such as a social blueprint of groupism or technocracy that stigmatized the term “Social Engineering”. Popper already formed this idea around 1919, and he described it in “The Open Society and its Enemies (1945), and “The Poverty of Historicism” (1957). Poppers’ “Social Engineering” was definitely devised in response to Nazism and socialism, and it can be said that it is a social/political thought that was formed in response to the situation in those days.
Since Popper’s thought unfortunately had not been well developed, the so called “scientific” attitude toward the social problems were emphasized by engineers.
This idea leads to the technological forecasting and social change made by The Rand Corporation in the 1960s. It seems that the progress of system engineering, and the success of those projects such as the space program, which applied system engineering, accelerated the trend of using scientific technology to solve social problems, and thus “Social Engineering” became a technological idea in the USA. For example, Olaf Helmers’ “Social technology”, “Engineering economic system”, and “Application of system engineering for social problem” are similar ideas that represent the movement towards system engineering for problem solving in the society. Nevertheless, Yujiro Hayashi points out that in terms of new value, multiple value society, and the conscience of human beings, “Social Engineering” in Japan faced serious limitations in their applicability in the early 1970s. At the same time Mitsuo Suzuki proposed taking game theory as the basis of “Social Engineering” since there were needs for consensus building, which was not about system engineering or system methodology but about the central idea of “Social Engineering”. One solution was the participation of the citizens. However, the idea of generalizing the fields of “Social Engineering” such as social system theory, social/economic planning, management engineering, and city/regional planning, that were proposed by Syuntaro Shishido did not take shape even in the 1980s.
At any rate, belief in technology was relatively strong in Japan. For example, although the idea of information engineering changed to information science in the 1970s, people in Japan supported the notion of solving social problems by technology. The idea of social technology that rose in the late 1990s also fits this context, though the thought of considering the whole society, as Karl Popper pointed out, has been lost. In addition, the term “Social Engineering” in English sometimes involves negative meanings such as wrongful acts like hacking on the computer network or getting inside information, such as passwords, by pretending to be a member of the target company, usually by telephoning and asking a worker for the information, rather than actually hacking.

Target of “Social Engineering”

The target of “Social Engineering” is the society, though the major target to be concerned in social engineering differs between universities.

The title of the chairs of the world’s very first department of Social Engineering, established in 1966 at the Tokyo Institute of Technology, changed with the period:: In the 1960s, there were Social Engineering, Development Planning, Mathematical Programming, Industrial Project, Regional Planning, and Resource Planning. It is possible to say that the target and the method were mixed since there were specific areas like economic statistics (regional economic system), educational sociology, city planning, game theory, mathematical programming, economic planning, scientific technology, landscaping, and system analysis.
In the 1980s and the early 1990s, the title of chairs were Social Engineering, City Planning, Regional Planning, Environmental /Resource Planning, Transportation /Economic Planning, Planning System, Social System Design, and Urban System Design. Thus the environmental issues were emphasized, though the industrial and scientific technologies were removed from the target.
In 1996, the titles were made into three fields: Urban and Country Planning (city planning, and country system), Public System Design (public institution, public policy, and public space), and Planning Theory (planning system, social planning, and planning aid mathematics).
In 2005, they were made into three large chairs: Urban and National Land Planning (city planning, and national system), Public System Design (public policy, institutional design (economics), historical space, public space, and global environmental policies), and Basic Social Engineering (decision theory, applied economics, and social system).
At Tsukuba University:: At the beginning, in the 1970s, there were four targets: Economics, Business Administration, City, and Social System. Later, Social System was absorbed by the other three.
In 2005, these three chairs covered all fields such as Economics, City Planning, Operations Research, Management System, and Public Policy.
There are also studies associated with Social Engineering in other universities, such as Policy Studies which are based on economics and social sciences and discuss the policies.

The Methodology of “Social Engineering”

At the Tokyo Institute of Technology the methodology was defined as follows:

In the 1960s, an interdisciplinary system with measurements performed using system analysis, game theory, economics, sociology, and engineering.: In the 1980s, not only the quantitative analysis but also design issues were emphasized, and thus landscape design was introduced. On the other hand, game theory was removed, and it is possible to say that the engineering aspect was stressed.
In 1996, macroeconomics (macro-economic dynamics) and applied micro-economics were introduced. Also, large-scale simulation procedures to tackle global environment issues were reintroduced.
In 2005, game theory and history was brought in. Moreover, philosophy of law that corresponds to the norms of the society was introduced.
On the other hand, in Tsukuba University, the methodology was, from the beginning, based mainly on quantitative analytical methods such as economics and operations research.

The significance and task of “Social Engineering”

This section considers the implication and task that were learned by the practice of “Social Engineering” in Japan.

In the 1996 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, “Social Engineering” is described as follows:: (1) Today’s problem solving cannot be achieved by just one method such as changing the institution or physical establishment of facilities. By using existing studies, including Engineering, it is difficult to come up with new policies or plans because they rely on individual methods.
(2) Interdisciplinary researches are essential though they are not fully achieved due to institutional constraints. It is possible to say that “Social Engineering” provides this interdisciplinariness since it is a comprehensive field.
(3) In light of the complexity of societies, quantitative information becomes dominant in the society.
(4) Especially in Japan, the desire to solve practical problem is not particularly high in the social sciences, therefore it might lose grasp of reality, and become a theory that is difficult to adapt. Problem solving is an aspect of “Social Engineering”, but it is rarely used for decision-making. Thus, it can embody reality at a level that should work beyond the life-sized perception.
(5) In “Social Engineering”, all efforts are made from an engineering aspect to obtain data which form our view of society, and this makes it possible to analyze them better than can be done using general statistical analyses. This is similar to the developments of the natural sciences due to new measuring techniques in engineering, and indicates the possibility for a new recognition of the society.
(6) In “Social Engineering”, not only an engineered approach like operations research is used for problem solving but the idea of planning is used, bringing a sense of realism into “Social Engineering”. However, it is important to note that planning is only one type of approach to problem solving.
(1) and (2) are committed to comprehensiveness, while (3) is quantity oriented. (4) shows the skepticism to social sciences, and (5) and (6) show affirmative behavior to practice.; (1) Even though its methodology has progressed it seems that it has only been able to achieve shortsighted problem solving.
(2) Decision-making is desirable by the nature of the study, but there is the possibility of it becoming an uncritical theory for status quo.
(3) An aim is to understand the society quantitatively, however, it is uncertain whether the limits of applying the theory to reality is understood. Moreover, it is not certain whether the non-quantitative means of interpreting the society has been discussed.
(4) “Social Engineering” may remain a superficial description compared with disciplines that were established long ago and have become highly developed. In this sense, there is doubt whether “Social Engineering” can obtain new knowledge “more important that that obtained by existing disciplines.; To discover such issues, it is important to disclose information and the knowledge obtained by the information. Furthermore, what was learned by experiments is also significant. It is important to clarify the point where “Social Engineering” stands with regards to learning, especially the history of planning, and a steady social reform by each social engineer.
A similar discussion can be seen in Hidano (2000a).: (1) Firstly, there is a limit to aiming to reform without a “vision”. This is because environmental, social and economic issues are related to motives and emotions of human beings. To change a society, it is important to motivate people to do so. Thus “vision” itself is a significant idea, and moreover, “concept” which is a concrete feature of the idea “vision” has become more important. Therefore, it is necessary to present the “vision” or “concept” of “Social Engineering”.
(2) Secondly, the superiority of market economies, and the difficulty in adapting policy/planning based on prediction in solving issues of the environment, the society, and the economy have become apparent. Thus, sharing information to solve problems has become ever more important.
(3) Thirdly, a group of people who support individual technology have gained enough power to change social institutions for their own group interests during periods of great economic growth. Consequently, they have created a social problem such as the construction industry proposing more public works than we need.
(4) Finally, it has become clear that Social Engineering will not become established as a study for solving problems simply by mechanical integration of the existing subjects.
Hidano (2000a) also states that “Social Engineering” can be seen as a study that contains the following features:: (1) It is an area of study which aims to solve problems of the region or society, and not a field for engineers. Therefore, it is different from traditional engineering which tries to solve problems by using their own field of study and industry.
(2) It is a practical study which tries to reform the society though enacting policies, planning, or by presenting concepts.
(3) Therefore, it has several methods for problem solving, such as using social systems (mechanisms), institutions, or using governmental or industrial finance. Furthermore, we may change our present value by rediscovering the value or presenting a new value. Of course, it considers environmental conservation, or solutions which do nothing.
(4) It is clear from (2) and (3) that information covering different fields is important, and a serious discussion after disseminating information among the public is essential.
(5) Moreover, the academic field will not be limited to any one discipline in the humanities or social sciences, and although it shows respect for existing disciplines, it will create new areas if required. On this occasion, it will build a principle that explains the unique fact of the problems under consideration, thus it is possible to say that it will value theorization. This is because practice without a theory might become obedient to the authorities or common ideas.
Regarding specific research in “Social Engineering”, the micro-economics dynamics theory goes beyond economics (Ono, 1998). According to neoclassical economics, even though it was criticized by professionals in other fields, it is now perceived as a tool for exchanging goods or services. Yoshiyasu Ono denied this idea by thinking that human beings perceive money not as a tool for doing something but as a essential good which in itself increases the utilities of people without using it, and built a new theory. Also, he thought that landscape design is new because it assumed that the aim of the design is landscape which offers peace in the local community, and surpassed Engineering which became autotelic. However, Hidano (2000b) pointed out that: (1) Without logical and clear structured theory, “Social Engineering” might be influenced by the actual society.
(2) If we should adopt long-term planning such as city planning as a tool of our measures, a long time will inevitably elapse before decision-making, implementation, and feedback from the society; then it will be difficult to assess the adequacy of the theory, and thus it will not contribute to academic knowledge.
Hidano (2000b) suggested that theories are influenced by the current society. Moreover, disbelief in planning has occurred, and in terms of the target of the study he argues that: global environmental issues like global warming, and problem solving in this globalizing society is extremely important. Furthermore, he emphasises the independence as learning, and states that it is certain that learning related with acquired rights will loose their competitiveness. In this sense, it is significant that “Social Engineering” fights with the evil at the time, as Karl Popper pointed out.
On the other hand, strength of the approach of “Social Engineering” is not constrained by convention, as also pointed out by Hidano.: (1) Deepening of the theory, and elaboration of the method will be achieved by standing face to face with reality.
(2) Social actions including presenting concept policy, rebirth of the plan, or design were necessary for the strengthening itself and for the researcher to rethink about “Social Engineering”.
(3) Gathering real data is the best way to understand better the real society.

New evolution of the “Social Engineering” at the Tokyo Institute of Technology

Based upon our understandings of the above discussion, “Social Engineering” at the Tokyo Institute of Technology changed in 2005.: (1) Firstly, we were concerned that “Social Engineering” without theory might end up and only follow the status quo and thus clarified the role of theoretical economics which was adopted as a basic theory in 1996. Furthermore, we reintroduced game theory. However, it seems to be too late because game theory in economics was validated in the 1980s, and has been further developed since then.
With respect to the target: (2) Although we stated in 1996 that we are allowed to research global warming and biodiversity with the National Institute for Environmental Studies, which a major research institute in Japan, it is possible to say that it was late for us to consider about global environmental issues. However, the fact that the target now includes nature and ecosystems is evidence of the evolution of “Social Engineering”.
Furthermore,: (3) The theory to integrate regional design, and the direction to lean on history are emphasized.
(4) Since it is predicted that most issues in the 21st century will be about the inner world, it is possible to say that the targets of “Social Engineering” are expanding to the fields of ethics such as “beauty”, “justify and love”, and “human rights and freedom”.
However, it is a fact that “Social Engineering” at Tokyo Institute of Technology could not catch up trend toward the rapid shift of the global situation like globalization of learning and the IT revolution. Especially the following three are problems: (1) New research or research by new entrants are not evaluated due to the uncompetitive situation under the closed world among the specialists. (2) It cannot answer complicated questions since the theory is not integrated. For example, interdisciplinary studies in social sciences and humanities gained popularity for a while, though they could not surpass the best knowledge of each field. (3) Discussions among researchers has decreased since there were too many researchers working to integrate the knowledge.
To solve these problems, ways to practice and deepen learning are sought.: For example, there is an idea that in this new world which offers a new means to communicate with others mainly by the Internet, the major point is how to make a non-hierarchical organization that offers open discussion.
Nonetheless, there are two prerequisites to prove the merits of “Social Engineering”.: (1) Absorption of achievements of other fields all over the world, and lowering of the barriers between existing fields of studies by collaborative or joint research.
(2) Creation and growth of an organization based on an independent individual who will not be influenced by the group interests which are common in Japan.

Looking at the task and significance, “Social Engineering” still seems to be an immature discipline. Firstly, the methodology was pointed out above though the interdisciplinary approach has not been achieved, and the way to establish a unified theory seems to be difficult. However, paying attention to the reality, it is clear that it is becoming difficult to expect development of new findings in any fields of studies without collaborative research. For example, economics came close to cognitive psychology, as the winner of the 2002 Nobel Prize in Economics was Kahneman who was a psychologist, and moreover, it became common to adapt the methods that were developed in computational psychology to economics, as did McFadden who won the 2000 Nobel Prize in Economics. Therefore it is possible to say that “Social Engineering” can breakthrough the existing disciplinarian boundaries by searching the best method that is not necessarily based on a single discipline. In this sense, it seems to be important to standardize economics, which is the most sophisticated field of study in the humanities and the social sciences, and integrate this with cognitive psychology, and also attempt to establish experimental methods. In addition, it is interesting whether the knowledge of history will help us to solve social problems.
On the other hand, the practical aspects of “Social Engineering” can be assessed by looking at how academic achievements have changed the world. Social engineers have made several astonishing outcomes such as economic policies governed by the latest macro-economic dynamics, the progress of international politics based on results predicted by a model of social influence under global warming, basic statistics such as nationwide estimates of land and building properties, and planning based on landscape.
Whatever the case, there is high expectation of the flexibility of “Social Engineering” which is beyond the framework of arts and sciences in the 21st century.

References
Hidano, N. (2000a) Nyu-mon Shyakaikougaku [An Introduction to Social Engineering] Nihon hyouron shya.
Hidano, N. (2000b) Atarashii Shyakaikougaku [New Social Engineering] in Imada, T., and Hashidume, D. Shyakaikougaku Nyu-mon, Nikkagirenn.
Ono, Y. (1998) Keiki to Keizai Seisaku [The Economic environment and The Economic policy] Iwanami Shoten.

top of this page

About this site