The design of the flow of an analysis gives the picture of the sequence of steps for conducting a study. In the SIA study, this flow is a map that shows the way to capture all the data needed to explain the process of social change. Noble (2000) commented that all social change issues happening in this world are related to the existing social actors and social systems (social structures and social networks). This indicates that the connection of social actors and social systems with social change is able to guide the design of the flow of the analysis for an SIA study.
As presented in Figure 2.1, the basic model of ANT shows that the impact is a product created by actors through a series of actions and changes. In this study, the same connection idea of actors, actions, changes and impacts is applied to study the social impact of development. But
the ANT-K Theory suggests capital as the specific way to identify the possible connections found among them that may contribute to social change. Lin (2007) pointed out that actors interact among themselves to look for possible change agents to build connections. The interaction is a process that lets actors communicate their knowledge of matter and mind related to capital issues with other actors (Russell, 1995). This knowledge determines the capability of actors to response to change agents (Lewis, 1990). The knowledge also helps actors to justify the reasons to form connections with others (Ayer, 1990), and then
understand the logic behind these connections (Bloor, 1991; Gettier, 1995; Morton, 1997). Richards (2000) commented that the effect of interactions of matter can be seen obviously, while the interaction effect of minds cannot be seen physically, but the impacts created are as noticeable as changes generated from the connections of actors.
Lin (2007) commented that human actors tend to form connections for two reasons: 1) to maintain existing capital stocks, or 2) to gain additional capital stocks. As for the non-human actors, e.g. natural or man-made features, the connections formed among themselves are due to: the effects of the earth‟s natural systems, which are beyond human control; and the effects of human social systems, which depend on human actions (Braybrooke, 1996). It seems that the starting points for all controllable connections between actors are the same, and rooted in the hands of humans. This indicates that the connections formed among human actors can be used to investigate the occurance of connections among human and non-human actors, both of which make up the whole social system that leads the process of social change (Craib, 1992). To predict the occurance of connections between actors, there are two aspects to be explored; both linked to the reasons for human actors to form connections, as discussed previously. First, connections among actors can be formed in order to maintain existing capital stocks that help to hold social positions in social structures (Lin, 2007). Individuals or collective groups tend to have relationships with others of the same social position who have similar interests and abilities, to help maintain and defend social power. These abilities refer to kinds of social power that actors have owing to their status, class or authority in a social structure and that also determine the reputation, wealth or power of human actors to act (Lin, 2007).
The second reason for forming connections is to gain access to capital stocks that belong to actors from different social positions. Individuals or collective groups at a lower level of social position tend to have connections with others in higher social positions in order to use their social power as a stepping stone to achieve additional capital stocks for themselves. Relatively, the connections help them to achieve a better social position with the help of other actors (Lin, 2007).
So, how do connections relate to human actions? Looking back at the earlier discussion of possible drivers for connections, interests and abilities are two keys that influence human
actors in deciding whether or not to form any connections (Abell, 1988). Interests show what
are the possible desirable results that actors are looking for through connections, while
abilities show which of the possible social powers that actors are actually using to produce these desirable results. As stated before, abilities are related to the status, class and authority of individuals or collective groups in a social structure, and it is reflected in their social
positions. These in turn are determined by their social, economic and political backgrounds in a social structure (Lin, 2007). Relatively, it indicates which aspects of social power actors are interested in using, to form connections, and what are the social, economic or political actions that may be taken by these actors.
Every action made by actors brings certain meanings and values that form part of the social arrangements. These actions fulfill the needs of humans for survival (Doyal & Gough, 1991). Actions are also a response to the psychological wants of humans for material reasons
(Strongman, 2006). Both individuals and collective groups influence each other in producing social actions through communications and exercising their power (Burkitt, 1993). Lin (2007) commented that some actions are meant to overcome issues with a social aspect, while some deal with issues of an economic or political nature. The social rules set in a social structure are formal or informal standards that affect the behaviour and motives of human actors to act (Cahn & Markie, 2006; McCord, 1996). This suggests that social rules could be guidelines that affect the decisions of humans to determine the types of capital stocks to be used for creating actions or relations.
Cohen (1987) stated that social rules show the rights and obligations of individuals or
collective groups in a social structure. Human actors use social rules to establish the meaning and value of appropriate ways to form connections with other actors and to take actions intelligently and successfully (Wallace, 1996). This includes decisions about actions that lead to the way in which non-human actors function and change (Braybrooke, 1996). As a result, these rules determine actions that bring values of social, economic and political opportunities or limitations for actors to achieve certain desirable social arrangements through possible change agents. These opportunities or limitations indicate what kinds of advantages or disadvantages actors hold in dealing with possible change agents. The opportunities or limitations also indicate gaps in actions that are needed for achieving a better result out of possible change agents in the future. In this context, “change agents” refers to social, economic and political chances available in a social structure to which actors are attached.
The argument above indicates that the design of the flow of analysis has to show the picture of how social actors have relied on capital to turn their connections with others into actions, changes, and the leading effects that shape the pattern of social impact.