[MUSIC] The most difficult problem to address in norm change is when the majority of the population though aware of alternatives values their standing practices. As they attempt to initiate change, trendsetters will face almost insurmountable odds. Beliefs has not yet changed and when and if they do, the change will be painfully slow. If there are dissident community members convinced that their practices are harmful, then it may be best for these individuals to come together into small groups. Trendsetters who come together into small groups can, if they are self sufficient, break off from the broader network in which they were previously embedded and create their own independent reference network. In this case they need not fear punishment. As they are sufficiently insulated from the larger population. Think of the Amish who came to America precisely because they rejected life in European society and wanted to create groups with their own rules and religion. They have remained independent and self sufficient for centuries. These networks possess several prominent properties. The year dense in that each individual as many connection with other network members and display a high level of similarity among it's members. It is important to note that these networks did not spread their lifestyle to other nearby groups, nor did they want to. In fact the Amish form a tightly knit group that is sufficiently segregated from the rest of society so as to impede Diffusion. In many cases however, a tightly neat network is not able to implement an sustain a new behavior. Take the case of a male genital cutting, which is often a societal prerequisite for finding a husband. If marriage market norms encourage exogamous marriages, a local change in personal beliefs, both factual and normative will not be sufficient to change marriage patterns. In this case, the reference network includes other communities of potential mates and at least some of these communities need to be involved for change to occur. As more groups that wants to implement a new type of behavior, for example ending child marriage or female genital cutting, will have an incentive to both give the other cohorts reasons for change and practically convince them that changing won't incur negative consequences. We may think of the starting group as a sort of collective trendsetter that wants to spread its new ideas to other networks. But how does the collective trendsetter successfully reach these other networks? Mark Ciligern discussed how deliberation not only develops within what they call the core group of trendsetters. But also how it diffuses out of the core group, through local and more general networks. There are several possible channels of diffusion that may be employed. Discussion with family and friends. Meeting with elders, religious leaders, women groups, community meetings, and discussion with nearby communities. Or inter-village meetings with delegates from surrounding communities. All these interventions aimed to secure a collective shift of personal beliefs, factual and normative that could have actually facilitated a change in social expectations. In other words, they provide sufficient reasons for change to convince others of the need to abandon a standing norm. We know that changing personal belief is not equivalent to change in social expectations, especially empirical ones. Change in the latter means either directly observing or trusting that the practice is being abandoned, and that a new one is emerging. At this point, our core group of trendsetter must convince others that they can reduce the risk associated with abandoning a norm. Organizing natural foot societies in China, in which Families committed to not binding their daughters feet and allowed their sons to only marry unbound women fought one of the main obstacles to the elimination of foot binding, the marriagability problem. Those families were convinced through public complains of the adverse effects of foot binding. The fact remained of not finding a husband for an unbound daughter. Marriage societies for the mutual abandonment of foot binding promised suitable mates for unbound girls, eliminating the greatest risk associated with abandoning the practice. Indian dowry-free matrimony websites are another example of an attempt to create such protected networks. As they also complement information campaigns with the assurance that daughters will find husbands. These networks change members' empirical and normative expectation through the creation of a new marriage market. Their very existent confirms that others have already deviated from the norm, while the available pool of potential spouses mitigate the fact of abandoning a shared practice. The last obstacle, a small group of first mover must overcome to expand their network is that of trust. The members of a small protected network bent on changing certain practices do not often face issues trusting each other. The independent group relies so much on itself, that trust between members occurs naturally for the purpose of their own survival. Such groups will not need any formal or external signals of commitment. Recall the example of the Amish. For children who grow up in an Amish community, all they know is a lifestyle, values and culture of their group. So leaving their community entails both a tremendous risk and a loss of identity. The risk is shared and keeps members together. Groups that decide to abandon a social norm that is shared in the wider population may not have the possibility of creating a self sustaining independent network. Outside of the small network, the problem of trust and commitment may easily arise. It is in this case that public commitment become a crucial element of change. We have seen the efficacy of public commitment in building trust that change is indeed occurring. That is, collectively promising to abandon the old practice and adopt a new one. A public commitment maybe very effective if it is done with people we know, and with whom we have repeated interactions. However, the creation of small networks or the organised diffusion of new ideas, starting from small groups, is not a feasible alternative when the communities are very large. For example, in large cities, scaling up certain intervention proves to be quite difficult. I already discussed the importance of the media in norm change. In the next video, I shall expand on the role of the media as trendsetters.
