C15(a) - Complexity and World Politics
Date: Jun 4 | Time: 08:45am to 10:15am | Location:
Chair/Président/Présidente : Olga Vorkunova (Primakov IMEMO, Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS), MSLU)
Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Olga Vorkunova (Primakov IMEMO, Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS), MSLU)
Session Abstract: “Although we all know that social life and politics constitute systems and that many outcomes are the unintended consequences of complex interactions, the basic ideas of systems do not come readily to mind and so often are ignored.” This condition remains conspicuously the case today, more than two decades after Robert Jervis penned the statement above. This panel therefore pursues several core questions: What are the potentials of complexity thinking for IR theorization? Why, after so many years, is complexity still marginalized in IR theory? Can novel applications of complexity approaches overcome such obstacles and deliver a unique ‘value-added’ to IR? As General Systems theorization has faded away and the epistemological turn in IR seems exhausted, re-engaging with complexity thinking re-invigorates theoretical possibilities. A complexity lens emphasizes the relational nature of systems, highlighting dense and recursive causal connections, while paying attention to dynamics of change and path dependence. We all witness the emergence of a different world order deeply in need of novel analytical frameworks. Complexity thinking expands and challenges the concept of “international” by viewing the socio-political world as interacting systems. Adopting this perspective opens the dialogue on World Politics and integrates power well beyond, but without excluding, the state. From theorizing space in IR, mapping research in complexity, understanding conflicts as complex adaptive systems, and developing unique insights on the Drug War in Mexico, this panel engages with a spectrum of topics on complexity and opens a dialogue on its promises and pitfalls in both theory and practice.
Rethinking Space in IR Theory: From Levels-of-Analysis to Complexity thinking: André Simonyi (Collège Militaire Royal de St-Jean)
Abstract: This paper addresses the question of space and analytical connections between local, global, and intermediate levels of analysis in IR theory. Despite a broad literature addressing the nature and role of theory in IR, scholars have yet to find satisfactory answers to the analytical challenge of integrating multiple cross-cutting and interlaced levels of human activity. Deterritorialization, fragmeration and globalization have contributed to the breakdown of the Euclidian geometrical view of the world and the integration of space as socially constructed. This approach reverses the lens from theory based on categories of analysis to categories of practice, opening a new spectrum of possibilities to view the socio-political world. The paper contributes to the reformulation of traditional hierarchies of state/international found in IR theorization by using complexity thinking to integrate levels of analysis. Treating concepts like “state” as categories of practice rather than fixed, immutable realities, it explores novel analytical possibilities for representing and theorizing the world today. Complexity thinking is a rich yet little known form of theorization in the field of IR. Through this paper, I seek to shed some light on its potential.
If You Don’t Know Me By Now: The ‘State-of-the-art’ of Complex Systems Research on Global Politics: Jinelle Piereder (University of Waterloo)
Abstract: Complexity, or complex systems theory, remains ‘new’ or marginal in most political science research, despite a steady interest in its tools and contributions for nearly thirty years. For some, complexity is an empty ‘buzzword’—which is certainly sometimes the case. But for others, complex systems research represents a fundamental ontological shift away from the mechanistic, Newtonian paradigm that has governed social science for so long. Additionally, complexity offers a way to revitalize classic systems theories from IR and sociology that have proven inadequate or incomplete. While a complexity-oriented research agenda may not yet have achieved the paradigmatic breakthroughs that its early advocates imagined, there has been a significant recent increase in the adoption of complex systems approaches to study global political dynamics and outcomes. This paper examines the current ‘state-of-the-art’ of complexity-based research on global politics (broadly defined). It asks, in which (sub)disciplines, journals, institutions, and countries has this research found the most purchase or coherence? What have been the most common methods and topic applications? What are the main thematic clusters and emerging trends? Where are there conspicuous absences? Finally, what do these answers suggest for the future of this research program as a whole? To answer these questions, the paper uses Gargantext V2 (Chavalarias and Delanoe, 2017)—an open-source software platform that “combines tools from natural language processing, text-mining, complex networks analysis and interactive data visualization”—to analyze and map the research corpus, highlight unexplored opportunities, and identify potential areas of future collaboration among complex systems scholars.
Understanding Evolutions within Contemporary Conflict with a Complexity Informed Lens: Robert Lummack (University of Ottawa)
Abstract: This paper contributes to efforts which employ complexity theory (CT) to more fully understand conflict. CT’s potential to understand conflict has not fully been explored, partly because it encompasses a myriad of substantial concepts which can be enacted singularly or in conglomeration. This paper elaborates upon three implications of a CT inspired approach using secondary source data from two important manifestations of contemporary conflict - the conflict in eastern Ukraine (2014-present) and the Boko Haram insurgency (2009-present). First, conflict actors can be understood as historically developed Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) with physical and ideational attributes. Second, understood as a structurationist theory, CT can illuminate links between agentic action and structural pressures. Thirdly, CT allows for regularities and patterns to be understood while simultaneously appreciating conflict’s fundamental unpredictability. This paper thus argues that these CT informed implications help make sense of observations of contemporary conflict as multilevel, multicausal, multigenerational and affected by an assortment of heterogeneous actors employing novel methods of conduct (kinetic and non-kinetic). An unpacking of these implications contributes to an understanding of how contemporary conflicts are understood, critical to inform meaningful prevention, resolution and intervention efforts.
A Complex Systems Approach to the Drug War in Mexico: Michael Lawrence (University of Waterloo)
Abstract: In 2006, the Mexican government deployed scores of soldiers and police onto the streets to directly confront the country’s flourishing drug business. Rather than quell the criminal activity, the government offensive only enflamed the drug violence, which has killed upward of 100 000 people and continues to spiral out of control today.
This paper demonstrates the ways in which key ideas from the complexity literature can be productively applied to illuminate this case study. First, it introduces the concept of a fitness landscape to explain the evolution, adaptations, and co-evolution of criminal and enforcement actors. Second, it draws upon the work of Joseph Tainter to argue that the government and drug traffickers represent regimes of resource extraction, but with energy sources (resources) of very different qualities (high profit drugs versus expansive taxation). The contrast has important implications for the organizational demands, adaptability, and resilience of these actors, ultimately benefitting criminal groups.
Finally, this paper examines threshold transitions affecting the structure of criminal networks. The analysis suggests that persistent government enforcement could potentially reduce the size (and hence threat) of drug organizations, but the nature of the threshold transition has important implications for how such a transition can be sustained. Ultimately, this paper demonstrates that complexity thinking yields novel insights on practical policy matters, and its potential has only begun to be recognized.