Complexity Theory in Political Science and Public Policy
| Author | Paul Cairney |
| Date | 01 September 2012 |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1478-9302.2012.00270.x |
| Published date | 01 September 2012 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Complexity Theory in Political Science and
Public Policypsr_270346..358
Paul Cairney
University of Aberdeen
Advocates of complexity theory describe it as a new scientific paradigm. Complexity theory identifies instability and
disorder in politics and policy making, and links them to the behaviour of complex systems. It suggests that we shift
our analysis from individual parts of a political system to the system as a whole; as a network of elements that
interact and combine to produce systemic behaviour.This article explores the use of complexity theory in public
policy,highlighting a small literature using the language of complexity directly to describe complex policy-making
systems, and a larger literature identifying complexity themes.It then highlights the main problems to be overcome
before complexity theory can become truly valuable in politics and policy making.
Keywords: public policy; devolution; complexity theory; political science
Advocates of complexity theory describe it as a new scientific paradigm (Mitchell, 2009,
p. x). They suggest that it can change the way we think about, and study, the natural and
social world. It marks a scientific revolution; a revolutionary break from the ‘reductionist’
approach. Complexity theory suggests that we shift our analysis from individual parts of
a system to the system as a whole; as a network of elements that interact and combine to
produce systemic behaviour that cannot be broken down merely into the actions of its
constituent parts. Rather, the aim is to identify what types of systemic output occur when
its members follow the same basic rules, and how sensitive the system is, or what small
changes in rules will produce profound changes in systemic behaviour.The metaphor of
a microscope or telescope, in which we zoom in to analyse individual components or
zoom out to see the system as a whole, sums up this shift of approach. Far-reaching
examples of emergent behaviour in the natural and social world – from bees swarming,
to thoughts and feelings emerging from cells and neurons in the brain, and emerging
forms of cooperation among social groups – also highlight its wide application. Indeed,
advocates of complexity theory highlight its strong appeal across the sciences as a whole
and its unusual ability to foster a meaningful degree of interdisciplinarity.
Complexity theory has been applied to the study of neuroscience, ecology, epidemi-
ology, memory coding, computer science and metabolic networks (Arenas et al., 2008;
Beim Graben et al., 2008; Motter et al., 2002; Moura et al., 2003; Newman et al., 2006). It
has some strong support in the social sciences (including Byrne, 1998), has attracted
special journal issues (including Public Management Review and Political Analysis – see
Mahoney and Goertz, 2006; Teisman and Klijn, 2008), has been used to understand
international relations (Jervis, 1998), public policy and policy-making institutions (Geyer
and Rihani, 2010; Room, 2011) and has been used by think tanks, academics and
practitioners to recommend new forms of policy making (Geyer, 2012; Hallsworth and
Rutter, 2011; Haynes et al., 2012; Room, 2011, pp. 306–18; Sanderson, 2006; 2009). It is
POLITICAL STUDIES REVIEW: 2012 VOL 10, 346–358
doi: 10.1111/j.1478-9302.2012.00270.x
© 2012 TheAuthor. Political Studies Review © 2012 Political Studies Association
To continue reading
Request your trial