356
J. Kooiman
social research, Goldspink ( 2000 ) examines the dynamic potential of four recent
linear oriented social theories. He argues that functionalists have a strong linear
dynamic perspective, while in the eyes of radical humanists the power of ideas
forms the main source of societal changes and dynamics. Structuralists (characteristically Marxist) explain concrete social processes in terms of societal dynamics,
whereas the self-referring individual tends to self-regulate change patterns in the
interpretative view.
According to non-linear theories, dynamic processes are mainly irregular, shockwise, irreversible or chaotic. The theory of non-reversible processes, for example,
suggests that open systems, including social ones, are usually unstable or in disequilibrium – they ‘ fl uctuate’ constantly. By means of positive feedback processes, these
fl uctuations can become ‘irreversible’ (Prigogine and Stengers 1984 ) . Two discoveries underlie ‘chaotic’ theories of change. One suggests that the initial conditions
of a process may be lost in time, while according to the other such processes are
critically dependent on initial conditions – the ‘butter fl y effect’. Although the concept of emergence has very old roots (Aristotle) and is not undisputed (Corning
2002 ) , its leap forward came in the 1980s with scienti fi c work on complex systems.
Their emergent properties include radical novelty (features not previously observed),
coherence or correlation (integrated wholes), occurrence at the global or macro
level, dynamics (arise and evolve over time), and ostensibility (Goldstein 1999 ) .
Each of the theories mentioned thus far has quite a different view, explanation
and assumption with respect to the dynamics of modern society, including the
fi sheries sector. We are therefore left with the following question: which theory or
combination of theories should we choose to employ? It is likely that no single
theory can explain all instances of societal change. In aquaculture, for example, we
may encounter patterns of rapid changes and high dynamics when a new species is
brought on the market. In time, however, we can expect stabilizing forces getting the
upper hand (Chap. 11 ). Similarly, a combination of micro-macro analyses can help
in understanding the dynamics of phenomena characterized as low, such as patronclient relations (Chap. 5 ), while macro studies may point to forms of higher dynamics created by the market and, in some cases, state regulation (Chap. 11 ).
The use of cybernetic principles for handling dynamic qualities of systems, as
expressed in terms of positive or negative feedback loops, can be helpful to identify
the working of dynamic forces. In positive loops, changes reinforce one another and
thus strengthen dynamics. In negative feedback loops, tendencies work to weaken
dynamic effects . For example, in the study of the MPA in Chap. 12 , where it is
shown that internal or external zero-steps in MPA creation are explanatory factors
for the dynamics of the way in which they tend to develop and their governability
issues, we can discern a ‘butter fl y’ effect. The study of shell- fi shing in Galicia
(Spain) provides a thorough analysis of the dynamics of the increasing role of gender in which all three sub-systems play a speci fi c role (Chap. 13 ).
Finally, attention should be paid to the concept of adaptation described in the
discussion of fi shing livelihoods in Chap. 5 . Theories of adaptation, such as complex adaptive systems and resilience and adaptive management thinking, are certainly of interest in the study of fi sheries dynamics as they are based on and make
use of different notions of dynamics or change.
J. Kooiman
social research, Goldspink ( 2000 ) examines the dynamic potential of four recent
linear oriented social theories. He argues that functionalists have a strong linear
dynamic perspective, while in the eyes of radical humanists the power of ideas
forms the main source of societal changes and dynamics. Structuralists (characteristically Marxist) explain concrete social processes in terms of societal dynamics,
whereas the self-referring individual tends to self-regulate change patterns in the
interpretative view.
According to non-linear theories, dynamic processes are mainly irregular, shockwise, irreversible or chaotic. The theory of non-reversible processes, for example,
suggests that open systems, including social ones, are usually unstable or in disequilibrium – they ‘ fl uctuate’ constantly. By means of positive feedback processes, these
fl uctuations can become ‘irreversible’ (Prigogine and Stengers 1984 ) . Two discoveries underlie ‘chaotic’ theories of change. One suggests that the initial conditions
of a process may be lost in time, while according to the other such processes are
critically dependent on initial conditions – the ‘butter fl y effect’. Although the concept of emergence has very old roots (Aristotle) and is not undisputed (Corning
2002 ) , its leap forward came in the 1980s with scienti fi c work on complex systems.
Their emergent properties include radical novelty (features not previously observed),
coherence or correlation (integrated wholes), occurrence at the global or macro
level, dynamics (arise and evolve over time), and ostensibility (Goldstein 1999 ) .
Each of the theories mentioned thus far has quite a different view, explanation
and assumption with respect to the dynamics of modern society, including the
fi sheries sector. We are therefore left with the following question: which theory or
combination of theories should we choose to employ? It is likely that no single
theory can explain all instances of societal change. In aquaculture, for example, we
may encounter patterns of rapid changes and high dynamics when a new species is
brought on the market. In time, however, we can expect stabilizing forces getting the
upper hand (Chap. 11 ). Similarly, a combination of micro-macro analyses can help
in understanding the dynamics of phenomena characterized as low, such as patronclient relations (Chap. 5 ), while macro studies may point to forms of higher dynamics created by the market and, in some cases, state regulation (Chap. 11 ).
The use of cybernetic principles for handling dynamic qualities of systems, as
expressed in terms of positive or negative feedback loops, can be helpful to identify
the working of dynamic forces. In positive loops, changes reinforce one another and
thus strengthen dynamics. In negative feedback loops, tendencies work to weaken
dynamic effects . For example, in the study of the MPA in Chap. 12 , where it is
shown that internal or external zero-steps in MPA creation are explanatory factors
for the dynamics of the way in which they tend to develop and their governability
issues, we can discern a ‘butter fl y’ effect. The study of shell- fi shing in Galicia
(Spain) provides a thorough analysis of the dynamics of the increasing role of gender in which all three sub-systems play a speci fi c role (Chap. 13 ).
Finally, attention should be paid to the concept of adaptation described in the
discussion of fi shing livelihoods in Chap. 5 . Theories of adaptation, such as complex adaptive systems and resilience and adaptive management thinking, are certainly of interest in the study of fi sheries dynamics as they are based on and make
use of different notions of dynamics or change.