Trustees of Princeton University

On Systems and International Regimes

Author(s): Ernst B. Haas
Source: World Politics, Vol. 27, No. 2 (Jan., 1975), pp. 147-174
Published by: Cambridge University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2009879 .
Accessed: 03/03/2011 19:26
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press and Trustees of Princeton University are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to World Politics.

http://www.jstor.org

ON SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL

REGIMES
By ERNST B. HAAS*

OES theecosystem
havea purpose?
Is itthefunction
ofthehuman
cultural
and biologicalsystems
to improve
adaptation
to theenvironment?
Can theweather
system
andtheworldpolitical
be
system
brought
intoequilibrium?
Does theworldenergy
system
suffer
from
entropy?
Thesequestionshave someverypracticalimplications
as governmentsseektocometoterms
withtheinternational
implications
ofthe
interdependencies
forgedbyscienceand technology.
Oncesuchinterdependencies
are experienced
by men,theycall forthe creationof
international
regimes-collective
arrangements
among nationsdesignedto createor moreeffectively
use scientific
and technological
capabilities.
Moreover,
international
regimes
areincreasingly
designed
to minimize
theundesired
consequences
associated
withthecreation
and exploitation
ofsuchcapabilities.
Onceit is decidedto createsuch
arrangements,
thequestion
soonbecomes:Whichtechnologies
should
be includedin theregime?Whichconsequences-only
thephysical
or alsotheeducational,
results,
economic,
and cultural
features
which
mayinfluence
theuseofthetechnologies
and,in turn,be changedby
them?The answeris likelyto determine
theadministrative
and legal
scopeoftheregime.
Two illustrations
will makethepointobvious.UnitedNationsefforts
tocopewiththedeterioration
oftheglobalenvironment
areconfinedto limiting
thephysicaland biologicaldamageassociated
with
industrialism
and urbanism.
The regimenow called"Earthwatch"
is
restricted
to monitoring
keysubstances
in the environment.
In the
process,
itdrawson thescientific
knowledge
ofa variety
ofdisciplines
and aimsat delimiting
the"system"
ofphysical
and chemical
interactions.Oncethat"system"
is better
understood,
it is hopedthatmore
comprehensive
regulatory
measureswill come into being.United
*This paper is part of "Studies on InternationalScientificand Technological
Regimes,"a projectof the Institute
of International
Studies,University
of California,
The materialin PartI is also used in a companionessay,"Is There a Hole
Berkeley.
in the Whole?" in JohnG. Ruggieand ErnstB. Haas, eds.,International
Responses
to Technology,
specialissueof International
Organization(SummerI975). The paper
could not have been writtenwithoutthe substantial
contributions
of (in alphabetical
order) PeterCowhey,Jeffrey
Hart,David Laitin and JohnRuggie.

148

WORLD POLITICS

Nationsefforts
to dealwitha numberoftechnologies
influencing
the
usesoftheoceans,
however,
seektoaddress
theensemble
called"ocean
space,"a holistic
construct
whichstresses
theinteraction
between
shipping,mining,
oceanographic
research,
economic
development,
fishing,
pollution,
andworldtrade.Again,thenotionof"system"
is frequently
usedtocapture
anddescribe
theseinteractions,
conceived
primarily
in
physical,
butincreasingly
in humanand socialterms.'It takeslittle
imagination
to projectotherproblems
whichmaysoonbe described
inholistic
imagestofacilitate
discussion,
regulation,
andthedeterminationofcollective
benefits:
theusesofouterspace,thedevelopment
and
of energyresources,
delivery
theutilization
of new communications
technologies.
I am arguing
againsttheoverly
facileuseofthenotionof"system,"
notagainst
theneedtoconstruct
international
regimes.
If systems
were
straightforward
entities
whoseidentification
gaveno trouble,
theterm
wouldbe a distinct
is farfrombeing
helptoeveryone.
That,ofcourse,
thecase.Descriptive
difficulties
apart,thewordis alsousedto suggest
an almostmystical
wholeness,
a just barelygraspablereality"out
a cognitive
and steps.
there,"
mapfororienting
ourhaltingthoughts
The termis madeto subsumeotherconstructs
whichare similarly
used:complexity,
connectedness,
interdependence,
structure,
coherence,
in
andevolutionary-adaptive
movement.
Theseterms
appear proposals
formodels,rules,and regimes
to planall or partoftheinternational
naturalreeconomy,
international
security
and armsarrangements,
International
sources,
food,and energy.
planningtheremustbe. Intellectual
efforts
to advanceit arebadlyneeded.This articleis an atthe
international
temptto further
planningby seekingto demystify
tostripthevocabulary
andtheconcepts
usedin theprocess,
vocabulary
to clearunderstandofsomeofitsmurkiness
theobstacles
byshowing
in theassumptions
thatare sometimes
and commitments
ingimplicit
hiddenin thenotionof "system."
Eventhoughthispaperis a critiqueof theuse of systems
theory
in theadvocacy
at the
ofinternational
I shouldliketo stress
regimes,
and applications
of
outsetthatI am notarguingagainstall varieties
withthe authorsto be
thatapproach.I am in generalagreement
1 Examplesin the currentliterature
being used to show the
of systemicconstructs
politicsinclude: Edward Wenk,
and international
linksbetweenscience,technology,
Jr.,The Politicsofthe Ocean (SeattleI972); LesterR. Brown,WorldWithoutBorders
(New York I972); RichardA. Falk, This EndangeredPlanet (New York I97I);
Harold and MargaretSprout,Towarda Politicsof thePlanetEarth(New York I971);
(Dobbs Ferry,
and the Global Environment
JohnL. Hargrove,ed., Law, Institutions
N.Y. I972); CyrilE. Blackand RichardA. Falk, eds.,The Futureof theInternational
Legal Order(PrincetonI972), Vol. IV (especiallyPart I).

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

149

theywishto channeland reform

analyzedthattheforcesand trends
and holisticapproachif the
indeedrequirea muchmoreintegrated
is not
worldis toremainlivable.ButI wishto cautionthata rhetoric
theory
flawed
that
an
epistemologically
fora theory,
and
a substitute
theoryto be
makesforpoorpolicy.The variouskindsof systems
they
forthepurposes
identified
maywellbe usefuland appropriate
in whichtheyweredeweredesignedto serveand in thecontexts
tothedesignapplication
thattheirwholesale
veloped.
I fear,however,
regimes
goesbeyondtheirpower.A giventheory,
ingofinternational
itsapplicalimitsgoverning
obeying
thelogicaland epistemological
A problemarisesonlywhentheeftion,canbe judgedon itsmerits.
tocombine
theselimits,
as intheattempt
fortismadetofudgeorignore
cellsin thetypology
inhabiting
different
oftheories
thecharacteristics
to "jumpcells"ifwe wishto use systobe presented.
It is dangerous
to exworld.It is equallydangerous
temstheory
to fashiona better
theories
froma fieldin whichtheyproveduseful
tendsomesystems
intoa newarea-thesocialsciences-inwhichtheyseemtoapplyonly
theories
for
systems
I am eagerto use somespecific
as metaphors.
ingeneralwhen
ofusingsystems
theory
I amfearful
specific
purposes;
thatI am nottalking
we deviseinternational
Finally,I stress
regimes.
of variof studying
theinteraction
techniques
aboutsystems-analytic
in theoperations
ofinterables.Thesemayormaynotbe appropriate
is required
to assesstheir
typeofcritique
A different
national
regimes.
to
indebted
analysisis intellectually
Systems
benefits
and drawbacks.
of systems
butitstechniques
really
theory,
imagery
thesuperordinate
fora different
story.
providethematerial
I. SOME HIDDEN DOUBTS AND ASSUMPTIONS

ofsystems
servefuncDo systems
haveneeds,anddo theoperations
inthemindsofthepeoplewho
tionsotherthanthegoalsandpurposes
thattheydo. Suchthetheorists
suggest
inhabitthem?Mostsystems
to theconstructs
built-in
theycreate.
oriststhusattribute
teleologies
the
similarconstructs,
and socialsystems
obeying
Arenaturalsystems
tonatural
theteleologies
samerules?Iftheanswerispositive,
imputed
to theirsocialcounterparts.
extended
The
are automatically
systems
to
is
the
fittest"
of
the
be"survival
relationships
law ofthe
imputed
if man and his
tweenlivingspeciesand theirnaturalenvironment;
andbiological
worksarealsopartofthatensemble-asmanycultural
of huhold-thenthesamelaw appliesto thecharacter
evolutionists
to survive.
withman'sability
as theseinteract
insofar
maninstitutions
of international
whether
advocates
Hence,it makesa big difference

150

WORLD POLITICS

oftheenvironment
regimes
fortheprotection
thinkin terms
ofa continuoussystem
linkingman withnature,or whether
theymakeno
claimsto continuity.
The implications
of theseopposingviewscome
roost
in
the
hometo
strategies
imputedto theregimes
proposedfor
The moreholistic
order.
thesystem
toundertheinternational
thought
tobe tackled,
themorecomprehensive
theregimeto
liethe"problem"
are
is goingtobe; ifthepartsbelievedto be in interaction
be created
theregimeis likelyto be moremodest.
to be separable,
thought
The
in short,
in hiddenassumptions,
translate
intostrategies
of
differences
whentheunderstanding
as opposedto incrementalism
totalredesign
is appliedto theadvocacyof new international
of systems
arrangeaction.
mentsforcollective
of
morethanan aggregation
By a socialsystem,
then,I meannothing
interhumanbeings(plus theirphysicalmilieu)who are sufficiently
dependentto sharea commonfate . . . or to have actionsof some of
themusuallyaffecting
the lives of many of them.. . . It is up to the

at anygiven
to decidewhether
or notthoseentities
researcher
existing
in
levelof analysisare besttreatedas constituting
separatesubsystems
of some
thenationsin whichtheyare foundor as a singlesubsystem
largerentity.... In additionsocial entitiesat any level may be treated

in onestudyand as setsof subsystems

as setsofsystems
in another,
deunderexamination.2
pendingon thephenomenon

as Singerdefinesthem,haveno purpose.Theyare taxonSystems,

topermit
omiesdevisedbytheresearcher
thespecification
ofhypothein thehopeofgradually
sizednon-random
events
andtrends
mapping
If everyone
in thissense,we wouldhaveno
reality.
usedtheconstruct
problem.
usedbythelawyers,
Butthesystems
ecologists,
oceanographers,
and
inthediscussion
ofregimes
genetic
engineers
do havepurposes.
Singer
wishesto confinetheentities
whoseinterdependence
makesup the
topeople,groups,
or regions;others,
system
states,
however,
useroles,
transactions,
andsymmetries
activities,
ratios,
as thecomponents.
When
are
the
relationships
component
units,thereis alwaysa tacitor overt
thatthe"right"relationship
must(oughtto) conduceto
implication
somecondition
whichis "needed,"
"requisite,"
"optimal,"
or"natural."
isteleological
inthatitshouldoperate
Hence,thesystem
so as torealize

its Aristotelian
finalcause.

2 J.David Singer,A GeneralSystemsTaxonomyfor PoliticalScience (New York

9. For a perceptive
critiqueof generalsystemstheoryappliedto international
constructed
issuesand of otherdeductively
see JeromeStephens,"An
systems
theories,
Appraisalof Some SystemsApproachesin the Studyof International
Systems,"
Interxvi (SeptemberI972).
nationalStudiesQuarterly,
I971),

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

151

Moreover,mostdesignersof international
regimesuse bothentities
and relationships
as components.Their systemsare not exclusively
physicalor social; theyare both.They seek to aggregatenatureand
societyintoa wholethatpermitsprojectionintothefuture.Our problem arisesbecausesuch wholes combinefactualwith normativeconsiderations
and prescriptions.
We cannotalwaysbe surewhichconditionswhat.Unlesswe can be sure,we remainin the dark as to the
How
thatunderliethe prescription.
degreeof expertiseand certainty
muchofthelanguageused is justmetaphor,
colorfulrhetoric
designed
to persuadeskepticalaudiencesand colleagues?
We haveto knowwhat-if any-purposethedesignerhas in mind;
whether
thatpurposeis shared internationally;
and theextentto which
therealizationof thepurposeeventuallychangesinternational
reality.
This suggeststhe followingmore specificquestions:What is the
"reality"to be grasped?Is it "real" in the sensethatthe components
and interrelationships
specifiedare the stuffof man, society,and
nature?Or is thatrealityseen as approximate,as "constructed"
by
imaginativeobservers?
The answerssuggestmore questions:Are subsystems
"natural"or
constructed
entities?Does it make a difference
whetherwe specify
thepoliticalsystemas a subsystem
of the socialor cultural? Make the
social and/orculturalsubsystem
the superordinate
system?Make the
entiresocial-cultural
subordinate
subsystem
to the biologicalor physical or genetic?Couple the geneticand culturalintoone evolutionary
system?Couple themhow-as continuaor in termsof breakpoints?
the intentionsof systemstheorists.What
We begin by classifying
do theywantto explainor predict?The past and futurestate(or beas "thesystem."What assumptions
havior) of thewhole theyidentify
underlietheprojection?Systems
theoriescan be dividedintodeterministicand heuristicconstructs.
Determinists
see the componentsas relativelyunchangeableand arrangethemin an eternalpreprogrammed
dance; the rulesof the dance may be unknownto the actorsand are
specifiedby the theorist.The recurrent
patternsdiscoveredby him
constitute
a super-logic
whichpredictsthe futurestateof the system.
Deterministic
systemsare "concrete"in the sensethattheirdesigners
are the reality"out there."Cerbelievethemto be real; such systems
Heuristicconstructs
follow
taintyabout themfacilitates
prescription.
the Durkheim-Weber
pattern.They are analyticratherthan concrete
becausetheydo not professto represent
the real worldfaithfully
and
certainfeaturesdeaccurately,but selectfor intensiveinvestigation
isolatedby the theoristas presumptively
crucialin explainliberately

152

WORLD POLITICS

theorists
do
ofevents
or trends.
inga variety
Carefulheuristic-analytic
And
notassertthatwhatis beingdemonstrated
is thewholereality.
theirprescriptions
areconsequently
morecircumspect
and contingent.
As in thecaseofdeterministic-concrete
systems,
however,
whatis disof whichthe
coveredby the theorists
stillconstitutes
a super-logic
actorsmaybe ignorant,
and thepatterns
sketched
also makeup the
rulesofthesystem.
theorists
alsodiffer
in themethodological
and
Systems
assumptions
therulesofthesysprocedures
theyemploy;or,howdo we determine
tem?We can collapsethevariousmodesintotwo:formal/deductive
place
systems
andinformal/inductive
systems.
Formalsystems
methods
from
theobserver
on an extraterrestrial
pedestalto watchthesystem
irof actorsare considered
theoutside.The perceptions
and motives
and submerged
relevant
becausetheyareconsidered
tobe internalized
much
inthesystem's
rules.Hencethetheorists
treatsuchsocialsystems
of
in whichthevolition
as biologists
andphysicists
treattheirsystems
stanceleadsto the
thecomponents
is notan issue.Sucha theoretical
assumption
thatsystems
are "closed":theessential
rulesor specified
is usually
attributes
determine
theoutcome.
The outcome,
moreover,
specified
bydefinition,
andformalconstructs
areusedto showhowit
is attained.
Thatoutcome
is usuallydescribed
as equilibrium,
stability,
or ultra-stability.
The system's
"needs"are to attainthatstate;the
forthemeeting
ofthatneed.Hence,
are"requisites"
system's
operations
Theirteleology
is built
closedsystems
arealsocalledrequisite
systems.
with
Trendsfoundtobe in conflict
in: itistoadaptinordertosurvive.
The focusofthe
thisendarediscussed
undertheheadingofentropy.
is thesystem
analysis
itself.
are also knownas "open"or "evoluInformal/inductive
systems
Theirdesigners
do notclaimto be able to specify
tionary"
systems.3
withgeneticand culturaltheoriesof humanevolutioncouched
3Not to be confused
in systemic
terms.Such theoriesmay or may not be open,dependingon the future
by the theorist,
and dependingon what he means by adaptation.
stateprogrammed
of a certaingene pool to facilitatelater
If adaptationmerelymeansthe preservation
leave the outcomeopen. See I. MichaelLerner,
culturalevolution,such formulations
patternis
Evolutionand Society(San Franciscoi968), chap. 22. If the evolutionary
to achievea predefined
spiritualcondition,however,we have a case of
subordinated
adaptationmeaningsomethingveryspecific.See TheodosiusDobzhansky,Mankind
evolutionarytheories
Evolving (New Haven i962), chap. I2. Hence, ecosystemic
in
tend to be deterministic
stressingthe trendtowarda new human consciousness
in method.
intentand informal/inductive
For evidencethatmy typologyof systemstheoriesis far fromcommandingunidevisedby
and more demandingcharacterization
see the different
versalacceptance,
and
Relations,"Fred Greenstein
KennethN. Waltz in his "Theoriesof International

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

153

fromusingformalconstructs
andrefrain
essential
rulesandattributes,
studiesofthe
Instead,
empirical
thestateofthesystem.
forpredicting
so thatthedemonstration
of theactorsare featured
actualbehavior
fromthedata,insteadof downupwardtowardabstraction
proceeds
as a whole.The focusis on theparts,and the
wardfromthesystem
rather
thanviceversa.There
fromtheirinteraction,
wholeis projected
thus
is no fixedoutcome
or neededstateto be reached.Suchsystems
of thesystem
to attainconditions
leaveroomfortheactors'learning
in a deterministic
thiscanbe doneeither
beprespecified;
whichcannot
feelsthat
on whether
thetheorist
depending
fashion,
or a heuristic
rulesundercontrol.
he graspstherealand has thetransformation
areshownin thematrixbeofthesedimensions
The combinations
in theprojection
degreeofcertainty
low.Eachcellimpliesa different
themost,and
withCell i representing
ofneededor desiredfutures,
use
of
consystemic
We cannowseethatthe
Cell4 theleast,certainty.
since
regimes,
forthedesignof international
structs
posesproblems
hoverbetween
scientists
wouldinhabitCell i, biologists
mostphysical
in eitherCell 3 or Cell 4.
Cellsi and2, and socialscientists
THEORIST'S

INTENT

AND ASSUMPTIONS

ABOUT ATTRIBUTES VS. RELATIONSHIPS

THEORIST'5S
METHODS AND

ASSUMPTIONS

Intent:Deterministic Heuristic
Attributes
central
Assumption:
central
Relationships
3
Method:Deductive; I
System
is reality;
Closed
Method:Inductive;2

ABOUTREALITY

Actoris reality;

Open

It is essential
thatwe distinguish
tothequestion
ofpurposes.
I return
actorshavein mindwhentheyenthegoalsand objectives
between
in systemic
terms(as in the
thatcouldbe described
gagein activities
ascribed
characteristics
by
of regimes),
and theessential
construction
Nelson Polsby,eds., The Handbook of PoliticalScience,Vol. VII (forthcoming).
constructsas genuine systems
Waltz is unwillingto considerinformal/inductive
to remaincloselyidentifiedwith the generalsystemsapproach
theories,preferring
genus.The differwhichI considerto be merelyone speciesin a morecomprehensive
with
becausethetermsused by me are notsynonymous
encein approachis significant
thesame termsas employedby Waltz, notablythe words "open" and "closed."

154

WORLD POLITICS

to systems
in Cells I, 2, and 3. Both are "purposive"in that
theorists
theyare thoughtto conducetowardthe achievement
of some end or
outcome.4
Even the systems
in Cell 2 partakeof the built-inteleology
in thattheoutcomeis stillconsideredto be someformof equilibrium,
rather
thoughthespecification
takestheformof a rangeofpossibilities
thanone predetermined
end. I shall referto human goals and objectivesas "purposes,"and use the term"function"forthe systemically
definedend. In that way, I underlinethe difficulty
of combining
naturaland socialsystems
intoa singleconstruct;
althoughtheweather
systemmaybe thoughtof as havingfunctions,
it can hardlybe said to
be endowed with purposes.
My emphasison the distinction
betweenfunctionsand purposesis
inspiredby an underlyingdoubtaboutthe finalityand utilityof the
knowledgeused in the construction
of regimes.Certaintyregarding
thewholeofwhichpiecesofdisciplinary
knowledgearetheconstituent
partswill furnishthe "scientific"
warrantforpostulatingas "known"
or "knowable"the functionsimplicitin the more deterministic
and
thus
be
used
deductivesystemsconstructs.
Scientificknowledgewill
as a legitimating
deviceforpolicy.If thefunctions
weretrulyknown
and generallyaccepted,a natural/social
systemcontinuumcould come
of shortto taketheplace of politicalbargainingbased on perceptions
and
run advantage,thus making obsoletethe incremental-heuristic
tentative
formulations
systemic
containedin Cell 4. If a new paradigm
of knowledgewere to emergesimplyon the basis of the persuasive
of itsadvocatesor thereligiouszeal of itsprophets,
a systemic
rhetoric
ideologyheavilyindebtedto naturalsciencemightbecomethe guide
4 For a thoroughgoing
critiqueof the epistemological
qualitiesof structural-functionalsystemstheory,see A. JamesGregor,"PoliticalScienceand the Uses of Functional Analysis,"AmericanPoliticalScience Review,LXII (June i968). For a disin the analysisof international
cussionof the ambiguity
of "functions"
phenomena,
see Haas, Beyondthe Nation-State
(Stanfordi964), chap. 3 and especiallypp. 62-68.
of imputingsystemic
The difficulty
to humanpurposes,while retaininga
properties
framework
forthe presentation
of the overallargument,
is avoidedby James
systems
N. Rosenauin The Adaptationof NationalSocieties:A Theoryof PoliticalSystem
Behaviorand Transformation
uses biological
(New York 1970). Rosenauthroughout
as analogies,not as determinants
and evolutionary
of humanbehavior,thus
arguments
withinthe boundsof heuristic/inductive
keepingthe presentation
systemstheorizing.
of thesameconcerns,
In ErvinLaszlo's treatment
however,thisepistemological
distincand socialsystems
tiontendsto getlost.WhileLaszlo treatsnaturalsystems
as different
the behaviorof social systemsas subordinate
he interprets
entities,
to the imputedreof the naturalsystems
withinwhichsociallifemustoperate.His prescripquirements
to assuresurvivaland adaptationfollowsfrom
tionforcognitiveadjustments
necessary
His argumenttherefore
straddlesseveralcellsin my matrix,
thisconceptualhierarchy.
aboutactualconductcannotbe made fromdeterministic
because-he insists-inferences
desirableassertionsabout conductcan. See his
but normatively
systemicassertions,
The SystemsView of the World(New York 1972) and The WorldSystem:Models,
Norms,Variations(New York I973).

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

155

were not
even if the constructs
forinternational
regimeconstruction
tests.
able to pass veryrigorousepistemological
Innate skepticism,
however,keeps me from taking too seriously
do not now agreeon the
eitherof thesepossibilities.
Naturalscientists
and meaningoftheparts.Therecharacter
ofthewholeor theidentity
fore,theydo notnow functionas a priesthood
eagerand able to spread
thewordthattheuniformity
of natureis a clearguideto international
politics.As longas thatis true,a serviceis beingperformed
by stressing
of new regimes,
thathumanpurposesremainin the saddleas definers
eventhoughthesepurposesare heavilyinfluenced
by whateverscientificknowledgeis offeredas being reasonablyfinal.Hence the constructscapturedin Cell 4 remainthe only ones now freeof unwarrantedmysticalimplications
withrespectto chartinga desirablecourse
in the designof a moreintegrated
world order.They alone are able
to capturethe combinationof initialpurposesand the latercognitive
of goals which may come about as new knowledgeconreordering
debate.
straintsare introducedinto the international
ANDHOLISM:THREE COGNITIVEMAPS COMPARED
II. INCREMENTALISM

Threeclaimsto systemic
wholeness,all developedundertheauspices
of theOrganizationforEconomicCooperationand Development,will
now be scrutinized.
Two are the productsof committees
of experts;5
to OECD.6 I shall comparethe
one is theworkof a formerconsultant
threein orderto discoverwhy a new international
regimeis being
advocated;how complextherealityto be regulatedis conceivedto be;
how scienceand technologyare conceivedto relateto international
to values.These
societyand politics;and whatrole is beingattributed
of thelargerquestion:What intellectual
are thecomponents
construct
includedin theseclaims?
is explicitlyor implicitly
5 Science,Growthand Society:A New Perspective,
Reportof the Secretary-General's
Ad Hoc Groupon New Conceptsof SciencePolicy;HarveyBrooks,Chairman[hereto as theBrooksReport](OECD, Paris 1971). Erich Jantsch,
afterreferred
ed., Perof theOECD WorkingSymposium
spectivesof Planning,Proceedings
on Long-Range
Forecastingand Planning,Bellagio,October 27-November2, i969 (OECD, Paris
of thegroup [hereafter
of thejointstatement
i969). Use is made primarily
referred
to
as theBellagioDeclaration],7-9.
in theBellagiomeetTherewas a certainamountof overlapamongtheparticipants
ing and the Brookspanel. Moreover,Jantschtestifiedbeforethe Brooks panel. It
membersof theClub of Romeparticipated
in both
shouldalso be notedthatprominent
events;althoughtheydid notspeakwithone voice,theimpactof the Club's approach
is morevisiblein the BellagioDeclarationthanin the BrooksReport.
6 Erich Jantsch,
TechnologicalPlanningand Social Futures(London 1972). Even
werenot partof the OECD approachin thesense
of Jantsch
thoughtheformulations
mostof the ideas involvedwere developedby
of havingorganizational
endorsement,
whileworkingforOECD.
Jantsch

156

WORLD

POLITICS

WHY HAVE AN INTERNATIONAL REGIME?

for
ofthe"trigger"
The threeproposals
agreein theiridentification
and theyalso agreeon the solution.
approach,
a new international
and
natureofscienceandtechnology,
is theJanus-headed
The trigger
"Socialinstitutions
is theneedto "planinternationally."
thesolution
complexity
as a resultof an ever-increasing
facegrowingdifficulties
and asfromthe development
and indirectly
whicharisesdirectly
withscienceand tech"Policiesconcerned
oftechnology."7
similation
muchmore
nologyin thenextdecadewillhaveto takeintoaccount,
actualand
and disbenefits,
thanin the past,the benefits
explicitly
of scienceor thedethatmayresultfromtheapplication
potential,
"The timeis past
And,moreambitiously:
of technology."'
ployment
as a fancy
have
been
when
...
regarded
long-range
planningmight
aimsor crudebusiness
policiessuch
to individual
meansto contribute
planningis becoming
ofprofit.'
Today,long-range
as 'maximization
an integral
partof thesearchfora new culturalbasis,new setsof
to a
intoplay,and new and flexible
responses
valuesto be brought
All threesharethefearthatthedemons
rapidlychangingworld."9
changewill makean already
unleashedby veryrapidtechnological
morecomplex-notonlybecauseof the
complexlifeyetintolerably
butalsobecauseofthe
withtechnology,
associated
obviousexternalities
on decisions
withdependence
resulting
associated
publicresentment
considerations.
Only a changed-a morehighly
fromtechnological
is thought
capableof savingus fromthesedemons.
planned-science
and by inAll threeagreethatbyplanningscienceand technology,
planningofpublicpolicyin gencludingsuchplansin an improved
canbe found.'
eral,a solution
planningof scienceand technology.
The solutionis international
a regime.
Thatrequires
Whatshouldsucha regimedo? Whatactions
or constrain?
Whatvisionsor modelsshouldinspire
shouldit foster
it
shouldit be,and
it?Whichvaluesshould serve?How technocratic
howparticipatory?
mustbe interIn thefirst
place,it is notobviouswhythesolution
to
confines
itself
that
the"probasserting
Report
The Brooks
national.
becauseenvironmental
doesnotrespect
pollution
lem"is international
of technological
inequalimplications
becausetheeconomic
frontiers,
and becausethe phenomenon
of the
traderelations,
ityexacerbate
makesnationalplanningandregulation
inmultinational
corporation
7 BellagioDeclaration,
7.

8 BrooksReport,
15.

9jantsch(fn.6), 3.

10BrooksReport,96; BellagioDeclaration,
8; Jantsch
(fn.6), chap.ii.

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

157

effective."
The BellagioDeclaration
makesmuchthesamepoints,'2
but expresses
thesesentiments
in a vocabulary
of interdependence
formulates
as a "totalsystems
to which
whichJantsch
perspective,"
I shallreturn
later:"If technology
is at therootsofprocesses
suchas
worldunification,
environmental
population
explosion,
deterioration,
and thewideningof various'gaps' (especially
theone betweenthe
richand thepoor),it is also capableof contributing
to attempts
to
if developed
copewiththesesetsofproblems
and appliedat a higher
thangenerally
degreeofrationalization
acceptedtoday.Aboveall, it
or evenglobal,policyforscimustbe guidedbya trulyinternational,
In short,the international
character
enceand technology."13
of the
solution
is dueto a perception
thattheproblem
involves
a largenumof theregime?
berofinterdependencies.
Whataboutthecharacter
doesnotcontainanysuggestions
fornew
The BellagioDeclaration
international
regimes
eventhoughituseslanguagesuggesting
thatany
forcomprehensive
mechanism
planningwouldbe highlydesirable.
is on studiesand reviewsto be
In theBrooksReport,
theemphasis
to be adoptedby
newpractices
conducted
bytheOECD and specific
Governments
are advisedto plan thedethemembergovernments.
and the economyas a
of science,technology,
velopment
education,
thefuture
demandforsociallydecoherent
package,and to consider
variable.R & D looking
sirabletechnologies
themajorindependent
Memberstatesare advisedto create
towardthisendis to be fostered.
to the head of government,
a top-level
mechanism,
responsible
for
Members
arealso urgedto gear
and planning.
technology
assessment
inlinewith
totheneedsofthedeveloping
theirscience
policies
nations,
reUN programs.'4As forOECD, the glimmersof an international

in the following
gimeare barelydiscernible
suggestions:
systematic
innovation
and the
studies
thelinksbetween
clarifying
technological
aretobe launched;theimpactofeducational
behavior
oftheeconomy
is to be scrutinized;
thetechpolicieson socialchangeand stability
assessment
are to be perfected;
niquesof technology
plansformore
basicresearchare to be drawnup, a la
collaborative
international
forall informaCERN; OECD is to becomethemainclearinghouse
and to developinternationrelating
to environmental
degradation,
OECD is given
tionalpollution
standards;
perhapsmostimportantly,
a setofinternational
socialindicators
in order
thetaskofdeveloping
to monitor
thewelfareof theircitizens.15
to enablegovernments
In
theregimewouldconsistof standardized
and
short,
data-gathering
11

Brooks Report,23-24.
14Brooks Report,
76-i07.

12
15

BellagioDeclaration,
7.
Ibid.

13

(fn.6), I77.
Jantsch

158

WORLD POLITICS

To theextent
thatsuchpractices
analysis.
areaccepted
as authoritative
theirneteffect
bymember
governments,
mightwell be to constrain
action,to suggestpolicies,and to preemptdomestic
and inter-state
conflict.
Buttheproposals
containno cognitive
no
masterparadigm,
unified
vision,
andno clearstatement
on thebalancebetween
expertise
andparticipation.
Jantsch's
proposals,
however,
do. The taskis nothing
lessthan"to
shapethefuture
of mankind";thespecific
sectors
of concernto the
BrooksCommittee-science,
technology,
education,
economicgrowth
-are redefined
by Jantsch
to includeall programs
"in such areas
wheretheneedforglobalpoliciesand strategies
imposesitself."1
His
is on bundlesof technology-food,
emphasis
population,
oceans,enthanon policies.Sinceeverything
information-rather
invironment,
teracts
witheverything
else,onlyglobalplanningof the ensemble
makessense.Buttheregime
heproposes
is lessa codexofrulesthanan
agendaforresearch
whichis heavilyweightedon the technocratic
side.It is to preparetheworldfortotalplanning.
Fundamental
research
research
per se, fundamental
applicableto
and specificresearchdesignedto pioneer
technological
innovation,
new technologies
in theimportant
areasof globalpolicywouldbe
and thelargecorporations
coordinated.
Governments
internationally
would participate,
withextensive
forinnovation
capabilities
at the
moreoperational
levelsbeingleftto privatefirms.
Overallguidance
throughsystems
analysisand normative
mustbe superforecasting
decentralized
innovation.
Jantsch
imposedon suchrelatively
therefore
foran International
provides
and foran
Systems
AnalysisInstitute
International
Research
The two,designed
to "invent
PlanningCenter.
thefuture,"
"to explore,
assessand
engagein normative
forecasting,
futures'
and consistent
evaluatealternative
setsof technolog'possible
icalelements,
andtomapoutalternative
On
pathsto achievethem.""7
thebasisof suchexercises,
specific
guidancewouldthenbe provided
forlower-level
to producethedesiredtechnologies.
organisms
SCIENCE AND SOCIETY: SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES

foran international
Our threesuggestions
regimeforscienceand
alsoshowverysubstantial
substantive
technology
agreement.
All conas nowpracticed,
andtechnology,
do notautomatically
curthatscience
ofmoreperfect
to theevolution
thattheytendto
contribute
societies,
tensions
and misunderstandings,
international
exacerbate
and that-at
resist
andtechnology
rational
leastthusfar-science
planning
bythose
16

Jantsch
(fn.6), I78.

17

Ibid.,i87.

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

159

thatscienceand techmostqualifiedto do it. Theyagree,further,

against
thepoorintheglobal
nology
tendtopittherichanddeveloped
by enabling
arena.Theyalso sharea faithin theabilityof science,
mantounderstand
tomakea contribution
to theevolusociety
better,
society.
In short,
thefaith
tionofa moremoraland a moreefficient
verymuchin
in scienceas a superior
guideto publicchoiceremains
theforefront
oftheirthinking.
forbetter
concern
modesofpublic
Despitea unanimously
expressed
in policymaking,a distinct
technocratic
thrust
is also
participation
in all threeproposals.
use
Theyinsiston theimproved
incorporated
of large-scale
quantitative
modelsto assistin makingpolicychoices
torescuemanandsociety
frombad planning.
The character
designed
of technological
R & D and the associated
expensesmake forthe
ofthedistinction
betweenthepublicand theprivatesector,
blurring
conthusleadingtheauthors
to suggest
thatR & D be increasingly
ofthiscomplexof
a collective
thedependence
sidered
good.Moreover,
as a crucial
on "knowledge"
ofknowledge
andthepossessors
activities
in additionto strengthening
the technocratic
aspectof
component,
as crucial
a specialconcern
foruniversities
theargument,
alsosuggests
andJantsch
tobetter
contributors
The BrooksReportimplies,
policy.18
thatinstitutions
forthecreation
and application
of
arguesforcefully,
and practical
knowledge
arebecoming,
and oughtto
newtheoretical
a kindof fifth
estateableto clarify
howoursocialand ecobecome,
nomicrelations
are becomingmorecomplex.The expenseand the
of the research
and forecasting
thatare advocatedhere
complexity
of theeffort.
of
All aremindful
alsocall fortheinternationalization
the socialdislocation
and malaisebroughtaboutby the past unall see
plannedand unpredicted
impactof scienceand technology;
and technological
as one of thepurposesof scientific
planningthe
ofsuchdislocations
better
methods
offorecasting
amelioration
through
is
A policyforscienceand technology
trade-offs.
and ofdetermining
to minimize
socialstrife;infusing
politicswithmorescienthought
to do thesame.
tificrigoris expected
a lineof thought
At one crucialpointjantschsuggests
withwideforan international
regime.He believesthat
rangingimplications
and technological
eventhoughscientific
planningis deeplyflawed
of"technique"
overpurpose
andshowsstrong
signsofthedominance
18 The BrooksReportputstheemphasis
on theprotection
of academicfreedomand
researchin unithe continuedsupportsocietyshouldgive to unguidedfundamental
research,but wishesto redefine
versities;Jantschalso favorscontinuedfundamental
so as to put theminto the role of activelydemonstrating
the missionof universities
how societyshouldbe reorganized.See his chaps. i5 and i6.

160

WORLD POLITICS

(alongthelinesoftheargument
developed
byEllul),thereinheres
in
ita rationality
whichis potentially
abletounifyworldthinking
along
functional
lines.Specialists
and institutions
who devotethemselves
to
regrouping
and rethinking
linksamongsocialpurposes
and innovativetechnologies
would,in overcoming
thedominance
of technique,
also imposetheirsuperior
rationality
on currently
rulingspecialists
and institutions.
The upshotoftheargument
is to relocateMitrany's
trendofthought
withinthenexusof scientific
problem-solving.
COGNITIVE

MAPS:

COMPLEXITY

AND VALUES

Whatsharedperceptions
ofreality
we haveencountered
so farnow
rapidlybeginto fade.It wouldbe idle and misleading
to countthe
ortopicsenumerated
number
ofsubjects
byeachapproach
in orderto
determine
thescopeofcognition.
It wouldbe equallyfutileto sketch
thearrows
ofcausation
between
thesubjects
in orderto mapthecomoftheperceived
plexity
linkagepatterns.
A moreimpressionistic
way
ofsummarizing
thedifferences
and similarities
mustsuffice.
in determining
The BrooksReportis interested
linkagesbetween
and economicperformance.
science,
technology,
education,
industry,
and saturation
aredependent
Economicgrowth,
stagnation,
variables;
aretheindependent
ofkeyconcern.
theothersubjects
variables
"How
muchandwhatkindofeachdetermines
howmuchandwhatkindof
thesethecore
theother?"is themainquestion.
We mightconsider
of thesecoresubjects,
On theperiphery
subjectsof theargument.19
we encounter
lessclearlyidentifiable
suchas social
however,
subjects,
demandsand "needs,"thepaceand kindofsocialchange,socialconthedegradation
oftheenvironment.
Theseperiphflictandharmony,
eralsubjectsare intendedto highlight
the valuessubserved
by the
in
withina
thedifficultydiscussing
coresubjects;
theyalso illustrate
and themoreephemeral.
theconcrete
singleconstruct
Finally,referwhich
andbehavioral
madetoinstitutional
enceis frequently
patterns,
19The codingof linkagestatements
was done as follows:All major statements
asin the BrooksReportand the Bellagio
sertinglinksbetweensubjectswere identified
Declaration.In the case of the BrooksReport,I used the summarychapterentitled
and Society,"pp. I5-25. Subjectswere
"Assumptions
ConcerningScience,Technology,
to the overallargumentby examiningthe
then sortedin termsof theircentrality
to the "core"or the
of thepredicates
used to link themtogether.
strength
Assignment
of the claimmade-i.e., on the degreeof cer"periphery"
dependedon the strength
taintyas to the natureof the linkageexpressedby the authors.It would have been
betweensocial values and social/
simplerif the authorshad explicitlydifferentiated
but sincetheydid not, a more indirectcodingschemehad to be
economicprocesses,
concernswere treatedinstrumentally
adopted.Institutional
by the authors-i.e.,simply
as a wayof obtaininga betterfitbetweencoresubjectsor betweencoreand peripheral
subjects.

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

161

arealsotreated
as subjects.
Theseincludesciencepolicy-making,
participatory
decision-making,
bureaucracy,
thebehavior
ofthepublicand
oftheeconomy,
private
sectors
publicopinion,
multinational
corporations,and international
organizations.
These patternsubjectsare
brought
intothediscussion
whenever
linkagesbetweencoresubjects
are criticized
as notproperly
servingthe peripheral
subjects.
What
matters
tous,therefore,
ofknowledge
is thedetermination
ofcertainty
to be imputed
to theauthors
in establishing
To do this
thelinkages.
we study
thestrength
ofthepredicates
beusedtoexpress
thelinkages
tweenthetypesofsubjects.
The strongest
predicate
would affirm
thatA is necessary
and/or
sufficient
to bringaboutB. Suchstatements
are actually
foundin the
to existamongthecore
BrooksReportonlywhenlinksare asserted
subjects
themselves.
Connections
between
thecoreand theperipheral
tendto taketheformof "A is known,or is verylikely,to
subjects
precedeB." Fromthiscautiousformulation,
thebulkof the"oughtclaims"taketheforms"A is better
thanB," or "B dependson A," or
"A is necessary
the
forB." Ought-claims
are confined
to specifying
to
whicharedesirable
forthepattern
in orderbetter
changes
subjects
servethecautiously
Causative
linkedcoreand peripheral
concerns.
and prescriptive
imputations
betweenand amongthesecomponents
lackrigor,
andthesolutions
thisuncertainty
reflect
overthecognition
ofcomplexity
studies.
bycalling,forthemostpart,forfurther
The BellagioDeclaration
foritsterseness
compensates
bythesweep
ofitsassertions.
It avoidstheenumeration
ofconcrete
ofsocial
sectors
thespecification
of socialprocesses,
activity,
and theexamination
of
institutions.
itasserts
Instead,
as "known"thatthecontemporary
social
crisisistheresult
ofa nonsystemic
in misunderview;thattheincrease
stoodcomplexity
will deepenthe crisisbecausepast planninghas
of
ignoredthe "wholesystem";
thatthe onlyacceptable
definition
is "systems
areindisputably
planning
design";andthatall thesethings
and irresistible
trends.
clearbecausetheyare basedon world-wide
Fromthiscognitive
basetheDeclaration
thenconcludes
thatplanning
is necessary
to saveus fromchaos.Moreover,
better
planningrequires
of values,new socialexperiments,
theidentification
maximumpartheaccelerated
use of betterquantitative
models,and the
ticipation,
ofinstitutions
at higherlevelsof action.
integration
to link
Jantsch's
cognitive
mapself-consciously
rejectsthetendency
in
a
as
connections.
important
subjects such way to assertcausative
His mapis a moreelaborately
andcarefully
constructed
version
ofthe
His unitsofanalysis
arebundlesoftechnologies
conBellagiogroup's.

162

WORLD POLITICS

sideredin terms
oftheirsocialfunctions,
notin thesenseofthesocial
use actually
madeoftechnology,
butrather
in thatoftheapplication
he wantsto see imposed.In short,thefunctional
constraints
of the
map are his personalpreferences
regarding
theproperuse of technology.The identification
and manipulation
of thefunctions
are aspectsofthemassivesystemic
overlay
whichdefines
theboundaries
of
hismap.20
We mustlooktothatsystemic
construct
and thevaluesexplicitlyand implicitly
interwoven
withit if we wishto exposethe
cognitive
structure.
It mustbe said,furthermore,
thattheclaimto certainty
implicit
in all thisis quiteunqualified.
Necessary
steps,institutionaland cognitive,
are derivedas absoluteimperatives
forsurvival
andsalvation;
everything
takestheformofa factualassertion:
current
practices,
preferred
futures,
systemic
visions,
institutional
reforms,
reorientations
of consciousness.
Jantsch
quoteswithapprovalRutherford'sdictum
that"itis thefirst
stepthatcounts."
The first
stepon the
roadtocertainty
is theacceptance
ofhismapas thenewdispensation.
The authors
agreethatplanning
whichis divorced
fromthevalues
andnormsofsociety
is an abomination.
Theyinform
us overandover
thattheonlyacceptable
formofplanning
is onewhichis forever
consciousofthepurpose
and
oftheplanandthekindofsociety-national
international-which
theplanis toproduce.
Buthowcan onebe sure
of whatthesenormsand valuesmightbe? Are we talkingabouta
nation'svalues,theworld's,or theauthors'?
Arethesevaluesknown
or shouldplanning
beforehand
so as to allowthe
be openandflexible
introduction
of newvaluesas theschemeunrolls?If society's
values
arenotpresumed
tobe fullyknownandweighted,
bent
a participatory
suchflexibility.
dictates
seem
to
share
the
authors
a
belief
Moreover,
is madeavailable,
that,as newknowledge
valuesarelikelyto change,
as will themethods
foundmostappropriate
forplanning.
This conclusionfurther
necessitates
openand flexible
planning.
Whosevaluesdominatethecognitive
maps?How can we know
whattheyare? The BellagioDeclaration
thatit is inspired
suggests
of society's
values.Theseare stipulated
byitsauthors'
understanding
tobe thedesiretoavoidalienation,
socialdislocation,
andthedegradationoftheenvironment.
valuescannot
All schemes
agreethatsociety's
be fullyknownandwillnotremainfixed,
be conandmusttherefore
in theplanningprocess.
rediscovered
theauthors
of
stantly
However,
infer-that
the BrooksReportimply-andI
theytakeforgranted
fora highstandard
of living,socialharmony,
an
society's
preference
20Jantsch(fn.6), 6, 3Y-36, I73.

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

163

inquiry!The same
andfreedom
forscientific
environment,
unspoiled
I stress,
howto international
society.
valuesareimpliedas applicable
is basedon
ofsociety's
valuesbytheauthors
ever,thattheimputation
effort
and thatno empirical
thanassertion,
moresubstantial
nothing
wantswhatfromwhom.There
whoin society
is madeto determine
is
of clashingvalues-in-action
thatthe interplay
is no appreciation
and thatthismaybe thehuman
thatvaluesare in dispute,
politics,
condition!"

on theotherhand,advanceshis valuesas centralto the

Jantsch,
flexiThe verypurposeof planningis socialself-renewal,
proposals.
because
necessary
Thesearenotonlyinstrumentally
openness.
bility,
but are positivevaluesin theirown right.
of gaps in knowledge,
are thelegaciesof thebad planstatus,and bureaucracy
Hierarchy,
ningofthepastwhichthenewvisionis designedto banish.Beyond
shouldbe adapted
Jantsch
arguesthattechnology
thesegeneralities,
should
and economics
and thatbothtechnology
to"humanpurposes"
conceived
politto"broadly
be redefined
in terms
oftheircontribution
throughsocial
Privacy,self-realization
ical and culturalchange."22
freedom
forartistic
expression
consumption,
higherpersonal
mobility,
arenottreated
byhimas valuesbutas "suborresearch-such
specifics
to theinternational
arena,however,
functions."
Withrespect
systemic
by thematerespect
he advocates
economic
equalityamongnations,
in which
pluralism
East,and a cultural
Westforthespiritual
rialistic
21 The BrooksReportcautionsagainstexcessesin participatory
democracyas inconsistentwith the makingof stableand informeddecisions,while lauding maximum
in planning.The Bellagio Declarationcontainssimilar
feasiblepopularparticipation
evidenceof ambivalenceon thisissue.
to recallthatwhat I have identifiedas the cognitivemap of the
It is important
crispas one mightwishbecausethemembers
BrooksReportis not as epistemologically
on somefundamental
of thepanel werefarfrombeingin completeagreement
proposiinterface.
Interviews
and correspondtionsrelatingto thenatureof thescience-society
ence withfourof the ten membersconvincedme thattheydisagreedon two rather
basic points.(i) The majorityfelt thatthe purposeof the Reportwas to improve
in orderto link more closelythe
the utilizationof sciencein public policy-making
international
planningof scienceand of scientific
thinkingto comprehensive
planning
and to relyon more systematic
foreconomicand social development,
astechnology
sessmentin doing so; a minority,
however,thoughtthatthisobjectiveshouldbe ata greaterinternational
consciousness
of ecologicalintertainedby deliberately
fostering
viewson thepower
coincideswithslightlydivergent
dependence.(2) This difference
of scientific
knowledgeto influence
politicalchoice.While almostall membersshared
from(and superiorto) politicalknowltheview thatscientific
knowledgeis different
themajorityfeltalso thatwhiletheremaybe comedgebecauseit is trans-ideological,
to problem-solving
of knowledge,theycontribute
prehensive
systems
onlyby indicating
ratherthandeterminative.
thelimitson effective
choice;suchknowledgeis facilitative
feltthatsuchknowledgeshoulddictatechoiceratherthansimplyaid in
The minority
themakingof politicaldecisions.
22 Jantsch
(fn.6), 6-7.

164

WORLD

POLITICS

thedominance
ofWestern
ideaswouldgivewayto notionsofman's
withnature.
harmony
in all this,whether
It is quiteunclear,
thesevaluespreexist
theunofthedynamic
folding
whichis advocated,
orwhethplanning
process
er theyareto be realizedas theprocessunfolds.
Jantsch's
determinationto avoid"linearcause-effect"
statements
also obscures
whenand
wherevaluesareto maketheirappearance.
Henceit is idleforus to
forwhat?"He is muchmoreinterested
askhim,"planning
in asking,
"whatvalueswill facilitate
planning?"And he pinshis hopesto an
tobetter
evolutionary
changein humanvalues-conducive
planningaboutenvironmental
as technology
todisbrings
Process
seems
changes.
nottheotherwayaround:"industry
coverhumanpurposes,
and the
university
havetobecomepolitical
institutions
inthebroadest
meaning,
in theplanningforsociety.
i.e.,activeparticipants
In particular,
scicanbe brought
enceandtechnology
to interact
in a truly
withsociety
normative
wayonlyifall threeinstitutions
inthetriangle:
governmentindustry-university
changeconsiderably
(orarereplaced
bynewinstitutions)"[sic].23Does noteventheprocess
havea normative
purpose?
considers
the psychocultural
PerhapsJantsch
evolution
of mankind
to be thatmeta-purpose:
"The real and undivided
responsibility
for
thecontinuity
ofmankind's
evolution
fallsbackon manhimself
and
on theamplification
of hiscapabilities
theinstitutions
through
of society.Therecan be no doubtit is in mankind's
powerto obtainthe
necessary
controlthroughthe implementation
of integrative
planPrometheus
wished
to
make
the
world
safe
for
ning.""
man;
simply
Jantsch
seemsto wantto makeit safeforplanning.
III. SYSTEMS: REALITY, AIDS TO THINKING, OR MYTHOLOGY?

arethepartsfromwhichwholes
Processes,
values,outcomes-these
arebuilt.Whentheyareincludedin a comprehensive
cognitive
map,
we callthemsystems.
The "system"
in Jantsch
consists
ofthetotality
oftheinteractions
between
theseentities:
nature,
technology,
man,and
Thesearearranged
so as to consist
of sixsubsystems:
society.
naturetechnology,
man-technology,
society-technology,
man-nature,
man-sohimis to identify
ciety,
nature-society.
Whatinterests
the"functions"
to assessthenormative
performed
byeachsubsystem,
implications
of
eachfunction
(in termsoftheroletechnology
plays),and to redefine
oreliminate
or substitute
functions
thatarefoundwanting.
Functions
the
man-nature
include
variousformsof experformed
by
subsystem
23

ibid.,25.

24ibid 29.

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

165

nature.Butthesoploiting,
dominating,
or aesthetically
appreciating
as education,
transciety-technology
subsystem
showssuchfunctions
and urban
control,
portation,
publichealth,automation,
population
as
in short,
development;
"functions"
includesuchdiversecategories
The funcsimpleactivities,
deliberate
policies,and socialobjectives.
includeall of thepollutiontionsof theman-technology
subsystem
of whichwe usuallycomproducing
and privacy-invading
activities
of alienation-inducing
plain;here"functions"
becometheequivalent
sideeffects.
all ofthesubsystems
Planningis theprocessofmanaging
in sucha waythattheman-nature
functions
conand society-nature
links-i.e.,
troland guidethetechnology-man
and technology-society
ofthecurrent
a reversal
planningis required"to
process.
Integrative
Gainingcontrol
gain controlovertheinterplay
of thefunctions."25
theneeds
impliesthatnormative
anticipations
be madeto determine
subofsuperordinate
subsystems
withrespect
totheto-be-subordinated
processes
already
systems.
Thiscallsfortheforecasting
oftechnological
and the
counter-processes
underway
andfortheplanningofdesirable
technologies
appropriate
forthem.Towardwhatend? Apartfrom
alienation
and assuring
humanfulfillment,
it is notclear
banishing
whattheend is,sincethefunctions
and the
thatanimatethesystem
of discritique
thephilosopher
makesofthemaresimplya grab-bag
by his personalpreferparateitems,distinguished
fromone another
ofnormative
is to showwhyonefuture
ences.The essence
forecasting
not
stateof affairs
is better
thananother
and howit can be attained,
simplytheprojection
how any desiredfuturecan be realized.But
without
thestipulation
valuesit is difficult
to tellthe
ofsomespecific
better
fromtheworse.
Andyet,theessenceofthisorientation
is itsexplicit
teleology.
Systems-iftheyarenotto lead"togrotesque
excesses
ofreductionist
and
behaviorist
thinking"26-must
havea purpose.For thatveryreason,
25 Ibid., 37. My summary
of the systemcoversmaterialin Jantsch's
chapter3. For
a morepopularizedversionof the same argument,
see AurelioPeccei,"How to Survive on the Planet Earth,"Successo (FebruaryI971). Peccei includesa numberof
practicalsuggestions
for immediatestepsto be taken at the international
level. In
Successo(DecemberI973) Peccei spellsout the argumentas to why an ecologically
holisticperspective
is requiredforthe solutionof concreteinternational
problemsinvolvingpopulation,
resources,
food,economicgrowth,and war. The researchprogram
of theClub of Rome withrespectto theseis describedin The New Threshold(London I973). Portionsof thisapproachwere endorsedwith a call for a comprehensive
reviewof international
planningproceduresat the Salzburgmeetingof the Club of
Rome (February4, I974), whichwas attendedby six heads of government
(Mexico,
Austria,
Sweden,Senegal,Canada,Netherlands)and fourministers
(Pakistan,Switzertwo
land,Ireland,Algeria). Amongthemembersof the Club of Rome in attendance,
had been membersof the Brookspanel.
26Jantsch
(fn.6), i74.

166

WORLD POLITICS

scienceis notand shouldnot be value-free.

It followsthatJantsch
wouldattempt
to incorporate
intopurposeful
his systems
construct
behavior
viaorganization
theory.27
However,
thepurpose
is nottosolve
problems;
thatis theshortcoming
as
of "stratified
systems
thinking,"
in theuseofsystems
analysis
forpolicy-making.
The purposeis managingthesystem
in itsentirety.
Jantsch's
"system,"
then,is botha description
ofgoodreality
formanipuand a normative
political
theory
andinstrument.
latingthatreality.
Integrative
planning
isbothpurpose
Whathappenswhen"stratified
is appliedtosolving
systems
thinking"
thebad
problems
is illustrated
bythechaoswhichis theotherreality,
fororderone.Peace,forinstance,
insteadofbeingthemaster
concept
ingtheentiresystem,
is construed
to meannation-centered
and selfish
behavior
at lowerstrata
in thesystem.
arenever
Economic"problems"
solved,
becausetheyareconstrued
tobe madeup ofeconomic
elements
and actorsonly.The UN FirstDevelopment
Decadefailedbecauseof
suchstratified
thinking.
Jantsch
findstheessenceofthecontemporary
crisisin thelackofsuperordinate
ofcognitive
purpose,
theinadequacy
andthemisdefinitions
seek
integration,
ofissuesbyactorswhomerely
to "solveproblems."
is the"multiechelon
Jantsch's
of organizational
remedy
acsystem"
tionthrough
multiechelon
coordination.
Multiechelon
systems
arecomposed
ofechelons
(orlevels)ofsubsystems,
someor all ofwhich-atall levels-may
be goal-setting
anddecision
unitsatthenexthigher
hierarchical
level.It is important
tounderstand
thatthefunction
ofthehigher-placed
unitsis notoneofrigidcontrol,
butofcoordination.
In a multiechelon
system,
nogoalisdefined
a priori,
orfrom
thetop,fortheoverall
system-it
results
from
theinteraction
ofsubsystemic
goals,totheextent
thattheycanbe coordinated,
andit
maybecome
modified
ifgoalsorcoordinability
change
inthe
anywhere
system.
Energies
andambitions
at all systems
levelsarebrought
into
is "alive"in manyor all ofitselements,
play,andthesystem
thereby
thehierarchical
justifying
structure."
Thisorganizational
ofthevisionimposedon reality,
counterpart
both
descriptively
andprescriptively,
permits
theredefinition
andrelocation
of otherwise
insolubleproblems
at higherlevelsof abstraction
and
For Jantsch
consciousness.
thesystem
is thetruth;grasping
thetruth
will makeus, if notfree,at leastintointegrative
plannerswiththe
Circularnormative
purposeto plan-thesystem.
if theydo
theories,
27 Jantsch
acceptsMesarovic'smathematical
theoryof organizationalbehaviorfor
thispurpose.See his chapterii. Mihajlo D. Mesarovic,D. Macko,and Y. Takahara,
Theoryof HierarchicalMultilevelSystems(New York and London i970).
28 Jantsch
(fn.6), I7I-72.

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

167

ofinternational
at
notseemtohelpmuchin theconstruction
regimes,
leastmakestirring
mythologies.
a pleasingmetaphor,
If systems
it wouldnot
languageweremerely
muchthatsomuchofa "definite
matter
fix"isbeingclaimed;since
very
is involved,
muchmorethanmetaphor
however,
themythology
beunlessthescientific
claimcanbe madea bitmore
comesmystification
In i968 AndreiSakharovarguedthatthescientific
definite.
societies
ofRussiaand America,
becauseoftheirbuilt-in
trendsand impulses
musttendtowardbothdetente
andinternal
democratiza(subsystems),
tionin Russia;in i973 he ruefully
admitted
thatdetentecan come
aboutwithout
democratization.
Do systems
havea lifeof theirown
irrespective
ofthevolition
Can Kissinger
oftheirhumaninmates?
and
ofactualorpotential
Brezhnev
Does
changethesystem
convergence?
it dependon theskillof theobserver
who definesand sketches
the
Does the system
evenexistoutsidethe imagination
of the
system?
?
observer
of automatic
adThe issuebecomesacutewhensystemic
properties
or adaptation
are beingclaimed.In Jantsch's
justment
case it seems
thatthe"real"system(the one Jantsch
prefers)existssideby side
intoexistence
withthestratified
conduct
system
brought
bythefoolish
andscientists
ofstatesmen
ofsystems
(orbytheimagination
analysts?),
and thatthegood will supplant
thebad by virtueof consciousness
In theBellagioDeclaration,
raising.
thingsaremurkier
still.The key
sentence
reads:"Theneedis toplansystems
as a whole,tounderstand
offactors
andtointervene
thetotality
involved
in thestructural
design
to achievemoreintegrated
All large,complexsystems
are
operation.
Butin thefaceofimmense
capableofsomedegreeofself-adaptation.
socialand economic
technological,
political,
stresses,
theywillhaveto
structures.
This
can
lead
to
new
develop
easily
gravesocialdisturbances
if theadaptation
is notdeliberately
planned,butmerelyallowedto
is held capableof self-adaptation,
happen."2"
The "system"
i.e., of
That supposedly
evolution
towarda new equilibrium.
happensas a
29Bellagio Declaration,8. The drafters
of the declaration,in additionto Jantsch
on whoseworkJantsch
futurists
includedfourdistinguished
himself,
oftenrelies:Jay
DennisGabor,Hasan Ozbekhan,and AurelioPeccei.Sincethegroupalso
W. Forrester,
includeda dozen others,it is apparentthatno comprehensive
consensuson the detailsof "thesystem"couldbe expected.In fact,manyof theseparatepaperspresented
of social,physical,and biological"reality"which
at the meetingdisplayconceptions
For an elaboratepresentation
do not fitJantsch's
with ample episconceptualization.
which is close to Jantsch's,
see H. Ozbekhan,"Toward A
temologicaljustification
GeneralTheoryof Planning,"ibid.,47-I58. For a biologicalemphasiswhich hedges
the questionof how determinative
adaptive-evolutionary
systemsare withouthuman
see Rene Dubos, "Future-Oriented
intervention,
Science,"ibid., I59-78, and Dubos,
Reason Awake (New York i970).

168

WORLD POLITICS

by variousincontriggered
strainsand stresses
resultof dialectical
Fine.Thenwhythe
innovation.
technological
trends,
including
gruent
It is not
will evolveanyway.
The new structures
needto intervene?
or theirlagging
of thesenew structures
theevolution
clearwhether
meantthe
thedrafters
Probably
will causegravesocialdisturbances.
thathastobe planned.In otherwords,
lag,becauseitis theadaptation
has
afterall. Evolution
is notcapableof self-adaptation
the"system"
Towardwhatend? As long as
to be helpedalongby theplanners.
to sociallife,thequestion
did notlinkbiologicalevolution
scientists
Butvalues
in Darwinian
settled
theory.
wasneverfinally
ofa teleology
is
becausetheevolution
in theBellagioDeclaration
assertthemselves
stateof affairs,
towarda "richer
clearlymeantto lead to somebetter
a sysby superimposing
indulgein mystification
life."The drafters
while
on
choice
beingundefinedviewof reality political
temically
theactorsor whether
constrains
thesystem
willingto opton whether
the actorsshapethe system.
andtheBellagio
ofinternational
is theJeremiah
If Jantsch
planning
groupa moremodestHosea,theBrooksReportappearsin theroleof
theReportsays,
"Scienceandtechnology,"
a pragmatic
KingSolomon.
andinternational
within
national
frame"form
partsofa singlesystem
other
with
within
those
frameworks."30
systems
works,interacting
retain
the"othersystems"
Unlikethemoreprophetic
visions,
systemic
in thisscheme;therefore,
the approachreautonomous
importance
Scienceand
and problem-solving-oriented.
problemmainsessentially
health,and
public
education,
interact
withand intersect
technology
though
them.Nor aretheboundaries,
industry;
theydo notsubsume
withcare,because:
to exist,outlined
stipulated
forthemanagement
of
science
andmeasurement
We lackan adequate
themdown
anda rationale
forbreaking
interacting
systems
complex
isolable
suchthatanalysis
ofthesub-systems
intosufficiently
sub-systems
to be usedin dealing
forthepolicies
thatarerelevant
yieldsresults
is to
method
ofscience
withthesystem
as a whole.... The essential
intodiscrete
andsoluble
andwe
problems,
breakdownglobalproblems
todothisintentative
realizing
thatanyparticuways,
beprepared
must
is onlya first
andwemayhavetostart
larbreakdown
approximation,
distance.3'
overagainandproceeding
someconsiderable
30BrooksReport,I7. But the"othersystems"
are sometimes
called"subsystems"
in the
Report.The differences
of opinionamongthemembers
of thepanelmayalso be responuse of thesystems
One membertoldme thathe was
siblefortheinconsistent
construct.
to systems
notmotivated
by anycommitment
and thathe consideredtheuse
thinking,
of systems
languagelittlemore than a rhetorical
flourish.
31 Ibid.,57.

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

169

with"bigproblem"
closeto equating"system"
Thiscomesperilously
actuallyfeaan assumption
with"partialsolution,"
and "sub-system"
approachto design.
turedin thesystems-analytic
if
to planningdoeshavea purpose.Subsystems,
Suchan approach
fashion.Economic
do not developin an orderly
leftto themselves,
nonis foundto be disruptive,
discontinuous,
growth,
in particular,
of
an
and
destructive
sociobiological
equiunderlying
linear, possibly
between
and nature(at whichtheReporthints
man,society,
librium
of
in somewhat
then,is thestimulation
elusiveterms).The purpose,
is miniin sucha waythatsocialconflict
growth
orderly
subsystemic
manand
oftheharmony
between
understanding
mized,an increasing
of
function
and thepureknowledge-generation
natureis stimulated,
of
As in thecaseof Jantsch,
thespecification
scienceis safeguarded.32
withthegroup'svalues,
forscienceis heavilyintertwined
functions
thattheBrooksReportis articulate
about
withthemajordifference
is desirable
in itsownrightand,
Scientific
research
itsvalueaspirations.
moregood thanill to society.
Science
on balance,has contributed
in
shouldprovidemoreguidancein thechoiceof new technologies
under
associated
withgrowth
currently
ordertobringtheexternalities
But
equilibrium.
and restorethe social-biological-economic
control,
plan,all thishas to be doneon a much
sincetherecanbe no master
basisthanfavored
under
morepiecemeal
bytheothertwoproposals
of scienceshouldtherefore
not be the
review.The majorfunction
ofthought
butthefacilitation
ofthewholesystem
ofpolitintegration
cannotbe definitely
andtherefixed,
icalchoice.The valuesofsociety
thenormalprocessof democratic
foreshouldbe workedoutthrough
It is thefunction
interests.
of scienceto improve
between
bargaining
between
alternatives
which
bydemonstrating
themethodofchoosing
of
action
are
more
feasible
than
by suggesting
courses
others,
future
and by theearlyascan be solvedtechnologically,
whichproblems
associated
withtechnological
of second-order
consequences
sessment
can
be
that
clarified
The
by conducting
goals
groupargues
change.
cost-benefit
welfare
analyses
prior
extensive
technology-economy-social
Thisrequires
ofnewtechniques.
introduction
better
totheunregulated
of a setof socialindicators.33
In
use of socialscienceand especially
a
science
function,
thissensealonedoes
acquire guidance-and-control
be considered
and onlyin thismodestwaycan improved
rationality
reason.
of presently
thereformer
fragmented
Ibid.,I 8-20, 30-36.
33Ibid.,38-39,56-57,62-65.

32

WORLD POLITICS

170
IV.

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

theory
in international
Ourprevious
discussion
oftheuseofsystems
associated
with
relations
has shownsomeof theperilsof obfuscation
Whenever
normative
assertions
are
thisprevalent
modeof thought.
a mythology
fora
associated
withthisapproach,
therisksofmistaking
scientifically-validated
claim to truthare greatlyenhanced.In the
becausethesystems
conpresent
context
thisdangeris compounded
in thenaturalsciences,
especially
in
struct
enjoysso muchlegitimacy
betweenreal and hypothetical
biologyand ecology.The difference
demonstrated
interaction
andthosewhicharemerepatterns
variables,
forheuristic
andtolerances
thresholds,
boundaries,
lyposited
purposes,
or observation
as opposedto analytically
basedon experimentation
thenaturalscientist
phrasedquestions-alltheseneednotpreoccupy
It is understandable,
ifnotcondonable,
as theydo thesocialscientist.
andengineers
turntointernational
thatwhenbiologists
planning,
they
are
into
their
discourse
the
with
whichthey at
concepts
carryover
or analogy-however
ease.For others,
mistaking
metaphor
however,
demonstrated
truthwithpracticalconsequences
resuggestive-for
mainsa graverisk.Social systems,
eventhe "socialsystemof sciin thesamewayas theecologyof alence,"are notnaturalsystems
or theglobaltemperature
balance.
pinegrazinglands,inshore
waters,
In the"real"worldtheyaretheresultofthewillofman-and therewill whenhe changeshis mind.In the
foresubjectto a different
heuristic
worldtheyoughttobe simply
devicesto aid our
"analytical"
Hencetheyare neverdeterminative.
To pretend
thatthey
thinking.
are is to play sorcerer's
by introducing
self-fulfilling
apprentice
prophecies.
seemlessbothered
Naturalscientists
becausethey
bythisdistinction
to "black-box"
theunits(molecules,
feeltheycanafford
cells,insects)
difference
as faras
so longas their"inside"can makeno appreciable
And sincehypothetical
are concerned.
the interactions
variablesare
or confirmed,
thedistinction
to be falsified
between
concrete
expected
is notan important
onein naturalscience.
andhypothetical
It
systems
whennaturalscienceis appliedto
becomesveryimportant,
however,
whena scientific
and especially
socialrelations
enriched
rationality
by
to be linkedto international
socialscienceis supposed
planning.
The
of systems;
in Jantsch's
treatment
is acutelyillustrated
it is
difficulty
aboutbiological/ecological
when systemic
also manifest
theorizing
of evolution
intothemanipulation
forsocial
is translated
phenomena
ofthenaturalsystem
function
or chiefattribute
The concrete
systems.

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

171

as if it
to thesocialsystem
is thentransferred
(usuallyequilibrium)
werea "fact"to be confirmed
byproperpolicy,whenit reallyis no
The BrooksReport
or a personalpreference.
morethana metaphor
never
becausethedrafters
confusion
managesto escapethissemantic
construct
usageofthesystems
toa straightforward
commit
themselves
of scienceand
the"system
at all,thoughtheycomecloseto treating
as a setof concrete
whichhaveproduceddevariables
technology"
outcomes
in thepastbutwillno longerdo so in thefuture.
terminate
thequalityofthetwomajorproThissaid,I can now summarize
betweennatural
thereseemsto be no difference
posals.For Jantsch,
as if theywerethesame.A
and socialsystems;
he treatsall systems
of both
and theattributes
hisenterprise,
dominates
singleperspective
are eitherknownor can be known.The
naturaland socialsystems
at a
thetwoperspectives
useandplaceofsciencecanintegrate
Droper
are
His intentis to showthatsystems
higherlevelof consciousness.
should
madeup of concrete
He showshow thesevariables
variables.
andwhythey
ofas constituting
a whole(thegoodsystem),
bethought
is
The intent
areactually
(thebad system).
thought
ofas fragmented
ofreality
a description
is simultaneously
to assert
thatthegoodsystem
thebad intothegood.
capableofturning
construct
andan intellectual
in the
Bothapparently
andthegoodis immanent
areequallyconcrete,
of linear-conignorance
bad. (One mustbe steepedin theinvincible
The intentis
thisformulation.)
notto appreciate
secutive
thinking
constitute
bytheobserver
alsodeterministic
inthattherulesdiscovered
maynotbe aware
themselves
a strong
theactors
eventhough
dynamic,
whichwillcome
super-logic
ofthis.Pastbehavior
a historic
constitutes
leadingto salvato a bad end;immanent
another
super-logic
behavior
Jantsch's
is formaland deductive.
tion.As to themethodof analysis,
in termsof
His focusis on thewhole,and thepartsare interpreted
withthewhole.If thecomponents
theircongruence
(or lackthereof)
do notactas thelogicof thewholedictates,
theytendto be classed
of themethodthusleadsto
as eitherfoolsor knaves.The ensemble
It is designed
tomove
orclosedsystem.
whatwe havecalleda requisite
thatendis a littlefuzzyin thisintowarda specified
end,although
whichhaveto
theneedsor requisites
stance.The end thendictates
forwhichJantsch
formulates
be metin orderto attainfulfillment,
"functions."
Theirfinecalibration
thenmakespossibletheattainment
oftheend.
In theBrooksReport,
we cannottellfromthetextwhether
natural
In any event,the authors
and socialsystems
are similarconstructs.
in talkingabouttheuse of sciencefor
considerable
modesty
express

172

WORLD POLITICS

ofthesystems
beingtalkedaboutis
The concreteness
theirintegration.
aboutthelinksbeparticularly
in doubtas well.Certainstatements,
suggesta coninnovation
and industrial
tweenscience,technology,
betweenwhatis said
are attempted
creteintent;butwhensyntheses
on theone hand and theeconomyand socialarabouttechnology
on theother,thelanguagebecomes"analytical'in that
rangements
is beingmade.
the"real"worldfaithfully
no clearclaimto picturing
thandeterministic.
In short,
is moreheuristic
oftheauthors
theintent
butalwaysunder
patterns,
willfollowcertain
Theyarguethatconduct
and withouta claimto preciseforeknowlceteris
paribusconditions
a historic
superdiscussedare considered
edge.While the patterns
is moreof a
theensemble
logicofwhichtheactorsmaybe unaware,
As tomeththana prediction.
futures
checklist
as topossible
reasonable
thantheattention
paidtothewholeis lessimpressive
od,thelipservice
Esare notclearlydefined.
lavishedon theparts.Centralattributes
between
Transformations
sentialrulesof behaviorare not specified.
The demonstration
systemstatesare evokedratherthandescribed.
proceedsupwardfromthe sectorsor partsto a dimlyilluminated
The method
whole.It focuses
on theactorsrather
thanon thesystem.
whichgoes with
systems-theorizing
is thatof openor evolutionary
and inductive
Thereis a purposeof sortsinformal
investigation.
it is so fuzzyas not
harmony-but
well-being,
ofthesystem,
survival
of theothervariables
to providea focusforassessing
theinteraction
as to
in a "purposive"
thesystem
is so open-ended
In short,
manner.
purposecarevolutionary
itsannounced
leaveus to wonderwhether
punch.
riesanykindofteleological
Heuregimes.
ofinternational
to thematter
Thisbringsus,finally,
clearinternato suggest
areunlikely
systems-formulations
ristic/open
more
tionaloptions
andinstitutions.
Theyusuallycallformorestudies,
of
suspected
mapping
measures
of
satisfactory
interactions,
more
precise
to specific
linkages.Whiletheymayopt formanypartialsolutions
because
formulas
theyalso shyawayfromcomprehensive
problems,
towardwhattheywishto evolve.It
theycannottellus withclarity
thatthesocialvalues
maybe true,as in thecaseoftheBrooksReport,
Butthat,given
toprevailarean accurate
reflection
ofreality.
assumed
and changeability
is notthe
thepermeability
of politicalconviction,
sameas a holistic
stance.Deterministic/requisite
systems,
on theother
institutions
neededfor
withcaretheparticular
tospecify
hand,attempt
Systems
case,theInternational
as,in Jantsch's
thegoodprevail,
making
Institute.
Butin keepingthefinalpurposewellwithinsight,
Analysis

SYSTEMS AND INTERNATIONAL REGIMES

173

outhowactorswouldhaveto behave
is spenton working
littleeffort
in ordertomakethegood
towardoneanother
(or behavedifferently)
nowbecomes
designer
ofthesystem's
The valuecommitment
prevail.
purposeto thevalueshe wishesto
He willtailorthesystem's
central.
He willthensaythathisvaluesshouldbecomethevalues
maximize.
ofall.Buthecannottellushowthisistocomeabout.Andifhisvalues
of society,
segments
happennotto coincidewiththoseof important
nightmare.
visionmaybecomea totalitarian
theprophetic
regimeis muchweakerfortheopenThe caseforan international
In theBrooksReport(theroleof themultinational
theorist.
systems
reasonwhythestudies
apart),thereis no overwhelming
corporation
mustbe an international
and thedesignof socialindicators
responsiinfluence
eventually
it
should
enough,
If theworkis persuasive
bility.
policiesevenif done
and conducetowardharmonized
governments
by
If theworldis definedin holisticterms,
or privately.
nationally
regimebecomesconsiderably
contrast,
the case foran international
to this:theBrooksReport
in stanceamounts
The difference
stronger.
positionwhichbelievesin the
reformist
the incremental
represents
scitinkering;
slightinstitutional
of planningthrough
improvement
policyto
related
humanely
but
systematically
more
be
should
ence
and society
oncemoremakingsciencesafeforsociety
making-thus
standforthe"total
and theBellagioDeclaration
forscience;Jantsch
whichalso aimsat makingsciencesafeforsociety
design"approach,
to science.
hospitable
aboutmakingsociety
butis lessconcerned
funcwhichclaimcomprehensive
"Totaldesigners"
optforregimes
to
oftheworld.The tasksassigned
the"totalwelfare"
tionsinvolving
Moreover,
lackspecificity.
but,consequently,
theregimearesweeping
whencomparedto whatgovernments
theyare highlycontroversial
Nor aretheynecesas necessary.
andinterest
groupsseemtorecognize
inof the specialists
consensus
withthescientific
sarilyin harmony
are
personal
valuesthat
reflect
volved-inpartbecausethefunctions
theglobalsociety
throughout
diffused
rather
thanbeingdemonstrably
on theotherhand,
"client").Incrementalists,
(whichis thedesigner's
to whattheysensethepublicmood
theirregimes
insiston tailoring
in scopebutmore
anditsvaluestobe.Hencethetasksaremoremodest
in detail.Theycan claimto reston a degreeof socialconspecific
among
sensusand, at least,on a minimumcommondenominator
modest
no doubt,is relatively
The BrooksReport,
scientific
specialists.
butit offers
and feasibleinternational
a reasonable
in itssuggestions;
To
of the actorswhomit addresses.
regime,giventhe limitations

174

WORLD POLITICS

ofthe"totaldesigners"
an actoffaithin
accepttheproposals
requires
theprophetic
sincetheintellectual
vision,
gapsoftheproposals
foreclose
on thebasisof moreconsensual
acceptance
knowledge.
And so their
is leftwithevenmoreholesthanthemoremodest
whole,perhaps,
incrementalist
suggestions.