Panarchy is a conceptual model that describes the ways in which complex systems of people and nature are dynamically organized and structured across scales of space and time. It provides a lens through which to  read and interpret events characterized by unpredictability and dynamic interconnectivity.

The theory was developed by Lance Gunderson and C.S. Holling in order to understand how systems function and interact across scales (Resilience Alliance 2018).

This framework is to be explored in a track at the R&D Management Conference 2024, where Antonio La Sala, Assistant Professor of Management at Sapienza – University of Rome (Italy) is co-chairing track P.46 “Panarchic pulse: tuning into digital platforms’ resilient rhythms” along with Dr. Giuliano Maielli, Dr. Francesca Iandolo, and Dr. Pietro Vito.

We asked Antonio about his interest in panarchy.

What do you think are the most disruptive influences impacting developments in your track?

The concept of panarchy derives from the Greek god Pan, which is the Greek for ‘all’, as in all-encompassing, and survives today in words such as ‘panacea’ and ‘pandemic’.

As suggested by its etymology, panarchy provides a meta-framework to investigate both socio-technical and socio-ecological equilibria, above all in a fuzzy and still unstable scenario.

In this context disruptive influences may have an impact in multiple ways:

1. Digital platform design and governance: Panarchy underscores the importance of adaptable, multi-layered governance structures in digital platforms. This is crucial for addressing challenges posed by rapid technological advancements, data privacy concerns, and the need for equitable access to digital resources. It encourages a design philosophy that embraces flexibility, resilience, and responsiveness to changes in user behavior and regulatory environments.
2. Capitalism evolution and socioeconomic balance: Through the panarchic lens, capitalism is a constantly evolving system with cycles of growth, collapse, and reorganization. This approach is pertinent for understanding market fluctuations, disruptive innovations, and even shifts in consumer behavior. It also provides insights into how socioeconomic systems can adapt to the variability of external pressures such as technological change and global crises.
3. Sustainable and ethical AI integration: This concept places a strong emphasis on the sustainable and ethical integration of AI into society. Gen-AI generates a multilayered impact which needs to be constantly balanced with societal values, environmental limits, economic interests ensuring that AI advances do not come at the cost of social equity, ecological health.
4. Innovation, AI and transformative impact on socioeconomic structures: As AI technological revolution permeates healthcare, education, social governance and businesses, it also implies changes that are prominently cultural, reshaping economic equilibria and influencing norms and social behaviors at multiple scale and time horizons. This transformation needs to be guided by principles of adaptability and resilience.

Can you describe some recent findings in this area that are of interest to you personally?

Probably the biggest finding relates to the panarchy of platforms ecosystems and refers to possibility of expanding insights gathered from the microfoundations’ perspective.

Platforms ecosystems are both socioecological and sociotechnical microfoundations, since they actively influence wider institutional and market equilibria rather than merely reflecting them.

At the same time, they also shape individual behaviors and interactions, influencing social norms and communication patterns, thereby either fostering adaptability and transformation or promoting rigidity. This can lead to increased innovation-driven resilience or create vulnerabilities due to monopolization and destabilization of institutions.

Panarchy also provides a lens to examine these dynamics over multiple temporal scales. For instance, while digital platforms may initially boost market efficiency, they could ultimately lead to market stagnation, adversely impacting social wealth and institutional order.

This change occurs more rapidly at the operational level, and more slowly at the institutional level, where authority is embedded in formal laws, legislation, and bureaucratic mandates or in informal (still tacit) expectations.

The degree of connectedness across levels and scales determines whether adjustments at one scale contribute to resistance, adaptation, or transformation into a new resilience regime characterized by new functions, structures, and goals in space and in time.