Complexity theory: a new framework for development is in the offing

Rihani, Samir

doi:10.1191/1464993405ps101pr

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 6 publications

(2 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, the concept of development now becomes an open-ended evolving process, driven by a large number of local interactions and uncontrolled by external forces 22 . The "self-organized," patterns produced here are not finite, orderly or predictable (Rihani, 2005,55) 23 26 .…”

Section: The Complexity Science Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 95%

CSO-State Partnerships and Social Finance: Smart Social Capital and Shared Incentives towards Public-Private Partnership Efficiency Using Social Impact Bonds

Kim¹,

Kang²

2012

AISR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to answer two research questions: First, what are the sources of weaknesses found in current CSO-government relationships? Second, how could these weaknesses be remedied to bring better efficiency in social development assistance programs? Applying the Complexity Science framework and Brinkerhoff’s related theoretical model to the field of social finance for the first time to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this article argues that the implementation of social finance, generally, and social impact bonds (SIBs), specifically, can combine to create “smart social capital”—a new model in which trust is furthered and arguably maximized between relevant public and/or private sector networks in the form of stakeholders, through the efficient combination of shared interests in the form of financial as well as societal beneficial gains by related stakeholders and the community at large.

show abstract

Section: The Complexity Science Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 95%

CSO-State Partnerships and Social Finance: Smart Social Capital and Shared Incentives towards Public-Private Partnership Efficiency Using Social Impact Bonds

Kim¹,

Kang²

2012

AISR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a result of this lack of knowledge about appropriate innovation search processes, humanitarian organizations are often “still trapped in a paradigm of predictable, linear causality” and top‐down problem‐solving structures (Ramalingam et al, , p. vii), which means that “local and regional actors are of secondary importance” (Rihani, , p. 56). To illustrate, in 2015, support for local and national NGOs accounted for only .4% of the overall international humanitarian assistance (Lattimer and Swithern, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking for a Needle in a Haystack: How to Search for Bottom‐Up Social Innovations that Solve Complex Humanitarian Problems

Kruse

Goeldner

Eling³

et al. 2019

J of Product Innov Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The worldwide increase in societal challenges is putting pressure on humanitarian organizations to develop sophisticated approaches to leverage social innovations in the humanitarian sector. Since humanitarian problems are complex problems, with the relevant knowledge being hidden, organizational search theory advocates the application of bottom-up and theory-guided search processes to identify the social innovations that solve these. Unfortunately, there has been no theoretical attention to understanding which approaches apply in this context. Further, established theory-guided bottom-up search processes, such as the lead user method, are unsuitable to the humanitarian sector, and we lack practice examples of adequate search processes. To start addressing this gap in theory and practice, procedural action research was done with the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies to develop a theory-guided bottom-up innovation search process for the real-life humanitarian problem of recurring floods in Indonesia. It revealed that an innovation search process for this context must differ significantly concerning its objectives and the steps to be taken from the lead user method, which was used as a starting point. Further, a comparison of the technical quality and the social impacts of the identified social innovations with social innovations identified through a non-theory-guided bottom-up search process (i.e., an innovation contest) suggests the superiority of this theory-guided search process. With this conclusion and the insights derived throughout the development of the search process, this study makes important contributions to theory development in the social and open innovation literatures and delivers important recommendations for social innovation practice in the humanitarian sector.

show abstract

“…This approach in focusing on the measurable and observable facts has advantages in providing transparency and explicitness in healthcare (White and Willis, ); however, it may be simplifying the issues in ways that are counterproductive and fail to take account of, for example, the political context seen in the emergent local contextual and often competing, intentions (Mowles, ) of the various stakeholders. Alternative perspectives are now being considered, of which complexity (Clarke and Oswald, ; Woodhill, ) is an increasingly popular lens through which to view these issues (Rihani, ; Mowles et al ., ; Ramalingam et al ., ; Sturmberg and MartinC, ). Such perspectives allow for more uncertain and ambivalent discourse about how things are experienced.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thinking through health capacity development for Fragile States

Mark

Jones

2012

Health Planning & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this paper is to consider capacity development for healthcare in Fragile States and its roles, for example, in securing civil and political stability, as well as improved health, within the various contexts prevailing in fragile settings across the world. As a precursor to this, however, it is important to understand how, in rapidly changing environments, the role and contribution of different donors will have an impact in different ways. This paper sets out to interpret these issues, and what becomes apparent is the need to develop an understanding of the value base of donors, which we demonstrate through the development of a value-based framework. This highlights the separate motivations and choices made by donors, but what is apparent is that all remain within the positivist perspective perhaps for reasons of accountability and transparency. However, the emergence of new interpretations drawing on systems thinking, and followed by complexity theory more recently, in understanding contexts, suggests that the favouring of any one of these perspective can be counterproductive, without a consideration of the contexts in which they occur. In seeking an explanation of these environmental contexts, which also address the perspectives in use, we suggest the use of wider multi-ontology sense-making framework such as Cynefin. Through this approach, analytical insights can be given into the interpretation, decision and intervention processes available in these different and often changing environments, thus enabling greater coherence between donor values and recipient contexts.

show abstract

Complexity theory: a new framework for development is in the offing

Cited by 13 publications

References 6 publications

CSO-State Partnerships and Social Finance: Smart Social Capital and Shared Incentives towards Public-Private Partnership Efficiency Using Social Impact Bonds

CSO-State Partnerships and Social Finance: Smart Social Capital and Shared Incentives towards Public-Private Partnership Efficiency Using Social Impact Bonds

Looking for a Needle in a Haystack: How to Search for Bottom‐Up Social Innovations that Solve Complex Humanitarian Problems

Thinking through health capacity development for Fragile States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About