The socio-cultural dynamics of development: part 2 the cultural basis of political evolution

Yolles, Maurice

doi:10.1108/k-02-2019-0084

“…The distinction between a developmental agency and one that is purely instrumental is that the former is capable of learning while the latter is not, simply responding to its environment through a selected option in its existing repertoire of possible behaviours, whether appropriate or not [168]. All cultural agencies have their own active or passive cultures, with the latter characterising ASEAN.…”

Section: Asean and Dispute Settlementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnosing Complex Organisations with Diverse Cultures—Part 2: Application to ASEAN

Rautakivi,

Yolles

2024

Systems

Self Cite

1

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, the second part of a two-part series, we explore the cultural stability of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The analytical framework adopted, formulated on a background of social cybernetics, uses Mindset Agency Theory (MAT) within a metacybernetic framework. Our exploration involves a thorough investigation of signs pointing to cultural instability, identification of potential pathologies, and the provision of insights into the underlying dynamics within ASEAN. Expanding on the theoretical foundation established in the first part, we explore the notion that regional organisations (ROs) like ASEAN can be viewed as complex adaptive systems with agency. Heterogeneity of RO membership can be both beneficial and detrimental, especially when this delivers cultural diversity. If detrimental, pathologies can arise that affect both ROs’ institutional dynamics and their affiliated regional organisations, a significant interest of this paper. In response to certain cybernetic aspects introduced in part 1 of the research, MAT is shown to be a specialised framework imbued with systemic and reflexive elements. Through this, the analysis sheds light on how an agency’s mindset connects with its behaviour and performance. ROs exhibit coherence in their operations when they successfully achieve adaptive goals. ROs, as agencies defined through a population of state agents, have mutual relationships and are encouraged to pursue shared regional objectives, such as economic growth, social welfare, security, and democracy. However, in highly diverse cultural environments, this poses unique challenges to achieving and maintaining cultural stability. The analysis scrutinises ASEAN’s behaviour, relating it to manifestations of cultural instability, and deduces conditions that encompass an inability to undertake collective action, covert narcissism, and a lack of authority. Employing MAT as a diagnostic tool to comprehend ASEAN’s intricate nature, the paper concludes with practical recommendations aimed at enhancing ASEAN’s cultural health and sustainability. The ultimate vision is to foster a more integrated and proactive regional entity.

show abstract

“…The distinction between a developmental agency and one that is purely instrumental is that in the former it is capable of learning, while in the latter it is not, simply responding to its environment through a selected option in its existing repertoire of possible behaviours, whether appropriate or not [381]. All cultural agencies have their own active or passive culture, the former being the case for the EU, and the latter for ASEAN.…”

Section: The Lack Of Asean Pragmatics In Dispute Settlementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Culture, Mindset and Functionality in Regional Organisations – A Study on ASEAN and the European Union

Rautakivi¹,

Yolles²

2023

Preprint

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regional organisations (ROs) are important in that they can enable states in their regions to pros-per and develop for improvement. Interest here lies in the European Union (EU) and the Associa-tion of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN). Their political development involves complex process-es for collective actions involving ingroup member RO states. To explore development, we firstly examine the rise of both the EU and ASEAN. The literature gives some attention to the behaviour-alist political approach to explain developmental differences using social organisation theory, often in terms of the Gemeinschaft-Gesellschaft paradigm of Tönnies. However, here we adopt a social psychology approach that distinguishes between operative structure (which directly determines behaviour), and substructure (housing normative personality deemed to be responsible for behav-ioural imperatives). This enables a relationship to be made between the Tönnies paradigm and the Collectivism-Individualism paradigm of Triandis. The theoretical approach adopted involves a complex adaptive systems model deriving from metacybernetics, and this also delivers Mindset Agency Theory as a qualitative methodology. Consistent with the general view, it is shown that the EU is more or less a coherent rational organisation, while ASEAN is more idealistic delivering pragmatic paradox. In particular, ASEAN is frequently descried as an organisation with contra-dictions, and for this reason its pathologies are explored in some detail

show abstract

“…The distinction between a developmental agency and one that is purely instrumental is that in the former it is capable of learning, while in the latter it is not, simply responding to its environment through a selected option in its existing repertoire of possible behaviours, whether appropriate or not [375]. All cultural agencies have their own active or passive culture, the former being the case for the EU, and the latter for ASEAN.…”

Section: The Lack Of Asean Pragmatics In Dispute Settlementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Culture, Mindset and Functionality in Regional Organisations – A Study on ASEAN and the European Union.

Rautakivi¹,

Yolles²

2023

Preprint

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regional organisations (ROs) are important in that they can enable states in their regions to pros-per and develop for improvement. Interest here lies in the European Union (EU) and the Associa-tion of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN). Their political development involves complex process-es for collective actions involving ingroup member RO states. To explore development, we firstly examine the rise of both the EU and ASEAN. The literature gives some attention to the behaviour-alist political approach to explain developmental differences using social organisation theory, often in terms of the Gemeinschaft-Gesellschaft paradigm of Tönnies. However, here we adopt a social psychology approach that distinguishes between operative structure (which directly determines behaviour), and substructure (housing normative personality deemed to be responsible for behav-ioural imperatives). This enables a relationship to be made between the Tönnies paradigm and the Collectivism-Individualism paradigm of Triandis. The theoretical approach adopted involves a complex adaptive systems model deriving from metacybernetics, and this also delivers Mindset Agency Theory as a qualitative methodology. Consistent with the general view, it is shown that the EU is more or less a coherent rational organisation, while ASEAN is more idealistic delivering pragmatic paradox. In particular, ASEAN is frequently descried as an organisation with contra-dictions, and for this reason its pathologies are explored in some detail

show abstract

The socio-cultural dynamics of development: part 2 the cultural basis of political evolution

Cited by 5 publications

References 81 publications

Diagnosing Complex Organisations with Diverse Cultures—Part 2: Application to ASEAN

Diagnosing Complex Organisations with Diverse Cultures—Part 2: Application to ASEAN

Culture, Mindset and Functionality in Regional Organisations – A Study on ASEAN and the European Union

Culture, Mindset and Functionality in Regional Organisations – A Study on ASEAN and the European Union.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About