Panarchy

Panarchy is a conceptual term first coined by the Belgian political economist Paul Emile de Puydt in 1860, referring to a specific form of governance () that would encompass () all others . [P. E. de Puydt, [http://www.panarchy.org/depuydt/1860.eng.html Panarchy] , first published in French in the Revue Trimestrielle, Bruxelles, July 1860.] In the twentieth century the term was re-coined separately by scholars in international relations to describe the notion of global governance and then by systems theorists to describe non-hierarchal organizing theories.

Panarchy as freely choosing government

In his 1860 article “Panarchy” de Puydt, a firm supporter of laissez-faire economics, applied the concept to the individual's right to choose any form of government without being forced to move from their current locale. This is sometimes described as "extra-territorial" (or "exterritorial") since governments often would serve non-contiguous parcels of land. De Puydt wrote:

“The truth is that there is not enough of the right kind of freedom, the fundamental freedom to choose to be free or not to be free, according to one's preference....Thus I demand, for each and every member of human society, freedom of association according to inclination and of activity according to aptitude. In other words, the absolute right to choose the political surroundings in which to live, and to ask for nothing else.”

De Puydt described how such a system would be administered:

“In each community a new office is opened, a "Bureau of Political Membership". This office would send every responsible citizen a declaration form to fill in, just as for the income tax or dog registration: Question: What form of government would you desire? Quite freely you would answer, monarchy, or democracy, or any other... and once registered, unless you withdrew your declaration, respecting the legal forms and delays, you would thereby become either a royal subject or citizen of the republic. Thereafter you are in no way involved with anyone else's government—no more than a Prussian subject is with Belgian authorities.”

De Puydt’s definition of panarchy was expanded into a political philosophy of panarchism. It has been espoused by anarchist or libertarian-leaning individuals, including especially Max Nettlau [Max Nettlau, [http://www.panarchy.org/nettlau/1909.eng.html Panarchy, A Forgotten Idea of 1860] , 1909.] and John Zube. [Ehrlich, Howard J. 1996. Reinventing Anarchy, Again. AK Press. p. 131] [ John Zube, [http://www.panarchy.org/zube/gospel.1986.html The Gospel of Panarchy] , 1986.]

Le Grand E. Day and others have used the phrase “multigovernment” to describe a similar system. [Le Grand E. Day, [http://www.panarchy.org/day/multigovernment.1977.html The Theory of Multigovernment] ,1969-1977.] Another similar idea is "Functional Overlapping Competing Jurisdictions" (FOCJ) promoted by Swiss economists Bruno Frey and Reiner Eichenberger.

Panarchy in global governance

James P. Sewell and Mark B. Salter in their 1995 article "Panarchy and Other Norms for Global Governance” define panarchy as “an inclusive, universal system of governance in which all may participate meaningfully." They romanticize the term by mentioning the “playful Greek god Pan of sylvan and pastoral tranquillity, overseer of forests, shepherd of shepherds and their flocks. It thus connotes an archetypal steward of biospheric well-being." [ [http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Panarchy_Etymology Etymology of Panarchy on P2pFoundation.Net] quoting from James P. Sewell and Mark B. Salter, "Panarchy and Other Norms for Global Governance: Boutros-Ghali, Rosenau, and Beyond", Global Governance, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 373-382, 1995.]

Panarchy in systems theory

Systems theory is an interdisciplinary field of science which studies the nature and processes of complex systems the physical and social sciences, as well as in information technology. Lance Gunderson and C. S. Holling also use the term in their 2001 book "Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Systems of Humans and Nature". [L.H. Gunderson and Holling, C.S. "Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Systems of Humans and Nature." Island Press. 2001.] The publisher describes the book’s theory thusly:

Panarchy, a term devised to describe evolving hierarchical systems with multiple interrelated elements, offers an important new framework for understanding and resolving this dilemma. Panarchy is the structure in which systems, including those of nature (e.g., forests) and of humans (e.g., capitalism), as well as combined human-natural systems (e.g., institutions that govern natural resource use such as the Forest Service), are interlinked in continual adaptive cycles of growth, accumulation, restructuring, and renewal. [ [http://www.islandpress.com/books/detail.html?SKU=1-55963-857-5&cart=%5Bcart%5D Island Press Bookstore description of Gunderson and Holling's "Panarchy".] ]

Paul B. Hartzog writes on the [http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Category:Panarchy P2PFoundation.Net] Verify credibility|date=February 2008: “Panarchy is a transdisciplinary investigation into the political and cultural philosophy of ‘network culture.’ The primary fields of relevance for panarchy are world politics (international relations), political philosophy/theory, and information technology. Panarchy also draws on insights from information/communications theory, economics, sociology, networks, and complex systems. In a master’s essay entitled "Panarchy: Governance in the Network Age" Hartzog states that “the emerging complexity of our social and political structures, composed of many interacting agents, combined with the increasing importance of network forms of organization, enabled by technologies that increase connectivity, propels the world system towards a transformation that culminates in a global political environment that is made up of a diversity of spheres of governance, the whole of which is called panarchy. To clarify, global linkages between individuals and groups create transnational networks consisting of shared norms and goals.” [Paul B. Hartzog, [http://panarchy.com/Members/PaulBHartzog/Papers/Panarchy%20-%20Governance%20in%20the%20Network%20Age.pdf "Panarchy: Governance in the Network Age"] , Master's Essay, University of Utah ]

These systems theories do not necessarily contradict de Puydt’s emphasis on individuals choosing between competing governance system because these theories of panarchy emphasize more free-wheeling and equalitarian heterarchical as opposed to top-down hierarchical organizing principles.

Etymology

As noted above, Panarchy is a conceptual term first coined by the Belgian political economist Paul Emile de Puydt in 1860. The OED lists the noun as "chiefly poet." with the meaning "a universal realm", citing a 1848 attestation by Philip James Bailey, "the starry panarchy of space". The adjective "panarchic" "all-ruling" has earlier attestations. [Ben Jonson, "The Alchemist" II.v.15: " Ars sacra, Or chrysopoeia, or spagyrica, Or the pamphysic, or panarchic knowledge" [viz., alchemy ] ]

There are a number of relevant uses of the word "panarchy" in recent scholarship.

Mark Salter offers this definition:

"Panarchy means an inclusive, universal system of governance in which all may participate meaningfully" (Sewell and Salter, 1995, p.373).

Gunderson and Holling, in their book "Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Systems of Humans and Nature" also simultaneously coined the term, saying:

"The term [panarchy] was coined as an antithesis to the word hierarchy (literally, sacred rules). Our view is that panarchy is a framework of nature's rules, hinted at by the name of the Greek god of nature, Pan." p.21

and

" [We needed to] invent another term that captures the adaptive and evolutionary nature of adaptive cycles...." p.74

For Gunderson and Holling,

"The cross-scale, interdisciplinary, and dynamic nature of the theory has led us to coin the term panarchy for it. Its essential focus is to rationalize the interplay between change and persistence, between the predictable and unpredictable." p.5 [http://www.resalliance.org/593.php Panarchy Chapter 1]

David Ronfeldt and John Arquilla, in their work on "netwar," state that:

"The design is a heterarchy, but also what might be termed a 'panarchy.'" [Ronfeldt and Arquilla, [http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR880/ In Athena’s Camp: Preparing for Conflict in the Information Age] , p.280.]

References

ee also

*Anarchism
*Anarchy in international relations
*Decentralization
*Polycentric law
*"The Cathedral and the Bazaar"
*Heterarchy

External links

* [http://www.panarchy.org/ Panarchy.org] ndash Original usage
* [http://www.panarchy.com/ Panarchy.com] ndash Modern usage, Writings and Discussion
* [http://www.resalliance.org/593.php Gunderson and Holling's discussion of the word "panarchy" on the Resilience Alliance website]
* Nicholas M. Gotts, [http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss1/art24/main.html Resilience, Panarchy, and Analysis] , 2007. Compares panarchy to World-systems theory.
* [http://www.dartmouth.edu/~panarchy The Panarchy Mansion at Dartmouth College] ndash Panarchy, a Dartmouth College undergraduate student group founded on Panarchist theory
* [http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Category:Panarchy Panarchy] at [http://www.p2pfoundation.net http://www.p2pfoundation.net]