Andres Bernal
In this week's precis Porter brings up climate change and environmental degradation as a point of inquiry when thinking about the theory of path dependency. Path dependency serves as an alternative to functionalist approaches to social science in which institutions and social structures exist to serve social functions brought about by purposeful rational actors (Pierson, 264). Path dependency instead draws attention to history and examines how events and changes in a social landscape whether big or small, accidental or purposeful, may create positive feedback loops that reinforces a particular trajectory.
Pierson cites Arthur as giving increasing returns phenomenon, or a positive feedback loop, four features main features including: Large set up or fixed costs, Learning effects, coordination effects, and adaptive expectations. These basically reinforce that people will stick to a single option because of costs, learning outcomes and the emergence of standard operating procedures, benefits from group buy in, and resulting expectations of outcome. Moreover, Pierson describes political life and the production of public goods as more prone to positive feedback loops given their nature and reliance on collection action, institutional development, authority, and social interpretation (260).
In the area of managing the relationship of economic activity and the natural environment, Porter suggests path dependency as an explanation for the current difficulty in changing course on or limiting green house emissions, reliance on fossil fuels, and economic extraction. As Pierson notes, a clean and safe environment is a public good and therefore political in nature relying on political action and policy for its delivery. Nevertheless, according to a path dependency approach the convergence of technological advancements, a globalized capitalist economy, and the demands of compound growth to achieve progress in a series of particular directions since the industrial revolution has made it difficult to do anything about this.
Hirschman argues that a political theory of exit and voice may help understand the possible options social agents make take when facing economic and political dilemmas. In this scenario, while voice could represent the activism of environmentalists, exit could represent the possibility of consumers purchasing solar or refusing to participate in the fossil fuel or meat industry whatsoever thereby bringing an equilibrium to the system. However, the continued reproduction of a pollution and extractive based economy founded on endless growth continues to dominate world wide political governance.
However understanding the environment only as a public good in which only the state can produce the alternative to the market, in a way reproduces the social interpretive frame by which we think about the market-state-environment relationship. Perhaps to take advantage of openings in alternative pathways whether through accidental changes or innovations or large scale political demands, an understanding of the environment and other forms of non commodity based collective value and wealth can be reimagined as a Commons as understood by David Bollier. Bollier's understanding attempts to move beyond the market-state dichotomy and place a particular resource (common good or public good) in relationship to community values, normative principles, acceptable protocols, and social relations that are open to rearranging. Following Ostrom's idea of Polycentric governance structures, multiple scale approaches to organizing social life may be introduced that include, are in relationship with, but are not limited to the market and the state. In the case of climate change, urgency may require this kind of creativity to in fact propel and generate the kind of positive feedback loops that will grow in complexity but also operate under a qualitative distinct interpretive political lens to the social logic of that which currently threatens our survival.
Additional sources
http://bollier.org/commons-short-and-sweet
http://bnp.binghamton.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Ostrom-2010-Polycentric-Governance.pdf
In this week's precis Porter brings up climate change and environmental degradation as a point of inquiry when thinking about the theory of path dependency. Path dependency serves as an alternative to functionalist approaches to social science in which institutions and social structures exist to serve social functions brought about by purposeful rational actors (Pierson, 264). Path dependency instead draws attention to history and examines how events and changes in a social landscape whether big or small, accidental or purposeful, may create positive feedback loops that reinforces a particular trajectory.
Pierson cites Arthur as giving increasing returns phenomenon, or a positive feedback loop, four features main features including: Large set up or fixed costs, Learning effects, coordination effects, and adaptive expectations. These basically reinforce that people will stick to a single option because of costs, learning outcomes and the emergence of standard operating procedures, benefits from group buy in, and resulting expectations of outcome. Moreover, Pierson describes political life and the production of public goods as more prone to positive feedback loops given their nature and reliance on collection action, institutional development, authority, and social interpretation (260).
In the area of managing the relationship of economic activity and the natural environment, Porter suggests path dependency as an explanation for the current difficulty in changing course on or limiting green house emissions, reliance on fossil fuels, and economic extraction. As Pierson notes, a clean and safe environment is a public good and therefore political in nature relying on political action and policy for its delivery. Nevertheless, according to a path dependency approach the convergence of technological advancements, a globalized capitalist economy, and the demands of compound growth to achieve progress in a series of particular directions since the industrial revolution has made it difficult to do anything about this.
Hirschman argues that a political theory of exit and voice may help understand the possible options social agents make take when facing economic and political dilemmas. In this scenario, while voice could represent the activism of environmentalists, exit could represent the possibility of consumers purchasing solar or refusing to participate in the fossil fuel or meat industry whatsoever thereby bringing an equilibrium to the system. However, the continued reproduction of a pollution and extractive based economy founded on endless growth continues to dominate world wide political governance.
However understanding the environment only as a public good in which only the state can produce the alternative to the market, in a way reproduces the social interpretive frame by which we think about the market-state-environment relationship. Perhaps to take advantage of openings in alternative pathways whether through accidental changes or innovations or large scale political demands, an understanding of the environment and other forms of non commodity based collective value and wealth can be reimagined as a Commons as understood by David Bollier. Bollier's understanding attempts to move beyond the market-state dichotomy and place a particular resource (common good or public good) in relationship to community values, normative principles, acceptable protocols, and social relations that are open to rearranging. Following Ostrom's idea of Polycentric governance structures, multiple scale approaches to organizing social life may be introduced that include, are in relationship with, but are not limited to the market and the state. In the case of climate change, urgency may require this kind of creativity to in fact propel and generate the kind of positive feedback loops that will grow in complexity but also operate under a qualitative distinct interpretive political lens to the social logic of that which currently threatens our survival.
Additional sources
http://bollier.org/commons-short-and-sweet
http://bnp.binghamton.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Ostrom-2010-Polycentric-Governance.pdf