Researchers across disciplines apply complexity theory to issues ranging from economic development to earthquake prediction. The breadth of applications speaks to the promise of complexity theory, but there remain a number of challenges to be met, particularly those related to its ontological and epistemological dimensions. We identify a number of key issues by asking three questions. Does complexity theory operate at too general a level to enhance understanding? What are the ontological and epistemological implications of complexity? What are the challenges in modeling complexity? In answering these questions, we argue that, although complexity offers much to the study of place and space, research in these areas has a number of strengths that enhance complexity research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamicLAHubermanBA, 2000, “The nature of markets in the World Wide Web”Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce15–12
2.
AgarwalCGreenGLGroveJMEvansTSchweikC, 2002A Review and Assessment of Land-use Change Models: Dynamics of Space, Time, and Human ChoiceCenter for the Study of Institutions, Population, and Environmental Change, Indiana University–Bloomington, IN, and USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Research Station, Burlington, VT
3.
AnderiesJM, 2003, “The transition from local to global dynamics: A proposed framework for agent based approaches in social–ecological systems”, in Complexity and Ecosystem Management: The Theory and Practice of Multi-agent Approaches Ed. JanssenMA (Edward Elgar, Northampton, MA) chapter 2
4.
AndreoniJMillerJH, 1995, “Auctions with artificial adaptive agents”Games and Economic Behavior1039–64
5.
ArthurWB, 1994, “On the evolution of complexity”, in Complexity: Metaphors, Models, and Reality Eds CowanGAPinesDMeltzerD (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA) pp 61–72
6.
AxtellR, 2001, “Zipf distribution of U.S. firm sizes”Science2931818–1820
7.
BakP, 1996How Nature Works: The Science of Self-organized Criticality (Copernicus Books, New York)
8.
BankesS, 1993, “Exploratory modeling for policy analysis”Operations Research41435–449
9.
BarnesTJ, 2001, “Retheorizing economic geography: From the quantitative revolution to the ‘cultural turn‘”Annals of the Association of American Geographers91546–565
10.
BattyMLongleyPA, 1994Fractal Cities: A Geometry of Form and Function (Academic Press, London)
11.
BenensonI, 1998, “Multiagent simulations of residential dynamics in the city”Computers, Environment and Urban Systems22(1) 25–42
12.
BousquetFBakamIProtonHLe PageC, 1998, “Cormas: Common-pool resources and multi-agent systems”Lecture Notes in Computer Science1416826–838
13.
CastiJ, 1997Would-be Worlds: How Simulation is Changing the Frontiers of Science (John Wiley, New York)
14.
CilliersP, 1998Complexity and Postmodernism: Understanding Complex Systems (Routledge, New York)
15.
ConteRGilbertN, 1995, “Computer simulation for social theory”Artificial Societies: The Computer Simulation of Social Life Ed. ConteR (UCL Press, London) pp 1–15
16.
CouclelisH, 1984, “The notion of prior structure in urban modelling”Environment and Planning A16319–338
17.
CouclelisH, 1985, “Cellular worlds: A framework for modeling micro–macro dynamics”Environment and Planning A17585–596
DearM, 1986, “Postmodernism and planning”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space4367–384
20.
FlowerdewR, 1998, “Reacting to ground truth”Environment and Planning A30289–301
21.
ForrestS, 1990, “Emergent computation: Self-organization, collective, and cooperative phenomena in natural and artificial computing networks”Physica42D1–11
GilbertN, 1995, “Emergence in social simulation”, in Artificial Societies: The Computer Simulation of Social Life Eds GilbertNConteR (UCL Press, London) pp 144–156
24.
GleickJ, 1987Chaos: Making a New Science (Viking, New York)
25.
GoldenfeldNKadanoffLP, 1999, “Simple lessons from complexity”Science284(5411) 87–89
26.
HamnettC, 2003, “Contemporary human geography: Fiddling while Rome burns?”Geoforum341–3
27.
HarveyD, 1969Explanation in Geography (Edward Arnold, London)
28.
HarveyDLReedM, 1996, “Social science as the study of complex systems”, in Chaos Theory in the Social Sciences: Foundations and Applications Eds KielLDElliottE (University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI) pp 295–323
29.
HenricksonLMcKelveyB, 2002, “Foundations of ‘new’ social science: Institutional legitimacy from philosophy, complexity science, postmodernism, and agent-based modeling”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences99(90003) 7288–7295
30.
HollandJ, 1992Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
31.
HorganJ, 1995, “From complexity to perplexity”Scientific American272(6) 104–109
32.
JanssenM (Ed.), 2003Complexity and Ecosystem Management: The Theory and Practice of Multiagent Approaches (Edward Elgar, Northampton, MA)
33.
JasanoffSWynneB, 1998, “Science and decision making”, in Human Choice and Climate Change: Volume One—The Societal Framework Eds RaynerSMaloneE (Battelle Press, Washington, DC) pp 1–87
34.
JohnstonRJ, 1994, “General systems theory”, in The Dictionary of Human Geography Eds JohnstonRJGregoryDSmithDM (Blackwell, Oxford) pp 215–216
35.
JohnstonRHeppleLHoareTJonesKPlummerP, 2003, “Contemporary fiddling in human geography while Rome burns: Has quantitative analysis been largely abandoned—and should it be?”Geoforum34157–161
36.
JudsonOP, 1994, “The rise of the individual-based model in ecology”Trends in Ecology and Evolution9(1) 9–14
37.
KauffmanS, 1995At Home in the Universe: The Search for the Laws of Self-organization and Complexity (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
38.
KrugmanP, 1996, “Confronting the mystery of urban hierarchy”Journal of the Japanese and International Economies10399–418
39.
KwasnickiW, 1999, “Evolutionary economics and simulation”, in Computational Techniques for Modelling Learning in Economics Ed. BrennerT (Kluwer, Boston, MA) pp 3–44
40.
LawJ, 1992, “Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity”Systems Practice5379–393
41.
LissackM (Ed.), 2001, “Special issue: What is complexity science?”Emergence3(1)
42.
LongleyPBattyM (Eds), 1996Spatial Analysis: Modelling in a GIS Environment (Geoinformation International, Cambridge)
43.
LongleyPABrooksSMMcDonnellRMacmillanWD (Eds), 1998Geocomputation: A Primer (John Wiley, Chichester, Sussex)
44.
Lo PrestiA, 1996, “Futures research and complexity: A critical analysis from the perspective of social science”Futures28891–902
45.
MalansonG, 1999, “Considering complexity”Annals of the Association of American Geographers89746–753
46.
MandelbrotBB, 1982, “The many faces of scaling: Fractals, geometry of nature, and economics”, in Self-Organization and Dissipative Structures: Applications in the Physical and Social Sciences Eds SchieveWCAllenPM (University of Texas Press, Austin, TX) pp 91–109
47.
MansonSM, 2001, “Simplifying complexity: A review of complexity theory”Geoforum32405–414
48.
MansonSM, 2003a, “Epistemological possibilities and imperatives of complexity research: A reply to Reitsma”Geoforum34(1) 17–20
49.
MansonSM, 2003b, “Validation and verification of multi-agent models for ecosystem management”, in Complexity and Ecosystem Management: The Theory and Practice of Multi-agent Approaches Ed. JanssenM (Edward Elgar, Northampton, MA) pp 63–74
50.
MikuleckyDC, 2001, “The emergence of complexity: Science coming of age or science growing old?”Computers and Chemistry25341–348
MonasterskyR, 2001, “When physicists tried to explain evolution, biologists cried foul”Chronicle of Higher Education47(35) 16
53.
NicolsonCRStarfieldAMKofinasGPKruseJA, 2002, “Ten heuristics for interdisciplinary modeling projects”Ecosystems5376–384
54.
OreskesN, 1998, “Evaluation (not validation) of quantitative models”Environmental Health Perspectives106 (Supplement 6), 1453–1460
55.
OreskesNScrader-FrechetteKBelitzK, 1994, “Verification, validation, and confirmation of numerical models in the earth sciences”Science263(5147) 641–646
56.
OstromE, 1999, “Institutional rational choice: An assessment of the institutional analysis and development framework”, in Theories of the Policy Process Ed. SabatierPA (Westview Press, Boulder, CO) pp 35–71
57.
O'SullivanD, 2004, “Complexity science and human geography”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series29282–295
58.
ParkerDCMansonSMJanssenMHoffmannMJDeadmanPJ, 2003, “Multi-agent systems for the simulation of land use and land cover change: A review”Annals of the Association of American Geographers93316–340
59.
PhelanSE, 1999, “Note on the correspondence between complexity and systems theory”Systemic Practice and Action Research12237–238
60.
PhillipsJD, 1999Earth Surface Systems: Complexity, Order and Scale (Blackwell, Malden, MA)
61.
PhiloC, 1992, “Foucault's geography”Environment and Planning D: Space and Society10137–161
62.
PicklesJ, 1997, “Tool or science? GIS, technoscience, and the theoretical turn”Annals of the Association of American Geographers87363–372
63.
PrattGHansonS, 1988, “Gender, class, and space”Environment and Planning D: Space and Society615–35
64.
RapportDJ, 1991, “Myths in the foundations of economics and ecology”Biological Journal of the Linnean Society44185–202
65.
ReasonPBGoodwin, 1999, “The action turn: Toward a transformational social science”Concepts and Transformations6(1) 1–37
66.
ReitsmaF, 2002, “A response to ‘simplifying complexity‘”Geoforum3413–16
67.
SardarZRavetzJR, 1994, “Complexity: Fad or future?”Futures26563–567
68.
SawyerK, 2002, “Emergence in sociology: Contemporary philosophy of mind and some implications for sociological theory”American Journal of Sociology107551–585
69.
SayerA, 1995Radical Political Economy: A Critique (Blackwell, Oxford)
70.
SchellingTC, 1978Micromotives and Macrobehavior (W W Norton, New York)
71.
SchneiderSTurnerBLGarriga-MorehouseIIGarriga-MorehouseH, 1998, “Imaginable surprise in global change science”Journal of Risk Research1(2) 165–185
72.
Science1999, “Complex systems”284(5411) 79–107
73.
SheppardEBarnesTJ, 1990The Capitalist Space Economy: Geographical Analysis after Ricardo, Marx and Sraffa (Unwin Hyman, London)
74.
SrbljinovicAPenzarDRodikPKardovK, 2003, “An agent-based model of ethnic mobilisation”Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation6(1), http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/6/1/1.html
75.
StanleyHEAmaralLANBuldyrevSVGopikrishnanPPlerouVSalingerMA, 2002, “Self-organized complexity in economics and finance”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences99 (Supplement 1), 2561–2565
76.
StewartP, 2001, “Complexity theories, social theory, and the question of social complexity”Philosophy of the Social Sciences31323–360
77.
StorperM, 1987, “The post-enlightenment challenge to Marxist urban studies”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space5418–426
78.
TesfatsionL, 2001, “Introduction to the special issue on agent-based computational economics”Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control25(3/4) 281–293
79.
ThriftN, 1999, “The place of complexity”Theory, Culture and Society16(3) 31–69
80.
ThriftN, 2002, “The future of geography”Geoforum33291–298
81.
TurcotteDLRundleJB, 2002, “Self-organized complexity in the physical, biological, and social sciences”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences99 (Supplement 1) 2463–2465
82.
WhiteREngelenG, 1993, “Cellular automata and fractal urban form: A cellular modelling approach to the evolution of urban land-use patterns”Environment and Planning A251175–1199
83.
WhiteheadAN, 1925Science and the Modern World (Macmillan, New York)
84.
WienerN, 1961Cybernetics or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
85.
WilsonAG, 1969, “The use of analogies in geography”Geographical Analysis1225–233
86.
WolframS, 2002A New Kind of Science (Wolfram Media, Champaign, IL)
87.
WrightDJGoodchildMFProctorJD, 1997, “GIS: Tool or science? Demystifying the persistent ambiguity of GIS as ‘Tool’ versus ‘Science’”Annals of the Association of American Geographers87346–362
88.
ZipfGK, 1949Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort (Addison Wesley, Cambridge, MA)
