A modern society, according to autopoietic and other analyses, comprises social systems that show organizational closure and selfrreferentiality, partly explaining widely perceived regulatory failure. This article compares four possible mechanisms for governance or steering of such systems, compatible with their autopoiesis: the use of subsidy, partnership with intermediary bodies, reflexive law, and a technique of government intervention that is ancient and common but not recognized, here named collibration. Some social actors exist mainly to check and balance other actors (e.g., employers' organizations and trade unions, or buyers and sellers in a market) and are self-referential only as a pair system This pair system is then self-policing but can be steered, within limits, by tipping the balance that is being maintained-as exemplified by price-loading taxes, cooling-off periods, and sport handicapping.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Artistode (1912). The politics (W. Ellis, Trans.). London: Dent.
2.
Ashby, W. R. (1956). An introduction to cybernetics. London: Chapman & Hall.
3.
Balch, G. I. (1980). The stick, the carrot and other strategies. In J. Brigham & D. W. Brown (Eds.), Policy implementation: Penalties or incentives? (pp. 43-67). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
4.
Bardach, E. (1977). The implementation game. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5.
Bardach, E. (1989). Social regulation as a generic policy instrument. In L. M. Salamon (Ed.), Beyond privatization: The tools of government action (pp. 197-223). Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
6.
Bardach, E. , & Kagan, R. A. (1982). Going by the book: The problem of regulatory unreasonableness. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
7.
Barrett, S. , & Fudge, C. (Eds). (1981). Policy and action. London: Methuen.
8.
Bayliss, L. E. (1966). Living control systems. London: English Universities Press.
9.
Beavis, S. (1993, November 12). Eggar admits nuclear levy is anti-coal. Guardian, p. 16-16.
10.
Beer, S. (1980). Preface. In H. R. Maturana & F. J. Varela, Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living (pp. 63-72). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel.
11.
Bercusson, B. (1988). Economic policy: State and private ordering. In T. Daintith (Ed.), Law as an instrument of economic policy: Comparative and critical approaches (pp. 359-400). New York and Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
12.
Berger, S. (Ed.). (1986). Organizing interests in Western Europe: Pluralism, corporatism, and the transformation of politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13.
Bernstein, M. H. (1955). Regulating business by independent commission. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
14.
Breyer, S. (1982). Regulation and its reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15.
Brigham, J. , & Brown, D. W. (Eds.). (1980). Policy implementation: Penalties orincentives?Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
16.
Broekstra, G. (1991). Consistency, configuration, closure and change. In R. J. In't Veld, L. Schaap, C.J.A.M. Termeer, & M.J.W. van Twist (Eds.), Autopoiesis and configuration theory: New approaches to societal steering (pp. 113-124). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
17.
Bruijn, J. A. de , & Heuvelhof, E. F. ten. (1991). Policy instruments for steering autopoietic actors. In R. J. In't Veld, L. Schaap, C.J.A.M. Termeer, & M.J.W. van Twist (Eds.), Autopoiesis and configuration theory: New approaches to societal steering (pp. 161-170). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
18.
Buchanan, J. M. , & Tullock, G. (1962). The calculus of consent. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
19.
Coleman, J. S. (1974). Power and the structure of society. New York: Norton.
20.
Coser, L. A. (1956). The functions of social conflict. New York: Free Press and Boston: Routledge Kegan Paul.
21.
Crouch, C. (1990). United Kingdom: The rejection of compromise. In G. Baglioni & C. Crouch (Eds.), European industrial relations: The challenge offlexibility (pp. 325-355). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
22.
Daintith, T. (Ed.). (1988). Law as an instrument of economicpolicy: Comparative and critical approaches. New York and Berlin: de Gruyter.
23.
DeAngelis, D. L. , Post, W. M., & Travis, C. C. (1986). Positive feedback in natural systems. New York and Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
24.
Deutsch, K. (1963). The nerves of government. New York: Free Press.
25.
Douglas, M. (1982). In the active voice. Boston: Routledge Kegan Paul.
26.
Dunleavy, P. (1991). Democracy, bureaucracy and public choice. London and New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
27.
Dunsire, A. (1990). Holistic governance. Public Policy and Administration, 5, 3-18.
28.
Dunsire, A. (1993a). Modes of governance. In J. Kooiman (Ed.), Modern governance: New government-society interactions (pp. 21-34). Newbury Park, Sage.
29.
Dunsire, A. (1993b). Manipulating social tensions: Collibration as an alternative mode of government intervention (MPIFG Discussion Paper No. 93/7). Cologne, Germany: Max-Planck-Institut fuir Gesellschaftsforschung.
30.
Dyson, K. (Ed.). (1992). The politics of regulation in Germany. London: Dartmouth.
31.
Edelman, M. (1967). The symbolic uses of politics. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
32.
Edelman, M. (1971). Politics as symbolic action. Chicago: Markham.
33.
Espejo, R. , & Harnden, R. J. (Eds.). (1989). The viable system model. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
34.
Fromm, E. (1942). The fear offreedom. Boston: Routledge Kegan Paul.
35.
Galbraith, J. K. (1967). The new industrial state. London: Hamish Hamilton.
36.
Galliher, J. F , & DeGregory, J. L. (1985). Violence in Northern Ireland: Understanding protestant perspectives. Dublin: Gill & Macmillan.
37.
Gleick, J. (1988). Chaos: Making a new science. London: Sphere.
38.
Goodin, R. E. (1980). Manipulatory politics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
39.
Green, T. H. (1895). Principles of political obligation. White Plains, NY: Longman.
40.
Gretschmann, K. (1986). Measuring the public sector: A contestable issue. In F-X. Kaufmann, G. Majone, & V. Ostrom, (Eds.), Guidance, control and evaluation in the public sector (pp. 139-158). New York and Berlin: de Gruyter.
41.
Habermas, J. (1981). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns [Theory of communicative action]. Frankfurt, Germany: Suhrkamp.
42.
Hanf, K. , & Scharpf, F. W. (Eds.). (1978). Interorganizational policy making. Beverly Hills, CA, and London: Sage.
43.
Hayek, F. A. von . (1944). The road to serfdom. Boston: Routledge Kegan Paul.
44.
Hood, C. C. (1983). The tools of government. New York and London: Macmillan.
45.
Horowitz, D. L. (1977). The courts and socialpolicy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
46.
Ingraham, P. W. , & Kettl, D. F (Eds.). (1992). Agenda for excellence: Public service in America. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
47.
In't Veld, R. J. , Schaap, L., Termeer, C.J.A.M., & Twist, M.J.W. van (Eds.). (1991). Autopoiesis and configuration theory: New approaches to societal steering. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
48.
Jantsch, E. (1981). Autopoiesis: A central aspect of dissipative self-organization. In M. Zeleny (Ed.), Autopoiesis: A theory of living organization (pp. 65-88). New York: North Holland.
49.
Jessop, B. (1992). The economy, the state and the law: Theories of relative autonomy and autopoietic closure. In G. Teubner & A. Febbrajo (Eds.), State, law and economy as autopoietic systems: Regulation and autonomy in a new perspective (European Yearbook in the Sociology of Law 1991-1992, pp. 187-263). Milan: Dott. A Giuffr6 Editore.
50.
Jones, R. W. (1973). Principles of biological regulation: An introduction tofeedbacksystems. New York and London: Academic Press.
51.
Keeling, D. (1972). Management in government. Boston: Allen and Unwin.
52.
Kickert, W.J.M. (1991). Applicability of autopoiesis to administration science. In R. J. In't Veld, L. Schaap, C.J.A.M. Termeer, & M.J.W. van Twist (Eds.), Autopoiesis and configuration theory: New approaches to societal steering (pp. 193-205). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
53.
Koppen, I. J. (1991). Environmental mediation: An example of applied autopoiesis? In R. J. In't Veld, L. Schaap, C.J.A.M. Termeer, & M.J.W. van Twist (Eds.), Autopoiesis and configuration theory: New approaches to societal steering (pp. 143-150). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
54.
Lasswell, H. D. (1951). The world revolution of our time. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
55.
Lasswell, H. D. , & Fox, M. B. (1979). The signature of power: Buildings, communication and policy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
56.
Laszlo, E. (1986). Systems and societies: The basic cybernetics of social evolution. In F. Geyer & J. van der Zouwen (Eds.), Sociocybernetic paradoxes: Observation, control and evolution of self-steering systems (pp. 145-171). Beverly Hills: Sage.
57.
Lehmbruch, G. (1991). The organization of society, administrative strategies, and policy networks. In R. Czada & A. Windhoff-Heritier (Eds.), Political choice: Institutions, rules and the limits of rationality (pp. 123-158). Frankfurt, Germany: Campus Verlag and Boulder, CO: Westview.
58.
Lorenz, K. (1966). On aggression (M. Letzke, Trans.). London: Methuen.
59.
Luhmann, N. (1966). Grundrechte als Institution [Basic law as institution]. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
60.
Luhmann, N. (1981). Politische Theorie im Wohlfahrtsstaat [Political theory in the welfare state]. Munchen: Olzog.
61.
Luhmann, N. (1982). The differentiation of society. New York: Columbia University Press.
62.
Luhmann, N. (1985). Soziale Systeme: Grundrifle eineralgemeinen Theorie [Social systems: Blueprint of a general theory]. Frankfurt, Germany: Suhrkamp.
63.
Luhmann, N. (1986). The autopoiesis of social systems. In F. Geyer & J. van der Zouwen (Eds.), Sociocybernetic paradoxes: Observation, control and evolution of self-steering systems (pp. 172-192). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
64.
Luhmann, N. (1988). Closure and openness: On reality in the world of law. In G. Teubner (Ed.), Autopoietic law (pp. 335-350). Berlin: de Gruyter.
65.
Marin, B. , & Mayntz, R. (Eds.). (1991). Policy networks: Empirical evidence and theoretical considerations. Frankfurt, Germany: Campus Verlag.
66.
Marsh, D. , & Rhodes, R.A.W. (Eds.). (1991). Policy networks in British government. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
67.
Maturana, H. R. , & Varela, F. J. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel.
68.
Mayntz, R. (1979). Regulative Politik in der Krise? [Regulatory policy in a crisis?] In J. Matthes (Ed.), Sozialer Wandel in Westeuropa. Verhandlungen des 19. Deutschen Soziologentags in Berlin 1979 (pp. 55-81). Frankfurt, Germany: Campus Verlag.
69.
Mayntz, R. (1980). Die Entwicklung des analytischen Paradigmas der Implementationsforschung [The development of analytical paradigms of implementation research]. In R. Mayntz (Ed.), Implementation politischer Programme I (pp. 1-19). Konigstein/Ts, Germany: Anton Hain.
70.
Mayntz, R. (1983a). The conditions of effective public policy: A new challenge for policy analysis. Policy and Politics, 11, 123-143.
71.
Mayntz, R. (1983b). Implementation von regulativer Politik [Implementation of regulatory policy]. In R. Mayntz (Ed.), Implementation politischer Programme HI: Ansatze zur Theoriebildung (pp. 50-74). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
72.
Mayntz, R. (1993). Governing failures and the problem of governability: Some comments on a theoretical paradigm. In J. Kooiman (Ed.), Modern governance: New governmentsociety interactions (pp. 9-20). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
73.
Mazmanian, D. , & Sabatier, P. (Eds.). (1981). Effective policy implementation. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
74.
Mingers, J. (1989). An introduction to autopoiesis-implications and applications. Systems Practice, 2, 159-180.
75.
Mitnick, B. M. (1980). The political economy of regulation: Creating, designing and removing regulatory forms. New York: Columbia University Press.
76.
Mohl, R. (1862). Staatsrecht, VVlkerrecht und Politik [Constitutional law, international law, and politics]. Tubingen, Germany: Laupp.
77.
Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organization. Beverly Hills: Sage.
78.
Noback, C. R. , & Demarest, R. J. (1982). The human nervous system: Basic principles of neurobiology (3rd ed.). New York and Tokyo: McGraw-Hill. (Original work published in 1967)
79.
Nonet, P. , & Selznick, P. (1978). Law and society in transition. New York: Harper & Row.
80.
Nordhaus, W. D. (1975). The political business cycle. Review of Economic Studies, 42, 169-190.
81.
Offe, C. (1986). The attribution of public status to interest groups: Observations on the West German case. In S. Berger (Ed.), Organizing interests in Western Europe: Pluralism, corporatism, and the transformation of politics (pp. 123-158). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
82.
Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
83.
Osborne, D. , & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.
84.
Ostrom, V. (1974). The intellectual crisis in American public administration. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
85.
Pressman, J. , & Wildavsky, A. (1973). Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland. Berkeley: University of California Press.
86.
Rehn, G. , & Viklund, B. (1990). Changes in the Swedish model. In G. Baglioni & C. Crouch (Eds.), European industrial relations: The challenge of flexibility (pp. 300-325). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
87.
Richardson, J. J. (Ed.). (1982). Policy styles in Western Europe. Boston: Allen & Unwin.
88.
Rosenbloom, D. H. (1986). Understanding management, politics and law in the public sector. New York: Random House.
89.
Ross, E. A. (1920). The principles of sociology. New York: Century.
90.
Salamon, L. M. (1981). Rethinking public management: Third-party government and the changing forms of government action. Public Policy, 29, 256-256.
91.
Salamon, L. M. (Ed.). (1989). Beyond privatization: The tools of government action. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
92.
Savas, E. S. (Ed.). (1977).Alternatives of deliveringpublicservices. Boulder, CO: Westview.
93.
Schmitter, P. C. (1986). Interest intermediation and regime governability in contemporary Western Europe and North America. In S. Berger (Ed.), Organizing interests in Western Europe: Pluralism, corporatism, and the transformation of politics (pp. 285-305). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
94.
Schultze, C. L. (1977). The public use of private interest. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
95.
Schwartz, M. , & Thompson, M. (1990). Divided we stand: Redefining politics, technology, and social choice. New York and London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
96.
Simmel, G. (1955). Conflict (K. H. Wolff, Trans.). New York: Free Press. (Original work published in 1908)
97.
Simon, H. A. , Smithburg, D. W., & Thompson, V. A. (1950). Public administration. New York: Knopf.
98.
Spinoza, B. de . (1958). Tractatus politicus. In A. G. Wenham (Ed. and Trans.), The political works. Oxford: Clarendon. (Original work published in 1677)
99.
Stebut, D. von . (1988). Subsidies as an instrument of economic policy. In T. Daintith (Ed.), Law as an instrument of economic policy: Comparative and critical approaches (pp. 137-152). New York and Berlin: de Gruyter.
100.
Stewart, R. B. (1988). Regulation and the crisis of legalisation in the United States. In T. Daintith (Ed.), Law as an instrument of economic policy: Comparative and critical approaches (pp. 97-136). New York and Berlin: de Gruyter.
101.
Stigler, G. J. (1971). The theory of economic regulation. Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 2, 3-21.
102.
Stigler, G. J. (1975). The citizen and the state: Essays on regulation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
103.
Stone, D. (1975). Where the law ends: The social control of corporate behavior. New York: Harper & Row.
104.
Streeck, W. (1984). Co-determination: The fourth decade. In B. Wilpert & A. Sorge (Eds.), International perspectives on organizational democracy (pp. 391-422). New York: John Wiley.
105.
Teubner, G. (1986). After legal instrumentalism? Strategic models of post-regulatory Law. In G. Teubner (Ed.), Dilemmas of law in the welfare state (pp. 299-325). New York and Berlin: de Gruyter.
106.
Teubner, G. (1987). Juridification of social spheres. Berlin: de Gruyter.
107.
Teubner, G. (Ed.). (1988). Autopoietic law: A new approach to law and society. New York and Berlin: de Gruyter.
108.
Teubner, G. (1989). Rechtals autopoietisches System [Law as autopoietic system]. Frankfurt, Germany: Suhrkamp.
109.
Teubner, G. (1992). Social order from legislative noise? Autopoietic closure as a problem for legal regulation. In G. Teubner & A. Febbrajo (Eds.), State, law and economy as autopoietic systems: Regulation and autonomy in a new perspective (European Yearbook in the Sociology of Law 1991-1992, pp. 609-649). Milan: Dott. A. Giuffrd Editore.
110.
Teubner, G. , & Febbrajo, A. (Eds.). (1992). State, law and economy as autopoietic systems: Regulation and autonomy in a new perspective (European Yearbook in the Sociology of Law 1991-1992). Milan: Dott. A Giuffrd Editore.
111.
Teubner, G. , & Willke, H. (1984). Kontext und Autonomie: Gesellschaftliche Selbststeuerung durch reflexives Recht [Context and autonomy: Social self-government through reflexive law]. Zeitschriftflir Rechtssoziologie, 5, 4-35.
112.
Thompson, M. , Ellis, R., & Wildavsky, A. (1990). Cultural theory. Boulder, CO: Westview.
113.
Toates, F. M. (1975). Control theory in biology and experimental psychology. London: Hutchinson Educational.
114.
Trubek, D. (Ed.). (1983). Reflexive law and the regulatory crisis. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
115.
van Twist, M.J.W. , & Schaap, L. (1991). Introduction to autopoiesis theory and autopoietic steering. In R. J. In't Veld, L. Schaap, C.J.A.M. Termeer, & M.J.W. van Twist (Eds.), Autopoiesis and configuration theory: New approaches to societal steering (pp. 31-44). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
116.
Van Horn, C. (1979). Policy implementation in the federal system. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
117.
Voigt, R. (Ed.). (1980). Verrechtlichung: Analysen zu Funktion und Wirkung von Parlamentarisierung, Burokratisierung und Justizialisierung sozialer, politischer und okonomischer Prozesse [Juridification: Analyses on the function and working of the parliamentarizing, bureacratizing, and justicializing of social, political, and economic processes]. Konigstein/Ts, Germany: Athenaeum.
118.
Voigt, R. (Ed.). (1983). Abschied vom Recht? [Exit from the law?]Frankfurt a.M., Germany: Suhrkamp.
119.
Weber, M. (1968). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. (Original work published in 1922)
120.
Weidenbaum, M. L. (1969). The modern public sector; new ways of doing the government's business. New York: Basic Books.
121.
Wight, M. , Bull, H., & Holbraad, C. (Eds.). (1979). Power Politics. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
122.
Willke, H. (1982). Gesellschaftliche Kriterien okonomischer Rationalitat [Social criteria of economic rationality]. Unpublished manuscript, University of Cologne, Germany.
123.
Willke, H. (1983). Entzauberung des Staates. Uberlegungen zu einer sozietalen Steuerungstheorie [Breaking the state's spell: Considerations on a societal control theory]. Konigstein, Germany: Athenaum Verlag.
124.
Zeleny, M. (Ed.). (1981). Autopoiesis: A theory of living organization. New York: North Holland.
125.
Zifcak, S. (1994). New managerialism: Administrative reform in Whitehall and Canberra. Buckingham, UK, and Philadelphia: Open University Press.
126.
Zolo, D. (1992). The epistemological status of the theory of autopoiesis and its applications to the social sciences. In G. Teubner & A. Febbrajo (Eds.), State, law and economy as autopoietic systems: Regulation and autonomy in a new perspective (European Yearbook in the Sociology of Law 1991-1992, pp. 67-124). Milan: Dott. A. Giuffre Editore.
