Complexity Science and Development: Concepts, Conditions, and Tools for Application

Authors

Keywords:

Complexity science, Complex adaptive systems, Development

Abstract

          In the twenty-first century, development can no longer be sufficiently explained by linear frameworks or mechanistic approaches that presume all variables are entirely controllable. This article discusses phenomena related to complex adaptive systems comprising multileveled, interrelated components, with continuous interactions leading to unpredictable outcomes. Applying complexity science to development begins by outlining its foundation, concept, and meaning evolved from natural science into social science and development studies. Conditions generating developmental complexity include multi-level interactions, contested systems, unplanned outcomes, and structural and dynamic systemic differences reflecting societal circumstances. Thus, to address social problems, practitioners must adopt a clear theory of change transcending logical frameworks to create spaces for collective learning, integrate transdisciplinary knowledge, and adaptive design. Additionally, agent-based modeling. developmental evaluation, outcome harvesting, and network analysis deepen understanding of outcome and multi-level change, ensuring flexibility and responsiveness to dynamic conditions. Complexity should not be viewed as impeding development but as a conceptual perspective for explaining the nature of social systems, identifying underlying conditions, and creatively managing them. This approach supports a paradigm shift in thinking, planning, and evaluation, ultimately promoting sustainable development that effectively responds to societal dynamics.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

กรมวิชาการเกษตร. (2563). รายงานประจำปี 2563. กรมวิชาการเกษตร กระทรวงเกษตรและสหกรณ์. https://www.doa.go.th/share/attachment.php?aid=3009

กรมส่งเสริมการเกษตร. (2566). กรมส่งเสริมการเกษตรส่งเสริมเกษตรกรปลูกพืชใช้น้ำน้อยทดแทนการทำนาปรัง ชูสร้างสมดุลภาคการเกษตร 3 ด้าน. https://www.doae.go.th/

วีรบูรณ์ วิสารทสกุล. (2558). ความซับซ้อนและทฤษฎีการเปลี่ยนแปลงทางสังคมในโครงการพัฒนา. สัมมนาวิชาการเนื่องในโอกาสการสถาปนาคณะสังคมสงเคราะห์ศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์.

สถาบันวิจัยเพื่อการพัฒนาประเทศไทย. (2557). การประเมินผลกระทบทางเศรษฐกิจในภาคครัวเรือนจากเหตุการณ์น้ำท่วม พ.ศ. 2554: กรณีศึกษาอำเภอบางบัวทอง อำเภอคลองหลวง และเขตดอนเมือง. สถาบันวิจัยเพื่อการพัฒนาประเทศไทย. https://tdri.or.th/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/8606.pdf

สถาบันวิจัยเพื่อการพัฒนาประเทศไทย. (2564). วิเคราะห์ผลกระทบของโควิด-19 ต่อแรงงานนอกระบบ. https://tdri.or.th/2021/01/covid-106/

Alkire, S., & Santos, M. E. (2014). Measuring acute poverty in the developing world: Robustness and scope of the multidimensional poverty index. World Development, 59, 251–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.01.026

Borgatti, S. P., Mehra, A., Brass, D. J., & Labianca, G. (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323(5916), 892–895. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165821

Byrne, D. (1998). Complexity theory and the social sciences: An introduction. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203003916

Byrne, D., & Callaghan, G. (2014). Complexity theory and the social sciences: The state of the art. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203519585

Carroll, A., Wood, L., & Tantivess, S. (2007). Many things to many people – A review of ThaiHealth. ThaiHealth.

Clark, C., & Rosenzweig, W. (2004). Double bottom line project report. University of California, Berkeley.

Cornwall, A., & Gaventa, J. (2001). Bridging the gap: Citizenship, participation and accountability. PLA Notes, 40, 32–35.

de Jager, L. A., Bal, M., Baudena, M., van den Broek, K. L., Davis, N., Dijkstra, H. A., Dorresteijn, I., Kamphuis, C. B. M., Lykourentzou, I., Mayor, Á. G., Omodei, E., Alvial Palavicino, C., Stok, M., van Bruggen, A. R., Wieners, C. E., Zimmermann, S., & Dermody, B. J. (2025). Transdisciplinary complexity science: Deepening system understanding for sustainability. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 1384. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05548-7

Geels, F. W. (2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research Policy, 31(8–9), 1257–1274. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00062-8

Gopal, S. (2015). Evaluating complex social initiatives. Stanford Social Innovation Review.

Hargreaves, M. B. (2007). Using complexity science to improve the effectiveness of public health coalitions. Mathematica Policy Research.

Hausmann, R., & Hidalgo, C. A. (2011). The network structure of economic output. Journal of Economic Growth, 16(4), 309–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10887-011-9071-4

Held, D., & McGrew, A. (2007). Globalization theory: Approaches and controversies. Polity.

Hirsch, P. (1990). Development dilemmas in rural Thailand. Oxford University Press. https://archive.org/details/developmentdilem00hirs

Holland, J. H. (2014). Complexity: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780199662548.001.0001

Holling, C. S., & Gunderson, L. H. (2002). Resilience and adaptive cycles. Island Press. http://hdl.handle.net/10919/67621

Klein, L. (2012). Social complexity in project management. Berlin: SEgroup. http://systemicexcellence-

group.de/sites/default/files/klein_2012_scpm.pdf

Lloyd, S. (2001). Measures of complexity: A nonexhaustive list. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, 21(4), 7–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCS.2001.939938

Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in systems: A primer. Chelsea Green Publishing.

Mercure, J. F., Pollitt, H., Bassi, A. M., Viñuales, J. E., & Edwards, N. R. (2016). Modelling complex systems of heterogeneous agents to better design sustainability transitions policy. Global Environmental Change, 37, 102–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.02.003

Patton, M. Q. (2011). Developmental evaluation: Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use. New York: Guilford Press.

Ramalingam, B. (2013). Aid on the edge of chaos: Rethinking international cooperation in a complex world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ramalingam, B., & Jones, H. (2008). Exploring the science of complexity: Ideas and implications for development and humanitarian efforts. London: Overseas Development Institute.

Rigg, J. (1991). Grass-roots development in rural Thailand: A lost cause? World Development, 19(2–3), 199–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(91)90200-Z

Rihani, S. (2002). Complexity theory and development practice: Understanding non-linear realities. London: Zed Books.

Roos, M. (2025). The complexity of problem-solving human social systems: Structural vs. dynamic complexity. PLOS Complex Systems, 2(7). e0000055. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcsy.0000055

Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1995). Scenario planning: A tool for strategic thinking. MIT Sloan Management Review, 36(2), 25–40. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/scenario-planning-a-tool-for-strategic-thinking/

Sterman, J. D. (2002). System dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/102741

Wilson-Grau, R. (2013). Outcome harvesting. Ford Foundation. https://outcomeharvesting.net

Downloads

Published

2025-12-29

How to Cite

Chotratanakamol, K. (2025). Complexity Science and Development: Concepts, Conditions, and Tools for Application. PSDS Journal of Development Studies, Puey Ungphakorn School of Development Studies, Thammasat University, 8(2 กรกฎาคม - ธันวาคม), 275–298. retrieved from https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/gvc-tu/article/view/284084