Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Complex Systems in Economics and Where to Find Them

  • Published:
Journal of Systems Science and Complexity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The economy as a whole and most of its constituent parts, like markets, government institutions, firms, or households, are inherently complex conceptual constructions. Micro-level diversity, decentralized interaction, self-organization, adaptation and learning, emergence, and evolution, are some of the fundamental features that the above entities share and that allow to classify them as being complex entities. In a complex economic system, existing structures of interaction are in constant mutation as individual agents contact and influence one another and, by doing so, reshape the macro environment in which socio-economic relations unfold. Notwithstanding the observed pervasiveness of complexity in economics, there are a few areas of economic thought where the discussion on the theme has gained an exceptional relevance. In this article, six of such areas are identified and their complex nature is highlighted and scrutinized. These pertain to: (i) Knowledge interactions and technological innovation; (ii) Corporate design and organizational learning; (iii) Public policies directed at market regulation; (iv) Banking and financial markets; (v) Environmental economics, sustainability, and climate change; and (vi) income inequality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hodgson G M, Come back Marshall, all is forgiven? Complexity, evolution, mathematics and Marshallian exceptionalism, Eur. J. Hist. Econ. Thou., 2013, 20: 957–981.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Caldari K, Marshall and complexity: A necessary balance between process and order, Cambridge J. Econ., 2015, 39: 1071–1085.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Colander D and Kupers R, Complexity and the Art of Public Policy: Solving Society’s Problems from the Bottom Up, Princeton University Press, Princeton and Oxford, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Heise A, Whither economic complexity? A new heterodox economic paradigm or just another variation within the mainstream?, Int. J. Plural. Econ. Edu., 2017, 8: 115–129.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Faggini M and Parziale A, More than 20 years of chaos in economics, Mind & Society, 2016, 15: 53–69.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Odum E P and Barrett G W, Fundamentals of Ecology, 5th Edition, Thomson, Brooks/Cole, Belmont CA, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Allen P, Complexity, uncertainty and innovation, Econ. Innov. New Tech., 2013, 22: 702–725.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bargigli L and Tedeschi G, Interaction in agent-based economics: A survey on the network approach, Physica A, 2014, 399: 1–15.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Cilliers P, Biggs H C, Blignaut S, et al., Complexity, modelling, and natural resource management, Ecol. Soc., 2013, 18(3): article 1.

  10. Bruno B, Faggini M, and Parziali A, Complexity modelling in economics: The state of the art, Economic Thought, 2016, 5: 29–43.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Foster J and Metcalfe J S, Economic emergence: An evolutionary economic perspective, J. Econ. Behav. Organ., 2012, 82: 420–432.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gallegati M and Kirman A, Reconstructing economics: Agent based models and complexity, Complexity Econ., 2012, 1: 5–31.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rosser J B, Emergence and complexity in Austrian economics, J. Econ. Behav. Organ., 2012, 81: 122–128.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kao Y F and Velupillai K V, Behavioural economics: Classical and modern, Eur. J. Hist. Econ. Thou., 2015, 22: 236–271.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Tesfastsion L S, Agent-based computational economics: Modeling economies as complex adaptive systems, Inf. Sci., 2003, 149: 263–269.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Frenken K, Technological innovation and complexity theory, Econ. Innov. New Tech., 2006, 15: 137–155.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Antonelli C, The economic complexity of technological change: Knowledge interaction and path dependence, Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, ch.1: 3–59, Ed. by Antonelli C, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Krafft J and Quatraro F, The dynamics of technological knowledge: From linearity to recombination, Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, ch.7: 181–200, Ed. by Antonelli C, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Antonelli C and Scellato G, Complexity and technological change: Knowledge interactions and firm level total factor productivity, J. Evol. Econ., 2013, 23: 77–96.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Maggitti P G, Smith K G, and Katila R, The complex search process of invention, Res. Policy, 2013, 42: 90–100.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lane D A, Complexity and innovation dynamics, in Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, ch.2: 63–80, Ed. by Antonelli C, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lane D A and Maxfield R, Ontological uncertainty and innovation, J. Evol. Econ., 2005, 15: 3–50.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Colombelli A and von Tunzelmann N, The persistence of innovation and path-dependence, Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, ch.4: 105–119, Ed. by Antonelli C, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Barabási A L and Albert R, Emergence of scaling in random networks, Science, 1999, 286: 509–512.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Cantner U and Graf H, Innovation networks: Formation, performance and dynamics, Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, ch.15: 366–394, Ed. by Antonelli C, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ormerod P, Rosewell B, and Wiltshire G, Network models of innovation process and policy implications, Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, ch.19: 492–532 Ed. by Antonelli C, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Saviotti P P, Knowledge, complexity and networks, Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, ch.6: 141–180, Ed. by Antonelli C, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Chiva R, Ghauri P, and Alegre J, Organizational learning, innovation and internationalization: A complex system model, Brit. J. Manage., 2014, 25: 687–705.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Dosi G and Marengo L, The dynamics of organizational structures and performances under diverging distributions of knowledge and different power structures, J. I. Econ., 2015, 11: 535–559.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Dosi G and Virgillito M E, In order to stand up you must keep cycling: Change and coordination in complex evolving economies, Struct. Change Econ. D., 2017, in press.

  31. Chang M H and Harrington Jr J E, Agent-based models of organizations, Handbook of Computational Economics, Eds. by Tesfastsion L and Judd K L, 2006, 2: 1273–1337.

  32. Anderson P, Complexity theory and organization science, Organ. Sci., 1999, 10: 216–232.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Dosi G, Faillo M, Manara V C, et al., The formalization of organizational capabilities and learning: Results and challenges, LEM Papers Series 2017/08, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy, 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Schneider M and Somers M, Organizations as complex adaptive systems: Implications of complexity theory for leadership research, Leadership Quart., 2006, 17: 351–365.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Uhl-Bion M, Marion R, and McKelvey B, Comlpexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era, Leadership Quart., 2007, 18: 298–318.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Dosi G, Marengo L, and Nuvolari A, Institutions are neither autistic maximizers nor flocks of birds: Self-organization, power, and learning in human organizations, LEM Papers Series 2016/38, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  37. David P, Path dependence and predictability in dynamic systems with local externalities: A paradigm for historical economics, Technology and the Wealth of Nations, Eds. by Foray D and Freeman C, Pinter, London, 1992, 208–231.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Ioannides Y M, Complexity and organizational architecture, Math. Soc. Sci., 2012, 64: 193–202.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Elsner W, Hocker G, and Schwardt H, Simplistic vs complex organizations: Markets, hierarchies, and networks in an organizational triangle — A simple heuristic to analyze real-world organizational forms, J. Econ. Issues, 2010, 44: 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Durlauf S N, Complexity, economics and public policy, Polit., Philos. Econ., 2012, 11: 45–75.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Durlauf S N, Complexity and empirical economics, Econ. J., 2005, 115: 225–243.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Elsner W, Policy and state in complexity economics, A Modern Guide to State Intervention, Eds. by Karagiannis N and King J E, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, 2019, 13–48.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Velupillai K V, The impossibility of an effective theory of policy in a complex economy, Complexity Hints for Economic Policy, Eds. by Salzano M and Colander D, Springer, Milan, 2007, 273–290.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kirman A, Complexity and economic policy: A paradigm shift or a change in perspective? A review essay on David Colander and Roland Kupers’s complexity and the art of public policy, J. Econ. Lit., 2016, 54: 534–572.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Dawid H, Gemkow S, Harting P, et al., Labor market integration policies and the convergence of regions: The role of skills and technology diffusion, J. Evol. Econ., 2012, 22: 543–562.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Dosi G, Fagiolo G, Napoletano M, et al., Income distribution, credit and fiscal policies in an agent-based Keynesian model, J. Econ. Dyn. Control, 2013, 37: 1598–1625.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. Furtado B A and Eberhardt I D R, A simple agent-based spatial model of the economy: Tools for policy, J. Artif. Societies Soc. Simul., 2016, 19(4).

  48. Tabak B M, Cajueiro D O, and Serra T R, Topological properties of bank networks: The case of Brazil, Int. J. Mod. Phys. C, 2009, 20: 1121–1143.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  49. Grilli R, Tedeschi G, and Gallegati M, Markets connectivity and financial contagion, J. Econ. Interact. Coor., 2015, 10: 287–304.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Russo A, Riccetti L, and Gallegati M, Increasing inequality, consumer credit and financial fragility in an agent based macroeconomic model, J. Evol. Econ., 2016, 26: 25–47.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Kenett D and Havlin S, Network science: A useful tool in economics and finance, Mind & Society, 2015, 14: 155–167.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Cetorelli N and Goldberg L S, Organizational complexity and balance sheet management in global banks, NBER Working Paper, 22169, 2016.

  53. Kitt R, Economic decision making: Application of the theory of complex systems, Chaos Theory in Politics, Eds. by Banerjee S, Ercetin S S, and Tekin A, Springer, Amsterdam, 2014, 51–73.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Hommes C H, Interacting agents in finance, The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, Eds. by Durlauf S N and Blume L E, 2nd Edition, Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke, 2006, 4: 402–406.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Gaffeo E and Tamborini R, If the financial system is complex, how can we regulate it?, Int. J. Polit. Eco., 2011, 40: 79–97.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Cruz J and Lind P, The dynamics of financial stability in complex networks, Eur. Phys. J. B, 2012, 85: 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Giocoli N, Network efficiency and the banking system, Int. Rev. Econ., 2014, 61: 203–218.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Ramanauskas T, Agent-based financial modelling: A promosing alternative to the standard representative agent approach, Bank of Lithuania Working Paper, 2009, 3.

  59. Bookstaber R, Using agent-based models for analyzing threats to financial stability, US Department of the Treasury, Working Paper, 2012, 12–03.

  60. Gubareva M and Gomes O, On the edge of climate change: In a search of an adequate agent-based methodology to model environmental dynamics, Eds. by Sequeira T and Reis L, Climate Change and Global Development, Contributions to Economics, 2019, 37–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02662-2.3.

  61. Balint T, Lamperti F, Mandel A, et al., Complexity and the economics of climate change: A survey and a look forward, Ecol. Econ., 2017, 138: 252–265.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Farmer J D, Hepburn C, Mealy P, et al., A third wave in the economics of climate change, Environ. Res. Econ., 2015, 62: 329–357.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Farmer J D and Hepburn C, Less precision, more truth: uncertainty in climate economics and macroprudential policy, Bank of England Interdisciplinary Workshop on the Role of Uncertainty in Central Bank Policy, 2014.

  64. Foxon T J, Kohler J, Michie J, et al., Towards a new complexity economics for sustainability, Cambridge J. Econ., 2013, 37: 187–208.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Mercure J F, Pollitt H, Bassi A M, et al., Modelling complex systems of heterogeneous agents to better design sustainability transitions policy, Global Environ. Chang., 2016, 37: 102–115.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Berger T and Troost C, Agent-based modelling of climate adaptation and mitigation options in agriculture, J. Agr. Econ., 2014, 65: 323–348.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Hassani-Mahmooei B and Parris B W, Why might climate change not cause conflict? An agent-based computational response, MPRA Paper, 2012, 44918.

  68. Hassani-Mahmooei B and Parris B W, Resource scarcity, effort allocation and environmental security: An agent-based theoretical approach, Econ. Model., 2013, 30: 183–192.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Markey-Towler B and Foster J, Understanding the causes of income inequality in complex economic systems, University of Queensland Discussion Paper, 2013, 478.

  70. Desiderio S and Chen S, Why the rich become richer: Insights from an agent-based model, Int. J. Comput. Econ. Econometrics, 2016, 6: 258–275.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Cardaci A and Saraceno F, Inequality, financialisation and economic crises: An agent-based model, Sciences-Po Publications, 2015, 2015–27.

  72. Palagi E, Napoletano M, Roventini A, et al., Inequality, redistributive policies and multiplier dynamics in an agent-based model with credit rationing, Sciences Po publications, 2017, 2017–06.

  73. Caiani A, Russo A, and Gallegati M, Does inequality hamper innovation and growth? An ABSFC analysis, J. Evol. Econ., 2019, 29: 177–228.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Dosi G, Pereira, M C, Roventini A, et al., The effects of labour market reforms upon unemployment and income inequalities: An agent based model, Socio-Econ. Rev., 2018, 16: 687–720.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Dawid H, Harting P, and Neugart M, Cohesion policy and inequality dynamics: Insights from a heterogeneous agents macroeconomic model, J. Econ. Behav. Organ., 2018, 150: 220–255.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Hartmann D, Guevara M R, Jara-Figueroa C, et al., Linking economic complexity, institutions and income inequality, World Development, 2015, 93: 75–93.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Sbardella A, Pugliese E, and Pietronero L, Economic development and inequality: A complex system analysis, PLoS ONE, 2017, 12(9): e0182774.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ISCAL - Lisbon Accounting and Business School, Instituto Politécnico de Lisboa, and CEFAGE - ISCAL/IPL Research Center, ISCAL, Av. Miguel Bombarda 20, 1069-035, Lisbon, Portugal

    Orlando Gomes

  2. ISCAL - Lisbon Accounting and Business School, Instituto Politécnico de Lisboa; SOCIUS - Research Centre in Economic and Organizational Sociology, CSG - Research in Social Sciences and Management, Lisbon, Portugal

    Mariya Gubareva

Authors
  1. Orlando Gomes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mariya Gubareva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mariya Gubareva.

Additional information

This research was supported by the Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (FCT), under the Project UID/SOC/04521/2020, and by the Instituto Politécnico de Lisboa as a part of the IPL/2019/MacroVirtu/ISCAL and IPL/2020/MacroRates/ISCAL Projects.

This paper was recommended for publication by Editor TANG Xijin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gomes, O., Gubareva, M. Complex Systems in Economics and Where to Find Them. J Syst Sci Complex 34, 314–338 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11424-020-9149-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11424-020-9149-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation