Engaging complexity theory to explore partnership structures: Te Tiriti o Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi as a structural attractor for social innovation in Aotearoa-New Zealand

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore how a complexity informed understanding of Indigenous–settler relationships helps people to better understand Indigenous social innovation. To do this, this paper uses the attractor concept from complexity thinking to explore both the history and possible futures of Indigenous Maori social innovation as shaped by Te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi. Design/methodology/approach This paper frames Te Tiriti as a structural attractor for social innovation in Aotearoa-New Zealand and explores the dynamics at play in the social and economic activities related to Te Tiriti and the ongoing settlement process in Aotearoa-New Zealand. This paper outlines this as an illustrative case study detailing the relevant contextual spaces and dynamics that interact and the emergence of social innovation. Findings This paper suggests that the convergent, divergent and unifying dynamics present in a structural attractor provide a useful framework for building ongoing engagement between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people whereby Indigenous worldviews are given space to be articulated and valued. Originality/value In spite of the increase in research into social innovation, including in Indigenous contexts, the “context” of “postcolonial” context remains under-theorised and people’s understanding of the power dynamics at play here limits the understanding of how the mechanisms of Indigenous–settler partnerships structure social innovation and its impact.

Guest editorial: Complexity as a model for social innovation and social entrepreneurship: is there order in the chaos?

“…More recently, complexity thinking in social innovation has been carried forward through conference streams at the International Research Society for Public Management Conference and the International Social Innovation Research Conference, from which this special issue emerged. The articles in this special issue from (Abraham and Geobey, 2021; Lythberg et al , 2021; Rhodes et al , 2021; McGowan and Geobey, 2022) build on this body of work and further demonstrate the value of the complexity sciences as a theoretical tradition and empirical lens in social innovation and social entrepreneurship scholarship.…”

“…In addition, complexity science’s conceptual library is well-placed to deepen understanding of a complexity-informed understanding of social innovation and social entrepreneurship. [In this special issue, concepts like self-organisation (Lythberg et al , 2021), boundary-spanning, emergence, attractor states (Lythberg et al , 2021; Abraham and Geobey, 2021) and the adaptive cycle (McGowan and Geobey, 2022) are drawn upon across a range of empirical contexts].…”

“…Complexity theory may be particularly consequential in analysing non-traditional and particularly non-Western social innovation and entrepreneurship processes which diverge from economics-influenced understandings focussed on marketisation and competitive dynamics. Lythberg et al (2021) analyse the Aotearoa’s Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi as a structural attractor that, over time, has helped frame Indigenous social innovation in a drive towards decolonisation in an imperfect but improving partnership. The authors derive a “double spiral” combining the dual flows of opportunity and heritage, which provides an alternative explanatory account for Indigenous social entrepreneurship.…”

“…We consider three particular means of deploying complexity as a theoretical basis in social innovation and social entrepreneurship are salient: complexity as rhetoric, as an analytical approach and as a basis for developing new tools and methods. The papers contributed to this special issue from Lythberg et al (2021), McGowan and Geobey (2022), Rhodes et al (2021) and Abraham and Geobey (2021) cover a wide range of pertinent topics and approaches, contribute to each of trajectories.…”

Unravelling the asymmetric effects of procurement practices on firm performance: A complexity theory approach to complementing fsQCA with NCA

“…Complexity, a characteristic of many social phenomena that underpins how outcomes are influenced through the interactions between dynamic systems, processes and practices, has been described as a scientific trend that will dominate the future due to its ability to explain any complex system [ 27 , 28 ]. Complexity theory posits that current symmetric analysis techniques are insufficient to capture and explain situations [ 29 , 30 ].…”