DOI
DOI: 10.1111/j.1478-9302.2012.00270.x

Summary
The paper presents how “complexity theory” is often applied to the field of political science, in general, and public policy in particular. It does so by:
1) Presenting the main 6 characteristics of complex systems from the perspective of political science:
a) They cannot be explained by its parts;
b) Their behavior is hard (or impossible) to predict
c) They are sensitive to initial conditions (path dependence)
d) They exhibit emergent behaviors
e) They may contain “strange attractors” (punctuated equilibria)
f) They require interdisciplinary approach
2) Discussing the 2 main strands of complexity theory in political science:
a) The analysis of policymaking systems as complex systems, which require to investigate new approaches in policymaking, in order to overcome traditional “top-down approaches” (e.g. bottom-up approaches, “trial and error” policymaking)
b) Studies that highlight complexity without referring directly to complexity theory (e.g, new institutionalism, path dependence, punctuated equilibria)
In conclusion, the paper critically discusses the adoption of complexity theory to political science by presenting its pros and cons. From one side, if not adopted properly, it may push for a more “science-driven” deterministic approach that might be detrimental for the social sciences and further complicate the study of public policy without offering new insights. From the other hand, if adopted critically and with reason, it might favor stronger interdisciplinary cooperation with the hard sciences, help overcome old fashioned theories (behaviouralism and rational choice theory) and produce important practical insights for policymakers and practitioners.

Relevance for Complex Systems Knowledge
The paper elaborates concepts that are relevant for the establishment of an interdisciplinary curriculum by:
1. Presenting a working definition of complex system useful for political science and relevant also for scientific studies;
2. Shows how political sciences’ theories are accustomed to adopting critical system thinking without explicitly mentioning complexity theory;
3. Suggests the start of a dialogue between hard and soft sciences for the implementation of new research approaches;
4. Suggests a practical application of complex systems thinking for policy makers;
5. Promote the adoption of a common language between academics and practitioners for discussing complex systems.

Point of Strength
Clear and straightforward;
It elaborates on different topics of political science suitable for complexity theory;
It presents possible ways to enhance academic research and establish a direct dialogue between scholars and policymakers.