‘Through a Glass, Darkly’: Investigating Contemporary Higher Education Policy Dynamics from a Biological Perspective

This paper embraces the usage of complex systems theory, rooted in the natural sciences, as to gain a better understanding, both conceptual and empirical, as regards policy dynamics in European higher education. It does so by resorting to three constructs emanating from the study of biological systems, namely: requisite variety; autocatalysis; and hybridization. Following cybernetics (i.e. the comparative study of automatic control system), Ashby’s (1958) seminal work, as regards control mechanisms inherent to complex systems, sheds light on the importance associated with (requisite) variety in the context of seemingly complex environments. Stated differently, environmental complexity is mirrored in the types of organisms or forms present in a given (biological or social) domain, in our case the organizational field of higher education. The current policy emphasis attributed to ‘excellence’ and ‘relevance’ in detriment of other elements such as equity or ‘access’ seem to suggest that current policy frameworks neglect Ashley’s insightful considerations. Autocatalysis pertains to the automatic replicability of organisms or forms, thus ensuring survival. Recently, social scientists have used the former concept to shed light on the historical emergence of organizations and markets (Padgett & Powell, 2012). Policy convergence associated with the travelling of global, hegemonic ideas, resulting into isomorphic patterns (Ramirez et al., 2016), are but one manifestation of the above phenomenon within higher education. Finally, hybridization is associated with the combination of seemingly distinct organisms or in our case organizational forms (Battilana & Lee, 2014). Mandatory mergers or amalgamations (resulting from system contraction) between different types of higher education institution are examples of the rise of hybrid forms in European higher education, also resulting in new tensions and volitions associated with the mix of contrasting policy and/or institutional logics (Greenwood et al., 2010). The paper is qualitative in nature and builds upon policy developments in selected European countries, with a special focus on the Nordic region.