Actor Classifications: macro, meso, micro, pico
Actors at levels Macro, Meso, Micro and Pico
The table below generically characterizes actors at different levels in a modern society. Development initiatives typically involve actors at multiple levels.
The level (macro, meso, micro, or pico) of a Principal, will determine attributes of its interests (e.g., the resources for survival and growth that it must consume, produce or protect).
Also behavioural constraints are determined by the level. For instance:
- within their jurisdictions, macro and meso-level actors should refrain from giving preferential treatment to any of their micro or pico-level "subjects";
- companies compete at the micro-level in their sector of industry;
- persons compete in sports contests (in sports disciplines (meso-level)) or for job promotion (in the micro-context of an organization)
- the institutional instruments that governments can use to promote their industries are constrained by global trade agreements.
| Extent |
What is the area of concern and impact of initiatives? |
| Principals |
Who decides? Who is responsible at this level? |
| System |
What are typical interactions? |
| Design |
What are typical design or development methods? How is change initiated? |
| Cases |
Which cases illustrate change factors? What representative cases are there in the literature? |
| Problems |
Which approaches are used to identify problem messes? |
| Outcomes / values |
What outcomes are valued and produced? How are they measured? |
| Extent |
Landscape, with a local to global horizon. |
| Principals |
Intergovernmental agencies, regional, national and local authorities. Illustrations at Country Actor Maps, and further explanation at macro classification. |
| System |
The socio-economic interactions in a territory. |
| Design |
Regulatory Reform; Constitutive Institutional Analysis and Design. |
| Cases |
Current: Millennium Development Plan, UNFCCC, ….
Past: Parliament in England ; Limited liability by Law in New York State; TRIPS; Small-scale societies
|
| Problems |
http://www.worldometers.info/ provides a number of statistics that articulate problems in the areas of environment, health, food, water, energy.
Historical comparison (North, 1990), comparative economics, country benchmarking support a more focussed analysis of causal chains and means to overcome problems.
|
| Outcomes / values |
equity, capability, sustainability as a basis for health, wealth and inclusivity. |
| Extent |
Sector, such as an industry or agro sector, a scientific or applied discipline, etc. For more details see: Meso Classification.
In the Actor Atlas, the economic activity classes of ISIC are used:
|
| Principals |
Standards organisations; sector, engineering and science associations and comparable entities; specialized intergovernmental organizations such as FAO, WHO, ITU, etc. |
| System |
Sector-governance, standard-setting and other sector-wide interactions in an industry or discipline, or among members in a community of practice |
| Design |
Methods of scientific research; engineering design; standards development; sectoral Institutional Analysis and Design (Hess & Ostrom, 2007); diffusion of innovations (E. Rogers); the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions . |
| Cases |
Hygienic transition in Dutch cities;
Photo Voltaic cells; GSM |
| Problems |
Comparison among sectors, and how a sector copes with landscape developments (new technologies) and pressures. |
| Outcomes / values |
Sector governance, innovation, speed of diffusion of innovations, speed of standards development and adoption. Are know-do gaps effectively bridged? Risk control, quality standards, etc. |
| Extent |
The firm or organisation and the plants, land and service facilities it operates. |
| Principals |
Firms and other organisations, more details at Micro Classification. |
| System |
The farm, the factory, the delivery system and/or office environment that sustain the value creating processes |
| Design |
Business and organization development methods. For livelihoods, the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) gives a comprehensive approach. |
| Cases |
Many exist in the business literature. |
| Problems |
Various approaches exist. Benchmarking is considered an effective approach. |
| Outcomes / values |
Economic value added, productivity, market share, firm growth |
| Extent |
Person or individual actant. |
| Principals |
Persons in the role of workers, engineers, managers, farmers, parents, public servants. For more details, see: Pico Classification. |
| System |
The livelihood, the learning and/or work context of the person. Attitude, skills and knowledge matter, in addition to the resource endowment. |
| Design |
Kolb; learning paths.
The article How companies learn your habits by Charles Duhigg (February 16, 2012, New York Times Magazine) explains and illustrates the importance of cue-routine-reward loops for people, and it explains how life-events, such as giving birth, make customers vulnerable to intervention by marketers. |
| Cases |
Many exist in the literature on psychology and pedagogy. |
| Problems |
Social comparison (Festinger). |
| Outcomes / values |
Care of the self and the family. Personal health and wealth. |
| Extent |
The interaction in a value-constellation of principals and entities at the different levels. |
| Principals |
The principals from the four other levels, pico, micro, meso and macro. |
| System |
The ecosystem, including the natural, social and technical environment and the socio-cultural arrangements. |
| Design |
Poverty reduction strategies; Applying enterprise architecture in a multi-level perspective; |
| Cases |
Several cases are included in Geels & Schot (2007). Others can be found at http://www.citeulike.org/tag/multi-level |
| Problems |
(Economic) Growth Diagnostics
Benchmarking per level in combination with cross-level causal-chain analysis. |
| Outcomes / values |
Sustainable and equitable socio-economic growth by capable people. |
Why Social Architecture?
In their recent book, North, Wallis and Weingast (2009) explain the difference between natural states and modern societies. Modern societies create open access to economic and political organizations, and by doing so they foster political and economic competition, and development.
In the modern society, the balance between open access resources and private property is a subtle one. For knowledge resources, this balance seems to be least understood. Also claims on land, sea and its use are a contentious area.
Vagueness regarding the allocation of resources, be it land, knowledge or material, induces individual risk considerations that hinder development.
By using a multi-level classification of the actors in the socio-technical fabric we can articulate and vary the rules of interaction and the claims on resources. By visually representing the claims that exist on contested resources (consider the legal swamp metaphore), various actors can be allocated better understood and delineated claims on resources, which will be inputs to the construction of sustainable and equitable futures.
Both the classification and the visual representations are indispensable instruments in re-architecting the socio-technical fabric of the techno globe, to enable more inclusive, equitable and sustainable development.
