Edwards: Three kinds of holarchy lens

Continuing this post, Edwards (2010) explains in Chapter 7 the relationships between different lenses and lens categories. He also cautions that theorists who tend to rely on a small number of lenses miss the bigger picture of not only what other lenses have to offer but in how they relate in a broader metatheory. Of particular note is the relationship between the three different kinds of holarchical lenses: developmental, ecological and governance. An excerpt:

"It is important to note that for each of these forms of holarchy the regulatory processes that govern interactions between sub-holons are multidirectional and relational in character. Therefore, in their ideal form, holarchiesshould not be equated with top-down command structures or bottom-up revolutionary structures. That is, in true governance holarchies, more encompassing levels do not determine what the less encompassing levels will do in isolation from the organising agency of those junior levels. 'Higher' holarchical levels do not cause 'lower' levels to behave or think. The exchange is always a two-way process. Hence, in a balanced governance holarchy, constituent holons are best seen as leader-followers. In practice, however, distorted forms of these lenses can shape and reproduce inherently unhealthy social hierarchies (as Bhaskar has noted) and it is in these instances that we see oppressive forms of top-down power hierarchies and destructive forms of bottom-up revolutionary heterarchies. Healthy holarchies are actually a balance between supportive forms of hierarchy and stabilising forms of heterarchy" (133).