Circuits of Power and Environmental Change

Circuits of Power and Environmental Change
The concept of circuits of power can be used to introduce mechanisms of change into the static structure of business enterprise power networks. Underpinning the concept is an extended interpretation of power, combining three quite separate conceptions of power in the context of the embedded firm (Clegg, 1989). First, there is the agency view of power in which power is commodified - something to be acquired. In this view order is premised on sovereignty, which accords with the exercise of technical and positional power in resource dependence interpretation of organisational interrelationships (Pfeffer, 1981). Second, there is the Machiavellian view of power as relationship; concerned with what power does rather than what power is. Third, there is the Foucaudian view of power as discipline - the disciplinary practices of the state, society, culture and capital which generate and promote change and system instability. Through the processes involved in these circuits of power, the networks of relationships within which business enterprises are embedded are always in a state of dynamic tension in which short periods of change and transformation punctuate what might be long periods of tolerated inequality.

It is important to recognise that the three circuits of power are not arranged hierarchically and that all impinge on agents and enterprises simultaneously. The negotiated or imposed inequalities involved in relationships of dominance to control money and authority will generate time specific and place specific outcomes which will feed back through the circuit of power to affect the activities of agencies and to adjust social relations.

However, because the exercise of power provokes resistance, power will be exercised only episodically to create new standing conditions and to achieve new and modified outcomes. Both production and consumption require maximum certainty and minimised risk to create conditions of confidence. Under these circumstance, it is in the interest of al agencies to minimise the disruption to network relationships - no matter how unequal those relationships might be - which might be initiated by the exercise of power. The norm will be long periods of network stability punctuated by short periods of upheaval. In terms of the relationship between economy and environment, patterns of material extraction and chemical release are likely, therefore, to remain stable for lengthy periods of time. It can be argued then that patterns of ‘production pollution’ and ‘consumption pollution’ across network topographies will have a tendency to persist irrespective of their environmental and ecological consequences.

However, the episodic agency of the causal circuit of power is also embedded within a field of forces comprising a dispositional circuit of power relating to social integration and a facilitative circuit of power relating to system integration. To quote Clegg (1989):
The circuit of social integration is concerned with fixing and refixing relations of meaning and of membership, while the circuit of system integration will be concerned with the empowerment and disempowerment of agencies’ capacities, as these become more or less strategic as transformations occur which are incumbent upon changes in techniques of production and discipline (p.224)

The dispositional circuit of power is concerned with agent’s attempts to stabilise outcomes. in the business enterprise context, they are looking for kindred spirits, with similar views or strategies, converts who can be persuaded to give their support, and others who can be intimidated into giving their support. Thus, social integration is achieved through the formulation and fixing of rules, the establishment of membership and by ascribing legitimacy and granting status to groups of agents. The process is entirely pragmatic and political - in other words, Machiavellian. It has been labelled the ’sociology of translation’ and includes the process of ’enrolment’ (Callon 1986; Clegg, 1989) it creates what have been termed ‘obligatory passage points’ to ensure the continuation and stability of -unequal- outcomes in the causal or episodic circuit of power. In addition, it necessarily stimulates a tendency towards isomorphism and uniformity among agencies at one particular time and in one particular place as they all organise in the same way to achieve the same goal. Thee obligatory passage points can be seen in company law, labour laws and the full spectrum of ‘system forming’ and ‘system guiding’ government regulatory frameworks (Christopherson, 1993). They might also be identified as being affected by shifting social norms - modes of social regulation. In the context of environmental degradation, obligatory passage points can be seen not only in codified environmental regulation but in the persuasion and confrontation of environmental activists, and the pleas of environmental scientists for greater attention to be paid to their objective wisdom.

The circuit of facilitative power is concerned with system integration and the empowerment and disempowerment of agencies as techniques of production and discipline change through innovation managerial innovation and organisational innovation. Among business enterprises, different methods of production involve different forms of labour discipline and different work regimes. As those techniques of production and discipline change, the fixity and certainty sought through the creation of ‘obligatory passage points’ and the standing conditions of day to day operations is undermined. As it was put by Clegg 1989, the facilitative circuit is: a circuit of power which introduces a potent uncertainty and dynamism into power relations. it is a source of new opportunities for undermining established configurations of episodic circuits of power, as it generates competitive pressure through new forms of technique, new forms o disciplinary power, new forms of empowerment and disempowerment (p. 236)

This ‘potent uncertainty’ also has a spatial dimension as internationalising firms introduce new work regimes into the localities and communities they expand into. The concept of circuits of power adds detailed dynamic to the power networks . It demonstrates an unequal day to day struggle between business enterprises based on their control of resources. It highlights attempts to achieve certainty and stabilised inequality through ’translation’ and the erecting of ’obligatory passage points’. and it points to new technologies, new work regimes and new forms of discipline as forces of destabilisation. In short, it adds a dynamic tension to the relationships involved in enterprise power networks. Economy environment relationships seen from t his power networks perspective are, therefore, in a constant state of flux as patterns and forms of production and consumption change.

Technological change, changing work regimes and changing modes of discipline and regulation (facilitative power), either developed in situ or imported into a community through learning and inward investment, can radically alter the temporarily stable arrangements. The inference is, therefore that left to themselves, business enterprise power networks are incapable of acting to ameliorate mounting environmental problems locally and especially globally. If a configuration of obligatory passage points can be created that forces them to adopt environmental sustainability as a goal and performance standard can environmental degradation be curbed.

References;

Taylor, M., Environmental Change: Industry, Power and Policy, Avebury publishing, 1995
Clegg, s., Frameworks of Power, Sage, London, 1989
Clegg, S., Modern organisations: Organisation Studies in the Postmodern World, sage, London, 1990
Christopherson, S., Market rules and territorial outcomes: The Case of the US, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 17, p. 274-289, 1993