Political Networks as Complex Dynamical Power Systems

Explaining political processes requires moving beyond immediate political events to examine the "broader governance contexts and systems" that shape their paths and outcomes. Yet conventional political network analysis, while mapping observable linkages, rarely captures these deeper structural forces. The Integrated Structurational Analysis (ISA) method (Broadbent 2024) addresses this limitation by systematically extending the scope of what political network research can capture and explain. Sociology offers diverse theories of the forces that drive political processes—from structural Marxism to symbolic interactionism. But as practiced, these theories usually each form narrow, paradigmatic schools within distinct explanatory silos. Better explanation would require integrating multiple theorized forces into conjoint hybrid accounts. To enable integration, the ISA method breaks the diverse theories into their axioms and finds evidence for their real-world effect in the micro-power relational dyads (pairs) among actors. The ISA analyzes the (hundreds of) A-B dyads that effectively enact a case of political contention over time. The ISA method codes each dyad along three axiomatic dimensions: (1) the structuration (structured, plastic, or agentic) of the two actors, (2) the tangibility of the medium of power (legal-coercive, economic, institutional-normative, belief-knowledge, morality-legitimacy, affect) used between the actors, (3) the relative power dominance vs. autonomy of actors A and B in the dyad. These three dimensions cover the primary axiomatic differences among 18 theory types. In aggregate, this micro-data reveals the relative explanatory validity of the different theories for the phases, path-directions, and totality of a macro-case. Simultaneously, at the meso level, dyads link into evolving power networks. This multi-dimensional evidence enables ISA to answer fundamental questions that conventional network analysis cannot: What conflux of causal forces generates and transforms a political field process? How does this conflux mix, interact, and change? How do the relative proportions of structure, plastic, and agency shift over time? What about shifts in the relative effect of the six forms of capital (tangibility media)? How do causal forces interact with substantive actors (and actants)? Does actor agency, by introducing new forces, bring about structural change? Do these new forces magnify from tiny starts, adding complexity, or emerge unpredictably, generating chaos? Overall, does the macro-causal process indicate a complex dynamical system? My years long ethnographic study of Japanese environmental contention discerned 254 dyadic encounters across 9 phases (27 years). Initial ISA analysis (Broadbent 2024) revealed dramatic phase shifts in the dominant tangibility causal factor—from cultural (symbolic realist) to economic (Marxist class) to symbolic interaction to economic rational choice. At each phase, the dominant force decisively shaped the power structure and immediately ensuing path. The present paper extends the analysis to the full dataset, encompassing all three variable dimensions. This comprehensive treatment enables empirical responses to the fundamental questions raised above. It demonstrates how ISA transforms political network analysis from mapping static exchange structures to explaining dynamic field processes, providing scholars with a systematic tool for capturing the ontological depth of causal forces that generate real-world political outcomes.