The fact that the work of German sociologist Niklas Luhmann was not just that of a systems theorists, be even more so that of a historian, has been somewhat overlooked. Indeed, as the paper argues, this is first and foremost what sets Luhmann’s particular brand of systems theory apart from general systems theory and cybernetics. Thus Luhmann, showed little interest in maintaining the formal and technical ambitions of general systems theory. Rather, he used general systems theory as just one source among many, in order to provide a more adequate sociological analysis of modernity. Luhmann was of course a sociologist above all else. His basic motivation was the quintessential macro-sociological quest for insights into the fundamental structures and dynamics of society (Luhmann, 2005). Methodologically speaking, however, Luhmann more or less considered himself a historian, thinking, as he stated ‘mostly in historical terms’ (1991). This somewhat neglected historical dimension of Luhmann’s work has recently been made the subject of more careful scrutiny (Buskotte, 2006). The paper proceeds as follows. First, I discuss the theory of steering and control suggested by general systems theory and cybernetics, focussing on the so-called ‘autopoietic’ paradigm and the concept of self-governance. Second, I survey the macro-sociological analysis of constitutive traditions of governance suggested by Niklas Luhmann’s work on functional differentiation, contrasting his approach with the conventional macro-sociology of state, market and civil society widely applied in governance research. Third, I discuss the implications of functional differentiation for the transformation of public governance, distinguishing between the application of new governance mediums and scripts by government organisations and the issue of network proliferation. Finally, I turn to the issue of meta-governance and the role of state as seen from the systems theoretical perspective.
