Co-Constitution

Theoretical co-constitution proposes a shift from unilateral causality to a mutual ontological emergence, wherein entities such as individuals and institutions, technologies and health systems, or norms and marginal actors, are not merely influenced by one another but actively sculpt one another’s formation in synchrony. In contrast to linear causation—where A precedes and produces B—co-constitution theorises an entangled dynamism where boundaries between cause and effect dissolve, revealing a continuous interplay that configures both structure and subject. In the realm of International Relations, this lens illuminates how so-called "weak actors"—minor states, civil society organisations, even individuals—can subtly or radically influence global normative architectures, thereby contesting the notion of norms as merely imposed top-down from hegemonic powers; norms and agents emerge together, neither ontologically prior to the other. A compelling illustration lies in technology and healthcare, where the introduction of diagnostic AI tools or decentralised platforms for health records doesn’t merely ‘impact’ the system but rather reconfigures roles, expectations, and ethical frameworks in tandem with institutional responses. The health system, conversely, shapes the uptake, design and meaning of these tools, dismantling the myth of technology as neutral or external. Within organisational settings, particularly in the adoption of CRISPR gene-editing technologies, we observe how legal frameworks, bioethical discourses, market mechanisms and lab practices co-emerge with the tool itself, blurring the line between innovation and institution. Hence, co-constitution articulates a world not of isolated variables acting upon each other, but of symbiotic emergence, where agency is diffuse, contingent, and always relational.

All things are connected, but not all connections are equal

In the renowned quote by Charles Eames—“Eventually everything connects – people, ideas, objects. The quality of the connections is the key to quality per se”—we find an epistemological key to understanding complexity not as chaos, but as an ordered interplay of relational intensities where the strength, clarity, and ethics of connection define the substance of any system, from design theory to social fabric, from knowledge architectures to emotional bonds; this monadic reflection pivots on the assumption that value is not inherent in things but emergent in their relations, positioning connection as a verb rather than a noun, a process rather than a property, a threshold where meaning is continuously negotiated through context-sensitive interaction; for example, in the field of product design, Eames’s own multidisciplinary work with Ray Eames exemplifies this principle through the ergonomic and aesthetic synthesis in objects like the Eames Lounge Chair, where form, function, material, and user coalesce not through isolated excellence but through precise relational calibration; in the sphere of academic research, particularly in interdisciplinary studies, it is not merely the juxtaposition of fields that yields innovation but the careful curation of interfaces—a historian engaging with data science or a biologist rethinking narratives with philosophers only succeeds when the bridge itself becomes a site of rigorous, intentional inquiry; consider, then, how this principle might apply to ecological thinking, where climate justice movements succeed not by aggregating causes but by forging just, situated, intersectional solidarities between frontline communities, policymakers, and scientific frameworks; Eames’s aphorism thus becomes more than a design motto: it is a call to cultivate relational excellence, to refuse superficial linkage in favour of profound interdependence, where quality arises not from parts alone, but from the ethics of how they meet.

-