Strand 2 · Concepts and scales
One phenomenon, several analytical frameworks
The concepts overlap in some respects, yet they have different genealogies and objects. Distinguishing them makes comparison possible without conflating their contributions.
Compare frameworks without conflating them
The same crises can be examined through different questions. This table identifies each framework’s object, scale, relationships, and status.
| Framework | Object and scale | Relationships foregrounded | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Morin’s polycrises | Situated, including local, polycrisis configurations, distinguished from planetary La Polycrise. | Interweaving, inter-retroactions, and solidarity among problems, antagonisms, and crises; their effects may also counteract one another. | A descriptive plural. The passage and context set its scope. |
| “La Polycrise” and planetary crisis | In Terre-Patrie, intersolidarity among crises belongs to a diagnosis of the planetary condition and a shared community of destiny. | Interactions among crises, threats, and human and ecological problems. | Related ideas in Morin’s work, distinguished according to the text cited. |
| Global Polycrisis, Cascade Institute | Causal entanglement of crises across multiple global systems. | Transmission mechanisms, cascades, and degraded human prospects. | A contemporary framework for formalization, with its own methods and objects. |
| Polycrise Mondiale, Mikael Mesnil Duprat | A proposed account of world polycrisis in dialogue with Morin and contemporary research. | Intersolidarity and interactions, together with scrutiny of the categories and diagnoses used to understand crisis. | A proposed synthesis. “Second-order crisis” develops Morin’s “crisis of crisis.” |
Why distinguish Morin’s formulations?
In Terre-Patrie (1993), Morin describes multiple crises, their inter-retroactions, and their intersolidarity. He calls “La Polycrise” the vital problem constituted by this complex solidarity. “Planetary crisis” places that problem within a wider diagnosis of the planetary era, marked by dangers, uncertainty, and a shared community of destiny.
The plural “polycrises” can also describe multiple or situated configurations. Context and exact wording should therefore accompany each use.
From crisis to the crisis of crisis
In “Pour une crisologie” (1976), Morin examines how crisis unsettles diagnosis, weakens regulation, and opens several possible outcomes. The Polycrise Mondiale proposal extends this inquiry by using “second-order crisis” for the testing of categories, knowledge, and capacities to respond.
This extension is presented as a research proposal by Mikael Mesnil Duprat. Its status differs from Morin’s texts and the Cascade Institute framework.
Louis Delannoy’s research on different framings
Two studies by Louis Delannoy and colleagues address different questions. A Q-method study of 50 experts, selected from 166 people invited, identifies four framings: analytical tractability, networked shocks, global governance, and conceptual stringency. These framings describe the viewpoints collected, not four canonical definitions or a representative population survey.
A separate study tracks shock co-occurrences across 175 countries from 1970 to 2019. It documents variation across time and place. Co-occurrence can point to relationships for further study; by itself, it does not establish causality or show that every case is a polycrisis.
Together, these findings make the diversity of interpretations and situations visible. They complement the Morinian genealogy without replacing it.