For complex and hyper-complex systems, the type of outcome in terms of stability depends on the relative locations of subsystems generating variety and the control subsystems able to use variety to control the system variety.
This axiom reveals how system stability is structurally determined by the spatial, hierarchical, and relational positioning of variety generators relative to control systems.
Different topological arrangements of variety generation and control can produce fundamentally different stability outcomes - not as probabilistic tendencies but as necessary structural consequences.
Stability outcomes by different topology examples:
- Co-located: Local stability, global fragility
- Hierarchical: System coordination, brittleness to novelty
- Spatially distributed: Regional stability, coordination challenges
- Network distributed: Emergent stability, unpredictability
- Temporally separated: Oscillations, cyclical instability
- Cross-level (below): Fragmented stability, emergence or chaos
- Crossed networks: Structural instability, governance failure
- Adaptive coupling: Robust stability, high complexity
This framework appears to apply across all complex systems - biological, technological, economic, political, ecological - providing unified understanding of how system structure determines stability outcomes through variety topology.