Transmorphance of socio-technical systems: A conceptual framework for adaptive security

The article presents a new conceptual framework for analyzing and ensuring the security of socio-technical systems based on the fundamental difference between functionally stable and evolutionarily dynamic systems. Unlike the former, which are organized around clearly defined functions, the latter are structured by ontological invariants and exhibit the properties of complex adaptive systems: nonlinear dynamics, emergence, self-organization, and path dependence. It has been shown that traditional approaches to ensuring the security of socio-technical systems: robustness, survivability, and resilience - are proving insufficiently effective in an era of growing complexity of such systems and increasing environmental volatility. These approaches are primarily focused on maintaining or restoring the initial state of the system, rather than ensuring the possibility of its fundamental transformation. The growing interconnectedness and dynamic nature of current socio-technical systems require new theoretical foundations capable of accounting for radical structural changes while preserving the identity of the system. Based on five key axioms of complex systems: non-locality and multiplicity of components, emergence, nonlinear dynamics and path dependence, self-organization and adaptation, the authors introduce the concept of transmorphance – the ability of evolving socio-technical systems to survive radical structural transformations while preserving the ontological invariants that define the identity of the system. Transmorphance conceptually surpasses existing approaches by offering a paradigm of adaptation through change of form rather than preservation. The concept is empirically confirmed by a comprehensive analysis of the evolution of Jewish statehood over nearly three millennia. The analysis reveals key mechanisms of transmorphance, including the evolution from centralized territorial structures to distributed networks of autonomous communities linked by common legal norms and symbolic codes. Comparative analysis allows us to distinguish transmorphance from related concepts, in particular from antifragility and adaptive capacity from resilience literature. While antifragility focuses on extracting benefits from volatility within existing structural forms, transmorphance implies fundamental morphological transformations. Unlike adaptive capacity, which usually implies gradual optimization, transmorphance involves discrete transformations similar to phase transitions that change the basic paradigm of the system's functioning. The proposed approach expands the theoretical foundations of socio-technical system security management and offers new adaptation strategies in an era of high systemic volatility. Practical implementation of the theory includes the need to increase the adaptive potential of such systems and develop adaptive mechanisms capable of using crises as opportunities for systemic evolution.