The macrosystem, as defined by Bronfenbrenner, is the “overarching pattern of micro-, meso-, and exosystems characteristic of a given culture or subculture” and contains systems such as the economic, social, educational, legal, and political systems.
This outer layer in Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model represents the values, ideologies, and laws of the society or culture in which an individual lives.
Although often depicted as an outer ring in a diagram, it is vital to understand that the macrosystem does not function independently of the individual.
In fact, this layer, although seemingly distant, exerts its influence by affecting the operations of the inner layers, shaping daily experiences, and ultimately, impacting individual development.
Examples of Macrosystems in Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory
Below are some examples of the macrosystems in this theory:
Cultural Norms and Values
- Individualism vs. Collectivism: In a society that values individual achievement, children might be raised to be more competitive and self-reliant. This can be seen in parenting styles that emphasize personal accomplishments and independence. Conversely, cultures prioritizing collective harmony often raise children to put group needs before individual desires.
- Gender Roles: Beliefs about gender roles impact how children are raised and the expectations placed upon them within their families, schools, and communities.
- Religious or Philosophical Ideologies: Religious or philosophical ideologies shape beliefs about family, morality, and life purpose. These belief systems often influence childrearing practices, social interactions, and educational choices.
- Technological Advancements: In the digital age, children and adolescents participate in virtual microsystems like social media, which are influenced by the broader technological landscape. However, access to technology is not always equal, leading to a digital divide influenced by socioeconomic factors.
Socioeconomic Factors
- Socioeconomic Status (SES): A family’s SES influences a child’s access to resources and opportunities. Children from lower-SES backgrounds may face more challenges, while those from higher-SES backgrounds may have more advantages. This can influence proximal processes (interactions with their environment), personal characteristics (such as stress response), and their developmental trajectory.
- Poverty: Poverty is a powerful macrosystemic factor that can limit a child’s opportunities. Children growing up in poverty might experience substandard housing, limited access to quality education and healthcare, and higher levels of stress and environmental chaos. These factors can disrupt family routines, impact parenting styles, and hinder a child’s overall development.
- Economic Policies: Economic policies, such as those related to employment, housing, and welfare, can influence a family’s economic stability and impact a child’s well-being.
Education and Healthcare
- Educational Policies and Standards: Educational policies, such as curriculum choices, standardized testing, and funding for schools, influence a child’s educational experiences.
- Healthcare Systems: Access to quality healthcare, including physical and mental health services, varies across societies and can have long-term effects on a child’s development.
Other Macrosystem Influences
- Major Historical Events: Events like pandemics, wars, or economic crises can have lasting impacts on individuals and societies. Children growing up during these times may experience disruptions to their education, family life, and social interactions.
- Environmental Attitudes and Policies: Societal views and policies related to the environment, such as climate change or pollution, shape a child’s exposure to environmental risks and influence their understanding of these issues.
Strengths of the macrosystem concept:
Below are some strengths of the macrosystem concept:
- Provides a holistic understanding of development: The macrosystem concept considers the broader societal and cultural context in which development occurs, acknowledging that these factors can significantly impact a child’s upbringing and life trajectory.
- Highlights cultural influences: By emphasizing culture, the macrosystem concept helps explain cross-cultural differences in development.
- Examines socioeconomic factors: The macrosystem concept acknowledges the role of societal structures and inequalities in shaping developmental opportunities and constraints by including factors like poverty, social class, and access to resources.
- Considers historical influences: The macrosystem encompasses historical events and changes over time that can have a lasting impact on development, recognizing the role of major societal shifts in shaping individual experiences.
Limitations of the macrosystem concept
Below are some limitations of the macrosystem concept:
- Can be too broad and difficult to measure: The macrosystem encompasses a vast array of factors, making it challenging to operationalize and measure its specific influences on individual development.
- May not adequately capture cultural diversity: While the macrosystem acknowledges cultural influences, it may not fully account for the diversity of cultural experiences within a society or the dynamic interplay of multiple cultural identities.
- Was neglected in later iterations of the theory: Despite its importance, Bronfenbrenner’s later work, particularly in Phase 3 of his theory development, paid less explicit attention to the macrosystem, focusing more on proximal processes (which are enduring and increasingly complex interactions in a person’s immediate environment that drive development) and individual characteristics.
- Original conceptualization struggled to explain how distal systems impact proximal processes: One criticism of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model is its insufficient conceptualization of how the macrosystem directly impacts individual development, particularly how more distal systems influence proximal processes.
Evolution of the macrosystem for the digital age
- Need to account for virtual contexts: The rise of digital technologies and virtual environments necessitates an evolution of the macrosystem concept to encompass the impact of online cultures, digital divides, and the evolving nature of social structures in a technologized world.
- Incorporating cultural change and online subcultures: The macrosystem needs to reflect the dynamic nature of culture in the digital age, including the emergence of online subcultures, the impact of social media on social norms, and the role of technology in shaping values and beliefs.
- Addressing the digital divide: The macrosystem should account for the digital divide and its implications for developmental opportunities and inequalities, as access to technology and digital literacy are increasingly important in a digital society.
- Neo-ecological theory offers modifications: Neo-ecological theory, an adaptation of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory, proposes incorporating virtual interactions and activities as part of the microsystem by recognizing the existence of both virtual and physical microsystems. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of macrosystemic influences, such as culture and subcultural variations within societies, to understand development in the digital age.
Practical Applications of the Macrosystem
Here are some practical applications of the macrosystem that parents, educators, policymakers, and researchers can adopt to support child development better:
Understanding Cultural Diversity
For Parents and Educators
Recognizing and respecting the cultural backgrounds of children and families is crucial.
Parents and educators can incorporate culturally relevant practices into their interactions, creating a more inclusive and supportive environment.
For example, incorporating diverse literature in schools, celebrating cultural holidays, or arranging workshops to educate themselves about diverse family structures can create a more welcoming and supportive environment for children from all backgrounds.
For Policymakers and Researchers
Policies and research should be designed to be culturally sensitive and inclusive. Recognizing that developmental outcomes and acceptable parenting practices are culturally defined is essential.
This might involve funding culturally tailored parenting programs, promoting multicultural education in schools, or conducting research to understand the specific needs of diverse communities.
Addressing Socioeconomic Inequities
For Policymakers
Policies aimed at reducing poverty and providing equal access to resources are essential.
This might include increasing the minimum wage, expanding access to affordable housing, providing quality early childhood education, and ensuring affordable healthcare for all children.
Such measures can help level the playing field, providing children from disadvantaged backgrounds with a stronger foundation for development.
For Researchers
Research can play a crucial role in understanding the mechanisms through which socioeconomic factors impact child development and in evaluating the effectiveness of interventions.
This research can inform the development of evidence-based policies to break down systemic barriers.
Promoting Positive Social Norms
For Parents, Educators, and Community Leaders
Collaborating to create supportive environments within the community is crucial. This might include advocating for safe neighborhoods, accessible libraries and community centers, and quality after-school programs.
For Media Outlets
Mass media and social media play a significant role in shaping societal norms. Policymakers can encourage responsible digital citizenship and media literacy to mitigate the negative influences of the digital age on child development.
Promoting positive role models, challenging stereotypes, and advocating for diversity in media representation can have a ripple effect on societal attitudes and expectations, creating a more inclusive and supportive macrosystem for all children.
References
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Ceci, S. J. (1994). Nature-nurture reconceptualised: A bio-ecological model. Psychological Review, 10 (4), 568–586.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1995). Developmental ecology through space and time: A future perspective. In P. Moen, G. H. Elder, Jr., & K. Lüscher (Eds.), Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development (pp. 619–647). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10176-018
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1999). Environments in developmental perspective: Theoretical and operational models. In S. L. Friedman & T. D. Wachs (Eds.), Measuring environment across the life span: Emerging methods and concepts (pp.3-28). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10317-001
Guy-Evans, O. (2024, January 17). Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/bronfenbrenner.html
McLeod, S. (2024, January 24). Vygotsky’s Theory Of Cognitive Development. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html
Navarro, J. L., & Tudge, J. R. (2023). Technologizing Bronfenbrenner: neo-ecological theory. Current Psychology, 42(22), 19338-19354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02738-3
O’Regan, C., Brady, B., & Connolly, C. (2023). Building back better – using an ecological lens to argue for strengthening mesosystemic connections for young people in a post-pandemic world. Child Care in Practice, 29(4), 358–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/13575279.2022.2084364
Rosa, E. M., & Tudge, J. (2013). Urie Bronfenbrenner’s theory of human development: Its evolution from ecology to bioecology. Journal of family theory & review, 5(4), 243-258. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12022
Vélez-Agosto, N. M., Soto-Crespo, J. G., Vizcarrondo-Oppenheimer, M., Vega-Molina, S., & García Coll, C. (2017). Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory revision: Moving culture from the macro into the micro. Perspectives on psychological science, 12(5), 900-910. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617704397
