Indicators of Civilizational Viability: An Operational Framework for Comparing Interaction Architectures

Abstract

This article develops an operational framework for measuring civilizational viability within Vitology. Building on the comparative metrology of interaction architectures introduced in G27–G28, it proposes a system of Civilizational Viability Indicators (CVI) for evaluating the reproducible consequences of interaction among states, societies, institutions, and other interconnected systems. Eight indicator groups are introduced: Systemic Conflict Cost (SCC), Coordination Efficiency (CE), Autonomy Preservation Capacity (APC), Regenerative Capacity (RC), Adaptive Capacity (AC), Constructive Synergy Gain (CSG), Cross-Level Viability Alignment (CLVA), and Cross-Level Viability Conflict (CLVC). These indicators are integrated into a Comparative Viability Profile (CVP), intended to support multidimensional comparison without prematurely reducing civilizational viability to a single universal numerical index. The article further distinguishes Viable Polycentricity (VP) from Fragmented Polycentricity (FP) and formulates the Principle of Constructive Viability (PCV). The proposed framework does not assign predetermined viability values to geopolitical, cultural, or institutional models; instead, it evaluates interaction architectures according to their measurable effects on the viability of components, interconnected levels, and the larger system. G29 thereby advances the concept of Constructive Civilization from a theoretical proposition toward an operational and empirically testable framework. Keywords Vitology; civilizational viability; viability indicators; Civilizational Viability Indicators; Comparative Viability Profile; systemic conflict cost; coordination efficiency; regenerative capacity; adaptive capacity; polycentricity; Cross-Level Viability Alignment; Cross-Level Viability Conflict; Constructive Civilization.