A new way of understanding and apprehending complexity is being sought. The major problem facing science today is to cope successfully with the increasing complexity of society. Of course, reduction is possible, but it will be the complexity that will make us see whether the reduction is pernicious or not. Complexity stands as a judge not only of the applications of the method of science, but also of its very essence. The world is like a complex being, which can be broken down into many parts, interconnected in a wide variety of ways, often difficult to pin down. Our sense of inadequacy pushes us towards fragmented knowledge; each important part generates one or more different disciplines or subjects of study. We live in a world, which in turn is a system, full of systems. To act efficiently and responsibly in this world, we need appropriate techniques and tools to help us understand and manage the systems and sub-systems that make it up. This is what systems thinking is all about. Society has problems and seeks solutions, for which it invents the Scientific Method, but this is incapable of dealing with complex problems and social issues; thinking based on systemic concepts and ideas is more adequate.

The complexity of the phenomena corresponding to the Restricted Sciences, such as Physics or Chemistry, did not call into question the validity of the scientific method, but the complexity of those corresponding to the Unrestricted Sciences (such as Biology or Geology within the field of Natural Sciences; or Anthropology or Sociology or Political Sciences from the field of Social Sciences) did. At its most abstract level, systems thinking encompasses a wide and heterogeneous range of methods, tools and principles, all aimed at examining or studying the interrelationship of forces that are part of the common process. This field includes cybernetics and chaos theory, guestaltic therapy, the work of Gregory Bateson, Russel Ackoff, Eric Trist, Ludwig Von Bertallanfy and the Santa Fe Institute, among others. These different approaches share a common guiding idea: the behaviour of all systems appears to follow certain common principles, the nature of which we are discovering and analysing. It is argued that the problem of knowledge is not to try to know the totality; it is better to change the idea of knowledge and what should be done is to try to understand systems. To understand the system, it is necessary to understand the nature of interdependence: the greater the interdependence, the greater the need for communication and cooperation. General Systems Theory would be able to integrate the abstract models and generalisations that cybernetics and related disciplines have developed, and would truly represent a rational and all-encompassing alternative that would overcome the current inadequacies of mechanicism.  The vision of the world as one big organisation would be raised.

The original Aristotelian ideas would be taken up again by considering every entity as a system, that is, as universes or sets of elements (matter) provided with structure (form); and, evidently, the elements of the universe of a system can themselves be systems (structured sets). The relationships between the various components of an organisational system, which produces desired and undesired results, must be understood. A system only exists when its components relate to each other in pursuit of a common end; without a common end, there would be no system, implying that there would be nothing more than a series of a disjointed, even individually competitive, elements or components. The systems thinker must see the patterns and structures of the organisation over time from the top or from the outside, with a (systemic or holistic) perspective without losing sight of the details of processes, resources and people.

The Research Group on Economic Integration, INTECO, was officially created after the grant of an aid for research groups awarded by the Science and Technology Office of the Valencian government (GR01-167) in 2001; two years later, INTECO received the consideration of Group of Excellence in the 2003 call. This consideration was renewed in the 2009 call (PROMETEO 2009/098). However, the research group was already registered in the Technology Transfer Offices of the Universities to which most of its members belong. Thus, the Castellón research group has the code 115ECON in the OCIT of the Universitat Jaume I under the title "Economic Integration" and the Valencia group has the code UV-0736 in the OTRI of the Universitat de València in the research line "Economic Integration".

• Research line 1: Trade implications of globalisation and regional integration processes.

The objective of this research line is to determine the effect of continental and intercontinental integration agreements on trade. The analysis is carried out both globally and for each continent in particular, with the aim of detecting specific features for economic and geographical reasons that may condition the effects of the agreements on trade. Specifically, one objective of this line is to identify the impact that institutional, cultural and political aspects may have on international trade. Aspects such as armed conflicts, ethnic differences, the degree of democracy, religion, civil liberties, political rights and development aid, among others, are the subject of detailed treatment.

• Research line 2: Implications of globalisation and regional integration processes for economic policy.

The recent wave of financial globalisation has led to an increase in countries' holdings of foreign assets and liabilities, and their asset portfolios can therefore be seriously affected by changes in asset prices, opening the possibility of large cross-country wealth transfers that alter the dynamics of foreign asset balances. However, these valuation effects have not been considered either in theory or in official statistics until very recently. In this line of research we propose to examine the long-term sustainability of current account deficits for a set of OECD countries using two channels: one representative of classical intertemporal models (trade adjustment channel) and another, central to the unified approach of Gourinchas and Rey (2007) "International financial adjustment", Journal of Political Economy 115, which adds a complementary channel to the previous one, through changes in asset valuation (financial adjustment channel). From an econometric point of view, it is proposed to combine several novel methodologies that solve problems of regime shifts and cross-section dependence that appeared in previous works, as well as adding improvements in the database and in the conceivable or bounded nature of the variables themselves.

• Research line 3: Relations between economic integration and Environment

This research line, which joined the INTECO group in 2008, aims to analyse the interrelationship between environment and economic integration by answering several questions. Firstly, whether the spatial relocation of economic activity resulting from greater integration, trade liberalisation and foreign direct investment poses a threat to environmental quality. Secondly, whether economic growth resulting from economic integration leads to a more sustainable path in the use of environmental resources.

The main research aim is the quality of accounting information for decision-making and the effects that information can have on the redistribution of wealth, financial stability, and the functioning of markets and the economy in general. There are different research lines within this main objective. The first one is the analysis of those aspects of international accounting regulation. The standardisation process, lobbying interests and the changes and effects of international regulatory changes. The second research line is related to the effect of the characteristics of the entities and their environment on the quality of the accounting information they issue, including aspects pertaining to their corporate governance, management and internal control mechanisms and their institutional environment. The third research line focuses on control mechanisms, including auditor characteristics, audit quality, as well as institutional supervisors.