Planet Under Pressure

I cannot imagine anyone leaving this event still questioning that our planet is under pressure (PuP). But even that opening sentence is not an adequate framing of what is at issue.  And so it was at PuP, far too much inadequate framing and sensible, rigorous, use of language.

Let me start again. There is no doubt that human activity, directly and indirectly is affecting the quality of life on Earth. The public consolidation of the neologism, 'the Anthropocene', evident throughout the conference, is symbolic of scientific understanding as well as the way in which science is done.  The Earth will survive but life on Earth as we know it may not - what is at stake is the future quality of the relationship of humans with the biosphere, with other species (biodiversity) and with each other.  However at PuP a systemic sensibility, a capability to understand and talk in terms of relational dynamics, was not always evident in the plenaries and  the parallel sessions.

Several plenary speakers spoke of the need for systems thinking, and taking a systems approach.  These included Shobhakar Dhakal, Director-General of UNESCO, Irina Bokova as well as Wendy Watson-Wright, Deputy-Director General of UNESCO.  Julia-Marton Lefevre challenged the on-going use of the three pillars concept, arguing instead for more systemic understanding and approaches.  Learning as a key idea was not much in evidence except for Laurence Tubiana who stressed its centrality to change processes.  On the other hand in the word-cloud derived from the conference policy briefs the most prominent word was 'systems'.  Several speakers spoke about complex adaptive systems, some even referring to a complex system of systems!  In other words there was considerable confusion in the use of language (and thus thinking) about systems with some demonstrating a commitment to systems as ontologies ('real' entities) and others appreciating that systems were epistemological devices for knowing and acting.

Lack of theoretical clarity about the concept 'system' obfuscates getting on with the job - of taking practical action.  Too often speakers were left articulating exhortations and normative claims that ran the risk of leaving them naked in terms of how to move forward.  In a way the coining of the term 'Anthropocene' also has the potential to distract attention away from praxis - theory informed practical action - because it conserves a manner of abstraction involving classification, typical of doing science.  As an aside I left feeling that no scientist in future could defend ethically committing to an exercise in classification such as the MEA, because such exercises have become a means to avoid action.

I was pleased to have been at this conference even though my pessimism regarding our ability to act has not shifted greatly.  There is a conference declaration: "First State of the Planet Declaration" which is worth reading (see below).  Along with many others I was invited to comment on the draft of this manifesto and there have been many columns of reporting both in the press and digital media.  Here is what I said based on my experience of sessions I attended and my own research:

1. There is a lack of reflexivity on the part of scientists themselves.  Multiple perspectives including social scientists are needed to frame the research questions and agendas; more than lip-service needs to be paid to inter and trans-disciplinary research approaches (there is a need for significant institutional reform); the linear knowledge transfer paradigm needs to be abandoned in favour of knowledge co-production.

2. There is a need for more conceptual rigour - sustainability is not a state but an ongoing process; targets distort practice and produce perverse outcomes; the language of 'solutions' is inadequate in terms of the nature of the situations that have to be dealt with and implies science can deliver panaceas - this is not the case.

 3. The need for systemic understanding and practice was highlighted throughout the conference but too often this was confused with systematic and also too often people's comments and framings suggested a lack of systemic sensibilty (contextual and relational thinking and practice). For example the 'goal of increased education for women' was regularly espoused in the conference but when expressed as a goal or a target it ignores the systemic appreciation that the education of women has to be the result of changing patterns of social relations, personal identies and the beginning of the conservation of a different manner of living by many families and communities. Educated women is an emergent property of these systemic processes.

4. The conference has enacted an apartheid of the emotions - the result is that we risk conserving scientific communications that foster an emotion of fear rather than an emotion of hope. One of the best ways to alay fear is to offer people some agency in their own situations (including conference attendees).

5. More attention needs to be paid in the declaration to the systemic effects flowing on from climate change to the water cycle.

6. We need to abandon tripple bottom line approaches and framing and state clearly that the economic is merely one aspect of being social - and a domain where innovation has to happen.

7. Under research there is a need to recognise governance and praxis (theory informed practical action) as important and neglected areas of research.

You can judge from the declaration as to whether my points were taken on board or not.

Planet Under Pressure: New Knowledge Towards Solutions
1. Research now demonstrates that the continued functioning of the Earth system as it has supported the well-being of human civilization in recent centuries is at risk. Without urgent action, we could face threats to water, food, biodiversity and other critical resources: these threats risk intensifying economic, ecological and social crises, creating the potential for a humanitarian emergency on a global scale.
2. In one lifetime our increasingly interconnected and interdependent economic, social, cultural and political systems have come to place pressures on the environment that may cause fundamental changes in the Earth system and move us beyond safe natural boundaries. But the same interconnectedness provides the potential for solutions: new ideas can form and spread quickly, creating the momentum for the major transformation required for a truly sustainable planet.
3. The defining challenge of our age is to safeguard Earth’s natural processes to ensure the well-being of civilization while eradicating poverty, reducing conflict over resources, and supporting human and ecosystem health.
4. As consumption accelerates everywhere and world population rises, it is no longer sufficient to work towards a distant ideal of sustainable development. Global sustainability must become a foundation of society. It can and must be part of the bedrock of nation states and the fabric of societies.
5. The Global Environmental Change Programmes1 with the International Council for Science convened the Planet Under Pressure: New Knowledge Towards Solutions conference to assess the state of the planet and explore solutions to impending global crises. The conference brought together nearly 3000 leading experts and decision-makers to discuss global challenges and offer new solutions. And at least 3000 people across the world participated in the conference online.
6. Humanity has taken a huge leap and become a planetary-scale force. Significant changes have occurred since the 1950s, and the rate of change is accelerating. Researchers observe unsafe levels of pollution, ecological change and resource demand, with potentially catastrophic consequences for our global civilisation.
7. The past decade has seen the emergence of important areas of new scientific understanding by which to define what we are witnessing:
 A1. Humanity’s impact on the Earth system has become comparable to planetary-scale geological processes such as ice ages. Consensus is growing that we have driven the planet into a new epoch, the Anthropocene, in which many Earth-system processes and the living fabric of ecosystems are now dominated by human activities. That the Earth has experienced large-scale, abrupt changes in the past indicates that it could experience similar changes in the future. This recognition has led researchers to take the first step to identify planetary and regional thresholds and boundaries that, if crossed, could generate unacceptable environmental and social change.
A2. The Earth system is a complex, interconnected system that includes the global economy and society, which are themselves highly interconnected and interdependent. Such systems can confer remarkable stability and facilitate rapid innovation. But they are also susceptible to abrupt and rapid changes and crises, such as global financial meltdowns or the volatility of the global food system.
A3. Assessments of current mechanisms for governing global environmental change show why existing international arrangements are not dealing quickly enough with current global challenges such as climate change and biodiversity loss. There is growing evidence that diverse partnerships amongst local, national and regional governments as well as business and civil society provide essential safety nets should singular global policies fail – a polycentric approach for planetary stewardship.

8. These insights from recent research demand a new perception of responsibilities and accountabilities of nation states to support planetary stewardship. This requires goals aimed at global sustainability in order to achieve universal sustainable development. A crucial transformation is to move away from income as the key constituent of well-being and to develop new indicators that measure actual improvements in well-being at all scales. Equity in opportunities to improve well-being and eradication of poverty at the individual level will also play pivotal roles in the transition towards planetary stewardship.

9. Interconnected issues require interconnected solutions. Rapid scientific and technological progress can provide potential solutions – if adopted in timely manner – to reduce the risk of deleterious consequences for societies everywhere. But technological innovation alone will not be enough. We can transform our values, beliefs and aspirations towards sustainable prosperity.
10. Research plays a significant role in monitoring change, determining thresholds, developing new technologies and processes, and providing solutions. The international global-change research community proposes a new contract between science and society in recognition that science must inform policy to make more wise and timely decisions and that innovation should be informed by diverse local needs and conditions. This contract needs to encompass three elements:
B1. Integrated goals for global sustainability based on scientific evidence are needed to provide essential targets for societies. In support of this, the international scientific community calls for a framework for regular global sustainability analyses that link existing assessments that build on the foundations of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services and other ongoing efforts. Such analyses can be designed to bring coherence to the science-policy interface.
B2. The challenges facing a planet under pressure demand a new approach to research that is more integrative, international and solutions-oriented. We need to link high-quality focused scientific research to new policy-relevant interdisciplinary efforts for global sustainability. This research must integrate across existing research programmes and disciplines, across all domains of research as well as local knowledge systems, across the North and South, and must be co-designed and implemented with input from governments, civil society, research funders, and the private sector. As part of this new collaboration, at this conference the global-environmental-change programmes support a major research initiative, Future Earth: research for global sustainability.
B3. New mechanisms to facilitate an interactive dialogue on global sustainability among the various stakeholders and the policy-making community at different scales. Such interactions should be designed to bring societal relevance and trust to science-policy interfaces, and more effectively inform decision-making to keep pace with rapid global change.

11. To these ends, the initiatives above must be supported by:
• A greater commitment to fund and support capacity-building in science and education globally, and particularly in developing countries.
• A strong commitment to both applied and pure research and increased efforts to bring together disciplines, across all research domains.
• Strengthened support for observing systems, particularly in developing countries, including the new observations needed to support decision-making for global sustainability. New approaches should fully integrate global observing systems for environmental and social issues.
• Continued exploration of new areas of knowledge, such as theoretical and applied research in behavioural science and economics addressing ecological and social tipping points and irreversibility at multiple levels.

12. The United Nations Rio+20 Conference is an opportunity the world must seize at this crucial juncture. The UN Secretary-General’s Global Sustainability Panel report, Resilient People, Resilient Planet, provides a strong strategic framework for a sustainable future while calling for a marked strengthening of the interface between science and policy. The findings of the Planet Under Pressure conference support the key recommendations including:
C1. Fundamental reorientation and restructuring of national and international institutions is required to overcome barriers to progress and to move to effective Earthsystem governance. Governments must take action to support institutions and mechanisms that will improve coherence, as well as bring about integrated policy and action across the social, economic and environmental pillars. Current understanding supports the creation of a Sustainable Development Council within the UN system to integrate social, economic and environmental policy at the global level. There is also strong support for strengthening global governance by including civil society, business and industry in decision-making at all levels.
C2. A commitment to the proposal for universal Sustainable Development Goals is needed, as goals for Global Sustainability. These should be developed to take account of the synergies and trade-offs in and between areas such as food, water and energy security, maintenance of biodiversity and ecosystem services, sustainable urbanisation, social inclusion and livelihoods, protection of seas and oceans, and sustainable consumption and production. The research community should be involved in the development of goals, targets and indicators, recognising interconnected issues and building on existing measures of well-being. They should apply to all levels of governance.
C3. Recognition of the monetary and non-monetary values of public goods such as ecosystem services, education, health and global common resources such as the oceans and the atmosphere. These must be properly factored into management and decision-making frameworks at the national and sub-national levels to ensure that economic activities do not impose external costs on the global commons. Corrective measures that internalize costs and minimize the impacts on the commons need to be identified and implemented through regulatory and market-based mechanisms.

13. Our highly interconnected global society has the potential to innovate rapidly. The Planet Under Pressure conference has taken advantage of this potential to explore new pathways. It has marked a new direction for global change research. The international scientific community must rapidly reorganize to focus on global sustainability solutions. We must develop a new strategy for creating and rapidly translating knowledge into action, which will form part of a new contract between science and society, with commitments from both sides.
14. Society is taking substantial risks by delaying urgent and large-scale action. We must show leadership at all levels. We must all play our parts. A strong contribution from all stakeholders should make the UN’s Rio+20 conference a defining moment that sparks global innovation to move us towards a sustainable future. We urge the world to grasp this moment and make history.

London, 29th March 2012

From Nagambie to the land of the Fib Dems

The wetlands and billabongs around Nagambie, about 2 hours drive from Melbourne are awash and brimming with life. Australia is in the midst of a La Nina event and much of the landscape in south-eastern Australia is awash in spectacular, peculiarly Australian, ways (see these Wolf spiders for example).   The bird life is spectacular as we found out on a recent week-end in the locality - red-capped robins are particularly appealing.

In contrast England is experiencing a severe drought. There have already been crisis meetings amongst the main agencies and water companies. Fears for the summer are high.

London, striving to be Olympics ready, is pock marked with building activity.  The merchants of Regent St clearly anticipate a retail bonanza as many of the shops are undergoing major makeovers.  My Cockney cabbie preferred Boris to Ken in the mayoral stakes.  The bike riders are thicker than ever but accidents seem closer to hand. Compulsory road tax and insurance for bikers was my cabbie's policy prescription.

The new roof (or vest) at King's Cross Station is spectacular - surely now worth more then 200 Monopoly pounds! Though it was a little cool having our afternoon tea.

Steve Hilton, close friend and advisor to British PM, David Cameron is taking leave of the Civil Service and thus his championing of the 'Big Society' project.  Some reports make it clear that he was frustrated at his inability to push through reforms and public sector intransigence. Others are pleased at his departure!

The headlines upon my arrival seemed to suggest a government that had taken leave of its senses.  Road privatisation was on the agenda - was nothing learnt from the failures of rail privatisation? A two tier pay system was being proposed for civil servants in the north and south - clearly no one had explored the systemic implications of such a policy!  Who will ever vote for the Lib Dems (rebranded Fib Dems) again?

On the other hand the spring flowers were as enchanting as ever and the weather glorious.

More on fracking

In the New York Review of Books Bill McKibben reviews three important accounts of fracking including Josh Fox's documentary, 'Gaslands'. He gives a balanced overview but the final message is, for me, still one of despair.  He notes that:

'The rush to exploit 'extreme energy', and to rip the planet apart to get at it, knows no national boundaries.  Urbina reported last year that the big energy companies have spread the fracking technology around the planet finding new shale deposits in more than thirty countries.'

Regulators are in no position to keep up.  Thankfully in Australia we are now begining to see positive effects from concerted opposition.  It remains to be seen what position the new coalition government in Queensland will take.

Systemic approaches to education and the legacy of John Dewey

Schooling and university education are being debated across the world - it is a hot topic in Australia, the UK the USA etc..  It never ceases to amaze me how so many commentators, politicians and civil servants (i) generalise from their  own limited experience; (ii) trust the big consulting firms to deliver effective innovations (rather than repeat business); (iii) fail to learn from history and (iv) have no, or limited, appreciation of how learning operates.  Given my own experiences of three major Higher Education (HE) learning systems (traditional, didactic; student centred, experiential learning; student-centred supported open learning) it was thus pleasing to read a two-part series 'Schools we can Envy' and 'How, and How Not, to Improve the Schools' by Diane Ravitch in the New York Review of Books.

In particular I like Pasi Sahlberg's acronym 'GERM' as it is so fitting a description and metaphor for what is happening in the UK and Australia.  This extract explains the main points:

"Like George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind, Barack Obama’s Race to the Top program is part of what Pasi Sahlberg calls “the Global Education Reform Movement,” or GERM. GERM demands teaching to the test. GERM assumes that students must be constantly tested, and that the results of these tests are the most important measures and outcomes of education. The scores can be used not only to grade the quality of every school, but to punish or reward students, teachers, principals, and schools. Those at the top of the education system, the elected officials and leaders who make the rules, create the budgets, and allocate resources, are never accountable for the consequences of their decisions. GERM assumes that people who work in schools need carrots and sticks to persuade (or compel) them to do their best.

In Finland, the subject of the first part of this article,¹ teachers work collaboratively with other members of the school staff; they are not “held accountable” by standardized test scores because there are none. Teachers devise their own tests, to inform them about their students’ progress and needs. They do their best because it is their professional responsibility. Like other professionals, as Pasi Sahlberg shows in his book Finnish Lessons, Finnish teachers are driven by a sense of intrinsic motivation, not by the hope of a bonus or the fear of being fired. Intrinsic motivation is also what they seek to instill in their students. In the absence of standardized testing by which to compare their students and their schools, teachers must develop, appeal to, and rely on their students’ interest in learning."

The irony is that theoretically what Finland does takes much of its inspiration from the work of American John Dewey, who was also a great influence on Systems scholars like Russ Ackoff and West Churchman.  The GERM countries would do well to revisit John Dewey in their policy formulations.  Unfortunately this would require a major policy about-face as the key starting point.  A contemporary Deweian approach  needs re-recognition that education is a public good - an investment in a society - rather than a private good equipping the individual to compete in a mythical market. I do not see GERM politicians championing such a strategy.  Not even the UK Fib Dems had the courage of their convictions when it came to the crunch.

NASA data - patterns that challenge the sceptics

NASA managed to get man to the moon.  It is a scientific body to trust, in the main, as even their mistakes have been surfaced and addressed.

Look at this set of climate-related and CO2 data and try to tell me that we humans do not have to act, and act quickly.

IFSA 2012 PhD course in Systems Thinking and Practice

Announcement of the PhD Course

Systems Thinking and Practice in PhD Research: Making connections to Farming Systems Research
(3 ECTS)

Date: 29 June – 5 July 2012 including 4 days of IFSA Symposium. Download a PDF version of the course description. You can also download a flyer for print and further distribution remember to do double-sided print).

Objectives
Making connections among issues of farming, food, rural areas and environment and negotiating boundaries for research in these areas is becoming more and more complicated.  The context of the increasingly multifaceted complexity of sustainable development of food production and consumption is particularly challenging for PhD research.  It is a context that is a core part of the IFSA community’s experience.  The purpose of this course is to help you, the PhD student, develop your skills in contextualizing your research and making connections among issues using systems thinking.  It is also designed to help you build on what other researchers have done.
Through joining this course you can expect to:

• gain an overview of the intellectual traditions of Farming Systems Research,
• make links to the history of IFSA,
• strengthen your research through developing understanding of systems theories and methodologies
• have opportunity to reflect on strengths and weaknesses of different systems methodologies in relation to your own PhD research
• get added value from your participation in the Århus Symposium by also becoming part of a parallel critical learning systems community that has a PhD research focus
• develop appreciation of multiple perspectives on contemporary issues
• work across multiple disciplines

Process:
The course will be held in connection to the 10^th IFSA Symposium and draw on the gathering of specialists and researchers within this field.  Its design draws on tried and tested ways of experiential learning. The course will be grounded in a project of your own choice, preferably based on your PhD work.  In your time in Aarhus you will participate in an inquiry with three main parts – before, during and after the symposium. It will also involve some preparation and follow-up.

Before the course, you will be asked to complete an assignment in which you describe and reflect on either (i) your understanding and use of system theories in your project; or (ii) the rationale you have followed, or would follow, in making a choice to include, or not, systems theories in your PhD research

The pre-symposium part of the course will be offered in a workshop format consisting of a mixture of student presentations, lecture inputs and group work.  It will take place over two and half days starting on the morning of Friday 29^th June and finishing at mid-day on Sunday 1^st July.

The part of the course that runs in parallel to the symposium will provide mentorship and help you plan your attendance at the most relevant workshops for you at the IFSA symposium.  It will also provide an opportunity for joint reflection and feedback on the afternoons of Monday July 2^nd and Wednesday July 4^th.

After the symposium, on Thursday July 5^th, you and the other students will gather for half a day to recapitulate and work in groups, and agree on the assignment to be completed based on possible improvements of your own PhD study design, or future research trajectory, linking it to systems thinking and practice.  The course will end at mid-day.

Background and resources
This PhD course will benefit strongly from the fact that many outstanding researchers within farming system approaches will be gathered at the Symposium of the International Farming Systems Association.  Contributions specifically to this course will come from experienced researchers who have been a part of the IFSA community for many years.  They will include lectures and/or workshops that

• introduce systems theories;
• consider different systems approaches and methodologies suitable for researching issues of farming, food, rural areas and environment:
• bridge the different systems approaches – soft, hard, critical, viable etc.
• explore how to deal with handling of complexity and modeling
• critically review focuses on action, learning and reflexivity
• explicate social systems and learning systems approaches
• explore the relationship between systems approaches and transdisciplinary research

The key literature for the course will be:
Ika Darnhofer, David Gibbon and Benoit Dedieu (2012) The farming systems approach into the 21st century: The new dynamic. Forthcoming,  Springer, Berlin.

The following references provide additional background
Noe, E., Alrøe, H.F. & Langvad, A.M., 2008. A polyocular Framework for Research on Multifunctional Farming and Rural Development. Sociologia Ruralis, Vol 48 (1)

Noe, E & Alrøe H.F., 2005. Combining Luhmann and Actor-Network Theory to see Farm Enterprises as Self-organizing Systems. Cybernetics and Human Knowing. 13(1):34-48

Blackmore, Chris (Ed.). (2010) Social Learning Systems and Communities of Practice. Springer: London. (For online extracts)

Ison, Ray (2010) Systems Practice: How to Act in a Climate-Change World. Springer: London. (For online extracts)

Ramage, Manus and Shipp, Karen (2009) Systems Thinkers. Springer: London. (For online extracts)

Reynolds, Martin and Holwell, Sue. Systems Approaches to Managing Change. Springer:London. (For online extracts)

Course Assessment
To obtain the course certificate you will be required to:

• complete a pre-course assignment as outlined above
• participate in the lectures and group discussion.
• participate in one of the relevant working groups of the IFSA symposium.
• after the Symposium, complete assignment that discusses improvements to your own PhD study, or future research trajectory design, linking it to systems thinking and practice.

Registration for the Course
Registration for the course is done in relation to the IFSA symposium. If you follow the link to ‘Registration’ at www.ifsa2012.dk you will be able to register for the course

For further information
Egon Noe Tel.: +45 8715 8038  Email: Egon.Noe@agrsci.dk
Course Team:
Co-ordinators:
Associate Professor Egon Noe and Professor Nadarajah Sriskandarajah
Guest lecturers:
Professor Ray Ison
Senior Lecturer Dr Chris Blackmore
Associate Professor Hugo Alrøe

Planet Under Pressure Conference

I shall be attending this conference in London from the 25-29th March.  We have a paper being presented in this session: 

Tuesday 27 March 2012 - Options and opportunities, 10:30

Room 12

Collective action for the transition to a sustainable society: building the research and action agenda

Chaired by Sander van der Leeuw and Ilan Chabay
Convenors: Ilan Chabay, Chalmers University of Technology and University of Stuttgart; Sander van der Leeuw, Arizona State University; Pamela Matson, Stanford University; John Finnigan, CSIRO Marine & Atmospheric Research

Much GEC research has focused on understanding dynamics driving our planet to the present predicament; much less effort has been devoted to understanding how to effect a transition to a more sustainable society. This is the critical global challenge that this session will address through a search for innovative research efforts in the context of the Earth System Sustainability Initiative.

Social Learning Systems for Collective Action: a critical review of cases from UK, South Africa, China and Australia using social learning systems

 

Dr. C. Blackmore¹; Dr. K. Collins¹; Prof. R. Ison^{2 , 1}; Dr. J. Colvin¹; P. Wallis¹; ¹Open Systems Research Group, The Open University, UK ²Monash Sustainability Institute, Monash University, Australia

Lugano Summer School of Systems Design

Werner Ulrich has sent the following advice.


UNIVERSITY OF LUGANO, SWITZERLAND

LSS 2012: LAST DOCTORAL AND POSTDOCTORAL SUMMER SCHOOL
ON SOFT AND CRITICAL SYSTEMS THINKING

********************************************************

The Lugano Summer School is organizing its very last event in the
successful  series of "Doctoral and Postdoctoral Summer Schools on Soft
and Critical Systems Thinking." It will be held once again at the
University of Lugano in the southern, Italian-speaking part of
Switzerland, and its topic will be:

*/«Systems Thinking for Improving my Research and Professional Practice»/*

Dates: 18-29 June 2012
Location: University of Lugano, Switzerland
Faculty: Prof. Peter B. Checkland, University of Lancaster, UK
and Prof. Werner Ulrich, University of Fribourg, Switzerland
Number of available study places: 20

********************************************************

For complete information about the academic program,
workload, admission requirements, tuition fee, suggested credit units,
etc., please visit the School web site at
http://www.lss.lu.unisi.ch/

A printer-friendly LSS 2012 flyer can be downloaded from the School web
site.

A formal application is required which needs to be submitted through the
Registration Form in the School website. Its purpose is to make sure
that all participants are adequately qualified and motivated to fully
benefit of the academic program of LSS 2012.
Inquiries: Please address all queries to the School Director, Prof.
Werner Ulrich, at lss@gmx.ch <mailto:lss@gmx.ch>

Attention: Enrollment has been proceeding very well. At this stage, only
about 4-5 study places remain available. Enrollment will be closed when
all 20 study places have been assigned. This is your last chance ever to
be introduced to soft systems methodology (SSM) and critical systems
heuristics (CSH) directly by the original authors, in one and the same
integrated event. So, if you are interested, do not hesitate and
register NOW -- it is now or never.

Prof. W. Ulrich
Director, Lugano Summer School

Systemic sense and moral responsibility

I was pleased to see David Day's article published today in The Age.   His arguments, with which I concur, motivate me to respond to the current contestation of ideas and direction unfolding in Australia.  What is missing from the utterances of most of the politicians (Bob Brown aside) and vested interest spokespeople are claims that make systemic sense or carry with them any form of moral responsibility.  The issues to which I refer concerns the leaking of plans by Greenpeace to launch a major campaign of disruption to large coal developments, particularly in Queensland.  The 'howlers' are having a frenzy of course including condemning such action 'as treason'.

But first let's take a step back, to better appreciate the Australian context.  I attended an interesting seminar yesterday reporting integrated modeling research done on behalf of the GLA (Greater London Authority).  I was reminded just how different the underlying policy and political context is in the UK compared to Australia.  In the UK dealing with and talking about climate change has bipartisan political support.. ...and yes the phrase has legitimacy in Europe. Unlike the state of Victoria climate change can be spoken about in policy circles. As Donald Schoen would have said it is an idea in good currency in Europe but not Australia. It means that efforts to take effective action start in an entirely different places in the UK and Australia. In the mean time relatvely close neighbour Kiribati is negotiating with Fiji to buy 5000 acres to relocate the whole population because of the impacts of sea level rise!

From a systems perspective the expansion of coal mining makes no sense at all.  In fact it is systemically foolish and morally irresponsible.  Not even the economic arguments are defensible because of the lock-in that such investment brings, increasing dependency on a limited source of tax revenue and precluding full commitment to transforming the Australian economy into a post-carbon future. There is also the negative systemic effects that will come in increased port development and shipping movements that threaten the Great Barrier Reef world heritage site.   It is hard to imagine how Anna Bligh, running for re-election as Premier of Queensland, an 'old leftie' and strong feminist, could have sold her soul so fulsomely to this bleak coal-driven future.

Readers of my blogs may have noticed that there have been no postings to date about coal-seam gas and fracking.  The absense of such posts has been causing me considerable angst. But truth be known I have found the whole issue just too depressing to deal with since I saw Gasland almost a year ago.  In many ways I think fracking and associated coal seam gas extraction is one of the most significant moral issues of our generation. Certainly Gaslands showed vividly the systemic failure of EIA as currently institutionalised in the US -  it failed miserably to deal with the cummulative and systemic  impacts of development.  I only hope the same will not occur along the Barrier Reef and in regional and urban Australia.  Fracking and other forms of mining that expose our landscapes and farming systems to unanticipated blight is for me the apotheosis of runaway human greed.  Jonathon Bate in his great book, The Song of the Earth, frames the issue for us: it is that Australians need to appreciate the country as a place to dwell!

I commend those communities, polititicians and NGOs who are organising to try to prevent the excesses. Greenpeace and their ilk are the moral heroes in these situations. Where is Minister Crean in these discussions?  I fear the relatively new Ministry he is responsible for has been captured and  framed by interests from the big end of town.  It is in situations like these that the current minority government functions to the benefit of all.  Regional Independent MP, Tony Windsor, no friend of the Nationals and their coalition partners, has managed to force through a halt until the evidence is clearer.  Good on him!  We can all be confident that if Labour or the Coalition had abosolute control it would be business as usual for the extractive industries.

This brings me back to David Day.  He and I have another common interest, that of former Labour Prime Minister Ben Chifley who, like me, was a Bathurstian.  Chifley was a personal friend of members of my family who worked with him on the railway.  One, a great-uncle, was his campaign manager in Bathurst through the 1940s and 50s.   David is the author of the definitive biography of Chifley. Whilst it is disengenous, at one level, to invoke the ideals of former generations and apply them to the present I cannot help but wonder what Chif would have made of the current lot.  I imagine him smiling at the effective shift into public ownership of banks in the UK as a result of the GFC.  He  was widely read and could discourse for several hours on matters that concerned him and his electorate where crowds of 600 or more often came ot listen to him on the Bathurst King's Parade. He was also committed to nation building and investment in public infrastructure.  I am tempted to say that unlike so many of  the current generation he had the courage of his convictions.  This is what we need - but the convictions need to be congruent with our circumstances.

Plea to help energise Australian communities

I have received the following request from  the National Campaign Coordinator of the 100% Renewable campaign. I urge your suport.


Lindsay asks:   'Can you spend 2 minutes to help us liberate hundreds of millions of dollars for clean energy projects that could be owned by your community?



Dear community renewables supporter, 


Over the past few years, groups across Australia have started developing visionary plans to invest in their own clean energy future.

Hepburn Wind is Australia's very first community owned renewable energy company, near Daylesford, Victoria. It is owned by ordinary people, generates 100% renewable energy equivalent to the total electricity demand of Daylesford and Hepburn and puts more funding back into the community (per turbine) than any other wind farm. 

But while Hepburn Wind has been an inspiration to others, there are many unfair barriers that make it hard for other communities to follow.

In 2011 the Government, Greens and Independents listened to you and agreed to create a new $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC). For everyone who dreams of owning and producing their own power, this new body poses a huge opportunity.

This month, the expert panel of the CEFC will tell the Government what the Corporation should invest in. Together, lets convince the CEFC to use some of its funds for community energy!

Email them now at this link: http://100percent.org.au/content/energise-our-communities

Please sign this email action today if you would like to see CEFC support community renewable projects  - and tell the CEFC why YOU would like to see them support your community's vision for the future. 


Thanks for your support,
Lindsay

PS. A strong show of community support to the CEFC expert panel, right now - two weeks before they report to the government - will demonstrate that it is the right time to invest in safe, local, renewable energy.  Email the CEFC at: 100percent.org.au/content/energise-our-communities

The Macy Conferences

The Macy conferences played a special role in the history of Systems and Cybernetic thought and scholarship.  A new Blog developed for the forthcoming  EMCSR (European Meetings on Cybernetics and Systems Research) conference gives a nice overview.

Systemic insights in unlikely places

Apropo of the new Australian 'national conversation' about vested interests - most of them mining - I was struck last year by an episode of The Gruen Nation which went behind the green-washing of the mining and resources industries.  An insider reveals how communities who oppose are bought off by the developers.  If only Wayne Swan had shown this clip to the nation at his Press Club address we would have seen it for how it really is - a nation that can be easily spun, or bought-off.  For example, Australians have come to believe through massive expenditure in advertising and spin that mining constitutes 30% of the economy and 10% of the work force when it is actually more like 10% and 3%. 

Clips like this also presage the current preoccupation with billionaires.

Having a national conversation

I have just finished reading Lois Banner's insightful account of the lives of Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict in 'Intertwined Lives'.  Both were scholars of outstanding merit so it's a pity that they have both slipped, somewhat, from contemporary view.  Today was a good day to finish  this book as it coincides with heightened media interest in Australian Treasurer, Wayne Swan's essay exposing the threats to democracy that can arise through the actions of vested interests and by the abuse of wealth.  Although the general theme is not new it has needed saying (or resaying) in Australia for some time.  So good on Swan.  It is a pity he and others in government did not make this case to the Australian people before they began the process of introducing a mining tax, a key factor in the undoing of  Kevin Rudd as PM.

Ruth Benedict, amongst other contributions, developed typologies based on her anthropological studies  that attempted to account for the 'good society'.   According to Banner her work was described by Abraham Maslow 'as the most viable, post-Marxian theory of the good society'.  She talked about 'funnel' societies which 'chaneled wealth into the hands of a few men who had little concern for anyone else, while 'siphon societies' constantly spread wealth throughout the community' (p. 425-6).   For Benedict the Blackfoot of North America epitomised a 'siphon society'.  They were optimistic, free from violence, 'operating to an ethic of care: leaders identify with followers, the wealthy make certain that everyone is provided for, and leadership positions are opened to talented individuals. True freedom, Benedict asserted, means not only individual independence but also taking responsibility for others'. (p. 426).

Both Benedict and Mead were struck by the level of cooperation that occurred during war time (WW 2) in the US. They both worked hard to try to make that spirit persist in the peace as a necessary part of civil liberties.  Benedict worried that the US 'ran the risk of becoming a 'funnel' rather than a 'siphon' society' and that democracy would falter in the US because 'its system of government was based on reconciling special interests at the expense of the individual' and that 'its economy benefited the few over the many.'   Whilst undoubtedly worse in the US (see this posting) the place of special interests in formulating Australian national policy needs much more critical scrutiny and to be added to the national conversation that Swan has launched.

However we want a conversation of quality based on listening and mutual respect. I for one was sickened yesterday morning to hear on ABC radio Mitch Hooke gloating about his role, and that of the Minerals Council of Australia (of which he is CEO), in defeating  the government's original mineral tax proposals.   I also thought  the ABC's Emma Alberici's interview of Swan, heard on ABC News Radio this morning, discourteous and disengenouous.  To paraphrase  Margaret Mead, upbringing not race produces the differences between national groups.  So if Australia is to conserve its egalitarian nature then we need to attend to our manners of living together and, thus, the upbringing we provide to the inheritors of our culture.

Systems conferences in California in July

I am hoping to attend the ASC conference being organised at Asilomar (9-13th July) in conjunction with the Bateson Idea Group.  The ISSS then starts its conference at San Jose on the 15th.  I hope to take in the first few days.  The incoming ISSS President has posted a powerpoint that has much - perhaps too much? - interesting material.

New book series

CRC Press, an imprint of Taylor and Francis, has just launched a new book series, entitled “Communications in Cybernetics, Systems Science and Engineering”.

A fine mess of human invention

This paper 'How economic theory came to ignore the role of debt’, by Michael Hudson and the subsequent discussion provide fascinating insights into contestations of ideas with profound implications for how we govern what humans do.   

Tellingly Hudson notes that: ‘Increasingly, the discussion of finance and debt has been limited to monetarists with an anti-government ax to grind and vested interests to defend and indeed, promote with regard to financial deregulation.’

Avaatz's message seems good to me

From Avaatz:

'In the last 30 days, our community has grown by 2.5 million people. We were already the largest political web movement ever, and yet we're growing faster than anyone has seen before! We're taking more actions, winning more victories, donating more and generating thousands more media hits in one month than we used to in a year. It's thrilling, even a little scary, especially when we see that the pace is still accelerating...

Just to give a snapshot of the last few weeks --

• 5 million of us stood up to the ACTA and SOPA internet censorship bills, helping to put SOPA on ice, and putting ACTA under threat, with the President of the European Parliament and Germany, Poland and many other countries reconsidering their positions.
• we smuggled $1.8 million worth of medical supplies into Syria when no one else could, and raised $1.5 million more in donations, while our citizen journalists provided much of the world media's information and images.
• we generated thousands of news articles on 20 different campaigns.
• our sex trafficking hotline generated information that will result in a major set of arrests this week (can't say which country yet).
• we raised over 4 million dollars/euros/yen online to supercharge our work, and are growing our staff team like mad to keep up with the need.
• we ran over 40 campaigns, took over 10 million actions and told 25 million friends about campaigns we care about, on everything from deforestation in Brazil to the Murdoch scandal in the UK -- and made a serious impact on many of these.

If all that wasn't enough, we're about to launch a couple of big projects (stay tuned) that will take our community to a whole NEW level!

It's a thrilling privilege to serve this amazing community, and while the challenges we face are growing, the surge of spirited people rising to meet these challenges is growing even faster and stronger. We've come together and built something special, and it's taking off. Let's shoot for the stars.'

Get Up's top 10 issues for 2012

The results of Get Up's poll of members is out is a very user-friendly fashion. Numbers 1, 2 and 3 all concerned environmental issues.  As the Get Up folk say:

'It’s pretty amazing to be able to ask hundreds of thousands of Australians not only what they think will make this year the best year yet, but what they're prepared to do and to know that together, we actually have the power to do it. 
   
GetUp was created on the promise of a bold idea: that a great many people were ready to have a new kind of voice in our democracy, on the heartfelt belief that people cared more than pundits gave them credit for, and would change the country for the better if provided with meaningful opportunities to do so.'

Toward a Batesonian Cybernetic Concept of Culture

Guest lecture at the Department of
International Culture and Communication Studies

29 February, 2012

15.00 – 16.30

Copenhagen Business School

  Phillip Guddemi

Toward a Batesonian Cybernetic Concept of Culture

What would a cybernetic concept of culture look like if it were based on the mature epistemology of Gregory Bateson?  In some ways Bateson should be the best source of such a culture concept, as he was one of the pioneering anthropologists in New Guinea in the 1930s prior to his involvement in the Macy Conferences.  His interest in intercultural communication was catalyzed by the Second World War as well as by his prewar ethnographic experiences.  But after this period he ostensibly left anthropology and work on these issues.  I will show that his later cybernetic epistemology does have clear implications for culture and the concept of culture., concepts which in a second-order cybernetic epistemology have a distinct relationship to the Wittgensteinian idea of forms of life.

PHILLIP V. GUDDEMI: President, Bateson Idea Group, Sacramento, California USA; Managing Editor, Cybernetics and Human Knowing

Education: The University of Michigan, Ph.D., Anthropology, 1992; University of San Francisco, M.S., Environmental Management, 1982; The University of Michigan, M.A., Anthropology, 1979; University of California, Santa Cruz, B.A. (Honors), Anthropology, 1977.      

I was an undergraduate student of Gregory Bateson and I took four courses from him including an independent study on animal and human communication.  My graduate work at Michigan was with Roy Rappaport who included Batesonian and cybernetic ideas in his own research.  I did anthropological fieldwork in the far western East Sepik Province of Papua New Guinea, spending 20 months in 1986-87 and then 6 months in 1995.  In 1990-91 I held the Andrew Mellon Predoctoral Fellowship at the Metropolitan Museum, New York, researching the relation of Papua New Guinea art to ritual and social life.  My dissertation on Papua New Guinea art and ritual was completed in 1992.  Since that time I have revisited the field of cybernetics, presenting papers and publishing on Bateson’s work and on topics such as autopoiesis and semeiosis. I have specifically looked at a cybernetic reinterpretation of the concept of power, and I am also very interested in biosemiotics as an emerging paradigm for many of the issues Bateson worked on.  I have held the title of Managing Editor at C&HK since 2006 and I was Vice President for Membership for the American Society for Cybernetics between 2008 and 2011. 

Selected Cybernetics and Bateson Publications

“Conscious Purpose in 2010: Bateson’s Prescient Warning.”  Systems Research and Behavioral Science 28:5, 2011, pages 465-475.

“A Multi-Party Imaginary Dialogue about Power and Cybernetics.”  Integral Review 6:1, 2010, pages 197-207.

“You are adapting more to me than I am adapting to you (but what does more mean?): Cybernetic and Foucaultian explorations of the domain of power.  Proceedings of the 52^nd Annual Meeting of the ISSS, 2008.

“Toward Batesonian sociocybernetics: from Naven to the mind beyond the skin.”  Kybernetes 36:7/8, 2007, pages 905-914.

“Breaking the Concept of Power (and Redescribing its Domain): Batesonian and Autopoietic Perspectives.”  Cybernetics and Human Knowing 13:3-4, 2006, pages 58-73.

Autopoiesis, Semeiosis, and Co-Coupling: A Relational Language for Describing Communication and Adaptation.”  Cybernetics and Human Knowing 7:2, 2000, pages 127-145.

Fire in the street - a call to action

A few weeks ago I missed one of my pilates classes for very good reasons.  It had been a day when the temperature here in Melbourne had risen to 35 degrees. Just before 6pm, upon walking out my front gate, I found the electric cable and light pole on the opposite side of the street blazing like one of the sparklers we  played with as children on bonfire nights.  It was a shock.  I immediately went back inside and dialled 000 - the first time I have had to do this.  Then I walked down and cautiously knocked on the front door of the house  under the pole.  Despite an open front door those inside knew nothing of the blaze - but could 'smell some burning'.  Shifting the car from below the pole, by now dripping molten pastic, was a good idea - and fortunately done early enough to prevent any damage.  The fire brigade arrived soon enough and before long had the blaze out.   We had a short power outage, but within several hours all seemed fine again.

Disturbing though this incident was in inner city Melbourne, it is the wider implications that ring bells of alarm. It was a very hot day - but by no means one of the hottest we have had nor will continue to have.  Yet here was a spontaineous ignition of the sort that triggered major bushfires in rural Victoria in February 2009 with significant loss of life.

The subsequent Royal Commission concluded that: ' Faulty power lines are believed to have caused five of the 11 major fires on Black Saturday and the commission said the solution was the replacement of single-wire earth return power lines with aerial bundled cable or underground cables.'   Depite these findings the state government has deferred implemetation of these recommendations on cost grounds.

A few weeks earlier, on an even hotter day when my family and I were returning from Adelaide, the implications of power line failure in contexts of weather extremes became even more apparent.  As explained in this opinion piece published in the Adelaide Advertiser, based on an article written by my daughter on that very trip, electricity authorities are being forced to close down whole grid systems in periods of extremes, particularly where bushfires might ensue.  The end result is a community potentially subjected to life threatening heat stress.  As pointed out there is a need for institutional and technological innovation to break out of this trap.  It need not be expensive, but it does involve challenging the thinking and corporate interests that dismiss arguements for investing in more locally resilient power/energy systems.

Joining the American Society for Cybernetics, or renewing ASC membership

ASC President Ranulph Glanville writes:   "These are exciting times for the ASC. 

• The ASC is the most lively, radical, passionate and experimental of the cybernetics (and systems) societies that we know. It is also surprisingly international.
• We have expanded the range of our conferences: the web site for 2012, to be held in Asilomar together with the Bateson Idea Group, will be launched in a matter of days.
• We are developing a publishing program, including conference proceedings (the 2011 conference proceedings are in their final stages of editing).
• We are building software to allow a multi-authored introduction to cybernetics. 
• Naturally, we have facebook and linkedin accounts and a YouTube channel. 
• We will shortly invite members to join in an online discussion about the benefits the ASC brings.
• We ran the "Cybernetics of Cybernetics" competition to gain suggestions for how to become more cybernetic in our working.
• Later in the year we expect to announce a vastly reduced subscription to an electronic library of publications for members.
• Furthermore, our new VP membership, Javier Livas, is developing strategies to expand our membership.

These are amongst the many good reasons for being a member of the ASC. So I write to you as someone who has recently been a member of the ASC and/or attended our conferences, to invite you to join the ASC, or renew your membership for 2012,  by paying the annual subscription.

Go to https://www.regonline.com/ascmembership2012 where you will find our all new and much improved membership payment system. Please fill in the appropriate membership immediately! Do it now so we don’t chase you! Remember to check the renew automatically option (except if joining as a life member), thus automating your renewal.

Call for papers, 11th International Conference of Sociocybernetics

2- 6 of July, Algarve University, Faro, Portugal

Complexity and Social Action: Interaction and Multiple Systems

Recent events throughout the globe have put into perspective the need for new theory settings, new approaches and new insights into the current social dynamics that many consider on a verge of  rupture. Financial crises, social uprisings, forced governmental collapses, and increasing inequalities within several spheres of the social world are some of the events that necessarily put collective and individual social action into new perspectives.

It is no longer possible to think of social phenomena in a disconnected way, since their foundations and limits are not clear. The understanding of social action and interaction, as cause and consequence of social phenomenon, depends on the capacity to consider and analyze all possibilities in action systems, their diversity and relations integrating micro, macro and meso perspectives. It is therefore, imperative for the sociocybernetic approach to address such a challenge.

The study of the interaction between multiple systems can be a useful and sound new way of thinking, especially if it follows a transdisciplinary approach. From the variety of subjects relevant in this respect, the next RC51 2012 Conference in Faro, will emphasize the following:

1. Decision Making and Action: Decision making is a highly complex embodied process resulting from the concerted action of a diverse set of interconnected systems that allow for the development of social action under the uncertainty that the future holds. Under this theme, we intend to explore the complexity of the intra-systemic and inter-systemic pathways framing decision-making and subsequent social action.

2. Violence: Violence is an interconnected system, socially and culturally produced and reproduced, and therefore embedded in individuals, institutions and states. The production of violence is a phenomenon with deep interconnections between the social, cultural, biological, emotional and symbolic systems. The discussion between the articulation of the individual system (composed of responses/actions/reactions/interactions),and the social and cultural system which provide the actor with thesymbolic, and many times, unconscious tolls of actions and interactions, iscrucial to advance the production of knowledge in this area.

3. Social Movements: The new social movements, now emerging in many countries, with different levels of economic development, combine a variety of new dimensions that exceed previously sociologically knowledge. The sociological analysis of these movements’ actions requires, primarily, an intersystem approach of the complexity of all its dimensions, and secondly, two other dimensions of the social actors' selves: the relationship between themselves and the relationship that each social actor wants to have with old and new groups, organizations and institutions.

Papers are welcomed which address these issues. Beyond that other papers addressing conceptual and theoretical issues in sociocybernetics or reporting relevant empirical findings are also welcomed.

Systems thinking exposes major myths

It is a great pity that journalists and media commentators are not versed in systems thinking like Simon Caulkin.  In his most recent article Simon exposes the widespread myth of shareholder ownership of companies.  He writes:

"Where did the myth come from? For once it is possible to pinpoint the source with some accuracy. Flashback to the end of the 1970s, when a growing feeling that shareholders were being short-changed by corporate managers who had grown fat and lazy in the long post-war boom was crystallised by Michael Jensen and William Meckling in a paper that despite its less than pulse-quickening title, 'Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behaviour, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure', remains the most quoted ever in the economic literature.

The authors cast managerial underperformance as a 'principal-agent problem'. In their construct, shareholders are the firm's 'principals' who hire managers to run the company on their behalf. The 'agency problem' arises because if they can get away with it managers will (like everyone else) put their own interests first. In other words, the incentives are misaligned. Ergo, the argument runs, the way to get managers to do their job is to realign the incentives by giving them significant amounts of stock-based compensation, turning executives into shareholders too.

There is one glaring snag in the theory. In law, directors and managers aren't employed by shareholders at all but by the company as ‘autonomous legal person’. But that doesn't square with the new (and wholly ideological) assertion that the company’s sole purpose is to maximise shareholder value. That can only be the case if shareholders actually own the company. To sidestep this inconvenient fact, the authors simply dismiss the company's autonomous status as ‘legal fiction’— a ‘simple falsehood’, points out Gordon Pearson in his careful study, The Road to Cooperation, on which is based the entire edifice of governance that has stood ever since.

Ironically, Jensen and Meckling’s pro-shareholder remedies were eagerly seized on managers who correctly spotted in them a bonanza-in-the-making that would make their previous pickings look like small change. The theory expected them to be greedy; they complied in full, demanding ever greater incentives for their alignment in a perfect example of the self-fulfilling prophecy."

So at the root of so much of the current angst about bonuses, corporate greed and company non-performance are ill-equipped theories - ways of thinking - that become institutionalised. No wonder Maynard Keynes once said: 

‘Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist’