Reframing poverty and where it is

This article by Andy Sumner (The new bottom billion) makes a good case for reframing the way we consider poverty and its distribution.  An emergent issue from the analysis is that it brings into focus growing income inequlity in all nation states.  Different framings require different policies and actions.  As Sumner argues:

'The new bottom billion has reshaped the demographics of poverty. This calls for a renewed development narrative, one that focuses on inequality and shared responsibility.'

Joining up the dots on climate change - yet still contested

I was impressed by the article by Age journalist Adam Morton which joins up 'many of the dots' in an accessible way that allows a reading of what is happening across the globe on the weather front.  For example Morton writes:


'"The climate is changing," the National Climatic Data Centre's Jay Lawrimore told the paper. "Extreme events are occurring with greater frequency, and in many cases with greater intensity."

Munich Re reported that its database of natural catastrophes showed the number of extreme weather events such as windstorms and floods had tripled since 1980 "and the trend is expected to persist".
Not everyone working in the area is comfortable with linking the current shift in extreme events with greenhouse gases. There is disagreement in the scientific literature over whether extreme weather disasters have started to worsen.'

Scepticism remains strong, however meaning that this year is likely to be difficult politically in Australia in terms of achieving a price on carbon.   The Independents and Greens together ought to manage to tip the balance in transitioning towards a post-carbon society, after all it is more than climate change per se.

Ecosystem Services: Pricing to Peddle?

This article by Brian Czech raises some timely, systemic issues concerning ecosystems services. I recommend some of the follow-up postings as well e.g. David Bean.

'On November 15, five nations issued a complaint about a UN initiative called the “Global Green New Deal.”  These nations claim that “nature is seen [by the UN] as ‘capital’ for producing tradable environmental goods and services.”  They express their concern about the “privatization and the mercantilization of nature through the development of markets for environmental services.”   They also declare their “condemnation of unsustainable models of economic growth.”

For the purposes of this week’s Daly News, it matters little who these nations are, nor does it matter if their interpretation of the Green New Deal is completely accurate.  What does matter is that their complaint ripens our attention to a widespread and growing controversy about the implications of valuing ecosystem services.

The good news from the Green New Deal is that ecological microeconomics (such as valuing ecosystem services) has risen from the recesses of academia into the realm of international diplomacy.  The bad news is that ecological macroeconomics (such as limits to growth) apparently has not.  Let’s take a look at the implications.

The primary distinction of ecological economics, in contrast with conventional or “neoclassical” economics, is that ecological economists recognize limits to growth and a fundamental trade-off between economic growth and environmental protection.  The economic pie can only get so big even if all its pieces are correctly priced, including ecosystem services.  Because the economic pie can only get so big, society must also pay greater attention to fairly distributing the pieces.  In order to protect the environment, and to help allocate resources in the fairest manner, it helps to recognize the economic value of ecosystem services.  That’s what ecological microeconomics is all about; estimating the value of natural capital and ecosystem services.

In mainstream economic circles, on the other hand, limits to growth are seen as nonexistent or too far off to worry about.  That leads to a nonchalant attitude about fairness; just grow the economy because a “rising tide lifts all boats.”  Traditional economists don’t mind valuing ecosystem services, however.  As long as the prices are right, and markets are established, ecosystem services can be allocated efficiently, just like steel and milk into guns and butter.

The valuation of ecosystem services provides some common ground for neoclassical and ecological economics.  That should be a good thing.  However, common ground can be a minefield, too.  Many a well-meaning bureaucrat and diplomat are stumbling toward the landmines.

Perhaps the two most common concerns about valuing ecosystem services are:  1)  Many ecosystem services are beyond the ability of humans to estimate the value of, much less to “price” for the market.  “Value of the ozone layer?  Priceless.”  2)  The valuing of ecosystem services begs a market, then monetization of the services such that they are viewed as commodities to be traded like hogs or hoola hoops.  For many cultures this offends the senses of dignity and harmony with the natural world.  “Would you take 40,000 hogs for the climate regulation provided by that forest over there?”

But my concern is with another problem; namely, our inattention to where the money comes from to pay for services such as water filtration, carbon sequestration, pollination, etc.  There seems to be an attitude that, if we just throw enough money at a problem, we’ll solve it.  And that is precisely the attitude that creeps in when ecological microeconomics is not complemented with a healthy dose of ecological macroeconomics.  Markets convey the idea that you can have as much as you want as long as you pay the right price; ecological macroeconomics says the total is limited and the right market price should simply ration the limited total. And if the total is not limited then it is hard for the price to be “right”.

We especially need more awareness of the trophic origins of money.  Money doesn’t grow on trees, but it does come from the ground in a very real sense.  The amount of money available for the purchasing of guns, butter, hogs or carbon sequestration originates from the agricultural and extractive surplus that frees the hands for the division of labor.

In other words, it is not the ozone layer that “generates” money for throwing at its priceless service.  Nor does the North Pole “generate” the money for ecotourists to witness it.  What generates money is activity on the ground – on the farm, in the forest, in the fishery – that gives everyone else their food, as well as the materials for their clothing and shelter.  Everyone else is then free to work in the manufacturing or service sectors.  With plenty of surplus, the economy can even support bankers, actors, and financial engineers who set up markets for trading carbon permits.  That’s the trophic structure of the human economy.

The more our farmers, loggers, and fishermen produce, the more money we’ll all have for the bank, the movies, and trading in biodiversity credits.  But of course the more we ask them to produce, the more environmental impact we’ll have.  If you insist on growing the economy and protecting the environment, eventually the bank and the theatre will be empty; your money’s going straight to the ecosystem services market.  It’s like robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Now consider the other side of the coin, so to speak.  We often hear about the investment in the Catskill Mountains watershed that provides clean water to New York City.  I’m all for it!  But it’s no example of reconciling the conflict between economic growth and environmental protection.  What do the growthers think they’re going to do in that watershed:  open hog farms and build high-rises?  No, by “investing” in that natural capital a decision was made to keep the land relatively free from intensive economic activity.  That’s not the kind of investment they like to hear about in New York City, at least not on Wall Street.

So I’ll stop short of saying, “Let’s encourage all the ecological microeconomics we can get.”  Let’s encourage some of it, while realizing that there are only so many ecological economists to go around.  Let’s encourage far more study and practice of ecological macroeconomics.  With microeconomics, let’s help to demonstrate what’s at stake when we mine an aquifer or pull up a fishery.  But more importantly, let’s not peddle those ecosystem services like they’re rubber boots.  Remember where the money comes from to pay for them: the liquidation of natural capital stocks somewhere else.  That’s ecological macroeconomics, and that leads to a steady state economy where some of those precious ecosystem services stay where they belong: out of the market.'

Snow in Scotland - more systemic effects

Drennan writes:  'By the way, regarding systemic effects of the snow, here are a few more.

1) We all need food supplies etc but of course the big stores are all operating on the "Just  in Time" system - which  means a delay of a day or so means the stores start running out of food.

2) People hear about this difficulty on the news and so they buy twice as much as usual to "stock up" - except for the indigenous rural Scots who stock up at the start of November every year - and the result is the shops empty quicker.

3) This is all made worse by the fact that the TESCOs and ASDAs have outcompeted the small town centre bakeries etc which have often closed.  The TESCOs etc of course buy in bulk from bulk producers and hence the great majority of the bread eaten in Scotland is all made in three huge bakeries near Glasgow.

4) However, once an articulated lorry delivering supplies jack-knifes on a  motorway, huge traffic jams build up behind it and breakdown vehicles or road gritters that would make the road driveable can not get through. A few of these and the whole system jams up! We have of course developed a delivery system largely dependent on just in time deliveries by large lorries, and business based mainly on car commuting workers who get caught in the snarlups.

5) This of course means tankers cannot reach the main oil refinery, which means that petrol stations start running out of fuel for sale, which means even those that can move to deliver may run out of fuel.

6) In the meantime, amid the political blame game that is going on, the first minister for Scotland announces that we will have to get used to more such extreme weather conditions in Scotland - enter Climate Change.

All the best - it is thawing now but forecast to freeze up by Monday'

News from Scotland

A report from my friend Drennan.   The systemic effects are readily apparent!

'Just to let you see we are buried in it here. We have about one metre with plenty freeze thaw cycles to create icy roads, huge icicles hanging from buildings and traffic chaos. The central belt of Scotland was caught completely off guard and ended up with miles of motorway filled with hundreds of cars filled with people overnighting in them at -17 degrees centigrade. My sister .. ended up marooned at her daughter's house and her daughter marooned at her mother's house after abandoning her car on the motorway and walking miles overland to a functioning railway station to get some transport.

Meanwhile, we have been going down to -20 centigrade at night. A thaw is forecast but I hope to goodness it is a slow one or here come the floods!  This could be a long hard winter here. It is only the start of December,
the volcanic explosion in Iceland has created a dust layer, the Gulf  Stream (North Atlantic Drift) has weakened, and El Nino  is doing things that encourage a cold season also.

The last broadcaster who referred to a Winter Wonderland  has been strangled and another was taken to the edge of the village and snowballed to death.

We stay at home and drive nowhere. We couldn't go many places. All the hill passes seem to be permanently blocked. Nobody has any winter tyres for sale - they all went to Germany. Hope all goes well with all of you.'

Effective use of Systems in policy review and development

The Munro Review of Child Protection in England by Professor Eileen Munro of  LSE  has released a first report entitled: 'A Systems Analysis'.   It is recommended reading for anyone interested to see how good systems thinking and practice can help to frame and structure an important inquiry such as this one.  It also highlights the role that Systems capability can play in formulating public policy and effecting good governance.  David Lane, Reader in Management Science at LSE is providing expertise in Systems in support of the review.

In introducing this report Prof. Munro describes how it: 

'sets out the systems approach I am taking to understand how reforms interact and the effect these interactions are having on practice. It is at the front line where they come together, at present creating an imbalance and distortion of practice priorities.'

In outlining the report's approach to Systems is argued that:

'A systems approach will help this review to avoid looking at parts of the child protection system in isolation, and to analyse how the system functions as a whole. Social workers and other professionals accept many previous reforms were well intended but their interaction and cumulative effect on frontline practice have had unintended consequences. A systems approach will help to understand how and why previous reforms have had both beneficial and adverse consequences and how the review might improve how the system supports social workers and other professionals to protect children and young people better in the future.

The review will use systems theory in two ways. First, the review will look back at past reforms to explain what has happened, with systems theory providing a strong basis to build the review’s understanding. Second, the intention is to use systems theory analysis to look forward – with systems theory helping the review design an improved approach. The first leads naturally to the second since what is needed is a stronger understanding of the system and analysis of how aspects of the system interact with each other before the review recommends any further changes.'

For more background see this clip or this article. 

This Is Your Brain on Metaphors

My friend Bruce, in the middle of reading my book, has kindly alerted me to this article by Robert Sapolsky.  Here is a sample:

'This neural confusion about the literal versus the metaphorical gives symbols enormous power, including the power to make peace. The political scientist and game theorist Robert Axelrod of the University of Michigan has emphasized this point in thinking about conflict resolution. For example, in a world of sheer rationality where the brain didn’t confuse reality with symbols, bringing peace to Israel and Palestine would revolve around things like water rights, placement of borders, and the extent of militarization allowed to Palestinian police. Instead, argues Axelrod, “mutual symbolic concessions” of no material benefit will ultimately make all the difference.'

Follow-up from this year's ASC conference

News about this year’s conference.
•    Judy Lombardi made a slide show of the conference;
•    Lev Ledit, with Judy Lombardi, made a 35 minute movie from the video material recorded during the event;
•    You may like to hear Ernst von Glasersfeld’s after dinner speech, which formed a theme in Lev’s movie.

Of course, you are still welcome to explore the whole site. It is very rich, and still being added to!
Meanwhile, we are working on proceedings which will be published next year in a double volume of Kybernetes. There are also reviews of the conference: Claudia Westermann’s will appear in Leonardo—the Arts and Science Journal—on line in November (and may also appear in hard copy); and 2 reviews, one by Stuart Umpleby and the other by Michael Hohl and Stefan Wiltschnig will appear together in issue 1 of Kybernetes in 2011. Finally, ASC President Raulph Glanville has written an assessment that will appear in Cybernetics and Human Knowing, as the ASC column, by the end of the year, together with the text of Ernst’s talk.  urls will be posted on the conference site, when they are available.

Cybernetics of Cybernetics—a competition

Ranulph Glanville, President, of ASC (the American Society for Cybernetics ) and his committee are delighted to announce a competition (open to all, prize fund up to US$ 1500) to propose cybernetic ways in which a Society for cybernetics might be organised and behave. This follows a suggestion from Margaret Mead, the founding mother of cybernetics summarised below. Submissions should be received by noon, GMT, on 31 January 2011. Full details can be found on the ASC website.

The ASC welcomes your interest and your suggestions!

Brief Background Description

In 1967, Margaret Mead, one of the original attendees at the Josiah Macy Jr. conferences and the founding mother of cybernetics, presented a paper (published in 1968) called “Cybernetics of Cybernetics” to the American Society for Cybernetics (ASC). Following on from a suggestion by Gregory Bateson, at the end of her address Mead proposed that the ASC should consider itself as a cybernetic body, and apply cybernetic insights and techniques to its own organisation and operation.

Although Mead proposed a number of specific questions the ASC could ask about how it might be run (see full quote here), her suggestion received little attention. Rather, the title of her paper (given to her by Heinz von Foerster) became used more generally in the application of cybernetics to cybernetics, or second order cybernetics.

The “Cybernetics of Cybernetics” paper thus leaves two legacies. The ASC has come to recognise the need to take up Mead’s original challenge and address the conflict that occurs when a cybernetic society is not run according to cybernetic principles. The ASC can be seen as convention-bound in its operation, which is particularly odd for a cybernetic society.

The ASC (and no doubt other societies) needs ideas and renewal, and we are looking to competition entries for inspiration and direction developed from cybernetic principles. As the established home of second order cybernetics, these cybernetic principles should reflect, preferably, second as well as first order cybernetics.

Passing of Ernst von Glasersfeld

This evening I came home to news about Ernst's death this morning, 12 November 2010, at 7am US east coast time.  Ernst was seen by some as the originator of 'radical constructivism'.  I was fortunate to see him again at the recent ASC Conference in Troy, upstate New York where he gave, as always, an erudite talk as the conference after dinner speaker.  He was clearly pleased to be amongst that community even though his deafness made connection difficult.  Reports of his death at the age of 93 are beginning to appear.

See a synopsis of his work here.

Some current research projects

I have made links under News to some research projects that are currently under way.   One is a collaboration with RMIT and others under the auspices of VCCCAR.   We are responsible for one of the work packages:

Exploring local narratives (12 months)
Adaptation activity is strongly influenced by perceptions of risk either driven by underlying value and belief systems, or recent personal experience of weather-related extreme events, or as built into historical institutional arrangements and practices. How different actors perceive climate risks and differentiate risk from uncertainty (and how they think these will impact their activity) will ultimately be a critical influence on how individuals and organisations respond. This cross cutting theme will look at the narrative settings and the historical institutional basis which major stakeholder groups bring to their engagement with climate change adaptation. It is intended that work in each of the case studies will deliver theoretical and methodological advances as well as changes in understandings and practices amongst key stakeholders. The exact focus of the narratives will be identified according to the interests of local stakeholders.

I am also involved in the Building common understanding of climate adaptation scenario approaches and strategies project.

New UK White Paper in the pipeline

CIWEM have circulated advice about the Natural Environment White Paper. It seems that this paper is a key one from which several other policy documents and strategies will be developed. The item said:

'Last week Laura Grant from CIWEM attended the Natural Environment White Paper (NEWP) stakeholder meeting.  For anyone unaware the NEWP is the first since 1990 and will be published in April 2011. The NEWP will  set the framework for the Government’s priorities for the natural environment and how these will be delivered.

It will incorporate biodiversity, the marine environment, rivers, air and soils, ecosystem services and will also provide the overarching framework for the Water White Paper.

There are 4 key themes:

• Natural Value – ecosystem services, interdependencies within the natural environment, making a strong case for its economic value

• Big Society – communities to have bigger roles in protecting and enhancing the natural environment, a healthy natural environment is key for local jobs, public health etc

•  The Big Picture – environmental decisions don’t stop at administrative boundaries, landscape scale approaches, looking at multiple benefits to tackle issues such as flooding and climate change

• Think Global act local – impact on natural environment overseas, getting our own house in order, we rely on healthy natural environment abroad for food, preventing climate change

And three Crosscutting challenges:

• Climate change – adaptation, mitigation and renewable energy
• Demographic change – and patterns of consumption
• Incremental impacts – piecemeal degradation of the environment

There still seems to be significant scope for influencing what is included in the white paper. As such it is important to respond to the consultation ..... The discussion document summary gives a good overview and includes the questions ......There is a survey monkey questionnaire that you can fill in .....'

It could never happen here

A warning against systemic failure received from a colleague:


'we’ve all heard about the red mud disaster in Hungary. But it could never happen here …see the .. image of Gladstone, apparently a much larger basin than the one in Hungary, and much closer to the Great Barrier Reef. '

Great Aussie-style animation about main climate patterns

Only someone with true Aussie sensibilities could have designed this innovative website.  The DPI are to be congratulated on their creativity.

The Management Myth

Thanks to Roy Madron for pointing out this article by Matthew Stewart.  It is well worth a read, making the case that: 'most of management theory is inane, .... If you want to succeed in business, don’t get an M.B.A. Study philosophy instead'.  Our OU Systems courses cater for a range of needs and interests but they are at the 'applied philosophy' and sometimes 'applied epistemology' end of the spectrum, thus conforming to Stewart's dictum.

An example of Systems Practice

Demos have several recent reports likely to be of interest because of the situations of concern.  Most call out for some type of systems thinking and practice, as exemplified by the report entitled: Proof Positive.  The following account comes from the Demos website:

'We know a fair amount about what works in improving the well-being of children, but we struggle to do this at scale. This is illustrated by the significant socioeconomic inequality between children that exists today in spite of a decade of ambitious public service reform and increased investment.
Proof Positive explores two questions. First, how do we get practices that are proven to improve children's outcomes embedded within services for children, such as children's centres and schools? What kinds of systemic reforms can be successful in spreading evidence-based, effective programmes at the local level? Second, what is the scope of other types of systemic reform in improving children's outcomes?

The pamphlet argues we need a better understanding about how systems can be made more efficient. We need systems that make better and more widespread use of evidence-based practice. But we should not underestimate the impact that changing processes and structures can have on child outcomes – and the evidence base around this needs further development.'

New film about Gregory Bateson

Phillip Guddemi from the ASC advises that Nora Bateson's film about her father Gregory Bateson's work is now complete, and is being premiered at a number of film festivals. It has just been shown as part of the Vancouver (Canada) film festival, and there will be a premiere in San Francisco on October 10th. And if you happen to be able to make it to Italy there will be three premieres in November.

The evolving organisation

More systemic insights into the functioning...or not ... of organisations from Simon Caulkin.

New global water map showing regions most at risk

'About 80% of the world's population lives in areas where the fresh water supply is not secure, according to a new global analysis.... Researchers compiled a composite index of "water threats" that includes issues such as scarcity and pollution.  The most severe threat category encompasses 3.4 billion people.'

This is one of the reasons I am involved in developing a systemic and adaptive governance R&D program at Monash. Collectively we have to be in a position to respond systemically.

You are what you eat...or is there more to it than that?

A recent article by Emma John in The Observer, (Sunday 19 September 2010) makes a pretty convincing argument that it is what we eat more than what we do that accounts for our weight. In a list entitled: 'Snack attack: how long it takes to burn off 10 favourite foods' the following examples are given:

• 'One portion of Tesco lasagne (560 cal): 45 minutes of spinning
• One slice of Domino's pepperoni pizza (198 cal): 45 minutes of swimming
• Morrisons' chocolate-chip muffin (476 cal): 58 minutes of climbing
• Packet of Walkers cheese and onion crisps (184 cal): 35 minutes of frisbee
• Subway tuna wrap (310 cal): 1 hour and 10 minutes of body pump
• Bacon sandwich on white bread (430 cal): 58 minutes of football
• Coffee Republic ham and cheese toastie (436 cal): 1 hour and 30 minutes of netball
• Granny Smith apple (62 cal): 15 minutes of weightlifting
• M&S hot cross bun (159 cal): 20 minutes of skipping
• Mars bar (280 cal): 50 minutes of aqua aerobics'

This is quite a convincing argument and ought to make those with shares in gyms more than a little anxious about their investments.  On the other hand there are some systemic factors not addressed.  Weight loss and body image are, after all, not mere biological issues.  Exercise produces endorphins which in turn can be linked to moods and predispositions to depression.  The manners of living that are conserved in eating, drinking and exercise are also likely to be significant.  I delight in the 'slow eating' in France when staying with friends and the mix of foods - but find it hard to recreate the same features in my own home in another cultural context. The creation of 24 hour cities in the UK and Australia has escalated binge drinking and other unintended consequences.  We also know far too little about how different bodies react to foods in terms of the feelings of satiation and emptiness. Add to this how little we know about the microbial ecologies of our digestive system and how this may interact with different foods! All in all there is much still to be learnt about this topic - some of the wasted resources used on poorly designed gym activities and dieting fads would be better spent in a systemic national well-being strategy!