1. T306: Managing Complexity: A systems approach Block 4 Managing sustainable development: Learning with other stockholders (Part 1-5)

2. Part 1: Introduction Block authors This block will consider what sustainable development (SD) means to different groups of people. Systems provide language and theory to explore and make sense of the interconnections between environment and development. It provides ways of recognizing the importance of multiple perspectives on the issues and ways of learning what to do next in our systems of interest.

3. Why is sustainable development relevant to T306? Sustainable development provides an example of a domain of activity that many have experienced as complex. The term domain is used here in several of its recognized senses as: The area of activity of a person, institution etc; A sphere of thought or operations; The situation where something is applicable;

4. There are 3 particular features of SD that we will focus on: Issues of SD directly or indirectly affect and are affected by everyone. So, it is a domain in which everyone is a stakeholder. This domain provides opportunities to consider how systems theories and methodologies have been and can be used in practice. Many practitioners working in this domain have not explicitly used systems approaches but they with hind-sight- recognized the need to think and act more systematically and to adopt learning approaches, usually when crises on protests at decisions and actions have occurred.

5. Part 2: Engaging with sustainable development (SD). 1- Exploring your understanding of SD. SD can be described as “bringing environmental and development issues together with the future in mind”. 2- Searching for “system” in SD situations. (There are 3 newspapers articles in Boxes 1, 2, and 3 which offer some different perspectives on transport, environment and global warming.) The nations of “hierarchy” and ‘levels” are important in systems practice, useful in structuring and grouping elements when exploring a system of interest

6. There are many different hierarchies which individuals find meaningful in the domain of SD. The independence of human and our environment – human and non-human subsystems – means that systems practice in the domain of sustainable development and cannot concentrate on human factors alone. It is essential that political, economic, social, biological and physical dimensions be seen as parts of one system, so that we recognize the effects of our actions. Refer to table 1 on page 20- Hierarchies for structuring SD situations).

7. The concepts of hierarchies and system levels are central to SD, where individuals’ actions are relevant to a range of levels. Hierarchies are important to consider because systems possess emergent properties that their sub-systems do not. It is not always possible to predict what properties may emerge at different system levels in different people’s SD systems of interest. But for a system practitioner in this domain, it can be helpful to recognize different system levels to work out how to facilitate interaction and to realize that these systems will not simply be a sum of their parts. Different observers will attach different importance to different hierarchies, with the choice of level always being observer dependent.

8. Contextualizing SD in terms of historical events. In exploring SD situations we will need to understand some of the references to the history that others make The concepts of “environment” and “development” are used and understood in many ways. In T306, environment is a systems concept, referring to the context for a system of interest. Whereas, when talking about sustainable development, the term environment is used to refer only to the ecological, natural on biophysical environment

9. The term development will be used in several ways, for example, to describe: 1)_ World development in two different ways a historical process of change deliberate efforts by all kinds of organization and social movements as attempts aimed at progress and improvement 2)_ Particular site-based infrastructural projects, such as roads and supermarkets, in the sense of new developments or redevelopments. Systems of interest are not static-their boundaries and characteristics change with time and observer choice.

10. Predictions Whilst concerns about the future maybe well founded, the future is unknowable and often turns out to be profoundly different from the fantasies of both pessimists and optimists. Many of the disasters forecast in the past have been avoided by technological developments. The forecasts of future disasters are made precisely to encourage people to avoid them. There are several factors that seem to us to make the current forecasts of future problems different in principle from the past. This principle difference is that the scale of human activity on earth is now approaching the same scale as the natural cycles that occur around the globe.

11. Human engagement with parts of ecosystems is causing hundreds of species to become extinct each year and the effects of human activity are evident well beyond the immediate locations in which we live. Many of the resources that were used to drive industrial development in the 19th century are now exhausted. Water extraction rates exceed the annual flow of some rivers. However they do not run dry because waste water is returned to them. Another difference is that with the increased scale of human activities comes an increase in associated effects and disparities between rich and poor. Some claim that poverty is the main cause for environmental degradation, others have stressed that wealth is the main cause for environmental degradation. Action by one or a few countries alone would be ineffective unless matched by others.

12. Linking environment and development: In 1980, all organizations that see themselves as dedicated to preventing environmental catastrophe produced the World Conservation Strategy. This strategy stressed the interdependence of conservation and development and called for the vitality and productivity of the planet to be safeguarded

13. The Brundtland Report Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

14. The United Nations Summits and Commission for SD. The Earth Summit- the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development- held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, was the largest gathering of heads of government that the world had ever seen. From the Earth Summit Conventions emerged, a set of guidelines for climate change and biodiversity protection, a declaration on Environment and Development and Agenda 21. Agenda 21 is an extensive international agenda for action for sustainable development for the 21st century.

15. Increasing Globalization SD is concerned for the future inhabitants of the globe as a whole. Embracing conflict can sometimes be a creative process so avoidance is not always the best strategy. We need to value difference as well as similarity.

16. SD and Sustainability Sustaining implies something that persists but it does not imply something that is static or unchanging. It implies something dynamic and can also imply a radical change in people’s practices rather than continuing with “business as usual”. There are many types of sustainability- ecological, economic, financial, social, political, and institutional, depending on what is being sustained.

17. SD was selected as the focus for the domain considered in Block 4 rather than sustainability because, the process of SD has a historical tradition which has tried to increase the compatibility of ecological, economic and social sustainability, making each of equal importance in decision making. The situations described here in which a systems practitioner is managing all have some ecological, economic and social dimensions. In this block we will primarily use the language of SD but where we use the term sustainability it will be in its senses that are to do with both environment and development not just one or other.

18. Part 3: Discovering and contextualizing your own SD beliefs and values. 1)- Values, beliefs and circumstances In any situations, there will be many different perspectives, depending on values, beliefs and circumstances. Appreciating different perspectives, and accordingly recognizing the values, beliefs and circumstances that determine them, is an essential skill for a systems practitioner. In the domain of SD it is, particularly important for the practical purposes of working out shared agenda and planning group activities as the term “SD” means many different things to different people.

19. In this part we will concentrate on individual and group values, beliefs and circumstances, how they contribute to different perspectives and how they affect people’s thinking and behavior in the domain of SD. The term value will be used here to refer to meaning something that an individual or group regards as something good or that gives meaning to life. A belief is considered here to be an intellectual starting point for a sequence of reasoning. Circumstances is used here to refer to personal factors, such as experience and role that affect how a situation is perceived.

20. Connections between values, beliefs and circumstances. Values, beliefs and circumstances all determine our perspectives that in turn affect the way that we conceptualize the world-our world views. There are connections between these values, beliefs and circumstances. But as values in particular are often hidden and seen to be more to do with our emotional than intellectual ways of knowing, these connections are not easy to rationalize. Beliefs, on the other hand, as intellectual starting point seem to be more subject to reason. The way in which the term values, beliefs and circumstances are used is not standard in all literature

21. Exploring values, beliefs and circumstances in relation to a SD situation. There are systemic connections between our behaviors and the implications of that behavior when it is aggregated. There are many stakeholders with an interest in maintaining an interconnected set of activities (system). Many of these stockholders will have different interests in the same system.

22. Issues of stakeholding A stakeholder differs from a shareholder in that the key factor that identifies a stakeholder is inclusion rather than ownership. A shareholder of a company owns a small part of the company, whereas a stakeholder does not own any shares in the company but is affected or cares about it. Stakeholders may be individuals or groups of people. Most categorizations of stakeholders distinguish between primary, direct or active stockholding and secondary indirect or passive stakeholding.

23. In this block we will distinguish between those within and outside a system boundary. While stakeholders need to be identified, care is needed in not categorizing and potentially excluding some of them, too soon. Otherwise that may close down an analysis too early in the process when divergence is essential to its richness. Categorization of stakeholders may determine who participates directly and who does not. Issues arise in these processes of categorization when these most affected are not actively involved through arguably they should be. There interests or stocks may not be protected.

24. Stakeholder-analysis techniques are used by a range of agencies and can be used for different purposes. Stockholder analysis can be used as a means of addressing conflict and trade-offs. Conflicts can be defined as situations of competition and/or disagreement between stakeholders groups and trade-offs as the process of balancing conflicting objectives. Drawing a systems map is one way of representing how you are thinking of stakeholders in a situation. In recognizing a diversity of stakeholders in a SD situation and as a precursor to identifying or involving stakeholders in purposeful action, there is also a need to recognize the diversity of stakeholders’ beliefs about SD.

25. Some different beliefs about SD. Different people adopt different values and beliefs and devote their expertise in a different direction.

26. Values and SD be more to do with our emotional rather than our intellectual way of knowing and as such are not easy to rationalize. But just because they are not easy to rationalize does not mean that they have to remain hidden. Alan Holland, argues that values do not just contribute to beliefs but also to judgments, which unlike beliefs, are formed with reference to certain criteria.

27. He goes on to say a judgement is something for which we must be prepared to take responsibility and which we must stand ready to defend and therefore a means by which we create our own identities. Holland adds that values are most appropriately construed as “objects of judgement” and hence that the discussion of values belongs properly within rather than outside the arena of rational debate. The values of an individual are not held in isolation but in social or organizational context and the values of the individual may differ from the social or organizational norms.

28. A systems practitioner will nearly always be operating within a social and/or organizational context. In the domain of SD, where there are many multiple stakeholder situations, a systems practitioner is also likely to need to rationalize and defend the values on which their judgements are made and to work out what and whose values are relevant in a situation.

29. There are 2 reasons for this previous view, the first concerns action and the second ethics. Ethical meaning here what ought to be rather than what is. SD is an ethical concept and particular values and beliefs underpin it. The key elements for responsible Global citizenship

30. Values and attitudes: Sense of identity and self-esteem Empathy Commitment to social justice and equity Value and respect for diversity Concern for the environment and commitment to SD Belief that people can make a difference

31. For a system practitioner, discovering your own values in the domain of SD, can give insights into what is important in a situation and what is shared and not shared with other individuals and groups. Values can be attributed to groups as well as individuals. Problems seem to occur because human values are conceptual and often hidden or disguised by social norms. They are difficult to determine because they are established very early in life and can be unclear even to individuals themselves. Value systems have been shown to have emergent properties that are world-views. It is suggested that these world-views about organizational life may be more important in the change process than separating our specific values.

32. Geoffrey Vickers focused on values and judgement in developing the concept of the “appreciative systems”. Cherishing is when objects (non-human) are valued for their sentimental value, something about the relationship with the object that is valued rather than the object. Phenomenology is a philosophical method of investigation that acknowledges the inter-relationship of subjects and objects. Focusing on the relationship rather than subject or object is one indicator of systems thinking.

33. Congruence between your SD values and your behavior. Whether needing to think and act systemically as an individual or to facilitate others, I have found it useful to recognize what is driving my behavior and the degree of congruence between my values and behavior to guide my actions. Change generally is an important factor to recognize when considering congruence between values and behavior.

34. Part 4: Systems practice for “managing” SD. 1)- Introduction In any situation involving sustainable development there are many people and organizations involved, each with their own different perspective. There will not be any widespread agreement about the nature of the problem, its timescale or what any solution or resolution would look like.

35. 2)-Vignette 2: Limit to growth Ultimately there would be constraints imposed on the growth of human population and industrial development because these were taking place on a finite (limited) planet. Exactly where and when these constraints would first “bite” was not predictable with any certainty, but that did not mean that the limits did not exist. This concept of limits to growth challenges the belief in economic growth, which has been advocated by western governments as the main vehicle for solving many problems.

36. The authors of the book “limits to growth” have made a recent study to establish whether a sustainable future is possible, and if so what level of material consumption; their conclusions are: 1)-Without significant reductions in material and energy flows, there will be in the coming decades an uncontrolled decline in per capita food output, energy use and industrial production. 2)-To avoid this decline, two changes are necessary, Comprehensive revision of policies and practices. Rapid, drastic increase in the efficiency with which materials and energy are used. 3)-A sustainable society is still technically and economically possible.

37. Systems dynamics is a modeling procedure, which computes changes in stocks and flows of specified variables over time. The use of models of complex “systems” to predict behavior is consistent with the MS method. enquire- to ask inquire- to make an investigation

38. 3.Vignette 3: Tragedy of the commons. In 1968, Hardin published a book called “The Tragedy of the Commons”; in this book he states that  like any area of grazing land the commons will have a limited carrying capacity that is the ability to provide food for animals on a sustainable basis. Figure 18 in page 69 illustrates the concept of carrying capacity and the decline in yield as none animals are introduced onto the land. Pursuing self interest results in the best outcome. Harden was able to demonstrate that when a resource is limited market economics would not produce sustainable outcomes.

39. Harden suggests that governments should intervene in markets to manage the limited resources so as to produce sustainable outcomes. “Limit to Growth” and “Tragedy of the Commons” provided a powerful counter argument to the accepted wisdom, namely that economic growth through the operation of competitive free markets would provide solutions to all the problems of development, poverty, food supply and so on. In most communities, there are some types of local control put in place in order to make sure that resources will not be exhausted by over use.

40. 4. The developing world When trying to help developing countries, it is crucial to include the full participation of the potential beneficiaries in the project. Without such full participation the project will simply not work as the originators intended. The participation has to be sufficiently deep that the different world views, perspectives, values and beliefs are genuinely reflected in the process and operation of projects.

41. 5.Managing systems practice in contexts of SD An aware systems practitioner has 3 choices in how they manage their engagement with stakeholders when pursuing any form of purposeful activity, the choices are to: 1-decide for stakeholders 2-decide with for other stakeholders 3-enable stakeholders to decide

42. Deciding for: When the systems practitioner takes control of the situation and uses their expertise to tell, or recommend to stakeholders what they should do.

43. Deciding with: When the systems practitioner acts as a facilitator for other stakeholders in the situation and participates in decision making with other stakeholders.

44. Creating an enabling process for deciding: When the systems practitioner explain to stakeholders what they see as the strengths and weaknesses of a particular method in a given context so that the stakeholders could choose for themselves. In this situation, there is the potential for the systems practitioner and stakeholders to become co-learners or co-inquirers. Each of these 3 situations requires a different set if skills for effective practice and will result in different capacities and potentials for learning. Why is the question of “who learns what?” important and why is it relevant to this block?

45. Because aware practitioners, using systems approaches are able to orchestrate a process of action research in which the key systems ideas of connectivity, emergence, communication and control are appreciated and in which multiple perspectives are valued. Using the phrase action research mean also action learning, as research and learning can be seen as the same process. When you get engaged in a situation – either as a consultant or as a stakeholder – then putting yourself in someone else’s position is much harder. This is because; your own beliefs, values and history will be determining your cognitive processes. It is only by becoming aware of your own perspective that you can create a mental space from which to construct a version of someone else’s perspective.

46. 6.Vignette 5: Learning from Brent Spar? Clearly an improved understanding of the different perceptions that the people have, and of the different values they place on natural and human resources is a vital requirement for professionals contributing to environmental decision making.

47. Part 5: Designing “learning systems” for purposeful action in the domain of SD. Introduction: The focus in the last section (Part 4) was focusing on managing systems practice according to three distinctions about power: deciding for deciding with enabling deciding by Each of these three possibilities placed different demands on the systems practitioner as juggler (juggling the B.E,C, and M balls).

48. The question of who participates in a learning process affects their capacity to be responsible to be able to respond purposefully. Some claim, that it is much easier managing systems practice in the “deciding for mode” but that is a trap in contexts such as SD. It is more challenging to be a system practitioner in the “decide with” or “enabling deciding by” modes. Because that involves much more attention to process issues, and other stakeholders are involved.

49. Identifying stakeholders and bringing them together in a decision making or situation-improving project is often very difficult but despite these difficulties  experience shows that  if key stakeholders are not involved decisions do not stick. The focus of this Part (5) is in the systems practitioner as a facilitator of a process design which is “enabling for stakeholders”. The main subject is going to be-process design in the modes of “deciding with” and “enabling” stakeholders to decide.

50. “Deciding for” is often needed in case such as: a. where stakeholders are not human b. where stakeholders cannot be involved with decision making either because They have: I. No capacity, where capacity might be determined by time constraints as well as bio- physical restraints. II. No desire to be involved III. Not yet been identified The disadvantage of “deciding for” is that however much we might try to put ourselves in the shoes of another, or acknowledge other perspectives, it is never the same as having these stakeholders participate.

51. There will be a focused on here on developing practice through a process of designing purposeful inquiry. Inquiry is an activity which produces knowledge Produces makes a difference It is sometimes hard to know whether employing a system approach would lead to a better situation or just a different one. When practicing in a “decide with” or “enabling deciding by” mode it is helpful for both the practitioner and these stakeholders who become involved to have a route map of the process they are beginning. Figure 19 in page 84 is one possible route map.

52. It is helpful for practitioner to become more aware of different ways of managing their systems practice in relation to the question: Who learns? The following scheme is helpful in addressing the question of how learns: All systems practice requires the practitioner to be concerned with his own learning. Using systems thinking to formulate systems of interest can help us to improve a situation for ourselves, a client or clients. This often results in “deciding for”.

53. In order for changes to be more sustainable, it might make sense to “design “our practice in a way that involves “giving away” or (or embedding) systems thinking and practice skills so that the stakeholders in the situation can use them in an on-going action- learning manner. This could be “deciding with” or “enabling to decide” In some cases it may make sense to design the practice in a way that enables the stakeholders to give a way their systems thinking and practice to others. This is a further elaboration of “enabling deciding by”

54. 2. Creative use of SS- method for “managing” SD in multiple stakeholder situations. Moving form “deciding for “to one of the other power relationships means that there is a need to focus on the C ball. (Contextualizing). When engaging with stakeholders who have multiple experiences and skills  the aware practitioner are  faced with the need to be clear about their role, and the process issues for involving stockholders. So managing the C ball is more sophisticated than just choosing one or more methods.

55. The very skilled practitioner relies on the thinking that underpins the various methods that are available. The word “designing” was used in the title of this part because designing is a special form of contextualizing. Design is a particular form of purposeful human activity. A successful design is one that enables someone to transfer thought into action or into another design. This type of design is called systematic design, because there is a clear objective to be optimized.

56. Systemic design is a design which creates the possibility of emergence and which is carried out awareness of the thinking used to guide the design. The most important emergent property in this part is “Learning which triggers purposeful action”.

57. 2.1Engaging with process design for emergent outcomes. First-order processes: A first order understanding is gained by accepting that there are general rules that apply to situations in terms of the identifiable objects and well-defined properties. By applying the rules logically to the situation, we can draw conclusions about how something has come about or what should be done. Here learning and action are based on the belief in a single reality (a real world) which can be approached and known objectively.

58. Second-order processes: It utilize data that takes as its starting point first-order data such as descriptions of physical, biological, and psychological events with specific reference to a person’s experience of gathering and working with, the side data.

59. The 4 stages involved in designing a process for emergent outcomes are: Stage 1: Bringing the system of interest into existence (i.e. naming the system of interest). Stage 2: Evaluating the effectiveness of the system of interest as a vehicle to elicit useful understanding (and acceptance) of the social and cultural context. Stage 3: Generation of a joint decision-making process (a problem-determined system of interest) involving all key stockholders Stage 4: Evaluating the effectiveness of the decisions made (i.e. how has the action taken been judged by stockholders?). (Please refer to pages 92-93)

60. 2.2 Developments in practice with SS-method The creative use of SSM offers strategies to break out of traps associated with uncritical use of systematic thinking and action which has characterized some attempts to manage SD. Please refer to: Figure 21-page 96 – The seven-step activity model of SSM. Figure 22-page 97- An “iconic” pictorial model of the process of SSM. SAQ 13-page 97, and its answer on page 124: give a comparison between figure 21 & 22.

61. DONE!!