1. G. P. Richardson July 2006 1 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Dynamic Complexity 50th Annual Meeting of the International Society for the Systems Sciences George P. Richardson Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany, SUNY

2. G. P. Richardson July 2006 2 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Decisions Real World Information Feedback Strategy, Structure, Decision Rules Mental Models Virtual World Selected Missing Delayed Biased Ambiguous Implementation Game playing Inconsistency Short term Unknown structure Dynamic complexity Time Delays Impossible experiments Misperceptions Unscientific Biases Defensiveness Known structure Variable Complexity Controlled Experiments Learning in and about Complex Systems Sterman (1994) Inability to infer dynamics from mental models

3. G. P. Richardson July 2006 3 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Dynamic Complexity arises because systems are… Changing over time Tightly coupled Governed by feedback Nonlinear: changing dominant structure History-dependent Self-organizing Adaptive Counterintuitive Policy resistant Characterized by tradeoffs

4. G. P. Richardson July 2006 4 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany System Dynamics Contributions Thinking dynamically Move from events and decisions to patterns of continuous behavior over time and policy structure Thinking in circular causal / feedback patterns Self-reinforcing and self-balancing processes Compensating feedback structures and policy resistance Communicating complex nonlinear system structure Thinking in stocks and flows Accumulations are the resources and the pressures on policy Policies influence flows Modeling and simulation Accumulating (and remembering) complexity Rigorous (daunting) model evaluation processes Controlled experiments Reflection

5. G. P. Richardson July 2006 5 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany The system dynamics modeling process Adapted from Saeed 1992

6. G. P. Richardson July 2006 6 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Processes focusing on system structure

7. G. P. Richardson July 2006 7 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Processes focusing on system behavior

8. G. P. Richardson July 2006 8 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Two kinds of validating processes

9. G. P. Richardson July 2006 9 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Six Traditions Contributing to the Evolution of Feedback Thought Biology: math models Econometrics Engineering Social Sciences Biology: homeostasis Logic Two Threads of Feedback Thought System dynamics arises in the servomechanisms thread (the first four in this list)

10. G. P. Richardson July 2006 10 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Forresters Hierarchy of System Structure Closed boundary around the system Feedback loops as the basic structural elements within the boundary Level [stock] variables representing accumulations within the feedback loops Rate [flow] variables representing activity within the feedback loops Goal Observed condition Detection of discrepancy Action based on discrepancy

11. G. P. Richardson July 2006 11 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany The Endogenous Point of View The closed causal boundary takes top billing Dynamics arise from interactions within that boundary Systems thinking is the mental effort to uncover endogenous sources of system behavior.

12. G. P. Richardson July 2006 12 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Dynamics

13. G. P. Richardson July 2006 13 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany New York City Population, 1900-2000

14. G. P. Richardson July 2006 14 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Global Atmospheric Methane (1860-1994)

15. G. P. Richardson July 2006 15 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Global Average Temperature (Reconstruction 1400-1980; Data 1902-1998)

16. G. P. Richardson July 2006 16 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Stocks and Flows

17. G. P. Richardson July 2006 17 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Stocks and flows help to explain self-reported drug use data

18. G. P. Richardson July 2006 18 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Challenging the clouds in a study of leasing in the automobile industry Were not in the used car business! ?

19. G. P. Richardson July 2006 19 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Stocks and flows in new car purchase and leasing

20. G. P. Richardson July 2006 20 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Intuitive view of effect of leasing on auto sales: Leased car pipeline

21. G. P. Richardson July 2006 21 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Stocks and Flows in Global Warming Thought experiment:

22. G. P. Richardson July 2006 22 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany But although the stock-and-flow insight holds, global climate is of course much more complex than that. And still much more complex than this simple global climate model, as well!

23. G. P. Richardson July 2006 23 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Feedback Thinking For one good deed leads to another good deed, and one transgression leads to another transgression. (Pirke Avot)

24. G. P. Richardson July 2006 24 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany The Classic Cybernetic Balancing Loop

25. G. P. Richardson July 2006 25 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany The Cybernetic Loop with Complications

26. G. P. Richardson July 2006 26 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany The Cybernetic Loop with Complications

27. G. P. Richardson July 2006 27 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany The Cybernetic Loop with Complications

28. G. P. Richardson July 2006 28 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany A Classic Reinforcing Loop (Myrdal 1944, Merton 1948) Prejudice against the minority group Majoritys perception of the inferiority of the minority Economic and educational discrimination against the minority Achievements of the minority group (R)

29. G. P. Richardson July 2006 29 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Structure and Dynamics of Terrorist Cells Recruiting terrorists Terrorist group Losing terrorists Terrorist actions Efforts to suppress terrorists Terrorist zeal Peripheral support for terrorists Terrorist funding Terrorist martyrs to the cause (R) (B) (R) (B) (R) Interfering with terrorist funding (B)

30. G. P. Richardson July 2006 30 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Teamwork and Communication are self-reinforcing Insights about building teamwork in a public school

31. G. P. Richardson July 2006 31 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Isolation of teams and punishing risk-taking inhibit the growth of trust

32. G. P. Richardson July 2006 32 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany But longterm experience with teamwork can build communication

33. G. P. Richardson July 2006 33 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Risk taking can enhance effectiveness, which can build trust

34. G. P. Richardson July 2006 34 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany A team-player culture is self-reinforcing: an opportunity or a trap

35. G. P. Richardson July 2006 35 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Likely leverage points

36. G. P. Richardson July 2006 36 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany The Problem: 1996 U.S. welfare reform Since 1930, a guarantee of lifetime Federal support 1996 legislation ended that: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - TANF At most five years of Federal support in ones lifetime The clock started for everyone on TANF in 1997 People began timing out in 2002 Financial burden will begin shifting to the states and counties A series of facilitated group modeling efforts in three New York State counties tried to help counties cope. Where are the leverage points?

37. G. P. Richardson July 2006 37 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany

38. G. P. Richardson July 2006 38 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany

39. G. P. Richardson July 2006 39 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Three Policy Mixes Base run (for comparison) Flat unemployment rate Historical client behaviors Investments in the Middle Additional services to TANF families Increased TANF assessment & monitoring Safety net assessment & job services Investments on the Edges Prevention Child support enforcement Self-sufficiency promotion

40. G. P. Richardson July 2006 40 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Investing in the Middle

41. G. P. Richardson July 2006 41 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Investing on the Edges

42. G. P. Richardson July 2006 42 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Base, Edges, and Middle Compared: Populations on the Welfare Rolls Edges looks better.

43. G. P. Richardson July 2006 43 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Total Job-Finding Flows from TANF Middle looks better.

44. G. P. Richardson July 2006 44 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Program Expenditures Edges looks worse, then better.

45. G. P. Richardson July 2006 45 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Populations in the Welfare System Middle looks worse than Base! Edges looks much better.

46. G. P. Richardson July 2006 46 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Total Recidivism Flows (back to TANF) The hint for understanding the puzzling dynamics: recidivism.

47. G. P. Richardson July 2006 47 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany A Stock-and-Flow Archetype at Work Here

48. G. P. Richardson July 2006 48 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Behavior of the Archetype in response to increased TANF support capacity Total families at risk Post-TANF employed Families on TANF

49. G. P. Richardson July 2006 49 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany The Behavior of the Archetype Families on TANF initially declines, as more support hastens job finding. Post-TANF families employed initially increases, just as policy makers would predict. Eventually (it takes a year and a half to begin to see it), … Families on TANF rises higher to a new high, Post-TANF Employed declines to a new low, And Total Families at Risk rises! …All because of increased TANF support capacity!

50. G. P. Richardson July 2006 50 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Why? Increasing TANF support Speeds job finding, Swamping downstream Post-TANF jobs and support

51. G. P. Richardson July 2006 51 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany Misattribution? Desirable rise in Post-TANF employed continues for almost a year and half after the intervention Families on TANF falls below initial for over a year after increasing TANF support capacity Very hard (impossible?) to see that the rise in Total Families at Risk is attributable solely to the improvement in TANF support capacity Dynamics almost certainly to be blamed on a weakening economy, a rise in client pathologies, or other exogenous factors

52. G. P. Richardson July 2006 52 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany A Loop View of the Archetype in Detail Suppose TANF support capacity increases…

53. G. P. Richardson July 2006 53 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany 120 B: Employed load controls recidivism 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 0306090 Time (Month) White bar (left) is the time slice of interest Red arrows (below) are the dominant influences

54. G. P. Richardson July 2006 54 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany 120 B: Employed load controls recidivism 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 0306090 Time (Month)

55. G. P. Richardson July 2006 55 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany 120 B: Employed load controls recidivism 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 0306090 Time (Month)

56. G. P. Richardson July 2006 56 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany 120 B: Employed load controls recidivism 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 0306090 Time (Month)

57. G. P. Richardson July 2006 57 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany 120 B: Employed load controls recidivism 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 0306090 Time (Month) White bar (left) is the time slice of interest Red arrows (below) are the dominant influences

58. G. P. Richardson July 2006 58 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany 120 B: Employed load controls recidivism 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 0306090 Time (Month)

59. G. P. Richardson July 2006 59 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany 120 B: Employed load controls recidivism 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 0306090 Time (Month)

60. G. P. Richardson July 2006 60 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany 120 B: Employed load controls recidivism 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 0306090 Time (Month)

61. G. P. Richardson July 2006 61 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany 120 B: Employed load controls recidivism 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 0306090 Time (Month)

62. G. P. Richardson July 2006 62 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany 120 B: Employed load controls recidivism 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 0306090 Time (Month) Dynamic complexity even in a structure this aggregate and tiny!

63. G. P. Richardson July 2006 63 Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany System Dynamics and Dynamic Complexity Thinking dynamically moves us beyond separate events and decisions, toward understanding. Feedback thinking extends traditional causal thinking. It improves (makes more realistic) how we think about the world and how we think about changing it. The endogenous point of view is empowering.