Systems Thinking and Feedback in Nature
Jack Hunter
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
Slides for a lecture on Systems 'Thinking and Feedback in Nature' - Presented as part of a Sector39 Permaculture Design Course at Chester Cathedral, 14/02/2018.
Related papers
Holistic Natural Systems -Design & Steering Guiding New Science for Transformation
Journal of the International Society for the Systems Sciences, 2022
Great societies and their cultures, like all natural systems (and as opposed to conceptual systems), emerge from their environments, organized and behaving as wholes with their internal designs coupled with their external worlds. So nature can be a great teacher of what complex holistic designs are and how they successfully work. Some notably become imperiled by challenges of their own making, as ours has; driven to endlessly maximize its growth naturally leading to ever-growing conflicts, internally and with nature. Now we can compare different kinds of growth systems in their natural contexts to expose their different ways of coupling with their contexts and steering. Some work out fine – the difference often how internal and external parts fit. It helps identify how some take paths leading to deep trouble while others work out fine – the difference is often with how internal and external parts do or do not fit together. Better steering (self-control) also comes from more exposure to internal and external contexts, allowing more prompt notice of new situations and sure response. Recognizing emerging systems starts with noticing something new becoming a growing center of relationships, a nucleus of activity in a nourishing place, something sprouting. Storms, trees, people, businesses, organizations, cultures, etc., all start as emerging internal designs that build themselves using connections with nourishing contexts. That coupling between internal and external worlds continues to evolve as the new system makes its home in the world, lasting for a short or long time. Another coupling of internal and external worlds matters, too, between human thoughts and lives. Our mental worlds are only indirectly connected with our contexts and can blind us to the meanings of life, as in one of our earliest recorded experiences, not feeling at home in the world. Those feelings of alienation, doubt, and separation from nature, turn out to greatly affect how we design our living systems, even helping to make reality only seem conceptual. So with this “kit of parts,” we explore emerging system steering using familiar examples. A simple diagram asks good leading questions to remind readers what emerging system designs and non-verbal cues for response to notice for successful steering. We also read the meaningful progressions as arcs of stories about relationships. We first get perspective from multiple views, like noticing smooth or rough takeoffs and landings as cues to look all around before guessing how they happen. Their likely validity comes from confirming their nonlinear continuities of emerging design, which are hard to fake, making the stories one reads into them reasonable hypotheses to check out. Finally, we use ordinary language to refer to natural systems in context, not abstractly, using careful language as our first systems science.
Nature's Systems
Routledge Handbook of Sustainable Fashion, 2014
I write here as both an industrial designer and a farmer’s daughter. My connection to the land means that I see nature’s systems as inviolable, a view that has resulted in great internal conflict throughout my 30 year industrial design career. I have seen creative energy poured into projects that prioritized industry over the environment, and noted time and again how chains of seemingly small decisions created momentum to carry us further and further from sustaining our natural world. From this perspective, I wonder: can we appreciate how urgent it is that we become more ecologically knowledgeable? Could greater ecological literacy then help us to distinguish industry rhetoric from ideas that genuinely steward the Earth? Ultimately, can we, as designers, producers, and shapers of culture, shift the momentum of the fashion industry to support natural systems?
Systems approach to agriculture
Leisa India (Farming Matters), 2012
The idea that thoughts can affect matter is not a new one. Indeed, indigenous cultures have long accepted the interconnectedness between human thought and the natural world, which scientific research continues to affirm. It is worth considering this relationship as we look for solutions to our global food crisis.
Learning and teaching about ecosystems : systems thinking and modelling in an authentic practice
2005
Introduction Our biological environment can be regarded as a complex adaptive system (Gell-Mann, 1995). Such a system behaves according to three key principles: order is emergent as opposed to predetermined, the system's history is irreversible, and the system's future is often unpredictable. These features result from the interaction of various ‘building blocks’ and processes at different levels of biological organization (individual, population, and ecosystem) (Holling, 1987). The dynamic behaviour of such a system proves hard to understand for secondary school students studying ecology (Barman et al., 1995; Magntorn & Helldén, 2003; Munson, 1994). In the traditional approach to ecology teaching, dependencies between populations tend to be represented through ‘food webs’. Although this format conveys the idea of a network, it does not contribute to students’ insights into the dynamic interdependencies of populations in the web (Hogan, 2000). Moreover, in many cases the foo...
Permaculture Patterning, a design framework for systemic transformation
How do we change the system(s) we live in ? By essence a system is an inherently complex web of relationships. Systems thinking researcher Donella Meadows has given us a map of leverage points to act on a system but there is no practical plan as to where to start effectively to trigger systemic change. Interestingly around the late seventies, two systems thinkers/practitioners developed practical design frameworks for systems transformation. The first framework, Permaculture, is an integrated approach to designing agro-ecological systems developed by ecological scientist Bill Mollison. Permaculture focussed initially on developing a resilient “permanent-agriculture” but it was expanded to stand also for "permanent culture," as it was seen that social aspects were integral to a truly sustainable system. Although it is still not widely recognized by either the scientific community or the general public, Permaculture has developed a very powerful set of analytical and design tools for whole systems transformation. The second framework, Pattern Languages, was developed by architect Christopher Alexander to build human settlements and “living” architectural systems. If Alexander’s Pattern Language focusses on built structures, it also encompasses a social dimension. Although Alexander’s work hasn’t taken off in the architectural field it deeply inspired software programming and a growing number of disciplines. Both frameworks share a common approach to systems design called patterning. While design builds structures by assembling elements, patterning can be seen as a branch of design that builds systems by weaving relationships. In this paper we look at the commonalities and differences between the two approaches, discuss how they could be used by systems thinking practitioners and propose Permaculture Patterning as a new framework for systems design and transformation.
Understanding the functional principles of nature—Proposing another type of ecosystem services
Ecological Modelling, 2009
Ecosystem services are usually interpreted as a free of charge "favour" provided to us and our society by nature. In other words, nature supplies us with a functionality that we would otherwise have to pay for. Our cost would be to provide resources either (1) to ensure the necessary inputs to drive our society, or (2) to assist in counteracting, absorbing or remediating unwanted effects that are results of our societal activities. Through ecosystem studies it has been found that a substantial part of the functionality of nature is laid out in all types of components-the compartments of the ecosystems together with the transactional interrelations (flows) and controls between them. Eventually, many so-called indicators have been proposed during the last decades. Such measures are dedicated to tell us about the quality side of ecosystem functionality, e.g. to tell us how well the system performs relatively to a theoretical maximum efficiency possible. As an additional hypothesis, such functions are thought to orient the systems and thus increase through time development, i.e. to be optimised under the given the constraints, through the evolution of the system. Recently is has been pointed out that natural and societal systems share the feature of being complex in their organisation. Meanwhile, it was remarked that societal systems in many ways evolved in opposite direction of how natural evolution would drive an ecosystem. Many philosophers of biology have stated that biological systems posses information and memory functions which improve their long-term capability to survive. This information is believed to be contained in the organisational structures of the system as much as in its gene pool. If we accept such arguments it means that studies of organisation and function of natural systems will provide us with another type of ecosystem services. This would namely give us information about in what direction to drive society in order to achieve a more sustainable system. This paper discusses what measures derived from modern ecosystem theory can possibly be used to study and compare the functionality of the two types of systems. The discussion takes an entrance point in two graphs-one that represents a natural system and one of a socioeconomic system. The systems possess similar levels of complexity in terms of number of compartments whereas their connectivities do differ in quantity and quality. The differences between the systems are compared from both a network and a thermodynamic perspective. Indications of the best available options that we have at present, will help to increase our knowledge about and understanding of the systems given. As a main conclusion it is possible to view and treat our society as an ecosystem. This means that it is possible to apply the same measures (indicators) that we use in ecological theory. The idea to use these features is so clear, obvious and at the same time cheap that this option necessarily has to be tried out. It seems a bit surprising that we-from a "natural science point-of-view"-to a certain extent understand natural systems better than socioeconomic ones. One major reason is that the latter type includes a large set of regulatory mechanisms that are exerted on a subjective basis as opposed to natural systems. As a consequence societal systems become much more difficult to evaluate, forecast and regulate than ecosystems.
The Relationship between Systems Thinking and the New Ecological Paradigm
Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 2015
The goal of the present research was to examine the relationship between the cognitive paradigm systems thinking and an ecologically informed worldview, specifically the New Ecological Paradigm. One hundred and fifteen psychology undergraduate students completed an online questionnaire assessing systems thinking, ecological worldview, environmental value-orientation, connectivity to nature, and environmental behaviors. Results demonstrated that systems thinkers possess a stronger ecological worldview and sense of connectivity with nature, harbour biospheric environmental values, and engage in more pro-environmental behaviors than those scoring low on systems thinking. Furthermore, it was found that systems thinking both uniquely predicted and was predicted by the New Ecological Paradigm. Moreover, results demonstrated that systems thinkers are better able to acknowledge 'system membership' and possess a greater understanding of the characteristics of complex ecological systems and their mutual influence on social-economic domains.
Living Systems Principles and Their Relevance to Design
Extracts from a Masters Thesis as completion for an MSc in Holistic Science, Schumacher College/Plymouth University, 2004. The article argues that a better understanding of the principles and dynamics of healthy ecosystems could aid in designing more appropriately/responsibly. Principles from chaos and complexity theories, emergence, self-organization, fractal structure, feedback loops, attractors etc, are explored within the context of design.
Getting the big picture in natural resource management-systems thinking as ‘method’ for scientists, policy makers and other stakeholders
Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 2007
This paper discusses the benefits of applying Systems Thinking to solving natural resource management problems. It first explains the Systems Thinking concept and briefly outlines its history and emergence in agriculture and natural resource management. A series of case studies are then presented which illustrate practical examples of how Systems Thinking has been used to address real life natural resource management issues. The case studies build on the conclusions of each other by adding additional ways (lessons learnt) of incorporating Systems Thinking into practice to address issues more systemically. The first case study deals with examples of how Systems Thinking facilitated the sharing and integration of disparate sources and forms of knowledge, and making sense of the factors influencing tree density in the tropical savanna region of northern Queensland. The second case study deals with how Systems Thinking has been imbedded in the design and implementation of a research project investigating how to improve financial returns to smallholder tree farmers in the Philippines. The third case study illustrates how Systems Thinking was used to design and facilitate an adaptive rodent management project in Cambodia based on participatory research, development and extension. From these experiences, the authors' highlight a variety of key points that lead to the proposition that Systems Thinking should be 'absorbed' into scientific research, in the same way that statistics, is today an integral part of all sciences. A framework for the application of Systems Thinking is presented to help improve sustainable land management.
Systems Thinking for Systems Making: Joining Systems of Thought and Action
A common use of systems thinking (ST) is for guiding our practices of systems making (SM). One style of ST for SM is centered on making designs with deterministic rules, as in the hard sciences, for guiding engineered applications. Another style mimics natural development, with a process by stepwise learning and improvisation to produce evolving designs; examples including architectural design, scientific research, and the practice of action research (AR). All these use exploratory pathfinding to search for better ways to work with reality, and this is the main subject of the paper. Both deterministic and adaptive ST for SM are widely found in differing roles, each having capabilities the other lacks. I start with simple models, such as step-wise improvisation for adapting recipes when making dinner. Another example is Robert Rosen’s model for how scientific and other cultures learn to work with nature, by turning attention back and forth between nature and theory for creating their cultural language. A review of the modern history of the systems sciences, as practices of ST for SM, then further broadens the view and context. That leads to introducing a new paradigm of natural systems thinking (NST), using commitments to critical awareness, emancipation, and methodological pluralism for working with natural systems.
Related topics
Related papers
Systems thinking – Language of complexity for scientists and managers
Land managers are regularly faced with the prospect of having to anticipate the consequences of their actions, and avoid unintended consequences, without comprehensive information about the system surrounding their management activities, for a number of reasons. First, natural systems are complex and while information may be available to assist managers in decision-making, it is often uncertain. Second, relevant information is often fragmented and scattered throughout scientific publications, reports, databases and in the heads of experienced people, making it difficult for managers to utilise. Third, people can have divergent views about management because pieces of information often relate to different management objectives (e.g. conservation vs. production) and different people hold different opinions about how management systems operate. This uncertain, fragmented and conflicting picture of natural resource management can result in managers continually dealing with symptoms rath...
Systems Thinking and Practice in Agriculture
Journal of Dairy Science, 1991
Reductionist science with its positivistic philosophical roots and experimental research practices has generally served agriculture well for around 150 yr. Technological innovations based on the propositions generated through this paradigm have played a profound role in the extraordinary productivity growth that has occurred in agriculture across the globe.
Systems ecology and environmentalism: Getting the science right
Ecological Engineering, 2013
Problems of environmentalism-environmental protection, conservation, and preservation-are now widely appreciated as important to human enterprise and destiny. Called to attention by advances in descriptive empirical ecology, the new problems are too complex for this same ecology to solve without further expansion of basic knowledge. Environmentalism needs an ecological science of complex systems, but its development is hindered by over-commitment of attention and resources to the applied problems. Certain aspects of environmentalism may run against the grain of how nature works; it is important to get the science right. A selection of ecological and environmental topics is reviewed from a systems ecology perspective. The ecological topics include system dynamics (linearity vs. nonlinearity, steady vs. non-steady state behavior) and indirect effects. The environmental topics are global change, overpopulation, biodiversity, and sustainability. A comprehensive hypothesis is formulated to emphasize that two kinds of science are needed, one empirical focusing on what is immediate and tangible, and the other theoretical dealing with what is indirect and intangible. Empirically based environmentalism is attentive to only the first. The hypothesis has the following elements: (1) Living processes degrade their immediate and nearby environments. (2) A maximum power principle holds that this degradation should be as quick and complete as possible. (3) By direct harnessing of maximum power, biota perform work to maximize their fitness (Type I, biological), at the cost of degraded environments. The life-environment relationship therefore becomes win-lose. (4) Maximum power also contributes to a network property, dominant indirect effects, giving rise to (5) network synergism that converts proximate interactions, mainly (+, -), and negative ones (-,-) to predominantly positive (+, +) relations, which become quantitatively dominant. ( ) In following the indirect line from maximum power to network synergism, biota do work that maximizes both their own and their environment's fitness (Type II, biological and ecological). By this, the life-environment relationship becomes win-win. ( ) This hypothesis has a built-in paradox: the invisible positive benefits deriving from the network synergism → Fitness-II line are (i) proportional to, and (ii) greater in magnitude than, the negative costs generated by the tangible, immediate, maximum power → Fitness-I line. (8) Therefore, environmental programs designed to power down to reduce environmental degradation will reduce not only Fitness-I, but also Fitness-II by foregoing the network synergism benefits that exceed the maximum power costs. (9) Misguided environmentalism could then produce the worst case of a lose-lose life-environment relationship. (10) Environmentalism must resolve and manage this apparent conflict, and ecology as its foundational science must expand to provide the knowledge to do so.
Adding artificial feedback to a simple aquatic ecosystem: the cybernetic nature of ecosystems revisited
Oikos, 2001
Petersen, J. E. 2001. Adding artificial feedback to a simple aquatic ecosystem: the cybernetic nature of ecosystems revisited. -Oikos 94: 533 -547.
Wicked Problems, Dynamic Solutions: The Ecosystem Approach and Systems Thinking
2016
This sourcebook accompanies the Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) on the Ecosystem Approach and Systems Thinking (EAST) developed by the Loyola Sustainability Research Centre at Concordia University, Montreal, and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in Nairobi, Kenya. The sourcebook is written for both teacher and student, though it is assumed that most of its readers will be teachers who are applying the MOOC to a hybrid class (blended learning) or are offering the MOOC to students and/or professionals in various branches of public administration, civil society, or the private sector. Each module is described in terms of the main learning objectives, a short introduction to the topic, a summary of prevalent policy initiatives and interventions, a list of suggested “discussion points” that can guide classroom or online discussions/debates, an annotated bibliography of some key sources that have been suggested by our subject experts, and a list of exciting websites, TED t...
A Systems View of Bio-Inspiration: Bridging the Gaps
INSIGHT, 2016
predict that we may soon be living in a world where less than 25% of our planet's ice-free land is unaffected by human activity. We are beginning to experience how crossing natural planetary boundaries for climate change, biochemical flows, land-system change, and biosphere integrity strains the resilience of our systems (Figure , Stockholm Resilience Centre 2015). "We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used This paper provides an overview of biom ] , an umbrella term for biomimicry, biomimetics, bio-inspired design, and related fields -all of which seek to draw design inspiration from natural systems (NS). The paper explores three levels of biom ] bridging, discusses benefits and implications of adopting a systems perspective, and proposes initiatives for further development. Searching for 'sweet spots' leveraging the synergy between our aspirations, our growing knowledge of NS, and the market economy will improve the ability of biom ] to deliver meaningful and impactful solutions.
Living Systems, Seeing Systems, Being Systems: Learning to be the systems we wish to see in the world
The Systems Movement celebrates a field of inquiry, action and appreciation that includes the theory, practice, perception, thinking, design, development and innovation of systems. The theme of this special issue of Spanda is Systemic Change and its power to make the world a better place. In order to apply systems thinking as a catalyst for future creating, life affirming and opportunity increasing change, it is necessary to understand what types of social innovation and emerging technology can be fostered to greatest effect and affect by systems thinking. This is critically important if we are to do more than merely create networks of social dysfunction and ever increasing environmental degradation. As a species, we already know how to do that. What we need are Technologies of Organizational Communion (TOCs) to serve as evolutionary guidance systems for the Technologies of Information and Communication (TICs – aka ICTs) that now stand the chance of connecting us not only with each other, but with the planet, with future generations, and most importantly, with ourselves. If we wish to shepherd in a new era of global peace, prosperity and thrivability, we must use systems thinking to inform social innovation and emerging technologies so that they connect us with life. This article suggests ways of understanding technology from a systems perspective. Based on this understanding, it considers the role of technologies of social interaction – also known as soft technologies – in creating the conditions for the emergence of healthy and authentic communities, from local to regional to national to global. A case is made for the importance of consistently generating TOCs in conjunction with the development of TICs. Given the framework presented for the interpenetration of hard and soft technologies, the essential interdependence of the two becomes evident if more harmonious ways of doing, being, and interacting with all life on Earth are the desired outcome of social innovation and emerging technologies. Finally, the article suggests that a key role of systems thinkers who understand how to live into the systems they design is to foster social innovations and emerging technologies that stand the best chance of giving rise to a glocal eco-civilization — one that is simultaneously locally and globally attuned. Key words: Systems thinking, evolution, development, consciousness, creativity, thrivability, curation, emergence, social innovation.
Implications of the synergies between systems theory and permaculture for learning about and acting towards sustainability
Permaculture involves the use of principles derived from the operation and organisation of ecological systems to guide the creation of sustainable settlements.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.