Design for Social Change

Design for Social Change

Howard Silvermanwww.solvingforpattern.org

ISSS19JUL12

Thanks to: International Society for the Systems Sciences, American Society for Cybernetics,

Greg Hill, Ecotrust, Cascade Systems Society, Todd Gilens+Maria D’Agostino,students in the Collaborative Design MFA at Pacific Northwest College of Art

Overview of 12 Propositions

• introduce terms

• explore regimes-on-a-landscape metaphor

• consider applications

Goal:

Draw upon the regimes-on-a-landscape metaphor to develop frameworks for use in “designing for social change.”

Howard Silverman solvingforpattern.orgHoward Silverman solvingforpattern.org

By “design,” I mean to act with intention.(Proposition #1)

Herbert Simon:“Design ... is concerned with how things ought to be.”

Victor Papanek: “Design is the conscious effort to impose meaningful order.”

Simon, H. 1996. The Sciences of the Artificial. Third Edition. MIT Press. p.114.

Papanek, V. 1971. Design for the Real World. Pantheon Books. p.3.


By “design for,” I mean a reflexive process.(Proposition #2)

Etienne Wenger:“Learning cannot be designed, it can only be designed for -- that is, facilitated or frustrated.”

Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge U Press. pp.229-30.


(For the purposes of this discussion) I understand “meaningful order” in terms of social-ecological systems, represented as state spaces (or stability landscapes)

and shaped by basins of attraction (i.e., regimes).(Proposition #3)

Brian Walker et al.:The state space of a system is the three-dimensional space of all possible combinations of the variables that constitute the system.

Walker, B. et al. 2004. Resilience, Adaptability and Transformability in Social-Ecological Systems. Ecology and Society 9(2):5.


The regimes-on-a-landscape approach is coherent with other research in complex adaptive systems.

(Proposition #4)

Brian Arthur: “[P]ositive feedback - increasing returns - make for multiple equilibrium points.”

Sewall Wright’s theory of shifting balances:

Ellerman, D. 2010. Pragmatism versus Economics Ideology in the Post-Socialist Transition. Real-World Economics Review 52:2-27.

Arthur, W. B. Positive Feedbacks in the Economy. Scientific American, 262:92-99.

Howard Silverman solvingforpattern.org

Regimes develop as mutually reinforcing sets of factors -- biological, psychological, social, and artifactual --

shaping and shaped by ecological interdependence.(Proposition #5)

Transition Management:“[A regime is] a coherent configuration of technological, institutional, economic, social, cognitive, and physical elements and actors with individual goals, values, and beliefs.”

Holtz, G., et al. 2008. Specifying “Regime” — A Framework for Defining and Describing Regimes in Transition Research. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 75:623-643.

Silverman, H., et al. 2012. Resilience & Transformation: A Regional Approach. Ecotrust.


Based on this holistic (biological, psychological, social, artifactual) understanding of regime configuration across multiple systems, we can examine analogous relationships,

e.g., types of resistance to transformation.(Proposition #6)

• senses of identity

• senses of anxiety

• cognitive denial

• confirmation bias

• Kahneman’s “system 1 thinking”

• addiction and pathology

• path dependence

• power, influence, and interests

• perverse incentives

• technological and infrastructural lock-in

• stranded financial capital

• traps (e.g., rigidity, poverty)

• Senge’s “success to the successful”


The regimes-on-a-landscape metaphor enables systemic differentiation between adaptation and transformation.

(Proposition #7)

Transformability:“To create a fundamentally new system when ecological, economic, or social structures make the existing system untenable.”

“new ways of making a living”

Adaptability:“To learn and adjust responses so as to continue developing within the current regime.”

Walker, B. et al. 2006. A handful of heuristics and some propositions for understanding resilience in social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 11(1):13.

Folke, C., et al. 2010. Resilience thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability. Ecology and Society 15(4): 20.


Transformation (“social change”) is indicated by shift a from one regime to another.

(Proposition #8)

Westley, F., et al. 2011. Tipping Toward Sustainability: Emerging Pathways of Transformation. AMBIO 40:762-780.

Francis Westley et al.:“Radical innovation originates in niches: small protected spaces in which new practice can develop.”


The regimes-on-a-landscape metaphor can be usefully combined with and compared against other systems approaches.

(Proposition #9)

Soft Systems Methodology Program Logic Model

Transtheoretical Model


Example 1: Relationships between dominant and alternative regimes reflect a “limits to success” archetype.

(Proposition #10)

Silverman, H., et al. 2005. Sustainable Food Systems: Working Towards a Fundamental Solution. Ecotrust.


Example 2: The regimes-on-a-landscape metaphor can inform the development of opportunities for boundary work.

(Proposition #11)

Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge U Press. p.105.

design: rocketeye.com

Sensemaking across community boundaries


Example 3: The regimes-on-a-landscape metaphor can inform the development of visioning processes.

(Proposition #12)

• Is developed for social, rather than organizational, contexts;

• Prioritizes for the agency of individual and organizational actors;

• Focuses on social dilemmas rather than evolutionary uncertainties, per se;

• Enables identification of institutional innovations; and

• Is spatially explicit.

Visioning that: Versus scenario planning example(Millennium Ecosystem Assessment)


The regimes-on-a-landscape metaphor can inform the process of “designing for social change.”

(Conclusion)

• By “design,” I mean to act with intention.

• By “design for,” I mean a reflexive process.

• (For the purposes of this discussion) I understand “meaningful order” in terms of social-ecological systems, represented as state spaces (or stability landscapes) and shaped by basins of attraction (i.e., regimes).

• The regimes-on-a-landscape approach is coherent with other research in complex adaptive systems.

• Regimes develop as mutually reinforcing sets of factors -- biological, psychological, social, and artifactual -- shaping and shaped by ecological interdependence.

• Based on this holistic (biological, psychological, social, artifactual) understanding of regime configuration across multiple systems, we can examine analogous relationships, e.g., types of resistance to transformation.

• The regimes-on-a-landscape metaphor enables systemic differentiation between adaptation and transformation.

• Transformation (“social change”) is indicated by shift a from one regime to another.

• The regimes-on-a-landscape metaphor can be usefully combined with and compared against other systems approaches.

• Example 1: Relationships between dominant and alternative regimes reflect a “limits to success” archetype.

• Example 2: The regimes-on-a-landscape metaphor can inform the development of opportunities for boundary work.

• Example 3: The regimes-on-a-landscape metaphor can inform the development of visioning processes.


Design for Social Change

Entertainment & Humor

Transcript of Design for Social Change