Problem perceptions
Like many other documents, websites, discussions and reports addressing the overall crisis, many posts in the LinkedIn STW discussion were describing various aspects of the current crisis or predicted conditions under the heading of 'problems', and calling for priority attention to these, as essential features of the 'model for survival'. Often, the very calls for successful resolution of key problems are presented as 'solutions' to the crisis, even when specific steps and means for resolution are not provided.
A listing of problems mentioned in the discussion and researched material illustrates the magnitude of the challenge: (incomplete, in no particular orderâŠ)
* Improved prediction, preparation and response planning for natural disasters;
* Prevention of war, especially nuclear war; and remedying consequences of wars;
* Understanding the causes, including human contribution, of climate change, and policies and steps to address its effects
* Resource depletion
* Shortages of essential provisions for human life:
- Food
- Water
- Energy
- Shelter
- Health care
- Education
* The question of growth, with the various aspects of
- growth of human population
- growth as a guiding maxim of economic policy of governments and private enterprise
- The role of growth-oriented, purely financial measures of performance (e.g. GDP) as criteria for government and private industry -- replacing these with quality-of life / human development and happiness measures
* The increasing inequality and disparity of income, wealth, property (the increasing gap between rich and poor)
* Debt and its role in the economy
* The controversy of free market versus regulation (Each seen by its proponents as the remedy of the 'problem' of the other)
* Conflict / conflict resolution: effective means and tools?
* Crime
* Corruption
* Power abuse
* Human rights violations
* Discrimination, marginalization and outright oppression of population segments
(women, children, ethnic and religious minorities)
* Private enterprise/industry, religious organizations, the military's influence on government, media
* Waste
* Pollution of atmosphere, drinking water, oceans, soil
* Citizen participation in governance
* Government models and forms: alternatives to democracy?
* Discourse: organization, effectiveness; linking discourse merit to decision
* Translation: mutual understanding
* Greed as a main motivation in economic and social interaction
* Changing / deteriorating human values, ethics
* Ignorance
* Enforcement of laws, agreements, treaties by means of 'coercive' sanctions (Credible threat of application of force)
* 'Big versus 'Small' -- the question of appropriate size of governments and other organizations
* Polarization
* Approaches to the study, understanding and resolution of problems (e.g. the role of systems thinking, design thinking, the argumentative model of planning, the role of experts, science, discourse).
Apart from a commonsense premise of urging the 'analysis' of problems, understood mainly as identifying and removing their 'root causes' as the proper way to solve them, the attitudes and suggested responses in the group to the question of just how that should be done in detail, varied substantially. These responses ranged from e.g. 'systems thinking' approaches to strategies relying more on the ability of people having been informed, inspired with a sense of global community, enabled and empowered, to initiate action and projects in cooperative, participatory, self-organizing patterns that move the whole towards more sustainable behavior and stewardship of the social, environmental and economic system. In this, the emphasis was mainly on individuals and small groups, while large ('big') organizations tended to be seen as detrimental to the development of sustainable patterns.
Some discussion was aimed at enhancing the understanding of problems related to the crisis themselves -- from a growing sense that these 'wicked' problems (Rittel's distinction, as opposed to 'tame' problems) will require new approaches and techniques for dealing with them.
From a systems point of view, the assumption is that all these problems must be seen as interrelated factors, and an eventual effective 'model for survival' must properly address these factors and relationships so as to provide acceptable, sustainable solutions for all of them. The key task for a systems thinking approach to the overall challenge would therefore be to develop models to understand those relationships and explore the ripple effect of specific actions and policies throughout the network of the problems. (Some difficulties in developing clear strategies from this point of view were encountered in the variety of schools of thinking within the ranks of 'systems thinkers'.)
No definitive resolution of this issue of problem understanding and approach was possible or even appropriate for a synopsis of the STW discussion in this report: it is in itself one of the subjects to be dealt with in a larger, global discourse.
The question of agencies expected to take on the leadership and responsibility for the steps needed for either of these strategies remains to be explored in adequate detail. The diagram below attempts to identify the plausible matching of the two examples of approaches with problem aspects to plausibly affected -- and therefore likely responsible -- agents and agencies.
