"Wicked problem" is a term that I find useful in defining the toughest problems in planning and policymaking. I have appended below a definition of this term. In the Kettering reading (Making Choices), the way that the authors describe terrorism and taxation fit the definition of wicked problems – in brief, they have no single universal definition and engage with competing values.
From a policy advocates perspective, one way to deal with wicked problems is the technique of value-laddering, which you are familiar with. Its a kind of "black art" in which the trick is to foreclose other problem definitions by arguing that your problem definition appeals to fundamental and universal values, while suppressing your opponents attempts to define the issue differently by reference to other fundamental values. While this ideological warfare gets the job done, politically, the authors of the Kettering reading suggest that it might harm our democracy, and they trace an alternative approach within American history, a deliberative tradition for addressing wicked problems.
For your blog question this week, I would like you to define a "wicked
problem" that you are familiar with (and, ideally, have been involved in).
Then, drawing from the Kettering reading, cite at least three possible advantages of addressing the problem
through a deliberative forum. Conclude by addressing whether, on the whole, you
think that the problem could best be solved through a deliberative forum, or
whether another approach would be preferable.
Wicked problems were defined in a classic planning paper:
Rittel, H.,and M. Webber; “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning” pp 155-169, Policy Sciences, Vol. 4, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Inc., Amsterdam, 1973.
In this paper, problems have the following characteristics
1. There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem. Formulating the problem and the
solution are essentially the same thing.
2. Since you cannot definitively define the problem, it
is difficult to tell when it is resolved.
3. Solutions to wicked problems arenot true-or-false but good-or-bad.
4. There is no immediate and no ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem.
5. Every implemented solution to a wicked problem has consequences of its own.
6. Wicked problems do not have a well-described set of potential solutions.
7. Every wicked problem can be considered a symptom of another problem. A wicked problem is a set of interlocking issues and constraints which change over time, embedded in a dynamic social
context.
8. The causes of a wicked problem can be explained in numerous ways: there are many stakeholders who will have various and changing ideas about what might be a wicked problem, what might be causing it, and how to resolve it.
9. The decision-maker has no right to be wrong--e.g., the consequences of failure are very high.
Comments