Thinking in Systems provides an alternative to “science, logic, and reductionism,” which typically take precedent over “intuition and holism” in postindustrial society (Meadows, 4). The objective of systems thinking is to understand not just the elements of a system, but how those elements relate to each other in order to achieve a greater function or purpose.
The elements of a systems are the tangible or intangible parts that comprise the system as a whole. These are often easiest to see and identify, and cause the least effect when changed. Interconnections are the relationships that hold the elements together. These can often be thought of as flows of resources or information. The function or purpose of the system is the outcome of the interconnections between the elements of a system. It is important to note that the purpose of the system may be distinct from the intent of system actors. For example, “no one intends to produce a society with rampant drug addiction and crime” (Meadows, 15).
This mode of thinking provides a useful lens for environmental challenges, that often have elements and interconnections that vary both across scales and over time. For example, the survival of an endangered species may be governed by the availability of nutrients within an ecosystem, and also by broader land-use patterns at the landscape scale. These elements and interconnections may shift over time within the context of a changing climate or an increasing global population. The ability to understand how elements interact to produce a purpose at a higher scale allows the system thinker to have a more holistic idea of what intervention strategies may look like.
Stock and flow diagrams are useful tools for systems thinkers to understand interactions between system elements, without being overwhelmed by complexity. Stocks are elements of systems that you can “see, feel, count or measure” (Meadows, 17). Flows represent the change in those stocks over time. Dynamics represent the overall behavior of stocks and flows over time. By consciously choosing what to include and exclude in a systems diagram, the systems thinker can understand where the diagram is a simplification of the real-world.
Different types of interconnections can also be used to better understand why a system behaves why the way it does. For example, feedback loops refer to when changes in a stock impact flows into or out of a stock. While balancing feedback loops will drive a system towards greater stability, a reinforcing loop will amplify a growth or destruction behavior. Delays, in which information delivered into a feedback loop affects future behavior, can cause stocks to oscillate, depending on the length of the delay. Finally, recognition of whether a stock is renewable or nonrenewable can help you determine whether the system is stock-limited or flow-limited. The ability to understand and identify these patterns can help the systems thinker predict how a system may behave.
Question: How can we use systems thinking to understand interconnections across scales of analysis? For example, if we are studying decision making among farmers in a certain community, how do we understand the influence of nearby communities, and state and national regulators?