I'm grateful for Professor Goldstein's guidance that these readings "are directly from the research rock.face and not processed for introductory-level classes, and so framed in ways that may not always be intelligible for the non-specialist." I appreciate the invitation to accept and even enjoy incomplete comprehension, and I'm right there.
Gravitating to readings 2 and 5, I found clear examples and accessible content. Patitsas1 seven-step primer on soft systems methodology attracts me for its clarity and simplicity. While studying in Toronto (with Steve Easterbrook of the Paris shower leverage points), Patitsas employs a New England dialect I love, "wicked" as in "wicked cool" or "wicked problem."
The first step: identify my domain of interest. With Scott Pruitt as the new head of the EPA, my domain is protecting the environmental and supporting a vast resurgence in environmental activism. Matching this to Patitsas's schema:
- The problem is not understood until after the formulation of a solution. Yes, we won't know all the obstacles and challenges to building this movement until it has been built.
- Wicked problems have no stopping rule. A stopping rule specifies how large the test statistic will be allowed to be before the trial is stopped. Building a grassroots environmental movement capable of shifting minds and hearts to the view that environmental protection is needed and benefits everyone, including business -- the size of this test group is unlimited, and the end of the trial is undetermined.
- Solutions to wicked problems are not right or wrong. Yes, solutions will fit, or not; be effective, or not: right and wrong are limiting paradigms irrelevant to this question of movement, passion, gestalt, and action.
- Every wicked problem is essentially novel and unique. Yes, this is an unique moment, a novel challenge, an as-yet-unmet opportunity.
- Every solution to a wicked problem is a 'one shot operation.' There is one (unknown) path to a renaissance of environmental resistance.
- Wicked problems have no given alternative solutions. Yes, maintaining our legal and regulatory system, to protect our commons from the perverse and unintended outcomes of consumptive capitalism, that's a single solution.
Step 2: Express the Problem Situation, in neutral language: The system of environmental protection established in the United States since 1970, through legislation, regulation, and administration, is likely to be significantly reduced in the next few years. I think there are people, including Mr. Pruitt, who would see this statement as not a problem.
Step 3: Identify Different Problem Frames. Easterbrook's article on Genetically Modified Foods explores the various frames surrounding the problem.2 While tackling that here, I recognize the importance of posing the problem in a variety of ways, with different lenses and filters, because different information is revealed.
The next few steps seem self-evident:
Step 4: Study the problem frames and pick one
Step 5: Arena of Action
Step 6: Theorize/model the relevant system
Step 7: Identify possible/feasible changes to the situation, and take action. My favorite. This whole approach, which seems fundamentally sounds, is reminiscent of Paolo Freire's3 work.
The question: From the perspective we've explored this week, how can the most effective and system-shaking forms of environmental activism be identified?
1.Patitsas' seven-step-primer-on-soft-systems
Comments