Loading…
#ISSS2016 Boulder has ended

Sign up or log in to bookmark your favorites and sync them to your phone or calendar.

Paper Presentation [clear filter]
Thursday, July 21
 

2:00pm

Anticipation and Systems Thinking: A Key to Resilient Systems
Disasters often endanger the foundations of our society. Due to many factors (larger popula- tion, more dependency on more complex technology, more and greater interference in natural systems and the environment, dramatic changes in the environment, ...) the number and the severity of disasters seem to grow, additionally exaggerated by the media coverage.The ultimate aim in the case of disaster is to save as many lives as possible and also safeguard the survival of the society in total and to protect as much of the societal structure, infrastructure and environment as possible. This requires the social system to show an amount of resistance and stability with respect to an incident that can cause endangering disasters.An incident of this kind can be attributed to the interaction of three overall factors: an external or internal hazard, a vulnerability of the system and an insufficient reactive capacity of the system to shield or resist the incident.With respect to the system’s capacity two countermeasures are essential to overcome an incident of that kind: * Anticipation of the incident and as a consequence the provision of adequate preparation and * Systemic Thinking in order to understand the relationship of and cybernetic loops within the components of the affected system and the incident.Anticipation and as a consequence a timely preparation of responses to future disasters will help to avoid the worst possible consequences and improve the chances for survival. Additionally we need a better understanding of the complex relationships causing the hazard and the long-term effects of our interventions on nature, human society, and environment: Systems Thinking.In this paper we analyze the key factors potentially leading to a system disturbance: Hazard, vulnerability of the affected system and capacity of the affected system. We classify these disturbances (incident, emergency, crisis, disaster, and catastrophe) and analyze the different reactions a system can show (fragile, fault tolerant, elastic, resilient, robust, antifragile). By discussing the phases of disaster management we can identify the information required for effective Anticipation and for the identification of critical systemic relationships. Finally we analyze the phases of Disaster Management, emphasizing the need for and the application of Anticipation. We identify the source of information needed for a successful anticipatory view. As a conclusion we identify systemic problems encountered during disaster management, especially in view of anticipatory actions.

Chairs
avatar for Gerhard Chroust

Gerhard Chroust

Prof. Emeritus, Systems Engineering, Johannes Kepler Univ. Linz
Gerhard Chroust is an Austrian systems scientist, and Professor Emeritus for Systems Engineering and Automationat the Institute of System Sciences at the Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria. Chroust is an authority in the fields of formal programming languages and interdisciplinary... Read More →

Thursday July 21, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 1B51
 
Monday, July 25
 

1:30pm

Developing an Understanding of Violence using the DSRP Theory as a Framework
2754 Cabrera and Cabrera’s DSRP model outlines the cognitive foundations for anything that arises. It proposes four mutually arising fundamentals: distinctions, systems, relationships and perspectives that are evident in any system. All living systems are complex adaptive systems that maintain their state through a flow of energy, resources and information across the system boundaries. Violence can be defined as the invasion of a boundary or the disruption of a flow across a boundary. When a boundary is set by a distinction, inside and outside is created. That which is excluded becomes the other and is often disowned, demonised and marginalised and thus becomes an easy target for violence. The parts of a system created by the boundary interact. Sometimes parts invade other parts so they are controlled by that part, thus impacting on the functioning of the whole system and reducing the requisite variety. The relationships between the parts can likewise be distorted, so that one part of the relationship uses power and control over the other. The parts have perspectives. A point of view makes one particular way of meaning making possible, but excludes others from being revealed. If people can be coerced into accepting one particular perspective, they can be deceived and thus have their behaviour controlled. Violence is thus a fundamental quality potentially inherent in all complex systems. Since complex adaptive systems are fractal, so is violence. We can thus gain an understanding of the patterns of violence at all fractal levels, from bacteria interacting to individual humans to whole societies. Violence springs from the same underlying systems dynamics, but is expressed in different ways depending on the level at which the system is operating. Galtung has identified three types of violence: direct, cultural and structural. Each of these will be discussed in relation to the DSRP model. Dutton’s Nested Ecological Model is used as a framework to explore factors behind the choice to use violence and makes the links to factors that tend to perpetuate violence from one generation to the next. Through being a victim of violence a person becomes vulnerable to factors that predispose them to perpetuating violence themselves. Having determined the way CAS are disrupted through violence, we can recognise the actions that will be needed to rebuild resilience and help restore the effective functions of the CAS and can thus formulate actions that may help reduce the likelihood of violence being passed on from generation to generation.

Chairs
avatar for Gerhard Chroust

Gerhard Chroust

Prof. Emeritus, Systems Engineering, Johannes Kepler Univ. Linz
Gerhard Chroust is an Austrian systems scientist, and Professor Emeritus for Systems Engineering and Automationat the Institute of System Sciences at the Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria. Chroust is an authority in the fields of formal programming languages and interdisciplinary... Read More →

Speakers
avatar for Victor MacGill

Victor MacGill

Facilitator, SIG Co-Chair: Critical Systems Thinking and Practice, Get Change Right
Completed my PhD through the University of theSunshine Coast. I am researching organisations that operate without a structured leadership. I have a growing interest in understanding violence from a systems perspective and the various ways it manifests in humans.


Monday July 25, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 1B51

1:30pm

Systems Thinking and Wildland Fire Management
2724 A changing climate, expanding ex-urban residential development, and increasing pressures on ecosystem services raise global concerns over growing losses associated with wildland fires. New management paradigms acknowledge that fire is inevitable and often uncontrollable, and focus on living with fire rather than attempting to eliminate it from the landscape. A notable example from the U.S. is the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy, which aims to bring multiple landowners and stakeholders together to achieve three broadly defined goals: resilient landscapes, fire-adapted human communities, and safe and effective response to fire. Implicit in the structure of these three goals is the nexus of three systems: the ecological system, the social system, and the fire management system, respectively. This systems-based structure reflects a perspective that contextualizes fire as a disturbance agent that influences and is in turn influenced by other agents and processes within a broader socio-ecological system. While the need for transformative system change is well-recognized, at least three central challenges remain: (1) the need to accept that how fires are managed is in many instances the limiting factor of system behaviour; (2) the need to improve our understanding of the characteristics and complexities of the fire management system itself; and (3) perhaps most fundamentally, the need to coherently apply systems analysis principles in order to improve system performance. In this presentation I will attempt to bridge these gaps by applying systems thinking to contemporary wildfire management issues in the U.S. One thread of the presentation will focus on synthesizing findings from various lines of fire-related research and identifying how collectively they reflect systemic flaws stemming from feedbacks, delays, bounded rationality, misaligned incentives, and other factors. Particular attention will be devoted to the “fire paradox,” whereby a legacy of fire exclusion in fire-prone forests has led to hazardous accumulations of flammable vegetation such that future fires burn with higher intensity and are more resistant to control; today’s “success” begets tomorrows failure. The second thread will outline a roadmap for redesigning the fire management system so that behaviour better aligns with purpose. This discussion will focus on recommended actions including breaking down institutional silos, investing in pre-fire assessment and planning, improving monitoring and performance evaluation, and adopting core risk management principles. Ideally this line of research will yield insights that can lead to meaningful systemic change and improved fire management outcomes.

Chairs
avatar for Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

SIG Chair: Socio-Ecological Systems and Design, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
https://about.me/bstefan

Speakers

Monday July 25, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 200
 
Tuesday, July 26
 

3:30pm

Comparing the Current ISIS and the (Not Yet) Past Leninist States (USSR and Pre-1979 China)
2791 What our media named as terrorism today are perceived as revolution by some. What we call revolution in mainland China and Russia, are no less violent and cruel than terrorism too. This paper observes and identifies the roots, the triggering historic events, the similarities among the differences, of the two huge phenomena and their two driving ideologies, i.e. the Extreme Islamism and the Bloody Communism, that have deep influence to our time and our daily life. As one of our subject has been just fading away into history (not really) and another is still going on while this paper is being written, we highlight the similarities or even isomorph of these two violent social phenomena, raising a question behind such similarity – what are the driven forces that enable these phenomena to emerge, or, why on this planet a certain number of people are doomed to believe, engage, fight for, and victimized by such pathological ideologies?

Chairs
avatar for Gerhard Chroust

Gerhard Chroust

Prof. Emeritus, Systems Engineering, Johannes Kepler Univ. Linz
Gerhard Chroust is an Austrian systems scientist, and Professor Emeritus for Systems Engineering and Automationat the Institute of System Sciences at the Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria. Chroust is an authority in the fields of formal programming languages and interdisciplinary... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 245