#ISSS2016 Boulder

A premise of this paper is that the dynamics of any system, by which we mean here the collection of processes that perform its functions and thus achieve its purpose, needs information for the execution, control, and coordination of such processes. The information processing aspect of a dynamics is precisely what provides the information that it needs in order to proceed. The dynamics of the Earth ecosystem, for example, includes the processes that encompass the origin and evolution of life and the development of human society. In this paper I refer to the part of this all-encompassing process that includes the behavior and evolution of biological systems and human organizations as the evolutionary process. The main focus of the paper is the information processing aspect of this evolutionary process. More specifically, I focus on the evolution of the information processing capabilities of biological organisms and systems, including human individuals and organizations. Especially important is the emergence through this evolutionary process of increasingly complex structures that have made possible more complex behaviors and, consequently, more complex ways of processing information. Superimposed on this evolution is the creation and development of artificial means of information processing and the integration of their use into the information processing aspect of human individuals and organizations. The idea is to contribute to the understanding of the potential that the development and use of artificial information processing devices and systems offers for the effective support of the functions of modern organizations and their adaptability. However, the tremendous potential of computer-based information systems and information technology cannot be fully realized if they do not appropriately extend the information processing capabilities that exist at all levels of the dynamics of the organizations that they support. A sufficient understanding of the information processing aspect of this evolutionary process is in my opinion necessary for the appropriate, synergistic extension, with computer and information technology, of the information processing capabilities that already exist in modern organizations. 

2930 

Ancient, Native, Indigenous and Tribal cultures.

A 2 hour documentary film “Force of Nature” produced by David Suzuki Foundation, CA, will be shown as the main event for the workshop. The filmbuilds on Dr. Suzuki’s personal experiences and contrasts the main stream Western world view with the Indigenous world view for the survival of all life on our planet. An opinion letter to be published in Ancient Science titled “conscious world view Transforming Individuals, Science, its Education and Research by V. Gupta, I. Gupta and J. Saldarriaga, will be distributed to the participants well before the workshop.

2818 A premise of this paper is that the dynamics of any system, by which we mean here the collection of processes that perform its functions and thus achieve its purpose, needs information for the execution, control, and coordination of such processes. The information processing aspect of a dynamics is precisely what provides the information that it needs in order to proceed. The dynamics of the Earth ecosystem, for example, includes the processes that encompass the origin and evolution of life and the development of human society. In this paper I refer to the part of this all-encompassing process that includes the behavior and evolution of biological systems and human organizations as the evolutionary process. The main focus of the paper is the information processing aspect of this evolutionary process. More specifically, I focus on the evolution of the information processing capabilities of biological organisms and systems, including human individuals and organizations. Especially important is the emergence through this evolutionary process of increasingly complex structures that have made possible more complex behaviors and, consequently, more complex ways of processing information. Superimposed on this evolution is the creation and development of artificial means of information processing and the integration of their use into the information processing aspect of human individuals and organizations. The idea is to contribute to the understanding of the potential that the development and use of artificial information processing devices and systems offers for the effective support of the functions of modern organizations and their adaptability. However, the tremendous potential of computer-based information systems and information technology cannot be fully realized if they do not appropriately extend the information processing capabilities that exist at all levels of the dynamics of the organizations that they support. A sufficient understanding of the information processing aspect of this evolutionary process is in my opinion necessary for the appropriate, synergistic extension, with computer and information technology, of the information processing capabilities that already exist in modern organizations.

2845 Systems are multi-dimensional, complex and have multiple ideals. One of the biggest problems with systems is the uncertainty on where do they begin and where do they end; what is inside and what is outside. This is because what is perceived to be the system is an approximation of the real system. It is possible to learn about the real system incrementally and improve the approximate system or system-in-focus; as the gap between the approximate and the real system is the source of the feedback and the basis for the incremental understanding. One iteration of understanding the real system could be identifying interesting properties, cognizing interesting insights based on these properties and creating models that capture this information. In the world of systems, an iterative approach to incrementally obtain understanding involves successively spanning many dimensions of the system and adopting a holistic attitude with regard to it. Holism spans multiple dimensions and is based on independence. Traditionally, system thinkers adopt an array of modelling approaches (influence diagrams, system dynamics models, viable system models, living systems models and so on) to develop an understanding of the system. In order to create a holistic view of the system, multiple models are collated, with each model defining a set of properties corresponding to the respective concerns. The different models allow system thinkers to look at the system at different levels of detail. They can be used to structure, identify, analyse and synthesize systems wherein each model commutes with the systems and relates to it. Each model is understood, worked upon and then composed keeping in mind the constraints of the system and the conditions in which the system exists. They can be either independent or dependant and dynamic. Each model is a different perspective in representing the system and if semantically motivated explains how the system is understood, analysed and synthesized. In this paper, the architecture of a modelling platform that provides the ability to model different aspects of the system is discussed. The objective of this platform is to support modelling as a capability so that a holistic understanding of the system can be developed. The focus is on those models and modelling approaches that can be supported by information systems in the form of tools. The discussion in this paper also stems around a unified model of the system which is constructed by taking into account the different perspectives obtained by modelling the system using different approaches. The instantiation of the architecture to realize a platform for modelling systems is presented. Keywords – Systems, Models, Multi-Models, Holism, Modelling Platform, Modelling Approaches.

2853   On the Information Processing Aspect of the Evolutionary Process 

2767 The nonprofit and public sectors are constantly challenged to create greater impact with fewer and fewer resources. The recession of 2008 has resulted in less funding for both sectors and increased demand for their programs and services, pushing many organizations to the brink. With the likelihood of change in the current state slim, nonprofits and public agencies are eager for new approaches that will enable them to create greater value from existing resources in a socially responsible manner. This paper introduces one possible tool, which was adapted from Carol Sanford’s stakeholder pentad introduced in her book, The Responsible Business: Reimagining Sustainability and Success. Sanford’s pentad is intended to shift a business’s focus away from measuring success based purely on financial returns to one of a quintuple bottom line centered on developing relationships with the following five sets of stakeholders: customers, co-creators, earth, community, and investors. The pentad for the nonprofit and public sectors includes a slightly different set of stakeholders: beneficiaries, co-creators, earth/humanity, community, and investors/funders. Beneficiaries are those for whom programs and services are provided. Co-creators are those with whom non-profits and agencies partner and may include volunteers, staff, partnering organizations, and other stakeholders. Earth/humanity is the pentad point of the global, long-term perspective and is based in relationship to earth and to humanity. The community point in the pentad refers to how an organization’s actions impact the community, and the local perspective and social context in which they operate. The investors and funders for nonprofits and public agencies are local, state, and federal funders, taxpayers, donors, foundations, and board members, without whom these organizations could not realize their visions. Attention to these five stakeholder groups creates a strong sense of resilience in the organization’s community. A case example of how to apply the nonprofit and public sectors pentad to an existing organization is outlined in this paper. It is described through Sanford’s four phases for reconstructing an organization already steeped in its processes and culture. These four phases are (1) cultural evolution, (2) strategic direction, (3) capacity building, and (4) work redesign. This approach will enable nonprofits and public agencies to thrive in the face of scarcity and high demand. Keywords: Carol Sanford; stakeholders; stakeholder engagement; nonprofit sector; public sector; living systems; sustainability; resilience; cultural evolution; strategic direction; capacity building; work redesign; critical systemic thinking; human service organizations  

2792 The authors compare three collaborative action research projects aimed at generative systems change. The goal of the article is to reflect on the dialogic methodologies they employed, the impacts and outcomes experienced by the participants as leaders and innovators of systemic change, and the evolution of the authors’ own practices as facilitators and catalysts of change. Wilson reflects on a three-year action research project in peri-urban Mexico on sustainable community development. Focusing on the emergent edge of the evolving system of local-state relationships, she recounts the changing attitudes, emotions, and behaviors of the public sector professionals and local community leaders engaged in the project. Wilson reflects on the sense of vulnerability and insecurity raised by the dialogic methodology she used, and the impact on her own practice and sense of self in the presence of these tensions. Bush explores a year of engagement within two urban systems within Asheville NC: public housing and community schools. Using distributed ethnography, he follows public housing's resident leadership’s efforts at self-organizing governance and an Ashoka Change-Maker School’s experience in spreading its educational approach. Offering propositions about leadership for resilience in urban systems, he reflects on the challenges to and evolution of self-awareness for individuals, organizations, systems, and himself as a practitioner-researcher. Walsh reflects on her praxis in regenerative development from 2006 to 2015 in the context of environmental gentrification in a neighborhood in Austin, Texas. To become an instrument of critical, creative, and collaborative change, she developed and fostered regenerative dialogue for green home repair and a community food forest. Walsh reflects on the ways this approach supported her and the residents in harnessing the generative potential of social conflict and vulnerability. The comparative analysis of the three stories concludes with propositions for leadership practices that foster thrivability in complex social systems. 1. Banzhaf, H. S., & McCormick, E. (2006). Moving Beyond Cleanup: Identifying the Crucibles of Environmental Gentrification. SSRN eLibrary. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=990074 2. Harvey, D. (2008). The Right to the City. New Left Review, (53), 23–40. 3. Hazy, J. & Uhl-Bien, M. (2015). Towards operationalizing complexity leadership: How generative, administrative and community-building leadership practices enact organizational outcomes. Leadership Vol. 11(1) 79–104 DOI: 10.1177/1742715013511483 4. Snowden, David (2002). Complex Acts of Knowing: paradox and descriptive self-awareness. Journal of Knowledge Management. Volume 6 . Number 2. 2002 . pp. 100±111 DOI: 10.1108/13673270210424639 Keywords: social systems design, leadership, thrivability, urban systems, generative dialogue

2803   Aristotle's Four Causes and Teamwork in Corporations Kulak, Daryl 

2793 How do organizations become order-created and extinct through emergence and immergence in their evolutionary dynamic states? How macrosimplicity emerges from microcomplexity and how sophisticated behavior emerges from the interaction of relatively simplistic parts？ Organization scholars have debated those questions for decades, but only recently have they been to gain insight into combining the linear and non-linear dynamics that lead to organizational bottom-up emergence and top- down immergence by explorative and exploitative learning, through the use of the complexity science. Two intriguing features of complex systems have been discussed in this paper: simple behavior at the high level emerging from convoluted underpinnings, and sophisticated behavior at the low level immerging from simple underpinnings. Complexity theory has sometimes concerned itself with the one sort of bottom-up emergence, sometimes with the other top- down immergence, and sometimes it seems to aim for both at the same time, seeking to explain behaviors that are both surprisingly stable and surprisingly sophisticated. Studied for organization science research, this paper summarizes these literatures, including the first comprehensive review of macro-simplicity and micro-complexity, cybernetic modernism, chaotic postmodernism and organizing postmodernity’s chaos in each of the 20 complexity science disciplines. In doing so, the paper makes a bold proposal for a discipline of organizational bottom-up emergence and top- down immergence by explorative and exploitative learning, and proposes an integrative model of four-phase adaptive evolution in organizations. The paper begins with a detailed premise of organizational theories, models and phenomena of order-creation and extinction, and then rigorously maps the processes of order-creation and extinction discovered by that complexity science to identify a four-phase adaptive evolution model in organizations. By way of conclusion, the author expects the four-phase adaptive evolution model could be applied to enact bottom-up emergence and top- down immergence by explorative and exploitative learning within and across organizations. Key words: bottom-up emergence, top- down immergence, exploration, exploitation, four-phase adaptive evolution

2807 This paper argues the need to develop a comprehensive, coherent, system-oriented description of the universe, and that doing so over time is quite feasible with the right approach. Charles Francois has stated: "We are indeed still - and mostly unconsciously - subservients to the general Cartesian reductionist model, which, after destroying the relationships network for the sake of 'simplicity', does never reconstruct it as an organized whole." This implies that the most important mission of the systems movement is to reconstruct the organized whole. We are deterred from this mission because of its apparent difficulty. It has long been recognized that "the whole" must be addressed to understand a system. But what exactly is "the whole"? The whole includes all of a system's parts. It also includes the relationships and processes of interactions among the objects and with the environment. And it requires addressing all in concert. (Let's call this all of the whole.) Furthermore, since a system's environment consists of other systems, these other systems must be considered part of the whole. This line of thinking expands the scope of the whole and when taken to its logical conclusion encompasses the entire universe. Hence the whole must be interpreted to mean not just a single system but the universal system of systems (the whole whole). While instances of the system pattern are interesting individually, the system pattern is most significant as a key element of the architecture of the universe. Finally, the universe is evolving, not static. The deep hierarchies of systems existing today provide clear evidence of continuing system evolution since the Big Bang. Hence the universal process of system evolution (whole history) must also be included in the whole. The whole means all of the interconnections within the broadest scope of space and time. It means the universe viewed as a system of systems, including all of the whole, the whole whole, and system evolution over the whole history. How can a system so large and complex be addressed? The system pattern, being fundamental to the functioning, structure, and evolution of the universe, provides a basis for organizing a universal description. While we can never describe the universe completely, we can develop and persistently improve and extend a description of the web of interacting systems. To do so we must systematically integrate, unify, and generalize the relevant nuggets filtered out of the existing vast sea of information. With modern tools and techniques the complexity of such an effort can be managed. The dominant approach for centuries has ignored systems in order to avoid complexity. The opposite trade-off is now required: we must embrace complexity so as to understand systems. By embracing and learning to effectively manage complexity, it is possible to describe the whole in the broadest sense and so to develop an unprecedented understanding of the universe as a system of systems. This paper aims to show that doing so is now viable.

2774 One of the reasons that systems thinking has developed over the years is to address problems that seemed to be unresolvable; the social equivalent of a Gordian knot. Since the term was first used in 1973 by Rittel and Weber (1973) these difficult problems have become known as “Wicked Problems”. A Wicked Problem is usually a social or cultural problem that is difficult or impossible to solve. Wicked problems become “wicked” not because they are innately evil , but due to the number of stakeholders, resources, lack of knowledge upon the subject, cost involved, the great possibility of unanticipated results and other factors that multiply the complexity of the issue to be addressed.. One of the defining characteristics of a Wicked Problem is that “solutions to wicked problems are not true or false, but good or bad. Ordinary problems have solutions that can be objectively evaluated as right or wrong. Choosing a solution to a wicked problem is largely a matter of judgment” Questions of what is the good and what is the bad are informed by systems of ethics. There are numerous ethical approaches to the ultimate question “what is to be done”? This paper argues that the version of American Pragmatism that has come to be known at Neo‐Pragmatism is a good choice to approach Wicked Problems. Neo‐ Pragmatism is uniquely suited to finding a “good” approach to a Wicked Problem due to the social nature of Wicked Problems. Since a Wicked Problem is fundamentally social it consists of constantly changing and shifting parts. If there is any stability in a Wicked Problem it is the stability of constant change. Neo‐ Pragmatism is founded on the understanding that all elements of human society are fundamentally contingent; that is to say that again the only constant is change. Neo‐ pragmatism is simply the only ethical structure that can readily adapt to the constant flux that is a Wicked Problem.

2800 Within all watersheds, ecosystem health is intrinsically linked to human health. The pathways of this coupling are multiple, diffuse and interacting. For example, the percentage of canopy cover in a given area is an indicator of both human and watershed health; more shade lowers surrounding temperature and helps to reduce rates of heat stress and skin cancer caused by sun exposure, and treed areas mitigate rainfall runoff, assist water infiltration and reduce risks of flooding. A recent study in Toronto found that having ten more trees on streets had a health impact equivalent to being seven years younger. To understand and manage such relationships requires an approach that appreciates the complex coupling of human and natural systems. The work we describe in this paper demonstrates an ecosystem approach to human health and well-being (a.k.a. an ecohealth approach) at the watershed scale. To explore the extent to which watershed governance agencies activity manage for both ecosystem and human health, we drew upon the Watershed Governance Prism to develop case studies and inform a self-assessment of five watershed governance organizations (the Fraser Basin Council, Cowichan Watershed Board, Save Our Seine Environment Inc., Otonabee Region Conservation Authority and Lake Simcoe and Region Conservation Authority). Through this work, we identified the need for a more strategic approach to watershed governance that actively seeks linkages with public health institutions to meet goals that are common to both the health and environment sectors. We found that watershed organizations’ programs affect the social and environmental determinants of health at multiple spatial and organizational scales, but awareness and indicators of the potential benefits are underdeveloped and poorly conceptualized. Stepping out from this study, researchers at York University and the Credit Valley Conservation Authority have collaborated on a project that seeks to understand and communicate the relationship among various watershed ecosystem components and human health and well-being. In the first phase of this project, we surveyed residents within the Credit River watershed about their perceptions of the connection(s) between their health and their surrounding environment, and we facilitated a workshop with governance stakeholders to identify key indicators of such relationships. Among our findings, we noted that some residents of the Credit River watershed understood that such fundamental relationships exist among the natural environment and their health. For example, many believed that places associated with water, such as streams and ponds, had a stronger effect on their health than other green spaces. We also found that older respondents had a greater appreciation of such connections than did younger respondents. Governance stakeholders identified several environmental indicators of health that would better communicate environment and health relationships. The top three were: percentage of canopy cover, access to green space, and percentage of impervious surfaces. We used this information in the design of an interactive web-based tool and geographic information system. This web-GIS displays provincial, regional, and municipal data related to the Credit River watershed, including indicators of health and descriptions of how they influence human health and well-being. It also includes a storytelling component that provides an opportunity for residents within the watershed to share personal experiences of their connection to the environment. The web-GIS is intended to educate the public about ecosystem services and their influence on people, and to demonstrate the impact of the work of Credit Valley Conservation not only on ecosystem health but also on human well-being. In the second phase of the project, we are further developing the web-GIS tool to support scenario planning for ecosystem and human health in the Credit River Watershed.

2813 Bio-mimetics have often provided a useful means of inspiration for engineering design – for instance in fabrication of materials for aerospace. One more recent area of interest, from the perspective of cyber security has been in the remarkable ability of the immune system to cope with the diversity and evolution of threats such as bacteria and viruses. The focus of this presentation is to further examine the architectural parallels between biological systems and engineered solutions in defence and security. Systems thinking and modelling are the tools utilized in examining the architectures and the capabilities of the biological systems such as anticipatory, adaptability and sustainability. In performing such an examination it is anticipated that insight and potential improvements may be found in both directions – improvements in our approaches to combat complex disease and also possible inspiration in the science, architectures and designs for our sustainable systems.

2882 Systemic wishes for the Chinese New Year is the blessing to each other in China in the beginning of each year. According to the Five Aggregate Human Mind system developed by Buddha, our minds are composed of five systems. Systemic Healthcare should be about balancing each one of these systems, and balancing between the systems. The ultimate goal is to live healthily so that we can work and play and achieve our tasks in life. In this paper, we try to classify the Traditional Chinese healthcare therapies according to these five aggregates to help human to become physically strong, emotionally happy, mentally kind, behaviorally charitable, and spiritually enlightened. The basic essentials in life include clothing, food, housing and transportation. In the Confucian classic, one of the disciples once said “Food and sex are basic instincts of human beings”. The desire for food ensures the physical survival of oneself, and the instinct on sexual desire makes sure the continuation of the family, clan and race. In order to have a stable flow, better basic essentials are required. They are usually related to the following four-character blessing phrases. These desires stimulate the research into efficient and effective methods for good survival and continuity, and part of the Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) Healthcare is about physical body healthcare. Here we will try to match it with the physical component of the Five Aggregate Human Mind System developed by Buddha. TCM healthcare can be divided into three different secret ingredients. The goal of emotional healthcare is to remain undisturbed by negative emotions thus falling into a vicious cycle. One should instead consistently concentrate on positive emotions, gradually and naturally resulting in the distillation of happy emotions and pleasant bodily sensations. Mental Healthcare aims to improve one’s habitual love and hate tendencies. We should eliminate feelings of jealousy for the rich and contempt for the poor. One should also forsake employing improper means purely to succeed. Nor should one selfishly seek pleasure at the expense of the feelings of others. In contrast we should develop our love towards the four pure characteristics in the teaching of Buddha, and relinquish the three evil toxic characteristics of human, namely craving, aversion and ignorance. The four pure characteristics can be simply understood as “unconditional love” towards others, mercy on the elderly and weak, sympathetic joy of sharing, and acceptance of the reality of life and human relations. Behavioral Healthcare is about our action, and we try to match it with the “Action Aggregate” of the Five Aggregate Human Mind system of the teaching of Buddha. Buddha divides the Action Aggregate into three different kinds, namely the bodily action, the verbal action and the mental intention action (brain wave? energy field?). The teachings of Buddha include: “Do not withhold an action because it will only do little good, and do not perform an action because it will only do little evil”. Therefore we should choose only charitable actions with goodwill. Only such actions could achieve the traditional Chinese wish of “Everyone embraced in one harmonious Qi”. The definition of being healthy by the World Health Organization, WHO, includes healthiness in three aspects, namely the physical, mental and “social”. Spiritual Healthcare is about the improvement of our in-born characteristics, possibly hidden in our physical DNA or our energetic “spirits” fields (Aura?). We now try to match this with the “Observation Aggregate” of the Five Aggregate Human Mind system in the teaching of Buddha. Here we must put our foundation in the fundamental teaching of Buddha in the “Four Nobel Truth”, guided especially by the “Right View” and “Right Thought” in the “Eight-Fold Nobel Path”, which is the fourth part of the Noble Truth.

Background: Borne of the practical turn in social science epistemology, action research typically espouses claims of personal, team, organizational, and community improvement/ transformation. It is also widely promoted as an effective framework of empowerment and emancipation to improve a social situation or condition (Reason & Bradbury, 2008; Stringer, 2007): an intent which appeals to leaders wishing to create improvement, particularly in low socio-economic and disadvantaged communities (Sankaran 2016). Validity of such espousals has been substantially unexplored, and where evaluations have occurred they have been focused more on process than impact. A group of international researchers are engaged in an evaluative study of over 100 action research initiatives (ESAR study) using a variety of methods, tools and conceptual frameworks. The Maturity Model is one of the conceptual frameworks adopted in the ESAR study. 
Maturity models have their origins in the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) developed through research to address the poor performance of software projects delivered to the US department of defence in the 1980’s. The purpose of the CMM model was to help contractors increase capability to improve their software engineering processes from an ad-hoc state to more formal and repeatable state and eventually to optimise the processes to be able to deliver consistent outcomes. Maturity models have found their way into many other organisational contexts such as project management, knowledge management, process management, research capability and even for information systems action research project management.
A typical maturity model consists of a sequence of levels that form a path to follow to move from an initial to an advance stage of maturity. These models help organisations to evaluate their current level of maturity of a process and set goals to move towards a higher maturity level.
While maturity models often use ‘business speak’ in their definition and terms used to describe  levels of maturity the authors feel that they can be made palatable and useful to action researchers to improve the ways in which they can manage their projects to deliver sustainable outcomes. This resulted in the development of the maturity profile.
The international ESAR research team have developed a framework of process and outcome indicators to represent stages of implementation and accomplishment for AR initiatives.  Data from pilot case studies were used to develop a maturity profile for AR initiatives, representing levels of maturity and evaluative outcomes at different stages of a project.  A questionnaire has also been developed for key attributes of a maturity profile that will be used at the proposed workshop to be validated and trialled by action researchers..The proposed workshop will be conducted using a ‘World Café’ format with the following schedule (Overall 90 minutes)
• Welcome and Introductions (10 minutes)• Welcome to the workshop –• Key Question to discuss today• Introduction of the facilitators• Allocation of participants to tables• Introduction to the process – (5 minutes)• World Café Rounds (50 minutes)• Break (10 minutes)• Prioritization (15 minutes)• Close 
The results from this workshop will be compared with similar workshop s that were held at the ALARA World Congress held in Pretoria in November 2015 and a workshop proposed at the next ALARA World Congress being held in November 2016 held in Adelaide.
The data from the three workshops will be analyzed and submitted as a journal paper by the authors in Systemic Practice and Action Research.

References:
Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (EDs.) 2008. The SAGE handbook of action research, 2nd. ed., London: Sage.
Sankaran, S. (in press). Taking action using systems research. In M. C. Edson, P. Buckle Henning, & S. Sankaran (Eds.), A guide to systems research: Philosophy, processes and practice. Singapore: Springer.
Stringer, E. T. (2013). Action research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

2905 System thinking is about seeing things as a whole, as unity. However the seeing could happen from different points of view according to their corresponding perspectives. As a result, there is a diversity of system thinking. This diversity provides the foundation to unite the different perspectives in order to advance to the next level of system thinking, the special systemic properties of the observers and decision makers. In this discussion panel, we present the Health and System Thinking from different perspectives, both theoretical and clinical, both microscopic and macroscopic, as well as both Eastern and Western. These include system thinking from Energy medicine, Traditional Chinese Medicine, Indian Ayurvedic Medicine, Micro-systemic environment of cancer cells, and Mathematical systemic view of acupuncture
 Coordinators: 1. Traditional Chinese Medicine: Thomas WONG 2. Energy medicine: Dr Dominique Surel https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-dominique-surel-2a081b
 Invited practitioners for in person or on video discussion: 1. Indian Ayurvedic Medicine by Dr. Shim 2. Micro-systemic environment of cancer cells by Gary Smith https://uk.linkedin.com/in/gary-smith-5338aa4 3. Mathematical systemic view of acupuncture by Kent Palmer https://www.linkedin.com/in/kent-palmer-95bb767

Each speaker will have a 5-10min talk about their work relating to health and system thinking. Then we will have discussions and questions concentrating on the theme of how “Unity in Diversity” may apply.


2905   

2860 We live in an age of complexity and complexity gives rise to uncertainty. Recognition of this, over 25 years ago, led to the suggestion of post-normal science which provides a method to support the explicit recognition and management of uncertainty. The suggestion of such a method, though, challenges the pre-eminent status of scientific knowledge and, as such, it is hardly likely to find support from scientists or the policy makers they advise who expect certainty and hard evidence. Hence it is not suprising to find there has not been a massive take-up of post-normal science. Yet, at the same time, another alternative form of science, citizen science, which also challenges the scientific establishment in suggesting that the interests of citizens should drive the research agenda, has grown signficantly. So, why has one achieved traction and the other not? In this paper, we look to address this question by exploring the custom and practice of both post normal science and citizen science.

2966 The CSR concept as it exists does not capture the essence of the kind of partnership required by CSR in developing countries to make the needed impact. In the bid to make CSR more beneficial in addressing developing country needs, partnership among stakeholders has been advocated as the panacea for CSR. In an attempt to develop a suitable CSR partnership for developing countries therefore, the study analyzed some NGO/corporate partnerships and community/corporate partnerships currently being used for CSR delivery in Ghana. Benefits of the NGO/corporate partnership include the availability of expertise and funds for CSR projects while the community/corporate partnerships benefit from the close interaction between the key stakeholders and targeted funding from the MNCs. The major drawback of both partnerships is their inability to engage in CSR from a systems perspective thus excluding some key stakeholders, particularly the communities. The government of Ghana which is in a pivotal position for development has no clear polices regarding CSR implementation and rather plays an indirect role in facilitating CSR by granting licenses and approvals for development projects. While NGO/corporate partnership and community/corporate partnerships met some CSR needs they were not effective in delivering the CSR that Ghana and developing countries require. I therefore posit the community corporate partnership responsibility (CCPR), a three stage concept that recognizes the key role of partnership among stakeholders for meaningful and mutually beneficial outcomes. The CCPR process involves community pre-entry processes, community engagement processes, and the CSR implementation processes and activities. Keywords: Corporate Social Responsibility; Partnership; Systems; Developing Countries; NGO/Corporate Partnerships; Community/Corporate Partnerships

2782 In this paper we discuss how socio-technical intervention in socio-ecological systems can increase understanding of burning issues that drives systems unstable and unbalanced. Using the challenge of drilling oil in the Yasuni National Park ecosystem in Ecuador and balancing it with the diversity of socio-cultural inhabitants in the ecosystem, we show how we can develop a space for evolution of mutual understanding of a CoI (Community of Interest) consisting of multiple system stakeholders and what mechanisms can help us in articulating concrete actions happening across different domains - ranging from scientific findings and publications all the way to artistic and emotional-engaging interventions, evolving in this way from mere transdisciplinary to rather holistic approach of solving complex socio-ecological problem. Paper presents outcomes of the pre-event, at-event, and post-event interventions at the workshop “Which data to look for? How to build thriving knowledge communities?“ related to the BunB conference. Our unique approach was to provide CollaboFramework (consisting of CollaboScience and CollaboArte socio-technical systems) that creates a dialogical space for mapping mutual fuzzy and multi-truth knowledge of known issues and guiding evolution of that initial knowledge through the set of dialogical interactions among stakeholders. CollaboFramework system is a novel approach that unites infrastructure for the collective-knowledge space with the set of socio-technical tools that incrementally evolve that collective-knowledge weaving. With CollaboFramework we recognize uniqueness and complexity of transdisciplinary dialogue of CoIs that aim solving wicked problems. We provide support for modeling personalized socio-technical processes governing each of those communities. Processes coordinate different components of CollaboFramework in the most efficient way for particular CoI and challenges it is facing at the moment. Processes guided with socio-psychological insights help CoIs to converge multidisciplinary knowledge into coherent and landscaped knowledge with the set of insights that will be capable of governing future actions and interventions in the problem-space, namely creating public media and artistic projects that will engage society and let all relevant stakeholders to be heard and recognized. In the future iterations of the CoI events, this will bring additional insights and start another iteration in the spiral of CollaboDialogue and calls for actions. In this paper we discuss how socio-technical intervention in socio-ecological systems can increase understanding of burning issues that drives systems unstable and unbalanced. Using the challenge of drilling oil in the Yasuni National Park ecosystem in Ecuador and balancing it with the diversity of socio-cultural inhabitants in the ecosystem, we show how we can develop a space for evolution of mutual understanding of a CoI (Community of Interest) consisting of multiple system stakeholders and what mechanisms can help us in articulating concrete actions happening across different domains - ranging from scientific findings and publications all the way to artistic and emotional-engaging interventions, evolving in this way from mere transdisciplinary to rather holistic approach of solving complex socio-ecological problem. Paper presents outcomes of the pre-event, at-event, and post-event interventions at the workshop “Which data to look for? How to build thriving knowledge communities?“ related to the BunB conference. Our unique approach was to provide CollaboFramework (consisting of CollaboScience and CollaboArte socio-technical systems) that creates a dialogical space for mapping mutual fuzzy and multi-truth knowledge of known issues and guiding evolution of that initial knowledge through the set of dialogical interactions among stakeholders. CollaboFramework system is a novel approach that unites infrastructure for the collective-knowledge space with the set of socio-technical tools that incrementally evolve that collective-knowledge weaving. With CollaboFramework we recognize uniqueness and complexity of transdisciplinary dialogue of CoIs that aim solving wicked problems. We provide support for modeling personalized socio-technical processes governing each of those communities. Processes coordinate different components of CollaboFramework in the most efficient way for particular CoI and challenges it is facing at the moment. Processes guided with socio-psychological insights help CoIs to converge multidisciplinary knowledge into coherent and landscaped knowledge with the set of insights that will be capable of governing future actions and interventions in the problem-space, namely creating public media and artistic projects that will engage society and let all relevant stakeholders to be heard and recognized. In the future iterations of the CoI events, this will bring additional insights and start another iteration in the spiral of CollaboDialogue and calls for actions.

2737 This paper takes a systems approach to outlining a framework for the sustainability of complex systems. Complex systems have one or more functions that strongly interact with their environments, or meta-system in which they are embedded. The success of the system in interacting with its environment over an extended time frame depends on that system’s ability to regulate its activities, both internal and external so as to remain ‘fit’. The concept of fitness derives directly from the evolutionary theory of phenotypic traits and capabilities (behaviors) being selected for or against by the environment of the system. But it is generalized beyond the standard neoDarwinian biological process. The roles of adaptivity and evolvability and the mechanisms of a hierarchical cybernetic governance subsystem in maintaining these are advanced as necessary conditions for achieving sustainability. An operational definition of sustainability is advanced along with a set of necessary conditions that must obtain in order for complex systems to achieve it. Several systemic dysfunctional conditions are explored to show how complex systems fail to achieve sustainability by failure of the hierarchical cybernetic governance subsystem. Examples from several natural and human-built systems are used to demonstrate these conditions. Clarification of the meaning of complexity across a spectrum of system types is given. A definition of complexity based on hierarchical levels of organization is given to ground the discussion of the hierarchical cybernetic governance subsystem and justify its necessity to achieve and maintain stable dynamics in unstable environments. The purposes and uses of this framework are discussed and examples provided. A brief description of the use of systems analysis to explore and discover functional and dysfunctional subsystems within the hierarchical cybernetic governance subsystem and how this might provide insights for the design of better performing subsystems is also provided. The paper concludes with a projection of the benefits of applying this methodology to the governance of the human social system (HSS).

2878 The study will inform the development of a systems model(s) of the social ecology of traffic safety to test intervention effectiveness in reducing motor-vehicle crashes, injuries, and deaths for the State of Texas by accomplishing the following three objectives: (1) analyze the traffic safety goals proposed in the Texas Department of Transportation’s Highway Safety Plan for 2016 from a systems perspective; (2) assess the applicability of different systems modeling methods suited to analyze the causal relationships and effectiveness of interventions; and, (3) develop preliminary recommendations for a systems model(s) of traffic integrating the conditions and relationships perpetuating motor-vehicle crashes, injuries, deaths, and their potential interventions. The study will provide the fields of traffic safety, bioinformatics, epidemiology, biostatistics, behavioral, human factors, and engineering research with a better understanding of the dynamics driving motor-vehicle crash injuries and deaths to (a) improve crash and injury outcomes and quality of life; (b) decrease spending and/or use of those that are ineffective and increase use of those that are; and, (c) increase understanding of the causes and the outcomes of motor-vehicle crashes, injuries, and deaths individually, socially, culturally, and economically. Collectively, this enables previously impracticable prevention efforts and is a novel way for assessing the effectiveness of different interventions aimed at reducing motor-vehicle-related morbidity and mortality. Systems approaches are capable of capturing the dynamic complexity inherent within traffic and social systems in ways traditional approaches cannot. This analysis will involve identifying suitable systems approaches for analyzing relationships between the traffic system and interventions, including traditional countermeasures to reduce crash and injury morbidity and mortality, such as Texas traffic policies and regulations for motor-vehicles (e.g., speed limits, licensing and educational requirements for motor-vehicle drivers, road geometry and material requirements, safety belt requirements; indicators of motor-vehicle crashes, injuries, and deaths (e.g., morbidity and mortality data for accidents that involve alcohol, drugs, intersections, large trucks, and pedestrians); and, proposed interventions for increasing the use of such practices (e.g., incentives driving use—or lack thereof—of motorcycle safety gear, monetary discounts for safety training programs). While policy makers, economists, and other constituents have proposed specific goals or targets to decrease motor vehicle injuries, crashes, and deaths, none have been tested using methods that capture the dynamic complexity of real-world social systems to not only understand how and why these problems occur, but also what are the best leverage points for change given the effect and cost of the proposed solutions. Accordingly, the systems model to be developed could be used to conduct virtual experiments to test whether the goals set in the Texas Department of Transportation’s Highway Safety Plan for 2016 would be better targeted at one or two specific populations or applied more generally across the state but respective to important social, policy, and environmental factors. If a targeted approach was to be used, the model could help identify which populations or environments exhibit initial conditions favoring adoption of a proposed intervention(s) and hence are the best targets for the intervention. Ultimately, the study seeks to create an optimal portfolio of motor-vehicle safety interventions for use by state and local governments to address the need for truly effective interventions to reduce motor-vehicle crash and injury morbidity and mortality. The model will fulfill a significant need within traffic safety, bioinformatics, epidemiology, biostatistics, behavioral, human factors, and engineering research, as it provides a novel way to assess proposed solutions for reducing motor-vehicle crashes, injuries, and deaths through a means capable of capturing dynamic interactions, adaptivity, and non-linearity inherent within traffic and social systems, that are less time-consuming, and far less costly than traditional approaches.

2918 Based on the concrete request of the European Commission (EC) for Mobility and Transport to support the cabinet in political decision processes as Special Advisor the author will elaborate in his contribution the need for and potential advantages of a General Systems Transdisciplinarity to solve serious systemic challenges facing one particular socio-ecological and socio-technological system. The EC for Mobility and Transport has announced its political agenda “A roadmap to a single European Transport Area towards a competitive and resource-efficient transport system” in 2011 and set the goals to foster further economic growth and job creation while anticipating resource and environmental constraints, e.g. drastically reduce world greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, with the goal of limiting climate change, supporting the development of innovative sustainable transport systems. Growing transport and supporting mobility while reaching the 60 % emission reduction target seems to be contradictory. But the EC strongly assumes that through optimising the performance of multimodal logistic chains, including by making greater use of more energy-efficient modes and through increasing the efficiency of transport and of infrastructure use with information systems and market-based incentives the systemic challenge can be unravelled. As this endeavour addresses multiple layers, multi-stakeholder, and cross-sectoral systems the EC called for a solid systems model to support and guide their political decisions and actions. Large scale technological and social behavioural changes are needed resulting in technological and social innovations. The EC takes on the responsibility of an active enabler of the emergent opportunities in the transport system through legislation and investments. Thus understanding the system and its emergent properties becomes a key success factor. The layers of the European transport eco system have been identified as Transport Infrastructure, Data, Applications, Service and Solutions, and Value Networks. But these layers are embedded in multi- and cross sectoral systems like the current inter-dependent political systems, economic systems, technological systems, environmental systems, social systems and cultural systems. Each of the systems can be addressed, analysed and through interventions possibly designed with different systems approaches, but we are today lacking the integration of these disciplinary grounded methodologies stemming out of and representing different schools of systems science in a sound transdisciplinary general systemology, bridging and enriching the disciplines like e.g. engineering, design, economics, and social sciences. The author assumes that through such real life complex challenges a most needed General Systems Transdisciplinarity can be put forward. The contribution is just one starting point, but a call for interested academic allies to co-create appropriate approaches to inform the development of a General Systems Transdisciplinarity for Discovery, Insight, and Innovation.