Systems Thinking for Net Zero
A Green Edge conversation with Professors Andy Lane, Environmental Systems, Engineering and Innovation, Open University and Ian Jenkinson, Mechanical Engineering, Liverpool John Moores University.
Systems thinking is widely believed to be critical in handling the complexity facing the world in the coming decades1. But while elements of systems thinking may be found in many real-world projects, processes and organisations – the UK Civil Service lists ‘Seeing the Big Picture’ as one of its 10 key competences, for example – the teaching of it still tends to be restricted to higher education, with structural barriers inhibiting it being taught at lower levels. Says Professor Ian Jenkinson: “Perhaps the problem is that there's no systematic thinking going into the design of the curriculum”.
About Systems Thinking
The history of systems thinking goes back about 100 years and, as Professor Andy Lane explains, different disciplines have contributed to its development: “Systems thinking is a term that is used to cover quite a range of activities and ways of doing things.”
Systems thinking can be seen as having two main areas. Firstly, there’s the ‘hard’ engineering- and technology-oriented areas of systems engineering, mathematical modelling and system dynamics. Many of the climate change models fall into this area and it also forms the basis of the UK Government’s Operational Research Service (GORS), which employs over 1000 analysts to support policy-making, strategy and operations across many government departments and agencies.
The second area is the ‘softer’ area of managing complexity in large scale, multi-disciplinary and multi-stakeholder situations. The whole idea of managing complexity is that when a lot of people are involved, then you have to deal with the many different perspectives and interests of those people.
It’s important to recognise that the two areas of systems thinking are not mutually exclusive. Instead, systems thinking brings a holistic approach that is complementary to the more reductionist approach of much of the scientific activity in the world today. As Andy says: “More often than not, to really get something right, you need both. But it is most useful when you've got to deal with what are sometimes called the VUCA [volatile, uncertainty, complexity, ambiguity] things. This what all the management people talk about.”
Systems Thinking in action
Systems thinking is more widely used than we might imagine, although it isn’t necessarily being reported as such. In the same way that a report on science results and findings doesn’t necessarily go into scientific method, then literature on subjects ranging from water catchment management to world economics may incorporate systems thinking without ever mentioning it. Systems thinking is widely used in healthcare, in areas like product lifecycle assessments. It features in World Economic Forum discussions and literature2. The Vanguard Method3 is widely used across a range of private and public sectors, and brings a systems thinking approach to improving service organisations.
Andy is keen to highlight the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and the work it is doing in the circular economy4. Much of the foundation’s work is underpinned by systems thinking and recognises the need to manage complexity – so much so, that it helped with the creation of a module on complexity for the International Baccalaureate curriculum.
But while systems thinking is inherently interdisciplinary, it tends not to be translated across from each discipline in which it is operating. Says Ian: “The health care systems thinking sits in healthcare. Climate sits in science and geography. In the economic sphere, the systems thinking is used in that context, but not many engineers know that is where it sits. So, we know what is in our discipline, but not necessarily spread to other disciplines”.
Teaching Systems Thinking
In England and Wales, The Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) has developed a Level 7 (masters-level) Systems Thinking Practitioner standard, which “[supports] decision-makers in strategic and leadership roles to understand and address complex and sometimes even ‘wicked’ problems through provision of expert systemic analysis, advice and facilitation.5” The standard is being adopted by several universities and as Andy says: “There has been as much joined up-ness as is possible within the higher education sector by those of us who do have clear centres for systems thinking [and] work with industry”.
Nothing exists within the IfATE standards below level 7, although Andy and Ian describe how individual universities - including their own - incorporate systems thinking into undergraduate programmes, for example through capstone projects. One key driver at university level is the UNESCO Education for Sustainable Development framework, of which systems thinking is a key competence.
For TVET and in schools, the scope for incorporating systems thinking is less clear. While TVET courses may provide opportunities for some forms of multi-disciplinary project work where systems thinking can be included, the problem in schools seems to be more structural. Andy says: “The way that the assessment by terminal examination is done in the school system, certainly in the UK, doesn't lend itself to the application of systems thinking. The real value of system thinking comes in using it. In the current curriculum, they can learn about it but they don't have that good opportunity to actually use it”
Ian agrees: “[T]he mentality or our way of thinking at the moment, based on the current system, is to assess and to classify people which is not necessarily where we need to be”.
But Andy and Ian go on to talk about how key elements of systems thinking could be embedded in school curricula. A key area is modelling. As Ian says: “I think that's probably where you need to get it embedded in the system, in each of the subject areas. I remember going back when I was a small child, at the rain cycle, if you remember, where the sun heated the sea, water evaporated, rain fell on the hill and then…. [Green Edge remembered the same poster].
“So if you could embed those sort of analogies, those sort of models, within different parts of the curriculum, I think that will be the way to develop systems thinking. The general principles could be a communication skill, but then having some sort of modelling, a model of whatever format, it doesn't have to be a computer model, attached to each of the curriculum areas I think is probably the way forward.”
But action needs to be taken at policy level to make this happen. So far, the record has not been good. Andy recalls working with the Ellen MacArthur Foundation some years ago when they were talking about how they how could get systems thinking into the UK school curriculum. But having looked at it and knowing where the political winds were going at the time, the foundation teamed up with International Baccalaureate instead.
Meanwhile, localised initiatives are being followed. For example, Green Edge is aware of a group of secondary schools that has incorporated the Extended Project Qualification (EPQ) alongside its A Level curricula, and has also teamed up with IBM in its P-Tech programme for 14 - 18 year olds in which modelling is a key part. But this means additional work, and in an education system that increasingly focuses on terminal exams as the way of sifting students, this is not possible across all schools in the UK.
Joined-up actions on systems thinking need to be taken across the education system. Ian again: “By the time people start to talk about systems thinking at our [university] level, it's too late because what we need to be able to do is to have people communicate across disciplines. It's very difficult for us to work with people from other disciplines without some sort of common understanding of how the system works.”
Systems Thinking in a complex world
The broader discourse on systems thinking is this: where does it fit within a world that is heavily influenced by an increasing tendency towards reductionism? As Andy explains, “[The reductionist approach] of doing piece by piece makes it seem as though that most problems are simple to solve, even if they're complicated. Take a bit of time because you just do little bits. You just do this, and something happens. A bit like politicians talk about policy levers. If they just do this and make this rule, then everything is going to change. But it's not like that, it's a complex world”.
Ian adds: “[Systems thinking] should be part of any young person’s education supporting problem solving and communication skills. If you're going to tackle big problems, you need to be able to communicate effectively and be able to have the toolkit to be able to solve a complex problem. Whichever walk of life you’re in, whatever career you pursue, this is one of the fundamental skills that you should be able to give young people”.
Ross D. Arnold, Jon P. Wade, Stevens Institute, NJ (2015)