“Systems thinking” and “Whole Systems”
In order to find resolution to the global issues, I believe we need to first reshape our perspectives of human inhabitance on Earth. As such we need to change the story of separation to one of inter. Although we may not all agree on the specifics, the average person can identify some issues regarding the “global crisis.” In a discussion, we often hear or say phrases like, “If only we would switch from oil to solar energy we would solve climate change” or, “If everyone stopped eating meat we would solve the water crisis” or, “If we invent better technology we will be able to feed everyone everywhere.” These phrases are touching on very important systemic issues, but the solutions are surface level. Based on my studies, I believe we need an integrative approach to understanding and addressing the issues. This approach and perspective has been referred to as “systems thinking.”
The Fifth Discipline, by Peter Senge, defines “systems thinking” and “whole systems.” He describes the need for systems thinking like so; “All around us are examples of ‘systematic breakdowns’—problems such as global warming, ozone depletion, the international drug trade, and the U.S. trade and budget deficits — problems that have no simple local cause.” He says that people often feel that the problems are just “too complex.” Senge highlights the importance; “Systems thinking is the antidote to this sense of helplessness that many feel as we enter the ‘age of interdependence.’” This awareness becomes a discipline for seeing the interconnected “structures” that underlie complex situations, and for discerning high from low leverage change.
A systems thinking perspective leads to whole systems thinking and action as it develops the human mind to see “wholes.” Aspects of observing whole systems include: noticing larger patterns that affect seemingly different issues, paying attention to feedback loops of sustainable versus unsustainable collective habits, and examining the process of how systems develop rather than looking for a cause and an effect.
The article “Shifting from ‘sustainability’ to ‘regeneration’” by Bill Reed applies the whole systems thinking approach to the process in which sustainability can be managed. Reed begins by stating that there needs to be a shift in how sustainable methods are being used today towards a model that teaches “how one can participate with the environment by using the health of ecological systems as a basis for design.” The main point of Reed’s article is to establish a goal for human and Earth interaction, known as regeneration. He describes regeneration as follows: “Regeneration is not simply about making a landscape and local habitat more productive and healthy. Effective regeneration requires that we engage the entirety of what makes a place healthy. This may be our home community, a corporate campus, a small lot, or a building.” The author concludes the article by encouraging people to use a regenerative model of living and being to evolve beings and our communities.
The Vermont based permaculture business “Whole Systems Design” applies these principles towards land regeneration. Ben Falk, the founder of Whole System Design, uses the permaculture principle “observing patterns of energy” in order to find the best application of technology to capture and store water, use solar energy, windmills, etc. Before applying the technology, permaculturists like Falk ask, “what feedback loops will be affected / encouraged in this land system?” One feedback loop might be encouraging more tree growth through systems that harvest and disperse more water. In order to see this feedback loop as a part of the larger system on the land, an observation of natural processes needs to occur. Questions such as “How will the house be affected throughout the seasons if we store more water in the pond?” must be asked to get an accurate sense of applications.
The term “whole systems” crops up again in the explanation of the sustainability and ecovillage movement as summarized by writer and sociologist Robert Gilman. The importance of feedback loops, interconnection, and relationships are re-emphasized. Through studying Gilman’s work and having informal conversations with him, I am reminded of the need to observe and identify living structures, rather than hierarchies, that create the systems we live in.
Based on my studies, here are some common principles of whole systems.:
- Each individual and the foundation (in this case the Earth) need to be healthy and thriving to co-create a thriving system. It becomes everyone’s vested interest to help each other in order to help themselves.
- The organizations that make up the Whole Systems Network strive to align their beliefs, that they should have a symbiotic and regenerative interaction between themselves and their environments, with their lifestyles, livelihoods, and communities.
- A system functions as a whole being made up of synergetic parts
- If an action affects all parts of a system simultaneously, then we can no longer isolate one action or cause contributing to one effect.
What is the Whole Systems Network and Why Does it Exist?
Having the opportunity to informally discuss the “Whole Systems Network” with Robert Gilman, I was able to better conceptualize the importance of this network. Throughout my studies at Goddard, I kept coming across the terminology of “whole systems” as discussed above. I noticed there were various organizations and movements that subscribed to a similar way of ecological thinking and inhabitation. To me, the term Whole Systems Network creates a container that can hold multiple pillars, including ecovillages, transition towns, cohousing and other co-ops, permaculture farms, and other organizations that aim toward a whole systems philosophy and practice. Should the network grow stronger as a whole by strengthening and replicating each type of pillar, it has the potential to transition us into a healthy future versus the unhealthy spiral into crisis.
The structural pillars of this system are what Gilman refers to as “laboratories.” Places like intentional communities are able to practice new ways of being and interacting. As these new ways of living become established, they are introduced back into the mainstream (cities, business models, etc.). Gilman says that these organizations and communities exist so that we, as the human collective, can ask, “What part of society is likely to stay as-is? What part needs to change ten percent? 80 percent? What might not even be existing right now but is needed to alter our future for the better?” If we continue to propel these laboratories with these questions in mind, we will have a deeper, faster understanding of what we need to restructure in to our global systems as we act locally and think globally.
Another component of these whole communities is the need for resilience in the coming future. Resilience is the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change. As defined by Rob Hopkins (developer of Transition Towns), resilience is measured by the ability and receptivity of a selected group to adapt to urgent issues. Resilience will be essential during the impending meta-crisis of peak oil, climate change effects, and the probable collapse of the global economy. The gauge of resilience will be dependent on the aptness that communities are able to formulate decisions affecting them and the capacity of a community to self organize and manage resources in a sustainable manner.