Search results

The governance of the relationship between humans and the biophysical world has been based on a paradigm characterized by dualistic thinking and scientism. This has led to the Anthropocene. The purpose of this paper is to reframe human-biosphere governance in terms of “cyber-systemics”, a neologism that is useful, the authors argue, not only for breaking out of this dualistic paradigm in human-environmental governance but also of the dualism associated with the use of systems and cybernetics.

In this paper the authors draw on their own research praxis to exemplify how the intellectual lineages of cybernetics and systems have been mutually influencing their doings, and how new forms of governance practices that explore different framing choices might contribute to building innovative governance approaches attuned to the problematique of the Anthropocene, for instance through institutional designs for cyber-systemic governance.

The growing popularity of the Anthropocene as a particular framing for the circumstances, if it is to transformative and thus relevant demands informed critique if it is to help change the trajectory of human-life on earth. The authors offer arguments and a rationale for adopting a cyber-systemic perspective as a means to avoid the dangers in pursuing the current trajectory of our relationship with the biophysical world as, for example, climate change. The essay frames an invitation for a systemic inquiry into forms of governance more suited to the contemporary circumstances of humans in their relationships with the biophysical world.

The research essay challenges many taken-for-granted epistemological assumptions within the cybernetics and systems intellectual communities. A case for radical change is mounted; the means to effect this change, other than through changes in discourse remain unclear though it is apparent that changes to praxis and institutional forms and arrangements will be central.

Cyber-systemic capabilities need to be developed; this requires investment and new institutions that are conducive to cyber-systemic understandings and praxis.

Understanding the global environmental crisis as an emergent outcome of current commitments to dualistic governance choices demands a reframing of much of what humans have done, re-investment in cyber-systemics offers a moral and practical response.

Financial crime costs the world economy more than $1tn. Yet policing responses continue to apply traditional law enforcement methods to detect, identify and disrupt criminal actors in financial systems. The purpose of this paper is to challenge existing thinking around law enforcement practices in financial crime within an Australian context, by presenting an alternative model grounded in management cybernetics and systemic design (SD), which the author terms “cyber-systemics”.

This study reflects on prior research work across cybernetics and SD to suggest an integrated approach as a conceptually useful basis for considering regulation of financial crime, and to demonstrate utility using a case study.

The Fintel Alliance between financial crime regulators and financial institutions in Australia demonstrates a strong connection with, and example of, this study’s cyber-systemic regulatory framework. It will be demonstrated that the form of co-design framework offered under cyber-systemics is both consistent with cybernetic and SD literature, but also a means of avoiding regulatory disconnection in times of change and disruption. This study also invites consideration of how future forms of governance might be structured using cyber-systemics as a conceptual backbone.

This work proposes a novel methodology at odds with traditional law enforcement ways of doing, inevitably requiring a change of regulatory mindset. In addition, this paper is purely conceptual and therefore more research on an empirical basis is required to prove the potential benefits in a real-world regulatory environment.

This is (to the author’s knowledge) the first conceptual exploration of blending SD and management cybernetics in the field of criminal law regulation.

The purpose of this paper is to prove that it is possible and necessary that higher education institutions develop appropriate competencies of students during the learning process as required by the practice if teachers use the systemic approach and cybernetics knowledge. The authors especially research the importance of competence entrepreneurship and how to stimulate entrepreneurship by developing competencies of creativity, teamwork and communication.

Based on systems theory, transversal competencies entrepreneurship, creativity, teamwork and communication, as well as their interdependence, were requisitely holistic selected. In the selection of diverse contemporary learning methods, the authors started from an action research approach that implies learning by doing, i.e. participation of students. With the use of statistical methods, the authors showed that a cyber-systemic requisite holistic learning action approach based on interdependence of teacher and students learning process results in innovation of researched transversal competencies.

Based on two quantitative and qualitative researches of 96 students’ competencies, the authors found out that when using contemporary learning methods, the desired results can be achieved. In described learning process everyone involved gained: both the teacher and the students.

The survey does not include verifying the usefulness of developed competencies in practice. Also, the study only covers the findings of the research study of one academic year.

The research is important for the practice of higher education, as it demonstrates that the teacher is with a targeted focus on the selected viewpoints able to effectively improve students’ competencies.

If higher education’s institutions take a strategic decision to target improvement of the transversal competencies of students, they will be easier and faster to employ, and practice will get more relevant employees. The economy will be more efficient and effective.

According to the authors’ knowledge, no research measures the development of selected transversal competencies using the contemporary learning methods, based on cyber-systemic learning action approach. The authors found out that the methods used have influenced the final results, which show that all measured students’ transversal competencies have improved.

This paper aims to demonstrate the value of forum theatre as a means to promote second-order awareness of workplace conflict and to further pragmatise cyber-systemic awareness to a wider public.

A blended methodology rooted in grounded theory and action research is used to assess the individual learning of participants in a forum theatre intensive studying workplace conflict. The results are then briefly theorised through the lens of second-order cybernetics.

Data indicate significant growth in self, other and context awareness among participants. All three of these competencies can reasonably be considered components of second-order observation.

The sample size thus far is, because of the time and resource constraints of the project, quite small, but the results strongly suggest a “proof of concept” that invites further study.

Institutions of various types that experience workplace conflict may be inspired to use similar methods. Cyberneticians and system scientists may also wish to avail themselves of these methods to communicate fundamental cyber-systemic concepts to a wider public.

Buoyed by an empirical demonstration of its effectiveness in facilitating greater self-reflection and alternative action in situations of conflict, a wider uptake of forum theatre technique (and the cyber-systemic concepts entailed), can make a significant contribution to the resolution/dissolution of a variety of conflicts across society.

This is the only empirical investigation of the outcomes of forum theatre known to the authors. It is certainly unique in its second-order cybernetic framework.

The purpose of this paper is to explicate the ways in which the practice of the dramatic arts has evolved to facilitate second-order observation of social systems and can be used to “pragmatize” systems thinking for a wider audience.

Survey of selected dramatic theory and practice from the nineteenth century to the present framed within the cyber-systemic theories of Niklas Luhmann, Werner Ulrich and Oswaldo Garcia de la Cerda and Maria Saavedra Ulloa.

Beginning with Naturalism in the late nineteenth century, theatrical practitioners have increasingly revealed the structure of social systems through their work, largely without any explicit adoption or deployment of systems theory. Current methods of theatrical presentation are highly compatible with cyber-systemic heuristics and could be used to make this body of theory known to a wider public.

Work involving the direct application of systems theory to theatrical practice is still in its very early stages.

Despite the lack of direct influence by systems theory, Western theatrical practice has evolved in such a way as to facilitate increased opportunities for second-order observation of, and subsequent intervention in, the structure of social systems. The deliberate cultivation and integration of systems theory could allow theatre to become a significant tool for the explication of systems theory to the general public in a highly practical manner.

As a communal and, in certain forms, interactive endeavour, a systems-oriented theatrical practice can provide an inclusive public space for the critique of social systems as they are currently structured and for the modelling of alternative structures.

Theorizing selected moments of theatre history as the development of platforms for second-order observation is a unique analytical approach. The applications suggested in this paper may lead to novel approaches to the development of systems literacy across society.

Three levels of learning developed by Gregory Bateson in the tradition of second-order cybernetics have in-part been translated in terms of double-loop and triple-loop learning (TLL), particularly in the tradition of systems thinking. Learning III and TLL have gained less popularity since they deal with less tangible issues regarding virtues of wisdom and justice, respectively. The purpose of this paper is to provide a learning device – the systems thinking in practice (STiP) heuristic – which helps to retrieve the cybernetic concern for wisdom in association with an often forgotten systems concern for real-world power relations.

Using “conversation” as a metaphor the heuristic is introduced based on three orders of conversation. Drawing on ideas of systemic triangulation, another heuristic device – the systemic triangulator – is used to surface issues of power in the three orders of conversation. Some manifestations in using the STiP heuristic for supporting postgraduate systems learning are demonstrated.

Some key complementarities between conventionally opaque cybernetic issues of wisdom and systems issues of power are revealed, and used proactively to explore more effective coaching of STiP.

Cybernetics and systems thinking may benefit from being grounded more in understanding, engaging with, and transforming social realities. The heuristics provide practical experiential and meaningful learning through conversation, and more social premium for the study of cybernetics and systems thinking.

The heuristics – STiP, and the systemic triangulator – provides an innovative cyber-systemic space for learning and action.