Ray Ison

Systems Practice: How to Act in a Climate Change World

Systems Practice: How to Act in a Climate Change Worldis a Reader that shows how to do systems thinking and to translate thinking into action (i.e praxis). The Open University has been teaching Systems for nearly forty years and although it has developed an effective approach to teaching students, there is still a major deficiency in the market about the doing of systems. This book aims to fill this gap and meet an important need by building the case for a systems praxiology. Praxiology is that branch of knowledge dealing with practical activity and human conduct. One of the main findings to emerge from the activities of the EPSRC-funded Systems Practice for Managing Complexity (SPMC) Network was the idea that systems practice is highly valued by those who do it and know about it but most use it as a silent practice. A consequence of this is that many people have not heard of it, they do not know how to talk about it and they also do not know what is involved in doing it, i.e there is little demand-pull despite the wide-spread and increasing recognition that there is a need for thinking and acting systemically. Systems Practicewill be relevant to praxis under the rubrics of leadership, management complexity, joined-up thinking, and action, strategic risk management, corporate social responsibility and climate change adaptation.

Agricultural Extension and Rural Development. Breaking out of Traditions

List of contributors About the authors Acknowledgements Part I. Breaking Out of Traditions: 1. The research-development relationship in rural communities: an opportunity for contextual science David B. Russell and Raymond L. Ison 2. The human quest for understanding and agreement Lloyd Fell and David B. Russell 3. Technology: transforming grazier experience Raymond L. Ison Part II. Historical Patterns, Technological Lineages and the Emergence of Institutionalised Research and Development: 4. From theodolite to satellite: land, technology and power in the western division of NSW Adrian Mackenzie 5. Experience, tradition and service? Institutionalised R&D in the rangelands Raymond L. Ison Part III. A Design for Second-Order Research and Development: 6. Enthusiasm: developing critical action for second-order R&D David B. Russell and Raymond L. Ison 7. Co-researching: braiding theory and practice for research with people Lynn Webber 8. The graziers story Danielle Dignam and Philippa Major Part IV. Limitations and Possibilities for Research and Development Design: 9. Designing R&D systems for mutual benefit David B. Russell and Raymond L. Ison Appendix Glossary Index.

Systems methodologies for sustainable natural resources research and development

Systems methodologies are helping to reshape the way in which natural resource Research and Development (R&D) is conducted but they are under-utilised and under-researched. This paper outlines some recent trends in systems thinking, and argues the case for the use and further development of systems methodologies for research and development in sustainable natural resource management (NRM R&D). Systems, or complexity, research reveals the inadequacy of development projects which are based on blueprints and certainty derived from linear projections into the future. Two strands of NRM R&D are explored: farming systems research (FSR) and systems learning. Both have been extended from farming to rural livelihood and food systems. This improves their holistic claims but increases demands on them. FSR acknowledges that both natural and socio-economic science are necessary to NRM but has had limited success in synthesising them. The systems learning strand is increasingly apparent but is still under-researched despite successes. Research to further adapt and develop systems methodologies in NRM contexts is identified.

Participatory rural appraisal design: conceptual and process issues

Emphasis in many past Participatory Rural Appraisals (PRAs) has been placed on the ‘doing’ dimension, with limited attention to the theoretical or conceptual underpinnings to process design. In this paper, conceptual and process issues relating to design are discussed, using a PRA case experience in the Kyeamba Valley, New South Wales, Australia. This design seeks to address issues embodied in notions of community, local participation and learning experience. How PRA process design can manage interpretation of data, who is involved in that interpretation, and the intentions of analysis are discussed. Questions about the nature and quality of change which could result from the conduct of PRA are raised.

Science–policy processes for transboundary water governance

In this policy perspective, we outline several conditions to support effective science–policy interaction, with a particular emphasis on improving water governance in transboundary basins. Key conditions include (1) recognizing that science is a crucial but bounded input into water resource decision-making processes; (2) establishing conditions for collaboration and shared commitment among actors; (3) understanding that social or group-learning processes linked to science–policy interaction are enhanced through greater collaboration; (4) accepting that the collaborative production of knowledge about hydrological issues and associated socioeconomic change and institutional responses is essential to build legitimate decision-making processes; and (5) engaging boundary organizations and informal networks of scientists, policy makers, and civil society. We elaborate on these conditions with a diverse set of international examples drawn from a synthesis of our collective experiences in assessing the opportunities and constraints (including the role of power relations) related to governance for water in transboundary settings.

Creating communities of practice: scoping purposeful design

Purpose – This paper seeks to scope the nature and form of practices, understandings and institutional arrangements thatmight contributetothe successful ‘‘design’’ andcontinuity of Communities of Practice (CoP) in a state government department in Australia. The study aims to provide research evidence to support the design and establishment of a CoP based on systems thinking within this department. Design/methodology/approach – A total of 13 semi-structured interviews were undertaken involving 14 informants. The interviewer also attended one CoP meeting. An emergent approach to research design was adopted with data analysis guided by previous studies on CoPs. Findings – The research revealed the existence of six CoPs that were purposefully created internally by the department. Six ‘‘design’’ and practice considerations were suggested for practitioners aiming to create and sustain successful CoPs. Research limitations/implications – Interview material was the only source of primary data and it was gathered from one organisation only – a state government department in Australia. Findings indicate that the role of the CoP coordinator is still not fully understood. Practical implications – The results from this study can be used in re-designing a systems thinking CoP to support systems thinking within the department. The study also revealed that purposefully designing CoPs is possible and useful for practitioners aiming to collaborate and share expertise across disciplinary and divisional boundaries. Originality/value – This study provides some guidance for the purposeful design of CoPs, which has been under-examined in the literature.

Systemic environmental decision making: designing learning systems

Purpose – This paper was written for a special issue of Kybernetes devoted to cybernetics and design. It aims to focus on case studies that are both informed by cybernetic and systems thinking and constitute a form of second‐order design praxis.Design/methodology/approach – The case studies exemplify reflective practice as well as reporting outcomes, in terms of new understandings, from an action research process.Findings – The paper describes what was involved in course design, from a cybernetic perspective, to effect systemic environmental decision making as well as developing and enacting a model for doing systemic inquiry (SI), which enabled situation‐improving actions to be realised in a complex, organisational setting. The paper lays out the theoretical and ethical case for understanding first‐and second‐order designing as a duality rather than a dualism.Research limitations/implications – There is a danger that readers from an alternative epistemological position will judge the paper in terms of kn...

Rapid rural appraisal: a participatory problem formulation method relevant to Australian agriculture

Rapid rural appraisal (RRA), a qualitative survey methodology, is being increasingly utilised in Third World situations to formulate better the problems and identify opportunities for agricultural research and development. In Australia there have been few recent innovations in research methodologies and in the processes by which agricultural research and development problems are formulated despite the increasing complexity of the problems being encountered. Outcomes of an exploratory RRA and a subsequent topical RRA, first used in an Australian context in the Forbes Shire, central western NSW, in 1988, are discussed. It is suggested that the concepts which underpin RRA and the range and richness of outcomes make it a relevant tool for the formulation of problems for agricultural research and development in Australia and other developed countries. A model for future agronomic research which has emerged from the RRA experiences and which incorporates RRA is proposed. This model, which focuses on farmer participation in the research process, is seen to offer greater potential for sustainable agricultural development in Australia than the increasingly questioned linear ‘transfer of technology’ model.

Metaphors for Reflecting on Research Practice: Researching with People

There are renewed demands for transparency and stakeholder participation in environmental planning and management. Research is a generic form of practice common to many professions. Appreciating the position of the researcher and reflecting on research practice can enhance its transparency. The case is presented for considering underlying metaphors as a way of making understandings explicit, transparent and structured, so as to enhance reflection on research practice. Metaphors can be explored, either individually or jointly, and learning opportunities can come from the exploration and awareness of alternative metaphors. Four metaphors have been chosen to reflect on research practice: research-as-action, research-as-narrative, research-as-facilitation and research-as-responsible. These metaphors define various roles relevant to researching with people and seem powerful ways of discussing what researching or planning with people might entail, and how to include the position of the researcher/planner in reflective practice. Whilst the primary concern is with research practice, the arguments might equally apply to other forms of practice such as planning, managing, advising or regulating.

Opening and Closing the Future: Climate Change, Adaptation, and Scenario Planning

The gales of climate change blow the future open and closed. In response, we are having to learn to live with a renewed notion of limits and a novel level of uncertainty. One emerging governance response is a turn to scenario planning, which generates narratives about multiple futures refracted out from the present. Like climate change itself, scenario planning, and the broader field of futures studies it is part of, is historically and socially positioned, belying its application as a mere method or tool. This paper discusses the growing turn to scenario planning within government climate change adaptation initiatives in light of parallel shifts in governance (eg, interest in efficiency and wicked problems) and adaptation efforts (eg, framed as risk management or resilience) and their shared roots in the ambiguities of sustainable development. It provides an extended introduction to a theme issue that provides, overall, a nested discussion of the role of scenario planning by government for climate change adaptation, noting how governance, climate change adaptation, and scenario planning all fold together the motifs of openness and closedness. This paper engages with the emerging field of future geographies and critical interest in future orientations to highlight the way societys growing engagement on climate change adaptation exposes, critiques, replicates, and amplifies our existing orientations to the future and time and their politically contested and embedded character. It points to the way the motif of open futures can be both progressive and conservative, as political and economic interests seek to open up some futures while closing down others in the name of the ambivalent goals of adaptation and sustainable development.