The tyranny of small decisions makes perfect sense to those who conduct the
complex system research used both to examine the Earth’s ecosystems and in social
sciences. Here the main thrust of the research lies in understanding relations
between single elements and the dynamics of the whole in order to understand why
single elements behave the way they do and how this might change. As a result, the
emphasis when searching for sustainable development solutions is less on
improving single technological products or economic incentives, and more on
understanding the dynamics of wider socio-technical or socio-ecological systems
(STS or SES) before thinking about which interventions could improve
sustainability.
Most reflexive transdisciplinary methodologies work with what has been called a
problem-driven approach. The research is designed around a specific problem or
challenge that scholars seek to address or produce answers for. Collecting information about its emergence, including talking to people, allows mapping which
actors, but also which institutional, technological, economic, environmental, and
socio-cultural conditions are relevant factors of its persistence. From this information one can draw a system that is relevant to dealing with the challenge. Often
this system will cut across official demarcations of organizations, sectors, disciplines or even nations.
The 2015 OECD System Innovation report explicitly defines ‘system innovation’
as a way of analyzing and innovating that will transgress the boundaries of
established containers: “The appeal of system innovation today is closely linked to
the pressing issue of meeting the ‘grand’ or global challenges of today. These
global challenges require policy actions across technological, economic and social
structures and boundaries, as well as national borders” (OECD 2015: 8).
Returning to the Brundtland Report, we realize that this is not really a new insight: The
integrated and interdependent nature of the new challenges and issues contrasts sharply
with the nature of the institutions that exist today. These institutions tend to be independent,
fragmented, and working to relatively narrow mandates with closed decision processes…
The real world of interlocked economic and ecological systems will not change, the policies
and institutions concerned must (WCED 1987: 17).
It seems that such structural change implications were among those demands
considered too radical at the time and that they thus need persistent reiteration. The
transformation and system innovation discourse brings the need for encompassing
structural change to the forefront and to the titles of flagship reports, while slowly
delegitimizing the narrow emphasis on adaptive market magic, money printing and
technological breakthroughs.
To me, this is part of the window of renewed opportunity for sustainable
development. The rapidly growing transdisciplinary transformation research community could become instrumental in helping to use this window strategically. It
promises the most telling insights into how the infamous integration of ecological,
social and economic dimensions of development can be achieved in practice.
16
2 What Political Economy Adds to Transformation Research
complex system research used both to examine the Earth’s ecosystems and in social
sciences. Here the main thrust of the research lies in understanding relations
between single elements and the dynamics of the whole in order to understand why
single elements behave the way they do and how this might change. As a result, the
emphasis when searching for sustainable development solutions is less on
improving single technological products or economic incentives, and more on
understanding the dynamics of wider socio-technical or socio-ecological systems
(STS or SES) before thinking about which interventions could improve
sustainability.
Most reflexive transdisciplinary methodologies work with what has been called a
problem-driven approach. The research is designed around a specific problem or
challenge that scholars seek to address or produce answers for. Collecting information about its emergence, including talking to people, allows mapping which
actors, but also which institutional, technological, economic, environmental, and
socio-cultural conditions are relevant factors of its persistence. From this information one can draw a system that is relevant to dealing with the challenge. Often
this system will cut across official demarcations of organizations, sectors, disciplines or even nations.
The 2015 OECD System Innovation report explicitly defines ‘system innovation’
as a way of analyzing and innovating that will transgress the boundaries of
established containers: “The appeal of system innovation today is closely linked to
the pressing issue of meeting the ‘grand’ or global challenges of today. These
global challenges require policy actions across technological, economic and social
structures and boundaries, as well as national borders” (OECD 2015: 8).
Returning to the Brundtland Report, we realize that this is not really a new insight: The
integrated and interdependent nature of the new challenges and issues contrasts sharply
with the nature of the institutions that exist today. These institutions tend to be independent,
fragmented, and working to relatively narrow mandates with closed decision processes…
The real world of interlocked economic and ecological systems will not change, the policies
and institutions concerned must (WCED 1987: 17).
It seems that such structural change implications were among those demands
considered too radical at the time and that they thus need persistent reiteration. The
transformation and system innovation discourse brings the need for encompassing
structural change to the forefront and to the titles of flagship reports, while slowly
delegitimizing the narrow emphasis on adaptive market magic, money printing and
technological breakthroughs.
To me, this is part of the window of renewed opportunity for sustainable
development. The rapidly growing transdisciplinary transformation research community could become instrumental in helping to use this window strategically. It
promises the most telling insights into how the infamous integration of ecological,
social and economic dimensions of development can be achieved in practice.
16
2 What Political Economy Adds to Transformation Research