Coevolving Innovations

Coevolving Innovations

… in Business Organizations and Information Technologies

Currently Viewing Posts in economics

Incremental Adaptation or Generational Shift? | Industry 4.0 to Industry 5.0 | 2024-04

April 25, 2024
0 Comments

As the book on Industry 4.0 to Industry 5.0 was taking shape in March 2023, I was invited not only to serve as an editor, but also to contribute as an author. The edited volume is the final deliverable for the In4act project centered at the  KTU School of Economics and Business in Kaunas, Lithuania that completed in December 2023.  As the project was winding down, a roundtable discussion with some of the researchers was released.

Industry 4.0 was announced by the European Parliament in 2015, with the funding for research into the impact on management practices and economics following in October 2018.  The EU announcement of Industry 5.0 during 2020 raised questions amongst researchers about how to handle the increased emphasis on human centricity.  Then in fall 2022, the rise of Generative AI with the release of ChatGPT captured the attention of leaders, worldwide.

As a contributor coming from Canada, outside the EU, my research in systems changes provoked a question as to the meaning of 4.0 and 5.0.  While the Industrial Revolution is conventionally regarded as 1.0, there’s a divergence on numberings used around the world. This led me to ask:  what might we learn if we framed a transition from Industry 0.0 to Industry 1.0 and compared to that?  Here’s the abstract.

As Industry 4.0 matures, what’s next? A generational shift to 5.0? Or an incremental adaptation to 4.x? Systems changes may involve both Socio-Technical Systems (STS) changes and Socio-Ecological Systems (SES) changes.

… Read more (in a new tab)

Ecological Limits to Development: Living with the SDGs | ST-ON | 2023-03-13

March 27, 2023
0 Comments

The book Ecological Limits to Development: Living with the Sustainable Development Goals, published in 2002 by Routledge, was released as open access in 2023 by Taylor-Francis for readers who don’t have access to a university library.

For the March edition of Systems Thinking Ontario, we were honoured to celebrate the release with editor-coauthors Kaitlin Kish and Stephen Quilley.  They were joined by contributing authors Sophia Sanniti and Kathryn Gwiazdon.  (There was minor confusion with two Katies/Katys on the call).

In a departure from the usual circle of introductions, we asked participants for a quick check-in via the chat.  The introducton to the book started after 3m15s in, with questions-answers beginning after 1h03m.

This recording of the session is available on Youtube, as well as on the Internet Archive .

Video H.264 MP4
March 13
(1h42m)		 [20230313_ST-ON EcologicalLimitsToDevelopment_1920x900.m4v]
(HDPlus 1920×900 1197kbps 1.04GB)
[on the Internet Archive]

A standalone audio was also created during the meeting.

Audio
March 13
(1h52m)		 [20230313_ST-ON EcologicalLimitsToDevelopment.m4a]
(103 MB)

Katie Kish started the session by describing the origins of the book, as a discussion between her and her doctoral supervisor.  I recognized some of the themes from her 2018 University of Waterloo thesis, Ecological Economic Development Goals: Reincorporating the social sphere in ecological economic theory and practice.  Katie unfortunately had to leave the discussion after 1h25m, leaving responses to her coauthors for the last half hour.… Read more (in a new tab)

The book Ecological Limits to Development: Living with the Sustainable Development Goals, published in 2002 by Routledge, was released as open access in 2023 by Taylor-Francis for readers who don’t have access to a university library.

For the March edition of Systems Thinking Ontario, we were honoured to celebrate the release with editor-coauthors Kaitlin Kish and Stephen Quilley.  They were joined by contributing authors Sophia Sanniti and Kathryn Gwiazdon.  (There was minor confusion with two Katies/Katys on the call).

In a departure from the usual circle of introductions, we asked participants for a quick check-in via the chat.  The introducton to the book started after 3m15s in, with questions-answers beginning after 1h03m.

This recording of the session is available on Youtube, as well as on the Internet Archive .

Video H.264 MP4
March 13
(1h42m)		 [20230313_ST-ON EcologicalLimitsToDevelopment_1920x900.m4v]
(HDPlus 1920×900 1197kbps 1.04GB)
[on the Internet Archive]

A standalone audio was also created during the meeting.

Audio
March 13
(1h52m)		 [20230313_ST-ON EcologicalLimitsToDevelopment.m4a]
(103 MB)

Katie Kish started the session by describing the origins of the book, as a discussion between her and her doctoral supervisor.  I recognized some of the themes from her 2018 University of Waterloo thesis, Ecological Economic Development Goals: Reincorporating the social sphere in ecological economic theory and practice.  Katie unfortunately had to leave the discussion after 1h25m, leaving responses to her coauthors for the last half hour.… Read more (in a new tab)

Ecological Economics and Systems Thinking | Katie Kish + David Mallery | (ST-ON 2021-10-18)

April 5, 2022
0 Comments

In the 1980s, ecological economics seemed to be mostly economists extending their work towards environmental and resource concerns.  In the 2020s, ecological economics is seeing a new generation first schooled in other disciplines such as environmental studies or one of the social sciences, then coming into economics.  Programs that encourage the new perspective include the  Economics for the Anthropocene partnership, and Leadership for the Ecozoic network.  Emerging scholars can bring a new research agenda.

This is what I’ve been learning through the Canadian Society for Ecological Economics (CANSEE).  To bring some of that perspective to the Systems Thinking Ontario community, I invited Katie Kish and David Mallery for a conversation.

This video has been archived on the Internet Archive .

Video H.264 MP4
October 18
(1h41m)		 [20211018_ST-ON EcologicalEconomics_Kish_Mallery_FHD.m4v]
(FHD 1547kbps 1.19GB) [on the Internet Archive]

Audio downloadable onto mobile devices was transcoded from the video into MP3.

Audio
October 18
(1h41m)		 [20211018_ST-ON EcologicalEconomics_Kish_Mallery.mp3]
(35.5MB)

Here is the content from the original announcement.

For this session, Katie Kish and David Mallery will lead a discussion on Ecological Economics in two parts.

(1) Where is Ecological Economics going with Systems Thinking?

  • In the “Critical Pluralism” paper (see below), the newest generation of EE scholars is portrayed as taking a regenerative approach to research and learning. This is best navigated with critical pluralistic approaches well-developed in systems thinking. The shift might be better supported through a wider set of systems tools, which might also have complementary effects on systems methodologies.
… Read more (in a new tab)

In the 1980s, ecological economics seemed to be mostly economists extending their work towards environmental and resource concerns.  In the 2020s, ecological economics is seeing a new generation first schooled in other disciplines such as environmental studies or one of the social sciences, then coming into economics.  Programs that encourage the new perspective include the  Economics for the Anthropocene partnership, and Leadership for the Ecozoic network.  Emerging scholars can bring a new research agenda.

This is what I’ve been learning through the Canadian Society for Ecological Economics (CANSEE).  To bring some of that perspective to the Systems Thinking Ontario community, I invited Katie Kish and David Mallery for a conversation.

This video has been archived on the Internet Archive .

Video H.264 MP4
October 18
(1h41m)		 [20211018_ST-ON EcologicalEconomics_Kish_Mallery_FHD.m4v]
(FHD 1547kbps 1.19GB) [on the Internet Archive]

Audio downloadable onto mobile devices was transcoded from the video into MP3.

Audio
October 18
(1h41m)		 [20211018_ST-ON EcologicalEconomics_Kish_Mallery.mp3]
(35.5MB)

Here is the content from the original announcement.

For this session, Katie Kish and David Mallery will lead a discussion on Ecological Economics in two parts.

(1) Where is Ecological Economics going with Systems Thinking?

  • In the “Critical Pluralism” paper (see below), the newest generation of EE scholars is portrayed as taking a regenerative approach to research and learning. This is best navigated with critical pluralistic approaches well-developed in systems thinking. The shift might be better supported through a wider set of systems tools, which might also have complementary effects on systems methodologies.
… Read more (in a new tab)

Ecology and Economy: Systems Changes Ahead?

January 19, 2020
0 Comments

Following the workshop at 2019 CANSEE Conference, cohosted with David L. Hawk, we were invited to contribute an article to a special issue of WEI Magazine.  Here’s the abstract for the workshop in May:

Systems Changes, Environmental Deterioration

This dialogue-oriented workshop will be framed by two short position papers (< 30 minutes each) towards energizing a discussion on the prospects for systems thinking and ecological economics.

(1) Systems Changes research program

Shifting the emphasis from stable states to a fluid world, what patterns describe shifts due to (i) human will, and (ii) nature? The Systems Changes program aims to extend research from the 1970s (e.g. West Churchman systems approach; Horst Rittel wicked problems; Christopher Alexander pattern language; Eric Trist and Cal Pava action learning) with 21st century advances (e.g. holons and hierarchy theory; resilience science; ecological anthropology; open sourcing).

(2) Environmental Deterioration: What have we learned about systems change(s) over the past 50 years?

Since the 1960s, nations have enacted regulations towards environment issues, sustainability of resources and stewardship of the environment: USA EPA (1969); Canadian EPA (1988/1999); EU Treaty of Maastricht (1993). Yet in 2009, the Stockholm Resilience Centre declared that human activity has exceeded two thresholds of nine planetary boundaries. Is it too late for the human race to act, or even to try? The 1979 Ph.D. dissertation on “Regulation of Environmental Deterioration” from the University of Pennsylvania will be considered retrospectively.

(3) Dialectic: Group Discussion

In an open group discussion, in what ways might a shift from “systems thinking” towards “systems changes” make a difference (or not)?

… Read more (in a new tab)

Following the workshop at 2019 CANSEE Conference, cohosted with David L. Hawk, we were invited to contribute an article to a special issue of WEI Magazine.  Here’s the abstract for the workshop in May:

Systems Changes, Environmental Deterioration

This dialogue-oriented workshop will be framed by two short position papers (< 30 minutes each) towards energizing a discussion on the prospects for systems thinking and ecological economics.

(1) Systems Changes research program

Shifting the emphasis from stable states to a fluid world, what patterns describe shifts due to (i) human will, and (ii) nature? The Systems Changes program aims to extend research from the 1970s (e.g. West Churchman systems approach; Horst Rittel wicked problems; Christopher Alexander pattern language; Eric Trist and Cal Pava action learning) with 21st century advances (e.g. holons and hierarchy theory; resilience science; ecological anthropology; open sourcing).

(2) Environmental Deterioration: What have we learned about systems change(s) over the past 50 years?

Since the 1960s, nations have enacted regulations towards environment issues, sustainability of resources and stewardship of the environment: USA EPA (1969); Canadian EPA (1988/1999); EU Treaty of Maastricht (1993). Yet in 2009, the Stockholm Resilience Centre declared that human activity has exceeded two thresholds of nine planetary boundaries. Is it too late for the human race to act, or even to try? The 1979 Ph.D. dissertation on “Regulation of Environmental Deterioration” from the University of Pennsylvania will be considered retrospectively.

(3) Dialectic: Group Discussion

In an open group discussion, in what ways might a shift from “systems thinking” towards “systems changes” make a difference (or not)?

… Read more (in a new tab)

Artificial intelligence, natural stupidity

December 17, 2018
1 Comment

Psychologist Amos Tversky, with Daniel Kahneman, collaborated not on artificial intelligence, but on the study of natural stupidity.  Their research into cognitive biases eventually became recognized in an emerging field of behavioral economics.  In hindsight, I can claim to have received an “A” in a Ph.D. course taught by the winner of a Nobel Prize in economics.

In my first cycle of doctoral studies, I was guided at UBC by my supervisor Ken MacCrimmon into a PSYC546 “Seminar in Psychology Problems”, which was led by Danny Kahneman.  This course was offered shortly after the 1982 publication of the book Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, edited by Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovic, and Amos Tversky.  With Kahneman at UBC in Vancouver, and Tversky at Stanford University in the San Francisco Bay Area, the back-and-forth flights to visit each other was frequent.  I uncovered more about the relationship between the two psychology professors in reading The Undoing Project. That book describes a difficult history of university faculty offers, not only around the two collaborators, but also the accommodation of wives Barbara Gans Tversky and Anne Treisman.

In late 1977, after Danny had told him that he wasn’t returning to Israel, word spread through academia that Amos Tversky might leave, too.  […]  Harvard University quickly offered Amos tenure, though it took them a few weeks to throw in an assistant professorship for Barbara. The University of Michigan, which had the advantage of sheer size, scrambled to find four tenured professorships — and, by making places for Danny, Anne, and Barbara, also snag Amos.

… Read more (in a new tab)

Psychologist Amos Tversky, with Daniel Kahneman, collaborated not on artificial intelligence, but on the study of natural stupidity.  Their research into cognitive biases eventually became recognized in an emerging field of behavioral economics.  In hindsight, I can claim to have received an “A” in a Ph.D. course taught by the winner of a Nobel Prize in economics.

In my first cycle of doctoral studies, I was guided at UBC by my supervisor Ken MacCrimmon into a PSYC546 “Seminar in Psychology Problems”, which was led by Danny Kahneman.  This course was offered shortly after the 1982 publication of the book Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, edited by Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovic, and Amos Tversky.  With Kahneman at UBC in Vancouver, and Tversky at Stanford University in the San Francisco Bay Area, the back-and-forth flights to visit each other was frequent.  I uncovered more about the relationship between the two psychology professors in reading The Undoing Project. That book describes a difficult history of university faculty offers, not only around the two collaborators, but also the accommodation of wives Barbara Gans Tversky and Anne Treisman.

In late 1977, after Danny had told him that he wasn’t returning to Israel, word spread through academia that Amos Tversky might leave, too.  […]  Harvard University quickly offered Amos tenure, though it took them a few weeks to throw in an assistant professorship for Barbara. The University of Michigan, which had the advantage of sheer size, scrambled to find four tenured professorships — and, by making places for Danny, Anne, and Barbara, also snag Amos.

… Read more (in a new tab)

The impacts of platforms

November 12, 2018
0 Comments

Concerns in the larger research body of research on platforms often leads to a subset looking into the impacts of the platform economy.  Let’s try some more digests responding to questions.

  • A. Is a shift to platforms considered as disruptive innovation?
  • B. Do network effects lead to a platform economy of “winner take all”?
  • C. With digital platforms based in information systems, what are the opportunities for knowledge effects?
  • D. What is the logic of participation on a platform?
  • E. Should platform capitalism be seen as positive or negative?
  • F. As an alternative to platform capitalism, should platform cooperativism be considered?
  • G. In the larger context of the sharing economy, how might platform initiatives be categorized?

The rise of the platform economy may be described either by the metaphor of “We Don’t Know Who Discovered Water, But We Know It Wasn’t a Fish” or the fable of the “Boiling Frog“.

A. Is a shift to platforms considered as disruptive innovation?

In a clarification about definition of disruptive innovation, Clayton Christensen doesn’t see Uber as disrupting the taxi business, because (i) the innovation doesn’t original on a low-end or new-market foothold; and (ii) the innovation doesn’t catch up with mainstream customers until quality catches up to their standards.  With disruptive innovation seen as a process, Uber is categorized by Christensen as as an outlier to the taxi business, offering a better quality service in the regulated taxi industry.… Read more (in a new tab)

Concerns in the larger research body of research on platforms often leads to a subset looking into the impacts of the platform economy.  Let’s try some more digests responding to questions.

  • A. Is a shift to platforms considered as disruptive innovation?
  • B. Do network effects lead to a platform economy of “winner take all”?
  • C. With digital platforms based in information systems, what are the opportunities for knowledge effects?
  • D. What is the logic of participation on a platform?
  • E. Should platform capitalism be seen as positive or negative?
  • F. As an alternative to platform capitalism, should platform cooperativism be considered?
  • G. In the larger context of the sharing economy, how might platform initiatives be categorized?

The rise of the platform economy may be described either by the metaphor of “We Don’t Know Who Discovered Water, But We Know It Wasn’t a Fish” or the fable of the “Boiling Frog“.

A. Is a shift to platforms considered as disruptive innovation?

In a clarification about definition of disruptive innovation, Clayton Christensen doesn’t see Uber as disrupting the taxi business, because (i) the innovation doesn’t original on a low-end or new-market foothold; and (ii) the innovation doesn’t catch up with mainstream customers until quality catches up to their standards.  With disruptive innovation seen as a process, Uber is categorized by Christensen as as an outlier to the taxi business, offering a better quality service in the regulated taxi industry.… Read more (in a new tab)

  • RSS qoto.org/@daviding (Mastodon)

    • Dec 19, 2024, 13:00 December 19, 2024
      From the 1982 publication of _Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems_, W. Richard Scott in 2004 reflected back on the history of organizational sociology.> Before open system ideas, organizational scholars had concentrated on actors (workers, work groups, managers) and processes (motivation, cohesion, control) within organizations. Scant attention was accorded to the environment within which the […]
    • Dec 19, 2024, 12:58 December 19, 2024
      For those interested in detailed distinctions between systems approach, systems thinking, General Systems Theory, system science, etc, Aleksandra A. Nikiforova (Lomonosov Moscow State University) started an entry in the Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization in 2022 that has been revised to 2024. https://www.isko.org/cyclo/systems .The International Society for Knowledge Organization is a “scholarly society devoted to the […]
    • Dec 15, 2024, 10:28 December 15, 2024
      The Future of Life Institute Safety Index is criticized by Mark Daley as too narrow, with an implicit bias disfavoring open sourcing.> The “Future of Life Institute” released their FLI Safety Index this week. [....] > By celebrating only those models that impose rigid controls on allowable thought and scorning those that grant the user […]
    • Dec 15, 2024, 10:11 December 15, 2024
      In understanding the precursors to the Gunderson and Holling 2001 _Panarchy_ book, it's good to keep in mind that when ecologists refer to "Adaptive Management", the clearer longer label is "Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management".Holling, C.S. (1979). Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management -- Current Progress and Prospects for the Approach: Summary Report of the First […]
    • Dec 10, 2024, 13:59 December 10, 2024
      In describing "go energy" and "stop energy", @pahlkadot approaches yang qi and yin qi, in a dyadic processual approach.> This is a useful nuance as I develop a framework for building state capacity. One of my admittedly obvious and oversimplified tenets is that systems have both “go energy” and “stop energy,” much as a car […]

  • RSS on IngBrief

    • Notion of Change in the Yijing | JeeLoo Lin 2017
      The appreciation of change is different in Western philosophy than in classical Chinese philosophy. JeeLoo Lin published a concise contrast on differences. Let me parse the Introduction to the journal article, that is so clearly written. The Chinese theory of time is built into a language that is tenseless. The Yijing (Book of Changes) there […]
    • World Hypotheses (Stephen C. Pepper) as a pluralist philosophy [Rescher, 1994]
      In trying to place the World Hypotheses work of Stephen C. Pepper (with multiple root metaphors), Nicholas Rescher provides a helpful positioning. — begin paste — Philosophical perspectivism maintains that substantive philosophical positions can be maintained only from a “perspective” of some sort. But what sort? Clearly different sorts of perspectives can be conceived of, […]
    • The Nature and Application of the Daodejing | Ames and Hall (2003)
      Ames and Hall (2003) provide some tips for those studyng the DaoDeJing.
    • Diachronic, diachrony
      Finding proper words to express system(s) change(s) can be a challenge. One alternative could be diachrony. The Oxford English dictionary provides two definitions for diachronic, the first one most generally related to time. (The second is linguistic method) diachronic ADJECTIVE Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. “diachronic (adj.), sense 1,” July 2023, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/3691792233. For completeness, prochronic relates “to […]
    • Introduction, “Systems Thinking: Selected Readings, volume 2”, edited by F. E. Emery (1981)
      The selection of readings in the “Introduction” to Systems Thinking: Selected Readings, volume 2, Penguin (1981), edited by Fred E. Emery, reflects a turn from 1969 when a general systems theory was more fully entertained, towards an urgency towards changes in the world that were present in 1981. Systems thinking was again emphasized in contrast […]
    • Introduction, “Systems Thinking: Selected Readings”, edited by F. E. Emery (1969)
      In reviewing the original introduction for Systems Thinking: Selected Readings in the 1969 Penguin paperback, there’s a few threads that I only recognize, many years later. The tables of contents (disambiguating various editions) were previously listed as 1969, 1981 Emery, System Thinking: Selected Readings. — begin paste — Introduction In the selection of papers for this […]

  • Powered by FeedBurner

     Feedburner

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • RSS on daviding.com

    • 2024/11 Moments November 2024
      Road trip to Rochester NY and Ithaca, with visits to art galleries as the days get shorter.
    • 2024/10 Moments October 2024
      Journey from Lugano Switzerland, return via Milan Italy, to fall in Toronto
    • 2024/09 Moments September 2024
      September neighbourhood music performances, day out with father, son's birthday party, travel via Milan to Genoa, systems conversation in Lugano
    • 2024/08 Moments August 2024
      Summer finishing with family events, and lots of outdoor music performances, captured with a new mirrorless camera for video from mid-month
    • 2024/07 Moments July 2024
      Summer festivals and music incubator shows in Toronto, all within biking distance.
    • 2024/06 Moments June 2024
      Summer jazz at the Distillery District, in Washington DC while at the annual systems conference, and then Toronto Jazz Festival

  • RSS on Media Queue

    • What to Do When It’s Too Late | David L. Hawk | 2024
      David L. Hawk (American management theorist, architect, and systems scientist) has been hosting a weekly television show broadcast on Bold Brave Tv from the New York area on Wednesdays 6pm ET, remotely from his home in Iowa. Live, callers can join…Read more ›
    • 2021/06/17 Keekok Lee | Philosophy of Chinese Medicine 2
      Following the first day lecture on Philosophy of Chinese Medicine 1 for the Global University for Sustainability, Keekok Lee continued on a second day on some topics: * Anatomy as structure; physiology as function (and process); * Process ontology, and thing ontology; * Qi ju as qi-in-concentrating mode, and qi san as qi-in-dissipsating mode; and […]
    • 2021/06/16 Keekok Lee | Philosophy of Chinese Medicine 1
      The philosophy of science underlying Classical Chinese Medicine, in this lecture by Keekok Lee, provides insights into ways in which systems change may be approached, in a process ontology in contrast to the thing ontology underlying Western BioMedicine. Read more ›
    • 2021/02/02 To Understand This Era, You Need to Think in Systems | Zeynep Tufekci with Ezra Klein | New York Times
      In conversation, @zeynep with @ezraklein reveal authentic #SystemsThinking in (i) appreciating that “science” is constructed by human collectives, (ii) the west orients towards individual outcomes rather than population levels; and (iii) there’s an over-emphasis on problems of the moment, and…Read more ›
    • 2019/04/09 Art as a discipline of inquiry | Tim Ingold (web video)
      In the question-answer period after the lecture, #TimIngold proposes art as a discipline of inquiry, rather than ethnography. This refers to his thinking On Human Correspondence. — begin paste — [75m26s question] I am curious to know what art, or…Read more ›
    • 2019/10/16 | “Bubbles, Golden Ages, and Tech Revolutions” | Carlota Perez
      How might our society show value for the long term, over the short term? Could we think about taxation over time, asks @carlotaprzperez in an interview: 92% for 1 day; 80% within 1 month; 50%-60% tax for 1 year; zero tax for 10 years.Read more ›

  • Meta

    • Creative Commons License
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
    Theme modified from DevDmBootstrap4 by Danny Machal