Abstract
How can we restore the ecological balance of our planet? The present article is aimed at contributing a structural framework for such a restoration. In the quest for ecological recovery, cybernetic–systemic approaches are in demand. They specialize in coping with complexity and offer new, transdisciplinary and non-reductionist ways of system design for renewing sustainability. This contribution uses a proven model from organizational cybernetics—the viable system model—as a frame for sustainable development. The model specifies how the viability of any human or social system can be achieved by means of clearly defined organizational structures. In accord with the logic of recursive organization inherent in the model, a proposal for a structural design aimed at enabling ecological recovery is formulated. That design includes all organizational levels of recursion, from individual to world. The implications of such a novel approach are far-reaching, and the impact powerful.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The two concepts are closely related: ecological balance has been defined as «a term used to describe the equilibrium between living organisms such as human being, plants, and animals as well as their environment.» (Thompson 2017). A recent definition of sustainability has emphasized the dynamics of ecological systems: “… a dynamic equilibrium in the processes of interaction between a population and the carrying capacity of its environment such, that the population develops to express its full potential without producing irreversible adverse effects on the carrying capacity of the environment upon which it depends.” (Ben-Eli 2012).
The path of Ray Anderson to ecologically committed entrepreneurship is documented in Anderson (1998).
Corporate homepage: http://www.interfaceglobal.com/Company/Mission-Vision.aspx. Accessed 7 March 2017.
Subsidiarity is an organizing principle according to which a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed effectively at a more immediate or local level (after the Oxford English Dictionary). In other words, “a matter ought to be handled by the lowest, smallest and least centralized authority capable of addressing that matter effectively” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity. Accessed 7 March 2017).
In this context, Prigogine’s theory of dissipative systems, with its concept of “order through fluctuation”, is crucial: Nonlinear systems under conditions far from equilibrium can pass over into new situations, in which fluctuations play a central role. These fluctuations can force the system to leave a given macroscopic state (Prigogine 1976).
Development is used here as an overarching concept in the sense of Ackoff (1981): it denotes the growing ability and desire of a system to satisfy its own and others’ needs. Depending on the definition it can reach out beyond viability (Schwaninger 2009). In relation with the cases presented, we are subsuming three activities—which need not be collectively exhaustive—under “development”: enhancement, improvement and transformation. Here we use the self-referential variant of the concepts: the prefix “self” invokes the autonomic nature of the respective functions.
The distinctions made here are on the one hand between first-order learning,—the learning through error correction,—and second-order learning, via changes of goals and other crucial parameters, which can involve a complete redesign of a system. In addition, meta-learning, or what Bateson (1973) called “deutero-learning” (pp. 140ff.), denotes the aspect of learning to learn (better).
Name anonymized.
http://www.interfaceglobal.com/ (Accessed 22 March 2017).
One must add that problems often cannot be solved in the place where they appear. For the most part, complex issues must be tackled somewhere else. If the cause rests on another plane, the process of solving the problem must transcend the boundaries of the involved strata.
References
Ackoff RL (1981) Creating the corporate future: plan or be planned for. Wiley, New York
Adam M (2000) Lebensfähigkeit sozialer Systeme: Stafford Beer´s Viable System Model im Vergleich. PhD thesis, No. 2442. University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
Anderson RC (1998) Mid-course correction. Toward a sustainable enterprise: the Interface model. Chelsea Green Publishing, White River Junction
Ashby WR (1956) An introduction to Cybernetics. Chapman & Hall, London
Aubin JP (1997) Viability Theory. Springer, Berlin
Bateson G (1973) Steps to an ecology of mind. Paladin Books, London
Beer S (1979) The heart of enterprise. Wiley, Chichester
Beer S (1981) The brain of the firm. Wiley, Chichester
Beer S (1984) The viable system model: its provenance, development, methodology and pathology. J Oper Res Soc 35(1):7–25
Beer S (1985) Diagnosing the system for organizations. Wiley, Chichester
Beer S (1989) National government: disseminated regulation in real time or “How to run a country”. In: Espejo R, Harnden RJ (eds) The viable system model—interpretations and applications of Stafford Beer’s VSM. Wiley, New York, pp 333–360
Ben-Eli MU (2012) The cybernetics of sustainability: definition and underlying principles. In: Murray J, Cawthorne G, Dey C, Andrew C (eds) Enough for all forever: a handbook for learning about sustainability. Common Ground Publishing, University of Illinois, Champaign, pp 255–268
Caniglia BS, Burns TJ, Gurney RM, Bond EL (2013) Rise of environmental consciousness. University Readers, San Diego, CA
Castells M (2013) Communication power. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Castells M (2015) Networks of outrage and hope: social movements in the Internet age. Polity, Cambridge
Crisan Tran CI (2006) Beers viable system model und die Lebensfähigkeit von Jungunternehmen—Eine empirische Untersuchung. PhD thesis, No. 3201. University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
Dubois E, Dutton WH (2014) Empowering citizens of the internet age: the role of the fifth estate. In: Graham M, Dutton WH (eds) Society and the internet. How networks of communication are changing our lives. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 238–253
Espejo R, Harnden RL (eds) (1989) The viable system model, interpretations and applications of Stafford Beer’s VSM. Wiley, Chichester
Espejo R, Reyes A (2011) Organizational systems: managing complexity with the viable system model. Springer, Berlin
Espejo R, Schuhmann W, Schwaninger M, Bilello U (1996) Organizational transformation and learning. A cybernetic approach to management. Wiley, Chichester
Frost B (2005) Lebensfähigkeit von Communities of Practice im organisationalen Kontext. PhD thesis, No. 3120. University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
Harari YN (2017) “Sharen” ist nicht teilen. Neue Zürcher Zeitung am Sonntag 7:4–7
Hoverstadt P (2008) The fractal organization. Creating sustainable organizations with the viable system model. Wiley, Chichester
Institut für Ökologische Wirtschaftsforschung (2014) Umweltbewusstsein und Umweltverhalten in Deutschland 2014. Vertiefungsstudie: Trends und Tendenzen im Umweltbewusstsein. In. Umwelt Bundesamt, Berlin
Kelly-Lain K (1997) Environmental education and sustainable development: trends in member countries. In: OECD (ed) Sustainable development. OECD policy approaches for the 21st century. Organisation for economic co-operation and development, Paris, pp 174–181
Meffert H, Kirchgeorg M (1992) Marktorientiertes Umweltmanagement: Grundlagen und Fallstudien. Poeschel, Stuttgart
Miller JG (1978) Living systems. McGraw-Hill, New York
Pérez Ríos J (2012) Design and diagnosis for sustainable organizations: the viable system method. Springer, Berlin
Popper KR (2002) Logik der Forschung. 10th edn reprint. Mohr, Tübingen (originally published 1959)
Prigogine I (1976) Order through fluctuation: Self-organization and social system. In: Jantsch E, Waddington CH (eds) Evolution and consciousness: human systems in transition. Addison-Wesley, London, pp 93–133
Schwaninger M (2006) The quest for ecological sustainability: a multi-level issue. In: Trappl R (ed) Cybernetics and systems, vol 1. Austrian Society for Cybernetic Studies, Vienna, pp 149–154
Schwaninger M (2009) Intelligent organizations: Powerful models for systemic management, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin
Schwaninger M (2012) Making change happen: recollections of a systems professional. Kybernetes 41(3):348–367
Schwaninger M (2015) Organizing for sustainability: a cybernetic concept for sustainable renewal. Kybernetes 44(6/7):935–954
Schwaninger M, Scheef C (2016) A test of the viable system model: theoretical claim vs. empirical evidence. Cybern Syst Int J 47(7):544–569
Sedikides C, Gregg AP (2008) Food for thought. Perspect Psychol Sci 3(2):102–116
Thompson D (2017) Ecological balance and its importance. http://scvswap.com/2015/05/09/ecological-balance-and-its-importance/. Accessed 16 Nov 2017
Willemsen MH (1992) Ist die Schweiz ein lebensfähiges System? Kybernetische Diagnose des schweizerischen politischen Systems. Rüegger, Chur/Zürich
Acknowledgements
The author is grateful to multiple executives from companies for their patience in responding to my questions. He wishes to thank in particular Dr. Felix Gress, Senior Vice President Communications and Public Affairs, the Continental Corporation, for providing insights into the structures and history of his organization. Many thanks to three anonymous reviewers who provided valuable comments. A token of special gratitude goes to Prof. Marialuisa Saviano and Dr. John Peck for their editorial support.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Handled by Marialuisa Saviano, University of Salerno, Italy.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schwaninger, M. Systemic design for sustainability. Sustain Sci 13, 1225–1234 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0538-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0538-5