<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: International crises and the value of Global System Dynamics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2010/06/15/international-crises-and-the-value-of-global-system-dynamics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2010/06/15/international-crises-and-the-value-of-global-system-dynamics/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 19:05:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: KevinPorter</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2010/06/15/international-crises-and-the-value-of-global-system-dynamics/comment-page-1/#comment-11776</link>
		<dc:creator>KevinPorter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2010 23:04:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=7696#comment-11776</guid>
		<description>Hear, hear, James Greyson!  I enjoyed your point regarding &quot;wet-ware&quot; first.  You reminded me of a story Dr. Thomas Hunt Morgan told when he explained why he banned the use of Friden Calculators (early computers) from the Biology Department at Caltech.  He said, &quot;Well, I am like a guy who is prospecting for gold along the banks of the Sacramento River in 1849.  With a little intelligence, I can reach down and pick up big nuggets of gold.  And as long as I can do that, I&#039;m not going to let any people in my department waste scarce resources in placer mining.&quot;  System Dynamics seems to be in the same fortunate position today.  

Three cheers for System Dynamics indeed!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hear, hear, James Greyson!  I enjoyed your point regarding &#8220;wet-ware&#8221; first.  You reminded me of a story Dr. Thomas Hunt Morgan told when he explained why he banned the use of Friden Calculators (early computers) from the Biology Department at Caltech.  He said, &#8220;Well, I am like a guy who is prospecting for gold along the banks of the Sacramento River in 1849.  With a little intelligence, I can reach down and pick up big nuggets of gold.  And as long as I can do that, I&#8217;m not going to let any people in my department waste scarce resources in placer mining.&#8221;  System Dynamics seems to be in the same fortunate position today.  </p>
<p>Three cheers for System Dynamics indeed!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jamesgreyson</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2010/06/15/international-crises-and-the-value-of-global-system-dynamics/comment-page-1/#comment-11667</link>
		<dc:creator>jamesgreyson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:17:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=7696#comment-11667</guid>
		<description>Three cheers for global systems dynamics! Systems thinking is really needed for a serious effort at resolving multiple interconnected global problems. Looking back, we can see that the efforts of past decades, using fragmented bit-at-a-time thinking, never stood a chance at turning things around. 

The language of complex systems can be, well, complex. If it helps, I think of systems dynamics as what&#039;s actually happening in the real world systems that we&#039;re all part of. Systems thinking is a conscious attempt to perceive and understand what&#039;s happening as a whole, without carving it up into the usual &#039;manageable&#039; chunks. Systems modelling comes when we try to track what&#039;s happening either at the level of systemic patterns or of quantitative data. All of this can be aimed at any point along the policy-making &#039;river&#039; from upstream paradigm-defining worldviews to downstream &#039;gosh, not another crisis!&#039;. 

Systems analysis (a general term for all of the above) has traditionally been arcane, involving brilliant minds, white coats and ever-more-powerful computers. The language didn&#039;t fit within departmental attention spans and the funding didn&#039;t include public dialogue. So of course no-one ever heard about it and, not coincidentally, the world&#039;s problems worsened. It&#039;s a joy to see some policy people (on the European stage) talking about systems and groups such as Lord Hunt&#039;s Global Systems Dynamics coalescing. 

This is a vital initiative. It offers a mindset that can get us all out of &#039;the age of austerity&#039;, so society should take care not to throw this baby out with the budgeting bath-water. For its part, the systems community can endeavour to remember that:
• models can make sense both on the back of an envelope and on-screen. 
• we need policies that look upstream at patterns as well as downstream at complexity.
• we must rely firstly on our mental &#039;wet-ware&#039; and only then on high-tech hardware.
• there must be genuine rich dialogue not just ticked-the-box consultation.

Together we can do more than map the future, we can invent it and make it happen!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Three cheers for global systems dynamics! Systems thinking is really needed for a serious effort at resolving multiple interconnected global problems. Looking back, we can see that the efforts of past decades, using fragmented bit-at-a-time thinking, never stood a chance at turning things around. </p>
<p>The language of complex systems can be, well, complex. If it helps, I think of systems dynamics as what&#8217;s actually happening in the real world systems that we&#8217;re all part of. Systems thinking is a conscious attempt to perceive and understand what&#8217;s happening as a whole, without carving it up into the usual &#8216;manageable&#8217; chunks. Systems modelling comes when we try to track what&#8217;s happening either at the level of systemic patterns or of quantitative data. All of this can be aimed at any point along the policy-making &#8216;river&#8217; from upstream paradigm-defining worldviews to downstream &#8216;gosh, not another crisis!&#8217;. </p>
<p>Systems analysis (a general term for all of the above) has traditionally been arcane, involving brilliant minds, white coats and ever-more-powerful computers. The language didn&#8217;t fit within departmental attention spans and the funding didn&#8217;t include public dialogue. So of course no-one ever heard about it and, not coincidentally, the world&#8217;s problems worsened. It&#8217;s a joy to see some policy people (on the European stage) talking about systems and groups such as Lord Hunt&#8217;s Global Systems Dynamics coalescing. </p>
<p>This is a vital initiative. It offers a mindset that can get us all out of &#8216;the age of austerity&#8217;, so society should take care not to throw this baby out with the budgeting bath-water. For its part, the systems community can endeavour to remember that:<br />
• models can make sense both on the back of an envelope and on-screen.<br />
• we need policies that look upstream at patterns as well as downstream at complexity.<br />
• we must rely firstly on our mental &#8216;wet-ware&#8217; and only then on high-tech hardware.<br />
• there must be genuine rich dialogue not just ticked-the-box consultation.</p>
<p>Together we can do more than map the future, we can invent it and make it happen!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
