Atkinson B. J. & Heath A. W. (1990) Further thoughts on second-order family therapy – This time it’s personal. Family Process 29: 145–155. https://cepa.info/4097
A series of articles has recently appeared in which implications of second-order cybernetics for the practice of family therapy have been discussed. In this article, we attempt to advance the discussion by addressing ideas that we think have not been adequately emphasized thus far. Specifically proposed are ideas about conditions that might facilitate the emergence of consciously pragmatic strategy informed by the kind of systemic wisdom that delicately balances natural systems without the benefit of human planning. It is argued that a shift in the personal habits of knowing and acting that typically organize individual human experience is required. After attempting to specify what this shift might involve, implications of these ideas for the practice of family therapy and for human action in general are discussed.
Ben-Eli M. U. & Probst G. J. B. (1986) The way you look determines what you see or self-organization in management and society. In: Trappl R. (ed.) Cybernetics and Systems ’86. Reidel, Dordrecht: 277–284. https://cepa.info/6243
The concept of self-organization is reviewed and its implications are explored in relation to management processes and social systems. A world view is taken, emphasizing a descriptive distinction of levels associated with the physical, biological, social, and mental. Self-organization principles, it is argued, are operative in all levels of such a stratified scheme, but they are manifest in different mechanisms and different embodiments. \\Management, planning, design, and other “intervention” type of activities are among the processes through which self-organization is manifest in the social domain. Ultimately they have to do with maintaining, enriching, and amplifying the potential variety of the systems concerned. The operationally critical question involved, it is suggested, is not whether management activities are “man-made” or “natural,” spontaneous” or “planned,” but rather, whether they enhance or supress the potential variety of a system under consideration.
Beunen R. & van Assche K. (2013) Contested delineations: Planning, law, and the governance of protected areas. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 45(6): 1285–1301. https://cepa.info/6297
In this paper we reflect on the relationship between planning and law. We analyse the Dutch interpretation and implementation of the European Union Habitats and Birds Directives by investigating the practices of delineation of protected areas. These directives provide a legislative framework for the designation of protected sites as well as for decision making about social and economic activities that might have negative effects on the conservation objectives. The formal boundaries of the protected area can have legal, political, and economic consequences and are therefore the subject of much debate. Using Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory, we analyse the debates concerning delineation and the potential for planning to reduce tensions and balance interests. It is argued that the irreducible differences between the economic, political, and legal perspectives, in combination with the Dutch path of a legalistic interpretation of EU directives, have produced a situation in which the role of planning is reduced and new forms of planning are hard to implement.
The meaning of cybernetics of sociocultural systems is discussed in terms of two rival traditions. Both are reductionistic with respect to cognitive interaction: One seeks a reduction to (A) the Artificial Gestalt of symbolic representations; the other to (B) the Biological Gestalt of cellular reproduction. Cultural Gestalt-switches and other irreducible properties, such as intersubjectivity and capacity for consciousness, call for a third position in terms of (D) Dialogue and Dualities, which comprises and transcends the complementarity of (A) and (B). Conditions are indicated for shifts between modes conforming to both, and for the prevalence and resolution of model monopoly. Examples are given from small group studies and socioeconomic planning in Norway.
Broderick J. & Hong S. B. (2011) Introducing the cycle of inquiry system: A reflective inquiry practice for early childhood teacher development. Early Childhood Research & Practice 13(2). https://cepa.info/458
The Cycle of Inquiry (COI) is a tool for emergent curriculum planning and for professional development of early childhood teachers and teacher education students. The COI guides teachers to document their observations of children’s learning, their interpretations of and questions about the developing knowledge they have observed, and their curricular designs for engaging children in the next steps in learning that are linked to the learning previously observed. Focusing curricular planning on observation and interpretation of children’s construction of knowledge allows teachers to plan for long-term learning experiences that are conceptually linked to children’s developing theories of the world. The documentation of teachers’ thinking in each phase of the COI process also supports teacher development by providing a format for teachers to reference their own thinking and construct new understanding about their teaching practice.
Brunner C. (2015) What a Conference Can Do. Constructivist Foundations 11(1): 105–108. https://cepa.info/2228
Open peer commentary on the article “Designing Academic Conferences as a Learning Environment: How to Stimulate Active Learning at Academic Conferences?” by Johan Verbeke. Upshot: The commentary starts with a critical approach towards the concept of knowledge in artistic research. I argue that without transforming the conceptual outline of knowledge production by taking sensuous and more-than-human elements into account, experimental formats for learning environments will be undermined. The comment closes with a constructivist and speculative proposition for the future planning of creative practice events.
Chettiparamb A. (2007) Dealing with complexity: An autopoietic view of the people’s planning campaign. Kerala: Planning Theory & Practice 8(4): 489–508.
Complexity is integral to planning today. Everyone and everything seem to be interconnected, causality appears ambiguous, unintended consequences are ubiquitous, and information overload is a constant challenge. The nature of complexity, the consequences of it for society, and the ways in which one might confront it, understand it and deal with it in order to allow for the possibility of planning, are issues increasingly demanding analytical attention. One theoretical framework that can potentially assist planners in this regard is Luhmann’s theory of autopoiesis. This article uses insights from Luhmann’s ideas to understand the nature of complexity and its reduction, thereby redefining issues in planning, and explores the ways in which management of these issues might be observed in actual planning practice via a reinterpreted case study of the People’s Planning Campaign in Kerala, India. Overall, this reinterpretation leads to a different understanding of the scope of planning and planning practice, telling a story about complexity and systemic response. It allows the reinterpretation of otherwise familiar phenomena, both highlighting the empirical relevance of the theory and providing new and original insight into particular dynamics of the case study. This not only provides a greater understanding of the dynamics of complexity, but also produces advice to help planners implement structures and processes that can cope with complexity in practice.
This article examines the relevance of the concept of autopoiesis for public participation in spatial planning. The concept of autopoiesis within social science, as advanced by Niklas Luhmann (1995) argues for a systemic, consistent and sophisticated theory of society based on a systems view, as opposed to more familiar action-based theories (for instance as in the case of the Habermasian tradition). By examining the relevance of the concept for public participation in spatial planning, this article highlights specific aspects of public participation that draw attention to dimensions of planning that are not currently explicitly highlighted within mainstream discourses in planning. 1
Chettiparamb A. (2018) Meta-operations, autopoiesis and neo-systems thinking: What significance for spatial planners? Planning Theory 17(4): 628–643. https://cepa.info/6261
This essay introduces the theory of legal autopoiesis to planning. It discusses the main tenets of neo-systems thinking and elaborates on select claims and concepts from legal autopoiesis for planners. The claims and concepts are then used to re-analyse a published case study describing the after-effects of the implementation of a Compulsory Purchase Order in the regeneration of the Docklands in Cardiff. The re-interpretation draws attention to the added insights brought into focus by the theory. The significance of neo-systems thinking for planning is then discussed. The article concludes that the new epistemological framings connects the universal to the particular with implications for current understandings of planning concepts such as public interest, consensus, situatedness, contingency and justice. Neo-systems thinking thus deconstructs ‘how to’ dilemmas for planners from a non-normative standpoint at a meta-operational level.
Open peer commentary on the article “Studying Conceptual Change in Classrooms: Using Association Rule Mining to Detect Changes in Students’ Explanations of the Effects of Urban Planning and Social Policy” by Arthur Hjorth & Uri Wilensky. Abstract: What could be more important than exploring how students construct knowledge? The authors have taken a major step in using constructionist tools to analyze how students change their concepts after interacting with a multiagent model in a course on urban design. I will address what I consider to be several missed opportunities in their presentation.