MODELLING THE WORLD The Social Constructions of Systems Analysts VOLUME ONE BY BRIAN PETER BLOOMFIELD BSc. A thesis submitted towards the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Discipline of Systems, Faculty of Technology,The Open University,March 1984 AWHmISATICN CCNFIMATICN ................................................ B.P. BLOOKFIELD STUDINT: ........................................ Modelling the World. The Social TITLE OF THESIS: ......................................................... Constructions of Systems Analysts ......................................................... ......................................................... I CWIRU "HAT I AM WILLING FOR Kï THECIS "û BE MADE AVAILABLE TO ñEADER.5 AND PHOTOCOPIED, SüJUDX TO THE DISCRETICN OF THE LIBRARIAN. .... ................ $,.&?*.) Signed: ABSTRACT This dissertation is concerned with a case study of system dynamics, a well-known simulation modelling methodology, and its implicit theory of social system behaviour. System dynamics is policy oriented and is directed towards the control and management of social systems. It originally evolved i n the context of military systems and then the application of systems engineering to the problems of corporate management, but was later expanded to tackle the problems of urban decay, population growth, and environmental collapse. It is therefore now aimed at large scale social engineering. The aim of the dissertation is to take tools drawn largely from the sociology of knowledge in order to provide a perspective on the development of this particular strand of the systems movement. We investigate the status of system dynamics as a cultural artefact which is both a product of social structures and a resource for mediating and reinforcing such structures. The dissertation is addressed to the systems community, but must al30 meet the academic standards of the sociology of knowledge. There are seven chapters. The first two deal with the background to system dynamics and with methodological aspects of the perspective adopted in our approach. The following two chapters exanine system dynamics as a social construction: firstly, with special emphasis on the social development of the cultural context in which it evolved; and secondly, on the social experience and cosmology of the System Dynamics Group at MIT. The next two chapters deal with the social effects of system dynamics, particularly its role as a 'binding agent' in negotiating social consensus. The seventh and final chapter discusses our conclusions. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my appreciation to J.Naughton (Systems Group, The Open University) and G.H. de Vries (Department of Philosophy, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, The Netherlands) for their encouragment, guidance and constructive criticisms during the course of the research described herein. Thanks are also due to colleagues and friends at the Open University and at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen who have provided both intellectual and moral support. Financial support was provided by the SERC and the Open University. Parts of Chapter Four have been published as 'Cosmology, Knowledge and Social Structure: The Case of Forrester and System Dynamics', Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 9, 1982, 3-15. CONTENTS PREFACE 1 CHAPTER ONE THE BACKGROUND TO SYSTEM DYNAMICS 8 1.1 FORRESTER'S CAREER 9 1.2 HISTORY OF SYSTEM DYNAMICS 10 1.2.1 URBAN DYNAMICS 15 1.2.2 WORLD DYNAMICS 18 1.2.3 THE LIMITS TO GROWTH 20 1.2.4 THE SYSTEM DYNAMICS NATIONAL MODEL 20 1.2.5 A NOTE ON CONVENTIONS 21 - CHAPTER TWO SYSTEM DYNAMICS A CULTURAL ARTEFACT 22 2.1 AN ALTERNATIVE MODEL OF THE RELATIONSHIP 27 BETWEEN KNOWLEDGE AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE 2.1.1 THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF KNOWLEDGE 30 2.1.2 THE SOCIAL EFFECT OF KNOWLEDGE 32 2.2 A NOTE ON REFLEXIVITY 35 2.3 THE INTERPRETATIONO F TEXTS 35 CHAPTER THREE FORRESTER'S WORK AS A PRODUCT OF SOCIAL 39 DEVELOPMENT 3.0 INTRODUCTION 40 3.1 THE WORLDVIEUS OF PARSONS AND FORRESTER 44 3.1.1 PROCESS-REDUCTION 44 3.1.2 THE ONENESS OF THE WORLD 45 3.1.3 CONFLICT 46 3.1.4 COMMON INTERESTS 47 3.1.5 INTERDEPENDENCE 4a 3.1.6 SYSTEM REQUISITES 49 3.2 PARSONS' WORK AS A PRODUCT OF SOCIAL 53 DEVELOPMENT 3.2.1 THE PERTINENCE OF GOULDNER'S CONCLUSIONS 56 FOR THE CASE OF FORRESTER 3.3 THEORETICAL SHIFTS AND SOCIAL CONTEXT 50 3.4 SUMMARY 65 CHAPTER FOUR COSMOLOGY, KNOWLEDGE AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE 67 4.0 INTRODUCTION 60 4.1 COSMOLOGY AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE 69 4.1.1 LINGUSITIC CODES 70 4.1.2 THE GRID-GROUP DIAGRAM 75 4.1.3 THE RESPONSE TO ANOMALIES AND THOUGHT STYLE 77 4.1.4 PROBLEMS WITH THE GRID-GROUP THEORY 78 4.2 COXPARATIVE HETHOD a4 4.2.1 CHOICE OF CONTROL GROUP 04 4.2.2 CHOICE OF COMPARATIVE ELEMENTS a5 4.2.3 SCIENCE POLICY RESEARCH UNIT(SPRU) 07 4.2.4 OTHER POSSIBLE GROUPS 09 4.3 THE CULTURAL SETTING OF SDG AND SPRU 90 4.3.1 SDG 91 4.3.2 SPRU 99 4.4 STRATEGIES FOR DEALING UITR ANONALIES: 103 THE BACKCASTING DEBATE 4.4.1 INTRODUCTION TO BACKCASTING 103 4.4.2 HISTORY OF THE DEBATE 106 4.4.3 ANOMALIES AND STRATEGIES FOR COPING 115 WITH THEM 4.4.4 COPING WITH THE WORLD 2 ANOMALIES 121 4.4.5 IMPROVED MODELS 128 4.4.6 SDG'S APPROACH TO MODELLING 131 4.4.7 SPRU'S APPROACH TO MODELLING 134 4.4.8 THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF ERROR 138 4.5 THE COSMOLOGY OF THE SYSTEM DYNAMICS GROUP 144 4.5.1 KNOWLEDGE 144 4.5.2 NATURE 146 4.5.3 MAN AND SOCIETY 140 4.5.4 TIME 151 4.6 THE COSHOLOGY OF THE SCIENCE POLICY 152 RESEARCH UNIT 4.6.1 KNOWLEDCE 152 4.6.2 NATURE 154 4.6.3 MAN AND SOCIETY 156 4.6.4 TIME 157 4.7 CONCLUSIONS 159 CHAPTER FIVE URBAN DYNAMICS AS A SOCIAL BINDING AGENT 164 5.0 INTRODUCTION 165 5.1 THE BACKGROUND TO URBAN DYNAMICS 167 5.2 CHARACTERISTICS OF TBE IIIIBAN STRUCTURE 168 5.3 KNOWLEDGE AS A CONSERVATIVE OR RADICAL 173 FORCE 5.4 KNOWLEDGE AS A EXPLANATORY RESOURCE 178 5.5 LEGITIMATION 181 5.6 ROLE OF SYSTEM DYNAMICS EXPERTS 186 5.7 SUMMARY 192 CHAPTER SIX THE SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF 194 - SYSTEM DYNAMICS THE CASE OF THE WORLD MODELS 6.0 INTRODUCTION 195 6.1 THE MESSAGE OF THE WORLD MODELS 198 6.2 THE SOCIAL ROOTS OF BELIEF 200 6.3 EXPECTED RESPONSES TO THE MODELS 20 3 6.4 DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF THE MESSAGE 208 6.5 DEEPER SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL QUESTIONS 216 6.6 SYSTEM DYNAMICS AND ASTROLOGY 219 6.6.1 MESSAGE CONTENT 222 6.6.2 STRUCTURES AS BELIEF SYSTEMS 223 6.6.3 SOCIAL EFFECTS 225 6.7 SUMMARY 227 CHAPTER SEVEN CONCLUSIONS 229 7.0 SUHHARY 230 7.1 RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER LINES OF ENQUIRY 235 7.2 RESERVATIONS 237 7.3 IDEAS FOR FURTHER WORK 239 NOTES AND REFERENCES 24 1 BIBLIOORAPAI 279 LIST OF DIAGRAMS CHAPTER ONE Figure (1 ) Flow diagram for the world model 1% Figure (2) Standard run of World 2 19b Figure (3) The development of Forrester's work 21a Figures ( 1 ) h (2) are taken from: J.W.Forrester, 'World Dynamics' (Wright-Allen Press Inc. 1971) CHAPTER FOUR Figure (i) General cosmological ideas 72a Figure (2) Douglas' grid-group diagram 75a Figure (3) Clusters of comparative elements 06a Figure (4) Standard run of World 2 104a Figure (5) Backcast of World 2 104a Figure (6) Alternative curves for DRMM 107a Figure (7) Crude birth and death rates 107a Figure (8) Curve for CIM 1233 Figure (9) Bloors modified grid-group diagram 139a Figure ( 10) The grid-group positions of SDG and SPRU 162a CHAPTER SIX Figure (1 ) Elements in the Limits to Growth Message 199a Figure (2) Two interpretations of the message 202a Anthropologists tell us that reality is always a social construction, that our conceptions of the social and natural worlds are mediated by social relations. In contrast to the position adopted by those scholars who argue that the intrusion of social factors into the production of knowledge leads to error or falsity, the notion that reality is socially constructed does not imply judgements about the validity of our socially produced knowledge. Rather, it aims to make explicit the existential conditions which underpin the ways in which we think about the world, and indeed, which make knowlcdge possible. In this dissertation we w i l l employ this idea to examine a controversial t,heory about the nature of man's place i n the world and the problems - - which confront him. This theory known as system dynamics suggests that man lives i n a network of social systems (incorporating economic, political, and ecological subsystems) and that the properties of these - systems determine many of the problems from famine to overcrowding, - and from unemployment to ecological collapse which have caused much public concern over the past ten years or so. System dynamics purports to explain the causes of these problems and to provide a resource for devising policies to remedy them. We are not primarily interested in the truth or falsity of the propositions of system dynamics but rather in its status as a socially constructed body of knowledge. We aim to unravel the interconnections of this construction in order to seek some insights into how this systems view of the world has been generated. System dynamics was originally developed within the Sloan School of Management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the United States. Its intellectual roots stem from systems engineering and the design of technological systems. Having achieved considerable success with such applications, systems engineering was later generalised to become a tool for the design and control of social systems, i.e. social engineering. It was thought that it could bring a more rigorous and objective approach to policy formation. System dynamics is thus policy oriented, and is concerned with the management and control of social systems. Further, it belongs to the class of theories known asgeneral systems theories which aim to explain the properties of systems, whether physical, social or other types.