Presentation

“Everything is connected”. That’s the main philosophical achievement of millennial Oriental wisdom. Far from being related only to mysticism and metaphysics, this stance underpins modern physics too (Capra, 2010). From this it derives that a clear-cut division between subject/observer and object/observed fails, because these dimensions are interrelated. Boundaries are never precise but surrounded by “dialectical penumbras” (Georgescu-Roegen, 1971): a plurality of irreducible v isions of the world are admissible and can coexist.

Why is this approach relevant to intersecting forms of injustice?

Complexity is the science that studies how things are connected and how the structure of these relations determines any system’s dynamics and their evolution. Hence, this approach is essential to get a holistic vision of the complex web of inequalities in which we all live and to set the path towards intersectional justice. For example, if our goal is to improve the living conditions of a B lack migrant worker who collects tomatoes in the South of Italy under the control of criminal groups (e.g., the mafia) it is impossible to focus and treat only one dimension of his or hr experience (racial discrimination, immigration, poverty , South/North divide , etc) at given time.

Systems thinking, on the other hand, helps us understand the direct and indirect effects, related to the interlinkages among multiple variables, of any intervention to balance multiple instances, and to get fair distributions of wealth, opportunities, and political power within society. In other words, , neglecting the inextricable interdependence of our daily life with other people and ecological systems could lead to a misleading interpretation of our world, as well as to biased/not effective policy interventions. But how exactly could systems-thinking help us face social, political, and ecological injustice? Here are some tips.

Keywords

Openness: complex systems evolve continuously and could suddenly change. Do not stick too much to fixed ideas, be an explorer.

Creativity: imagination is necessary to see the links between what might, on the surface, seem very different issues. We do not live in a Lego world, with fixed and predetermined pieces that compose our reality. We need to imagine new solutions and/or be able to conceive new problems to be solved. If not, someone else will do it.

Plurality: develop an interdisciplinary approach. The river of knowledge needs many different currents to flow. For example, before the pandemic, most of us knew nothing about viruses. However, the combination of social, psychological, and biophysical knowledge is helping us control it.

Cooperation: complex problems require coordinated interventions; isolated actions will never be enough. Join others, collaborate, and build strong social relationships.

Coherently with the inherent uncertainty of complex systems, the outcome of this recipe cannot be precisely defined in advance, but it will emerge once you try to engage with it.

Preparation

Here, I present some key concepts that may help you navigate the stormy sea of complex systems and try to provide some practical examples.

Totality is more than a sum total. Note that “complex” does not mean complicated: if you simply add more and more cars onto a road, a new complex phenomenon pops up (traffic). This reflects the possibility of ’emergence of (unexpected) novelties’ by combination, i.e., a property that belongs to the system as a whole (traffic) but which cannot be identified in any of the single and isolated components (cars) that make up the system itself. Moreover, in complex systems cumulative quantitative variations lead to qualitative changes. For example, rich and poor countries do not simply differ in the level of GDP; rather, they have drastic differences in the organisation of their society, infrastructures, and geopolitical/military power. How do we get socio-economic equality? It appears that we cannot only focus on money transfers. Whilst this is important, we have to consider the structure of the system we live in. Intersectional justice can be achieved by redistributing not only resources but also rights and opportunities to overcome social barriers related to privileged vested interests. This can be done by means of public interventions to improve the school system, housing market, labour conditions, health system, and gender/racial discriminations.

Things are not “things”. Any product you buy is the outcome of a process and will not disappear once you consume it or throw it away. To read this page you need an electronic device, which uses energy from fossil fuels, and which may be built in China, by people forced to work all day for a few dollars, and software made in the USA; and when you throw it away, it will be shipped to a digital landfill in Africa which is likely to harm children’s health. A way to quantify (and be aware of) the impact of each thing you buy is the “footprint”, i.e., the total amount of resources needed along the whole supply chain, including international trade. This is also important to weigh the consequences of our actions: for example, you could save much more water by reducing the consumption of meat than by being extremely careful at your tap. In fact, 1 kg of cow meat requires about 15,000 litres of water, or about one shower a day in a whole year.

Freedom is participation. Complex systems are characterised by uncertainty, deep interconnections, non-linearity, and unpredictability of the novelties: no one-fits-all solution exists. This entails that focusing only on techno-centric and market-oriented interventions is not sufficient. Rather than a limit, this calls for engagement and participation in political processes, beyond experts, of local communities and laymen. Each stakeholder can and should contribute (and struggle) to define what is desirable and how to attain it.

Systems thinking in action. Ecological and social problems are inextricably bound. Focusing on one goal might improve one issue but simultaneously exacerbate others due to inherent trade-offs. For instance, policies for social progress (e.g., universal basic income, working time reduction, etc) might increase pollution and wastes due to a higher level of consumption. On the other hand, measures to increase energy efficiency, via technological progress and automation, might disproportionately hit vulnerable low-skill workers and increase unemployment thereby. This calls for “policy coherence” that ultimately depends on simultaneous and balanced progress towards all the goals. The current pandemic situation is emblematic: if we only focus on the virus, we could overcome the current crisis but not prevent future pandemics. Instead, we need to rethink and change what (e.g., meat), how (intensive farming) and who (global food market) produce and consume.

Bibliographical references

Books: The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision (Capra & Luisi, 2016).
The Entropy law and economic processes (Georgescu-Roegen, 1971).
The Tao of Physics: An Exploration of the Parallels Between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism (Capra, 2010)
Movies: Mr Nobody (Jaco Van Dormael, 2010)
Websites: Water to Food project https://www.watertofood.org/
Complexity Institute https://www.complexityinstitute.it/