Placeholder canvas
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages

Go Home

2023 PwC Mark Paich Hackathon Highlights

The System Dynamics Society and PwC US joined forces to hold a hackathon event that brought together practitioners, researchers, and students passionate about the System Dynamics methodology. The 2023 PwC Mark Paich Hackathon explored two pressing challenges for our society with a unique lens, fostering diverse ideas, innovation, and creativity.

We had a record of 43 participants from all over the world. These enthusiastic participants formed 18 dynamic teams, showcasing innovation and global collaboration.

The two-day hybrid event held on July 21-22, 2023 attracted participants from varied backgrounds, including academia, industry, and government, who all desired to apply System Dynamics techniques to real-world problems. The challenge themes were Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) and Individualized Healthcare, which prompted participants to consider the potential benefits and significant risks of these leading technologies if mismanaged.


A Tribute to Mark Paich

The 2023 PwC Mark Paich Hackathon honored Mark Paich’s contributions to System Dynamics. He established PwC US’s simulation and modeling practice and was a renowned modeler and mentor. With a Ph.D. in System Dynamics from MIT, Mark taught at Colorado College and returned to MIT Sloan as a visiting lecturer. He received the System Dynamics Society’s Forrester Award and Applications Award.


The Winning Team

The winning entry, titled “Privacy and Wearables: Addressing Pitfalls of Data Sharing with Insurance Providers,” was an insightful piece from Team MITSD, comprising members Celia Stafford, Cathy DiGennaro, and José Luiz Lopez.

The team examined the benefits and drawbacks of incorporating wearables into US healthcare. These devices offer real-time health insights that could shift healthcare from reactive to preventive. However, sharing this data with insurance providers can pose privacy concerns. The team proposed informed consent, transparency, and enhanced cybersecurity to balance Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM) with patient confidentiality. They emphasized the importance of trust in the success of this integration, advocating that insurance companies prioritize health improvements over profit maximization.

In an interview with the victors, the enthusiasm and collaboration that defined their experience was palpable. Celia fondly recalled:

“I think it’s the biggest product I’ve ever put together in that short timeline… having that kind of deadline just encouraged creativity and it also encouraged hard work in a way that was fun!”

Their collaborative experience and ability to maintain a clear direction amidst the challenge set them apart. They won a $3,000 cash prize from the SDS and 1-year subscription of AnyLogic Professional (valued at $10,000), courtesy of AnyLogic.

Key Insight:

Wearables for remote patient monitoring can have transformative potential for proactive health management but data sharing concerns may arise, particularly with insurance companies. Policies, including regulatory interventions, intermittent data collection, and overhauling the healthcare system, are needed to confirm the responsible use of data and public trust.

Downloads: Model | Presentation | Policy Brief

Watch their presentation here.

 


Runners Up

The runner-up team, Semper Relaxo, comprising Ignacio Martinez-Moyano, Timothy Clancy, and Asmeret Naugle, presented an insightful work titled “Evaluating the Hype-Harm-Control Dynamics of Disruptive Technologies Including Runaway Breakout Risks”.

The team delved into the societal dynamics of generative artificial intelligence (AI) over a 10-year horizon. As generative AI hype increases, societal benefits and harm accumulate. The balance between hype and harm determines the controls put on AI. Unbalanced early and excessive societal harm creates incentives to implement controls that limit the growth of generative AI. Although hype-harm-control cycles are common to all disruptive technologies, the team also explored the unique dynamics of self-generating technologies like AI to ‘break out’ of alignment and escape control under extreme conditions.

In an interview with Semper Relaxo, they reflected on their intense, yet enjoyable experience of the competition, combining both seriousness and humor in their approach. Tim Clancy shared:

“If you have 48 hours, you have to think from the gut… we were just go go go and that sometimes is useful to get out of your head and just create something.”

The team also highlighted the invaluable contribution of humor, crediting memes for giving them a unique edge. They won a cash prize of $1,500 from the SDS.

Key Insight

New technology adoption, especially AI, might cause harm and disruptions in hype cycles. The timing and intensity of these harms determine societal and governmental reactions. There is a potential risk of AI autonomously coding and causing unchecked societal harm. However, the Hype Harm Control simulation offers a promising framework to study the tradeoffs between hype, harm, and control.

Access model and other resources here. Watch their presentation here.

 

Third Place

The Systems4Health team, consisting of Fatemeh Ehteshami and Pei Shan Loo, secured third place.  Their team presented a model focused on using mobile health technology (M-health) to improve hypertension management and treatment adherence.

Their work, titled “Leveraging Mobile Health Technology to Improve Hypertension Management and Treatment Adherence”, highlighted M-health’s transformative power in providing personalized data to help patients monitor their blood pressure and enhance treatment adherence. While acknowledging potential benefits, they emphasized challenges such as health disparities and stressed the importance of equitable access to M-health. The team concluded that inclusive adoption of M-health is crucial for effective hypertension management and reducing cardiovascular disease (CVD) risks.

They won a cash prize of $500 from the SDS.

Key Insight

Mobile health technology can help manage hypertension by providing personalized data, encouraging treatment adherence, and enabling remote patient monitoring. Patients can actively manage their hypertension, which can lead to timely interventions and better cardiovascular disease prevention. However, it is crucial to address health inequalities and enable equitable access to this technology for all patients, in order to achieve holistic hypertension care and effective CVD outcomes.

Access the model and other resources here. Watch their presentation here.

 

Fatemeh Ehteshami with Lyle Wallis (PwC)

Acknowledgments

We extend our heartfelt gratitude to PwC for their generous sponsorship, which provided an invaluable platform for innovative thinking and collaboration. Special thanks are also due to our esteemed judges:

John Ansah, Case Western Reserve University
Rod MacDonald, James Madison University
Corey Peck, Ontura
Steve Peterson, Dartmouth, The Peterson Group
Nasim Sabounchi, City University of New York

Their dedication and thoughtful feedback played an instrumental role in the success of this hackathon.

We’d also like to thank the software providers for making available free versions of their products for the hackathon teams: isee systems, AnyLogic, Powersim, and Ventana.

 

Recent Posts

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series We at the System Dynamics Society are continually seeking vibrant and knowledgeable presenters for our ongoing Seminar Series. As we unfold the calendar, there’s always a place for more insights, experiences, and expertise to enrich...

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group The System Dynamics Group, an autonomous research group at the University of Bergen (UiB) was established in 1971 by professor emeritus Svein Nordbotten. Inspired by the work of Jay W. Forrester, Nordbotten...

Upcoming Events

Recent Business cases

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame EXECUTIVE Summary Product design is a specific form of complex innovation that touches all areas of an organization’s management. While entrepreneurs recognise the value of design, they often tend to focus...

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care EXECUTIVE Summary Low levels of viral suppression at 69% for people with HIV make it hard to believe the 95% target level will be achieved by 2030 in St. Louis, USA. As a solution, Fast-Track Cities-STL opted...

Join us

Book Signing & Book Swap at ISDC 2023

Book Signing & Book Swap at ISDC 2023

Learn about their books directly from the authors!

Don’t miss out! Several book authors will join us at the Book Signing event at ISDC 2023. This event will be held live at the conference in Chicago, on Tuesday, July 25 at 12:15 pm CDT.

If you are an author of books related to System Dynamics or systems thinking, join us at the event!

 

Buy, sell, and exchange books

Do you have System Dynamics books that are accumulating dust on your shelf? Might other academics and practitioners in the field be interested in reading them?

Conference attendees are welcome to bring their new and used books to buy, sell, and exchange during this Book Swap event at ISDC.

 

Free shipping on Society books and games to pick up at ISDC

During the month of June, we’ll be providing free shipping coupons for LIVE conference attendees.

Pick up your products* at ISDC during the Book Signing & Book Swap event.

*Promotion only applies to the following specific Society publications, games, and replacement parts for games. Coupon code must be applied at checkout.

GAMES

BOOKS

Members get a 10% discount on all Society publications. Join now!

Recent Posts

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series We at the System Dynamics Society are continually seeking vibrant and knowledgeable presenters for our ongoing Seminar Series. As we unfold the calendar, there’s always a place for more insights, experiences, and expertise to enrich...

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group The System Dynamics Group, an autonomous research group at the University of Bergen (UiB) was established in 1971 by professor emeritus Svein Nordbotten. Inspired by the work of Jay W. Forrester, Nordbotten...

Upcoming Events

Recent Business cases

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame EXECUTIVE Summary Product design is a specific form of complex innovation that touches all areas of an organization’s management. While entrepreneurs recognise the value of design, they often tend to focus...

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care EXECUTIVE Summary Low levels of viral suppression at 69% for people with HIV make it hard to believe the 95% target level will be achieved by 2030 in St. Louis, USA. As a solution, Fast-Track Cities-STL opted...

Join us

How To Review for ISDC 2023

Reviews provide valuable feedback for authors, offering new perspectives and posing insightful questions to help them improve their work. They can inspire authors to think more deeply about their research, while also exposing reviewers to new ideas and honing their critical evaluation skills. Helpful reviews can also motivate newcomers to the field and foster a sense of belonging within the System Dynamics community. Through the use of reviews, the program committee is able to thoughtfully place work within the broader conference program, allowing for authors to engage with their peers and build a sense of community among those working on similar topics. Conference attendees can then benefit from attending more cohesive and engaging sessions, ultimately leading to a more productive and fulfilling conference experience.

Do you want to become a conference reviewer or improve your reviews? Here are ten tips to write a great review.

Ten Reviewing Tips

1. Don’t be intimidated by the review process. It’s a terrific experience that can help you develop your own critical evaluation skills and expand your knowledge of the field.

2. Start early and don’t rush through the work. Take your time to read and evaluate the paper thoroughly so you can provide constructive feedback to the author.

3. Remember that reviews are not about accepting or rejecting work; they’re about providing feedback and suggestions to help the author improve their work.

4. Be courteous and respectful in your review. Start with a positive comment, summarize the paper, and offer constructive criticism and suggestions for improvement. If you have a different view of the paper, explain your perspective in a respectful way and provide additional resources that might be helpful to the author.

5. If you find yourself struggling to understand a section of the work, don’t assume it’s your fault. Ask the author to clarify the section or explain it in simpler terms for a broader audience.

6. When evaluating the work, pay attention to the assumptions, feedback structure, and parameter values. If it’s not clear how structure relates to behavior, ask the author for more clarification.

7. If your strength lies in theory or practice rather than modeling, your unique perspective will be a great contribution to the author. Consider adding notes to the program chairs to let them know what your strengths are.

8. Make sure you’re familiar with what was asked of the authors in the submission instructions. This will help you evaluate the paper more effectively.

9. Avoid providing unhelpful feedback in your review. Don’t simply summarize the paper without offering any suggestions for improvement. Don’t attack or threaten the author, and don’t be rude or condescending. Systems thinking based papers should be treated as complete papers and not regarded as lesser work for lack of simulation. Slamming the door on the author is not productive; if the paper is not a good fit for the current conference, the author can improve for next year’s conference.

10. Can you volunteer to review a paper if you’ve submitted one of your own? Absolutely! You will not receive your own paper to review. Further, the review process is blind, so you won’t know any author’s identity.

For other conference review questions, contact the conference team.

Student-Organized-Colloquium (SOC) reviews are processed separately. To review for SOC, sign up here.

Watch the recording below

About the Speakers

Allyson Beall King, John Pastor Ansah and Saras Chung are ISDC 2023 Program Chairs.

Recent Posts

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series We at the System Dynamics Society are continually seeking vibrant and knowledgeable presenters for our ongoing Seminar Series. As we unfold the calendar, there’s always a place for more insights, experiences, and expertise to enrich...

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group The System Dynamics Group, an autonomous research group at the University of Bergen (UiB) was established in 1971 by professor emeritus Svein Nordbotten. Inspired by the work of Jay W. Forrester, Nordbotten...

Upcoming Events

Recent Business cases

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame EXECUTIVE Summary Product design is a specific form of complex innovation that touches all areas of an organization’s management. While entrepreneurs recognise the value of design, they often tend to focus...

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care EXECUTIVE Summary Low levels of viral suppression at 69% for people with HIV make it hard to believe the 95% target level will be achieved by 2030 in St. Louis, USA. As a solution, Fast-Track Cities-STL opted...

Join us

The System Dynamics Conference From the Perspective of a Multi-Method Simulations Developer

The System Dynamics Conference From the Perspective of a Multi-Method Simulations Developer

System Dynamics, Agent-Based and Discrete-Event simulations are three competing and complementary simulation methods that are used to address a wide range of real-world problems. Each one of these has its pros and cons and can be applied better or worse depending on the context of the problem but can also be complementary in order to capture different pieces of the reality we want to simulate.

As System Dynamics seems to be an obscure topic for most discrete-event and agent-based modelers, the opposite is also true. And assuming good practices are in place, contrary to Agent-Based modeling guidelines, in System Dynamics, there is no standardized way in which a section of a model can be reutilized and the definition of what a sub-model or module is, depends largely on the context of the modeler. In other words, while in Agent-Based modeling, the sub-model is the agent itself, in System Dynamics, the sub-model can be a theme, an entity, a set of stocks that look good together, the importance of a sub-system, etc. A solution to this standard modularization problem, both in its qualitative and quantitative forms was discussed during this conference, in particular for Work-in-Progress sessions.

From a qualitative point of view, the presentation “Modelling the Complexity of Large Systems: A Network-aided System Dynamics Approach”, intends to use a method based on graph theory to identify themes within a complex network of causal relationships. Each theme can be approached separately by the subject matter expert that is associated with that theme, while also helping define boundaries for future work to be developed (see Figure 1). This is a great approach because it highlights the themes and transforms eventually this complicated network into a well-designed Causal Loop Diagram, with clear sections that are easy to read and understand. Looking at these themes, to a multi-method simulations developer, it appears that these themes are very closely related to the concept of an agent.

Figure 1: Social network of themes and causal loop diagram of selected themes
(Wang, Zimmermann: Modelling the Complexity of Large Systems: A Network-aided System Dynamics Approach, 2022 International System Dynamics Conference, figure used with permission.)

From a quantitative perspective, in their workshop “Using a Tool to Professionalize Model development” Copernicos showed a tool that attempts to improve the structure of a model by creating entities that represent certain hidden topics in models, mostly looking at dimensions and subscripts (or arrays), and generating modules in Stella or sub-models in Vensim that represent what they call hidden topics. This is done with an Excel plugin that acts as a transformation interface that reads the model and generates a new model that is organized with the concept of entities. The arrays are still there as defined by the modeler, but the way the model is organized in modules (in Stella) or sub-models (in Vensim) becomes very similar to what an agent would be in agent-based modeling or to what an entity would be in Ventity. In my opinion, this is a great approach since it goes in the direction of standardizing the modularization of a big complex model, which is the topic we are discussing in this article.

In the multi-method framework, mostly used by AnyLogic developers, it is common to solve these problems by having Agent-Based/System-Dynamics hybrids, in which modules or arrays are replaced by the concept of agent. From the qualitative side, having agents as part of the conceptual framework greatly helps build a hierarchical network of reusable modules that represent the system that needs to be conceptualized. From the quantitative side, Copernicos’ attempt to generate entities is a great idea to build a standardized model structure, which is what multi-method modelers like me do use the standard multi-method framework present in Software such as AnyLogic.

During the conference, work related to hybrid simulations was sparse, and of course, this is a System Dynamics conference, so it’s maybe expected, but it seems to me from conversations with people during the event, that the interest in relation to multi-method modeling is much higher than what the presented work shows. The presenter of “A Cross-Disciplinary Computational Framework for Hybrid Simulation and Modeling” reported on a systematic literature review on how hybrid modeling has increased in popularity. Only a few authors presented hybrid models, e.g. Portia Mupfumira showed hybrid agent-based/System-Dynamics models in two presentations: “Smart Cities Hybrid Conceptual Modelling” and “Development of Hybrid Smart Energy Distribution Decision Support Model: Case of Zimbabwe” and Al Thibeault used Ventity to present “Agent-based Model for Testing Policy Options for Long-term Stability and Sustainability in the Rare Earth Mineral Sector”. Also, the Software Modelica’s object-oriented and multi-method capabilities were presented in the poster “Hierarchical, Component-Based Modeling Using the Cyber-Physical Modeling Language Modelica”.

During the roundtable “Panel on Careers in System Dynamics”, one of the panel members, with 20 years of experience in the field, talked about Agent-Based as a sexy methodology. And this is true, in particular, because agent-based is significantly more used in the business world (along with discrete events), making it very useful to build a proof of concept models very fast with 2D and 3D animations that can be very beautiful and attractive. But he talked about Agent Based modeling as something that has nothing to do with System Dynamics, expressing a separation when it comes to comparing both methods, instead of a synergy. The panel also talked about the struggle to be taken seriously as a System Dynamics professional and the struggle to get stakeholders to buy into the System Dynamics concepts but isn’t maybe the multi-method idea, that is largely documented in the literature the first step toward a thriving System Dynamics community? I think it might be.

Recent Posts

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series We at the System Dynamics Society are continually seeking vibrant and knowledgeable presenters for our ongoing Seminar Series. As we unfold the calendar, there’s always a place for more insights, experiences, and expertise to enrich...

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group The System Dynamics Group, an autonomous research group at the University of Bergen (UiB) was established in 1971 by professor emeritus Svein Nordbotten. Inspired by the work of Jay W. Forrester, Nordbotten...

Upcoming Events

Recent Business cases

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame EXECUTIVE Summary Product design is a specific form of complex innovation that touches all areas of an organization’s management. While entrepreneurs recognise the value of design, they often tend to focus...

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care EXECUTIVE Summary Low levels of viral suppression at 69% for people with HIV make it hard to believe the 95% target level will be achieved by 2030 in St. Louis, USA. As a solution, Fast-Track Cities-STL opted...

Join us

Modeling for Improved Organizational Staff Diversity

Modeling for Improved Organizational Staff Diversity

We cannot all succeed when (more than) half of us are held back.

This slightly modified quote is from Malala Yousafzai, the courageous young woman who stood up for her right to be educated. It summarizes the ethos of presentations at the International Systems Dynamics Conference held in Frankfurt and online in July 2022 which focused on improving diversity within organizations. Systems Dynamics modeling is being used in various ways to understand the mechanisms by which more than half of the world’s populations are being held back, and to support evidence-based solutions for change.

In the first plenary, Jeroen Struben presented a model to explain why women chess players drop out of competitions in their late twenties, never to return. The data from the Netherlands showed that the presence of peers and role models, and the culture of the broader community were major explanatory factors. There is also a project that will look at women chess players with and without children, which is already finding that family caring commitments have a large impact on women’s decisions.

Suzanne Manning (disclaimer: that’s me) also highlighted the impact of caring responsibilities on women, on career progression in a social science research team. In a qualitative model of mechanisms that were holding women back, factors such as family commitments and expertise in ‘softer’ science disciplines like sociology and indigenous knowledge (compared to expertise in more quantitative systems dynamics), were partially career-limiting.

The model of Inge Bleijenberg looked at mechanisms to explain why ‘ingroups’ of white, upper-class men hold a pay advantage over ‘outgroups’ (everyone else) in academia. Her model showed that while the human capital of both groups was quite similar, the ingroups made more and higher wage claims which were more likely to be accepted. This model shows how structural bias is built into our systems.

Several presentations addressed systemic bias, with models that were used as heuristic tools for organizations to make changes to increase staff diversity. A common theme was that organizations needed to be shown the things that were within their control and to realize that business-as-usual was not good enough to make a difference. Systems Dynamics models were key for getting organizations to make these mental shifts. Amin Dehdarian from EDGE had a process for gender targets set within a framework of representation, pay equity, policies and practices, and organizational culture. Systems Dynamics models were used to show how effective the strategies could be. A similar approach was taken by Hugo Herrera, who used microworld simulation models to help organizations develop a coherent suite of strategies for decreasing their gender pay gaps. Ivan Taylor, Takuma Ono, and Saraj Koul presented their case study of a model for increasing diversity in organizations applied to Twitter that have a vision of 25% of their US staff being from disadvantaged groups by 2025. Like the other models mentioned in this post, their data shows that improving fairness and diversity in recruitment and promotion are key aspects for improving diversity in the organization. They do acknowledge that their model does not currently account for the intersectional nature of disadvantage, which is future work for them.

All of these models have been used to gain a greater understanding of why some people in our organizations are held back, not because of their skills, knowledge, and experience, but because of their demographic characteristics and the systemic bias that goes with it. Systems Dynamics has been used in these cases to explain, spark discussions, and generate solutions. With these tools to hand, perhaps we can all succeed in this world, rather than just a select few.

  • Gender segregation dynamics: Women participation and performance in competitive chess in the Netherlands. Presenter: Jeroen Struben.
  • Recognizing systemic gender bias: Career advancement case study in a science team. Presenter: Suzanne Manning.
  • Gender and ethnic pay inequality in academia: A formal systems dynamics mode. Poster: Inge Bleijenbergh.
  • System dynamics modeling to set effective gender targets. Poster: Amin Dehdarian.
  • Tipping the scales: Using microworlds to uncover systemic issues driving organizations’ gender pay gap. Presenter: Hugo Herrera.
  • A System Dynamics Model to assist leaders to increase diversity in their organizations applied to Twitter’s 25/25 vision. Presenters: Ivan Taylor, Takuma Ono, Saroj Koul

 

Recent Posts

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series We at the System Dynamics Society are continually seeking vibrant and knowledgeable presenters for our ongoing Seminar Series. As we unfold the calendar, there’s always a place for more insights, experiences, and expertise to enrich...

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group The System Dynamics Group, an autonomous research group at the University of Bergen (UiB) was established in 1971 by professor emeritus Svein Nordbotten. Inspired by the work of Jay W. Forrester, Nordbotten...

Upcoming Events

Recent Business cases

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame EXECUTIVE Summary Product design is a specific form of complex innovation that touches all areas of an organization’s management. While entrepreneurs recognise the value of design, they often tend to focus...

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care EXECUTIVE Summary Low levels of viral suppression at 69% for people with HIV make it hard to believe the 95% target level will be achieved by 2030 in St. Louis, USA. As a solution, Fast-Track Cities-STL opted...

Join us

Is System Dynamics the Missing Subject in our Educational System?

Is System Dynamics the Missing Subject in our Educational System?

Is System Dynamics so valuable that we should encourage its inclusion in our educational system? This year, presentations at International System Dynamics Conference (ISDC) supported this hypothesis. The President of System Dynamics Society, Shayne Gary, noted a growing trend in appreciating systems thinking as a useful tool to explain complexities. The ever-expanding requirement to cope with a complex world opens room for increased utilization of System Dynamics in our daily life. The power of the method was proved in the global study “Limits to Growth” fifty years ago. Jorgen Randers reflected on this Anniversary by comparing the initial study results with today’s worldwide situation[1]. The project signals one of the most important features of System Dynamics, the capacity to describe phenomena and present their behavior in time, on a global scale.

“Fish Banks has a long history and has been successfully implemented in learning at pre-college, college, and adult levels.”

A major practical application of System Dynamics is as Interactive Learning Environment (ILE). Without the necessity to build a model, these applications allow direct visualization of the system, game playing, storytelling, or simulation of behavior. Notable are two general formats: desktop and online. Will Fisher used the System Dynamics game Fish Banks to explain environmental economics[2]. The students play actors in the fishery system, trying to maintain it. By changing the system parameters they were able to see how the system responds to the altered policies. Results show an easy understanding of the topic, increased awareness about the system, and ‘enthusiasm’ to play. Fish Banks has a long history and has been successfully implemented in learning at pre-college, college, and adult levels.

In another presentation, Juliette Rooney-Varga and her team studied how the use of the online simulation platform helps to change public opinion about climate change, especially at the level of public decision-makers [3]. In their work-in-progress study, they investigated, at which level readymade online interactive medium EN-Roads helps the transformation of insights and action of the politicians towards climate change. Although at the preliminary stage, the results brought some facts that simulation improves overall attitudes toward climate change.

“Lectures that utilize System Dynamics influence change in students’ thinking, enhance capacity to understand calculus, and increase skill in mathematical modeling.” Diana Fischer

Teaching by applying System Dynamics modeling is another practice. Diana Fisher presented work from her long experience in educating pre-college students[4]. She stressed how lectures that utilize the method influence change in students’ thinking, enhance capacity to understand calculus and increase skill in mathematical modeling. Fisher noted that modeling with System Dynamics is not learned quickly but requires support from the institutions and commitment by the learner.

Another approach to practicing System Dynamics in teaching was reported by Zimmermann[5]. She utilizes the participatory group model building method in her classroom environment and has developed instructions to teach System Dynamics through collaborative methods. The benefits of this approach are both learning the use of System Dynamics and also learning group dynamics and participatory processes.

“System Dynamics enhance understanding of complex macro-economic situations, increases soft skills, and improves analytical thinking with a possible wide range of applications with an overall positive impact at the social level.”

Programs to use System Dynamics have been developed at the country level. In Turkey, an environmental and climate change education program at the middle school level has been developed[6]. Students are taught via the direct application and changes in the System Dynamics model. The results are increased knowledge about the subject as well as a proactive attitude to create actions to fight climate change. The students reported interest in seeking environmental-friendly solutions and wanted to continue with the class during the next term. One activity within this program was an online platform for teachers to learn systems thinking and Systems Dynamics. In another case, David Wheat and the Ukrainian team highlighted experiences from the ten-year-long project to learn economics through System Dynamics[7]. The project developed capacities in Ukraine in cooperation with Bergen University. Activities were done in university settings, at the pre-college level, and at the National Bank of Ukraine. They also organized an annual conference, established a competence center, developed a system for scientific cooperation, and incorporated the program into the Ukrainian educational system. Now, without external aid, project members remain enthusiastic and continue the project. The outcomes proved that the use and teaching of System Dynamics enhance understanding of complex macro-economic situations, increases soft skills, and improves analytical thinking with a possible wide range of applications with an overall positive impact at the social level.

“Postponing the decision to involve System Dynamics in the regular curriculum is a loss of opportunity to improve the education of our children and the population in general.”

The 2022 ISDC showed System Dynamics as a useful tool to improve our teaching process with remarkable potential. This didactic instrument supports the learner to focus systemically on the topic and discover internal relationships that sustain or change behavior, expanding cognitive potential through visualizing the nonlinear problems in an array of feedbacks. Teaching System Dynamics extensively from childhood up through the academic levels could enhance children’s holistic understanding of real-world problems, increase their structural thinking capabilities and develop mathematical modeling skills. Our strategy should be to incorporate System Dynamics as a regular tool in our educational system, utilizing it in different formats and adapting the method to each topic. Holistic penetration of System Dynamics in our society was predicted by its founder Jay W. Forester and the method itself was created with the purpose to describe and explain the behavior of any system. Such a powerful method should be considered among the essential capacities for the new era of human development. Postponing the decision to involve System Dynamics in the regular curriculum is a loss of opportunity to improve the education of our children and the population in general.

 

Presentations: 

[1] Jorgen Randers: “From Limits to Growth to Earth for All – Overshoot and collapse in a 100-year perspective”

[2] W. Fisher: “Teaching the tragedy of open access: a classroom exercise on governing the commons”

[3] J. Rooney-Varga at all: “Can interactive simulation impact what policymakers say and do on climate?”

[4] D. Fisher: “A Model-Building Lesson on Global Warming & Potable Water Availability for a High School Science Class” and “Creating and Building System Dynamics Models From the News (Workshop)”

[5] N. Zimmermann: “Participatory modeling in an introductory systems thinking and System Dynamics class”

[6] M.C. Alibeyoglu et all: “An Educational Program Design: Environmental Education with Systems Thinking and the World Climate Game Project”

[7] David Weat et all: “Learning Economics with Dynamic Modeling in Ukraine, in Collaboration with Norway”

 

 

Changed!

Recent Posts

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series We at the System Dynamics Society are continually seeking vibrant and knowledgeable presenters for our ongoing Seminar Series. As we unfold the calendar, there’s always a place for more insights, experiences, and expertise to enrich...

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group The System Dynamics Group, an autonomous research group at the University of Bergen (UiB) was established in 1971 by professor emeritus Svein Nordbotten. Inspired by the work of Jay W. Forrester, Nordbotten...

Upcoming Events

Recent Business cases

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame EXECUTIVE Summary Product design is a specific form of complex innovation that touches all areas of an organization’s management. While entrepreneurs recognise the value of design, they often tend to focus...

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care EXECUTIVE Summary Low levels of viral suppression at 69% for people with HIV make it hard to believe the 95% target level will be achieved by 2030 in St. Louis, USA. As a solution, Fast-Track Cities-STL opted...

Join us

System Dynamics Focuses More on Sustainability Than the Sustainable Development Goals

System Dynamics Focuses More on Sustainability Than the Sustainable Development Goals

Register today to watch all 2022 conference recordings. Available until September 30!

The world is facing major global challenges that result in moving towards or beyond social and ecological tipping points and in the exacerbation of drivers of climate change, but also in the consolidation of simulation modeling and systems thinking to solve those global problems.

As a newcomer to the International System Dynamics Conference in Frankfurt 2022, I was intrigued by the great combination of topics, experts, and complex problems, but mostly by the large community of practitioners hungry to share and learn about Systems Dynamics. Full of energy, the entire conference had the intensity to encourage everyone’s interest and advance everybody’s practice.

Clearly, in the Anthropocene, there is a need to use integrative approaches to support transitions towards sustainability in general and the United Nations 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in specific. The acceleration and practice of systems thinking and modeling are fundamental for this and an increasing understanding of complex dynamical behaviors is at the roots of applied sustainability science. Sustainable and resilient socioecological systems maintain indefinitely into the future both human development and valued environmental functions.

Systems thinking and modeling are crucial for dealing with the complexity of our living world and its resources, and what better way to learn more about this than from practitioners of System Dynamics and sustainable development, which have progressed alongside for the last 50 years.

Systems Thinking and Modeling for the SDGs

In the Climate Change, sustainable drivers parallel session, the social tipping mechanisms for rapid decarbonization presentation by Sibel Eker, Assistant Professor at Radboud University and Research Scholar at International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), explained the Functional Enviro-economic Linkages Integrated Nexus (FeliX) model. The model simulates complex interactions among 10 global systems: population, education, economy, energy, water, land, food, carbon cycle, climate, and biodiversity and represents the modeling of indicators representing eight SDGs related to sustainable food (SDG 2), health and well-being (SDG 3), quality education (SDG 4), clean energy (SDG 7), economic growth (SDG 8), responsible consumption and production (SDG 12), climate action (SDG 13), and life on land (SDG 15). The FeliX model is one of the very few models of human-natural systems that cover feedback interactions of sustainability in one integrated framework suitable for SDG analysis.

In conversation with Professor Birgit Kopainsky from the University of Bergen, she highlighted the Millennium Institute’s Integrated Sustainable Development Goals (iSDG) model, a policy simulation tool that helps policymakers and stakeholders to make sense of the immense complexities of the SDGs. Due to the highly integrated nature of the model, most policies will impact more than one SDG. The model is categorized into environmental, social, and economic dimensions in computer-generated connectors that show extensively integrated sectors. Rather than SDGs per se, the model explores sustainability aspects, as it can simulate numerous policies simultaneously and map policy impacts across sectors.

Reaching The SDGs

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a collection of 17 interlinked global goals designed to “provide a shared blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into the future.”

The improving a population’s well-being parallel session presentation by Takuma Ono and Ivan Taylor showed how to conceptualize connections between SDGs based on network development by Le Blanc (2015) adapted to causal loop diagrams (CLDs). The SDGs alone give no clear understanding of causal interactions between SDGs, which can create difficulties for interpretation and implementation for any government.

Le Blanc’s work suggests that network modeling helps in identifying “extended” targets that are not necessarily core targets under any of the goals. The existence of the 169 targets turns what could have been a collection of unrelated goals into a system. However, they need to be adjusted to specific contexts and situations to avoid overly generic (but not actionable) statements about trade-offs and synergies. Therefore, the network modeling framework facilitates integrated thinking and policy-making. By using CLDs adapted from Le Blanc’s diagram, the model can include connections among all 17 SDGs, using the scores of the Sustainable Development Report[1]. By doing so, when the score of one SDG goes up relative to its initial value, it influences the target value of all indicators, as targets are collections of quantifiable indicators that underline each SDG. This means that there is an array of opportunities to assess different optimization goals that can be applied to any country in the world, provided an SDG score is available for calibration purposes.

Conclusion

Sustainability-related presentations at this year’s conference seemed to focus more on Sustainability as a societal goal than on specific studies about the Agenda 2030 and the SDGs. This presents the system dynamics community with the opportunity, and responsibility, to join in the global efforts to build a sustainable world. My expectation is towards more collaborations from different sectors and systems thinking approaches. That way our society might navigate the challenging interdisciplinary work required for genuine progress towards global sustainable development.

[1] Sachs, J., Lafortune, G., Kroll, C., Fuller, G., Woelm, F., (2022). From Crisis to Sustainable Development: the SDGs as Roadmap to 2030 and Beyond. Sustainable Development Report 2022. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://dashboards.sdgindex.org/downloads

 

Recent Posts

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series

Call for Presenters: Seminar Series We at the System Dynamics Society are continually seeking vibrant and knowledgeable presenters for our ongoing Seminar Series. As we unfold the calendar, there’s always a place for more insights, experiences, and expertise to enrich...

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group

From Bergen to Global: UiB’s System Dynamics Group The System Dynamics Group, an autonomous research group at the University of Bergen (UiB) was established in 1971 by professor emeritus Svein Nordbotten. Inspired by the work of Jay W. Forrester, Nordbotten...

Upcoming Events

Recent Business cases

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame

A Design Value Calculator: A System Dynamics Boardgame EXECUTIVE Summary Product design is a specific form of complex innovation that touches all areas of an organization’s management. While entrepreneurs recognise the value of design, they often tend to focus...

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care

Fast-Track Cities Uses System Dynamics to Enhance HIV Care EXECUTIVE Summary Low levels of viral suppression at 69% for people with HIV make it hard to believe the 95% target level will be achieved by 2030 in St. Louis, USA. As a solution, Fast-Track Cities-STL opted...

Join us

ISDC 2021 Highlights: Food “Wickedness”

The International System Dynamics Conference (ISDC) convenes practitioners who demonstrate what’s new and developing in their fields with System Dynamics. This section of the WiSDom Blog, “Conference Highlights,” asks system dynamicists to spotlight key presentations and innovations presented at the conference.

Note: Some links within the text take you to the conference website. You must login to the site to see these linked materials. Access to the website will be restricted in September, so make sure you check out the resources before it’s too late.

Conference Highlights Editorial Team: Saras Chung, Will Glass-Husain, Jack Homer, Sara Metcalf, and Remco Peters with coordination by Christine Tang

This highlight by Remco Peters spotlights the work of addressing Public Health Nutrition topics with system dynamics. Special thanks to Will Glass-Husain for editorial support.
 

Food “Wickedness”

There is a growing consensus in public health nutrition that interventions acknowledging the complex and dynamic nature of issues such as undernutrition, increasing obesity rates, and unhealthy dietary behaviours are needed. There is also a realization that potentially effective interventions have unintended consequences, widening inequities and exacerbating forms of malnutrition. System Dynamics is gaining prominence in public health nutrition for taking these factors into account. 

As a newcomer to this approach, the 2021 International System Dynamics Conference (ISDC) was a great opportunity for me to learn more about System Dynamics and examine current developments in the public health nutrition field. A variety of ISDC Presentations on public nutrition captured complexity, explored co-creation to identify leverage points, and considered unintended consequences for the field.

Capturing complexity

I started my conference on a promising note with Abigail Roche’s poster presentation: Modeling Cyclic and Temporal Relationships of Food Insecurity and Diet Quality for Nutrition Equity Policy Design.” Roche’s preliminary model aimed to highlight the effect of stress on eating patterns that could lead to the accumulation of chronic disease over time within historically redlined neighbourhoods. Her approach was a great example of the utility of System Dynamics in transitioning from a mental map to a tangible model for relevant stakeholders.

Raquel Froese Buzogany (Mapping Interactions Between Food Security and Poverty) Fernando Redivo (Modeling Household Level Food Security with System Dynamics) then showcased how causal loop diagrams and stock flow diagrams can be applied to capture the dynamic and complex nature of phenomena of food security. Their models presented a narrative in an accessible manner, which could be helpful for stakeholder engagement. This is an improvement on many other food and obesity models that acknowledge complexity but lack a clear set of actions that can be taken by policy-makers. 

Co-creation of Models to Identify Leverage

I was initially drawn to system dynamics by the participatory element of community-based modelling. Bringing together a diverse group of stakeholders to co-create and own models can be powerful. A key part of this is the process of building a common language to identify determinants and solutions which are best suited to their own context. The panel session on Food and Health and the presentation by Guus Luijben in the WIP session on Human Behavior exemplified this aspect of System Dynamics. 

Guus Luijben’s research, “Community-Based System Dynamics for Shifting Diets for a Sustainable Food Future,” involved group model building (GMB) sessions with experts and younger adults. Their goal was to develop policy measures to reduce meat consumption as a response to the worrying gap between the desired and actual meat consumption among young Dutch adults. Using co-created causal loop diagrams, they identified that social eating norms and the relatively cheap price of meat were important factors driving this gap. They proposed an intervention to increase community awareness of the negative effects of meat on the environment–a shift from psychosocial factors to contextual factors (upstream determinants) in promoting healthy eating behaviour. This was a great example of engaging a target group to identify effective intervention and policy levers.

In the Food and Health parallel session, Jacqueline Davison, Mark Heffernan and others shared a model developed in response to the New South Wales (Australia) Government’s priority to make a five percent reduction in childhood overweight and obesity prevalence by 2025. This session enforced the utility of participatory system dynamics to inspire collaboration with different state actors to address obesity. It was encouraging to hear that the state actors were eager to continue with the developed model.

Unintended Consequences

The next parallel session by Charles Nicholson discussed effective interventions to increase fruit and vegetable consumption in urban Kenya. Nicholson’s team assessed the causes for declining fruit and vegetable consumption through group model building with key decision makers in the value chain and the development of a quantitative model. 

This presentation included a couple of highlights for me: First, they identified that the participating organisations had a consumer-centric focus, suggesting that the participant pool should ideally be widened. Second, this session showcased the utility of system dynamics to identify unintended consequences. The researchers identified that increases in farm yields potentially has the largest dynamic effect on fruit and vegetable consumption. However, during this process they also identified that potential interventions would negatively affect the livelihood of farmers in the process of increasing yield. These kinds of insights (based on participatory modeling) are what make feedback loops shine for me.

Conclusion

This year’s conference gave me a sweet taste of the wide range and utility of the system dynamics toolkit available to address wicked public health nutrition issues. Presenters shared insights with attendees from their own work and also received helpful feedback and comments after the sessions. In light of current events, my expectation is that Food and Health will be even better represented in next year’s conference. I encourage those active with System Dynamics in the public health nutrition field to present and share their work with others on this platform next year. I hope I’ll be able to do so in the near future.

Remco Peters

rpj_peters@outlook.com

Remco is a Research Associate at the School for Policy Studies at the University of Bristol. His research interests focus on social determinants of diet, nutrition and well-being and systems thinking approaches to malnutrition.

ISDC 2021 Highlights: Tackling Structural Racism with Modeling

The International System Dynamics Conference (ISDC) convenes practitioners who demonstrate what’s new and developing in their fields with System Dynamics. This section of the WiSDom Blog, “Conference Highlights,” asks system dynamicists to spotlight key presentations and innovations presented at the conference.

Conference Highlights Editorial Team: Saras Chung, Will Glass-Husain, Jack Homer, Sara Metcalf, and Remco Peters with coordination by Christine Tang

This highlight by Braveheart Gillani spotlights the work of addressing structural racism with system dynamics

 

 

Tackling Structural Racism with Modeling

The brutal murders of George Floyd, Philando Castile, Breonna Taylor and other Black Americans in 2020 caught the attention of people worldwide, highlighting the inequities caused by structural racism. According to the Aspen Institute Roundtable on Community Change, structural racism is defined as “a system in which public policies, institutional practices, cultural representations and other norms work in various, often reinforcing ways to perpetuate racial group inequity.” 

These horrifying events happened alongside the COVID-19 pandemic, which also has had a disproportionate impact on communities of color. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that Black people were hospitalized 2.8 times more and died at almost double the rates of whites. Structural racism has been declared a public health crisis by the CDC as well as by some cities, such as Cleveland, and it also threatens access to decent housing, education, and jobs for many people. 

The topic of structural racism was first featured in two roundtable sessions a year ago at the 2020 International System Dynamics Conference. During these sessions, members proposed the development of a Special Interest Group (SIG) to build a community of practice for system dynamicists studying this topic. The goal is to build the capacity of SIG members seeking to resolve issues of structural racism using SD. The SIG has held monthly meetings to discuss work in progress, and share resources and concerns.  Some of their work was featured at the 2021 conference. 

One example of work on structural racism that was presented at ISDC 2021 included Dr. Peter Hovmand’s plenary presentation, Opportunities, Cautions, and Lessons in Humility: Possibilities for Advancing Racial Equity. Hovmand pointed to John Galtung’s work on Structural Violence, which views structural violence operationally as the gap between the oppressive status quo and an individual’s fully potentiated condition. System Dynamics could be used to identify such gaps, accelerate prevention strategies, and increase progress toward more equitable systems. Case Western Reserve University’s Community Based System Dynamics Lab has been addressing structural violence in the contexts of opioid addiction, sexual and gender minority continuity of care, and food and nutrition equity. 

In a separate talk on the Impact of Racial Discrimination Across the Life Span, Dr. Hovmand explored how seniors’ theories about their quality of life can vary depending on whether the individuals are Black or White. By using mixed methods and participatory systems mapping with two groups, the study found that Black participants reported greater socio-economic deprivation and lower health-related quality of life than their White counterparts. The two groups generated similar causal loop diagrams, but they described different distributions of resources affecting people’s quality of life.

Finally, in a presentation on Structural Racism and System Dynamics: A Scoping Review, Dr. Irene Headen, Mikayla Branz, and Ellis Ballard identified nine studies that addressed structural racism in a theoretical or an applied way. The six theoretical articles sought problem-based and paradigmatic insights, while the three applied articles sought participatory and dynamic insights.  

Dr. Headen also described four essential needs for future System Dynamics work focusing on structural racism: 

  1. Explicitly define time horizons and reference modes to improve problem definition,
  2. Clearly define and design modeling projects,
  3. Identify the best sources of structural knowledge and make the best use of system knowledge holders, and
  4. Think carefully about the origins and reliability of structural knowledge.  

ISDC 2021 showcased System Dynamics projects that are addressing structural racism across a range of disciplines. Leaders in this field are demonstrating how we can use the method to untangle the dynamics of structural racism and find ways to root it and its associated inequities out of society. It is exciting to see the insights that can come from applying SD to this complex and critical problem. 

Braveheart Gillani

Braveheart.gillani@case.edu
Twitter: @BraveheartGill1

Braveheart Gillani earned his Master’s in Social Work with a specialization in System Dynamics from the Brown School of Social work and is currently working on his Ph.D at the Mandell School of Applied Social Science at Case Western Reserve University. Braveheart’s research and advocacy are focused on sexual and gender minorities, healthy masculinity development, along with issues of racial equity. 

ISDC 2021 Highlights: Connecting Perspectives on Gender Dynamics

The International System Dynamics Conference (ISDC) convenes practitioners who demonstrate what’s new and developing in their fields with System Dynamics. This section of the WiSDom Blog, “Conference Highlights,” asks system dynamicists to spotlight key presentations and innovations presented at the conference.

Conference Highlights Editorial Team: Saras Chung, Will Glass-Husain, Jack Homer, Sara Metcalf, and Remco Peters with coordination by Christine Tang

This highlight by Suzanne Manning spotlights work that demonstrated gender dynamics in System Dynamics modeling. Special thanks to Dr. Sara Metcalf for her editorial support on this post.

 

Connecting Perspectives on Gender Dynamics

“All that separates, whether of race, class, creed, or sex, is inhuman, and must be overcome” –  Kate Sheppard, a leader of the women’s suffrage movement in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Kate was a woman ahead of her time, championing diversity and equality in the nineteenth century. She recognized the need to overcome all forms of discrimination.

As systems scientists, we can use our work to spotlight and disrupt discrimination, or leave these difficult issues aside, losing opportunities for insight. Science is not conducted in a vacuum. The research questions we choose to investigate, variables we choose to model, assumptions underpinning our simulations – these are under our control. 

As a first-time attendee at the 2021 International System Dynamics Conference, I was excited to see presenters spotlighting gender discrimination and the emergent system properties of gendered bias.

Two in particular, focused on gender-based violence, one of the biggest issues facing women in the world today. A poster titled It is Not My Fault was presented by Paola García Vázquez, Sandra Vázquez Guerra, Daniela Videa Martínez, and Gloria Pérez Salazar. The authors demonstrated a model of gender-based violence in Mexico, depicting feedback loops that discourage women from reporting by placing them in vulnerable positions without police protection. Their suggested policy intervention was to fund NGOs to provide strong support for women, to which an attendee suggested targeting the “machismo” culture which normalised violence against women instead. 

Eduardo De la Vega addressed that culture in his model of violence among adolescents in rural Colombia, suggesting men’s “conquer and domination” tendencies were a key factor for violence on the streets. Both Paola and Eduardo found that focusing on changing men’s attitudes towards violence in general, and against women in particular, could significantly impact violence. In other words, beyond the basic goal of keeping women safe, the models pointed to initiatives that make men safe to be around.

Trust was spotlighted by Sarah Pritchard, Lucy Puckett and Andrew Brown in their Work in Progress  presentation titled The Terrible Bargain. By modelling intimate relationships, they showed how men’s respectful behaviour towards women could be a balancing feedback loop that disincentivises unwanted behaviour. I agree – that’s a terrible bargain, for all involved. Their model included the impact of “patriarchal cultural norms.” Targeting societal norms of male behaviour…there’s a theme here

Another presentation, Sexual and Gender Minority Youth in the Foster Care Model by Dana Prince, Braveheart Gillani and Meagan Ray-Novak, highlighted a critical perspective using minority stress theory. They provided an alternative to linear models that suggest solutions that “blame the victim”, and instead reveal the complex structural issues that lead to multiple levels of stressors for this population. Policy makers need to see this work.

Policy makers should also see how gender dynamics emerge in Fernando Redivo’s model of household level food security in Zambia. Fernando considered a wide range of variables that might influence food security and found that a key factor for supporting food security was to proactively support women who head households. The presence of gendered structural discrimination in Zambian households meant that without extra help, these women were generally not able to sustainably support their families. 

Hesam Mahmoudi and Navid Gaffarzadegan also found insights that could help improve women’s lives, by investigating what causes disagreement among physicians. Their paper examined how physicians balance risk and outcomes in their decision processes, noting that some obstetricians overuse Caesarean sections for delivering babies. By choosing a gendered medical example, their analysis leaves the door open for questions about how to model women’s agency and influence in decision-making about delivery, suggesting fruitful avenues for further work. 

Parallel to issues of gender, another area for further work was identified by Irene Headen, Mikayla Branz and Ellis Ballard in their review of structural racism research in System Dynamics. They found very few articles in their search. Their recommendation was that models about systemically marginalised people should involve those people in development and analysis. 

This advice was on my mind as I attended a presentation by Takuma Ono of work with Rowland Chen, Ivan Taylor, Saroj Koul, and Mia Vogel, on promoting the success of women of color entrepreneurs in the United States. Takuma presented a thorough and high quality model.  While this project had not yet involved the subjects of the model directly, Takuma indicated that the next phase of their research would involve reaching out to these women to gather their perspectives.

System Dynamics practitioners are making important contributions to gender analysis, and we might expect to see even more at ISDC2022, since next year’s conference theme is ‘Diversity’. One analysis that I want to keep quiet, though, is from a Work in Progress presentation on gender and the Beergame, by Maria Guadalupe Arias, Juan Pablo Torres, Karla Padilla, and Samuel Madariaga. They compared gender differences while playing a look-and-react Beer Game, and the findings were disputing the literature that says men tend to focus their gaze on a single thing and women look around more. Please don’t share this with my kids – I’ve been telling them that as a mother I have an innate ability to see everything they do!

Suzanne Manning

Suzanne.Manning@esr.cri.nz
Twitter: @slmanning1

Suzanne is passionate about gender equality, education and science. She is currently trying to change the world by working as a social scientist at the Institute of Environmental Science and Research in Aotearoa New Zealand.