Dark Matter Labs reposted this
Systems Change & Finance • Bioregional Weaving & Regeneration • Regenerative Business Model Innovation
How #emergent can and should (funding/investment) strategy be in complex systems change work? A question that certainly has become more top of mind for me since joining the highly emergent [some say chaotic at times] body of work at Dark Matter Labs. I'm still trying to unpack all the dimensions of this question, let alone the answer(s). But here's a resource that gave me some perspective recently: Jewlya Lynn and Julia Coffman, in their (06-2024) paper »Passing in the Dark: Making Visible Philanthropy’s Hidden and Conflflicting Mental Models for Systems Change« argue that, at least in philanthropy, two mental models for systems change are being used: systems dynamics and systems emergence. – Strategies that use the systems-dynamics mental model aim at points of high leverage in a system and predict the kinds of changes that will occur. – Strategies that use the systems-emergence mental model look for parts of the system that are under-resourced and experiment with ways to disrupt or reinforce them. While the authors say that "neither of the systems-change mental models is inherently better" and the main point is "that if we do not make our models visible and align our practices to them, then unintentional disconnects will occur and our work will suffer", they also argue that the Systems-Emergence Mental Model is currently underutilized in philanthropy. Have a look at the full publication here: https://lnkd.in/eMjZXE86 Would love to hear what you think about this distinction and how you see it show up in your work Ana Bojadjievska, Elisabeth van Gelder, Laura Haverkamp, Anja Koenig, Jen Hooke, Eleni Theodorou, Tharald Nustad, Karen Hitschke, corien botman, Cheyenne Kooijman, Markus Hipp, Katrin Elsemann, Tracey Robertson and other people in #philanthropy. What do people from the #investment community think about this? Does what Jewlya and Julia describe similarly apply to #SystemsInvesting? Would the investing space also benefit from making the distinction in mental models explicit, for example?
Along the lines of your inquiry, this case study might be of interest, exploring the evolution of the ClinateWorks Foundation, an ambitious collaboration of philanthropies working to tackle climate change mitigation and adaptation. CW started out as a philanthropic initiative more aligned with the first pathway, and has evolved (and is evolving) to be more aligned with the emergent approach, for reasons and in ways that are well described in the case study. (It’s not binary of course, but the evolution does have features of both models). https://hewlett.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/ClimateWorks_Foundation_Case_Study.pdf
I would like to add that it is not just that systems are complex and changing, making the funding - understanding difficult for our traditional funding patterns- we can no longer use this as an excuse for inaction. Climate and economics are fundamentally changing historical systems - the adjustment or adaptation of communities/states/nations is with us now (we are already here)and yet funding is still behind whether a lack of willingness, understanding or courage. There is incredible work being done globally and on the front lines addressing the economic future of populations, such as the Bridgetown Initiative. The visual is also evident through work being done currently. Traveling into these bioregional systems as I did with Glenn Page in Iceland, seeing the impacts of climate and economics and how communities are adapting, or the work that has been done using historical knowledge in Hawaii to transform food systems and in NC - Carolina Farm Trust as well as so many others such as Climate Farmers - all address the historical and emerging insights needed to adapt/build future healthy systems. There is a critical need for collaboration, really courage to assist those changing current systems.
Hi Leon - Yep, it's a great piece isn't it?! Super helpful in terms of clarifying conversations and thereby supporting collaborative learning for effective action. You might find a recent synthesis I did of interest too, exploring what it might mean to be an ecosystem funder, funding for emergence. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ecosystems-emergence-social-change-exploring-funders-alan-hudson-jyiff/ I've also collated a bunch of resources on these issues which might be useful for others. https://tana.pub/2OCzPESZUNQC/ecosystems-emergence-and-social-change-implications-for-funders-references-and-further-reading-collated-by-alan-hudson Looking forward to hearing what Indy Johar has to say at the Systems Innovation conference in London later this week!
I like the comparison! I find metaphors can be helpful guides to overcome cognitive barriers when our more grounded context is limited, because most of us aren't living systems change on a day-to-day basis to the scope and depth we may wish to be. (Because it plays out at different scales and time-horizons, because the level of complexity is beyond most human ken, or other reasons.) And... as someone who likes to play with metaphor and language, and who is always trying to apply the conceptual to the nerdy nitty gritty on the ground, I can't help but notice some fun nuance in the canoe metaphor. The line, "... or get in the same canoe for a while" sounds simple enough. However anyone who's spent a lot of time getting in and out of a canoe will know it's actually not so simple. Throw in the part of this picture where it's all taking place in mucky, swampy waters and the metaphor really gains effect. The potential to tip, lose your stuff, get wet, stinky, messy and miserable is real. And so, the importance of understanding the differences between big boats and slender canoes, and practicing how to stabilize the craft while colleagues step in and out, is part of the need, as well as the great potential of emergence.
Leon Seefeld I'd suggest that you join us for the next UNDP Sandbox about exactly this topic - but from a monitoring and evaluation lens. :) Suzane Muhereza & Zazie Tolmer - Director at CoIntent can share more details :)
Thanks Leon - I went back twice to this text today actually :) - after discussions on the role of funding innovation and the potential of big bet philanthropy. So definitely useful as a reflection! I have come across (and also cough us using premises/approaches of) both, perhaps system dynamics more frequently than emergence speaking of the climate funding field more broadly. While I agree they are not mutually exclusive, I think there are choices that one should consider for e.g. how strategic we claim to be, how we balance between goals and process, how we engage with partners - and who are they, whats the story about change we want to tell (to ones board for e.g.), how can we engage in philanthropic collaborations etc. Maybe interesting for you Silke Breimaier
Speaking from public investment systems in Salish Sea, I see two entwined axes beyond what I would call “leverage vs. emergence”… one is about scale… what is the right scale to achieve transformative effects—this might be a question of prototyping vs enabling conditions. The other is about intervention vs. empowerment—who decides the target and method. Ideally systems analysis precedes method… and transformative investment is multimodal—often it is the interactions between different forces that creates a kernel of change.
Would you be available to meet to discuss system change? Thanks.
Systems Change & Finance • Bioregional Weaving & Regeneration • Regenerative Business Model Innovation
2wAlban Yau, Jason Jay, Johan Schot - any insights from your research into the investment space?