Yes We Can! (Climate Change is Wicked)

June 15, 2018

We are in trouble.  Actually, it’s double-trouble.  We have trouble enough with the problems we have, but we also have problems with these problems.  Don Scranton, in Learning to Die in the Antropocene: Reflections on the End of a Civilization, published in 2015, reflects this concern: “The problem is that the problem is too big.  The problem is that different people want different things.  The problem is that nobody has any real answers.  The problem is that the problem is us.” The problem that Scranton is concerned about is a serious one. In fact, it is about as serious as a problem could be. It is global warming.  Scranton believes that the problem of global warming is one that is too big, one for which there no agreement as to what needs to be done, one for which there are no real answers, and one that finds us right in the middle of it all.

He also believes that it is wicked.

“Global warming,” he writes, “is what is called a ‘wicked problem.’ It doesn’t offer any clear solutions, only better and worse responses.”  Wicked problems for which there are no “real answers” and for which there is no sure knowledge about the best thing to do, are not rare nor unusual.  In fact, they make up an important part of our lives.  They are ubiquitous.  They are universal.  They are perpetual.  And they are insoluble.  And, as in the case with global warming, they can threaten our way of life.

“Like All Others”

In 1948, psychologist Henry Murray and anthropologist Clyde Kluckhohn began Personality in Nature, Society, and Culture with these words:

EVERY MAN is in certain respects

a. Like all other men,
b. Like some other men,
c. Like no other man.

Except for their use of “men” to stand for both men and women (in 2018 they would have undoubtedly begun with EVERY PERSON….), their perspective is useful in helping us gain an understanding about the complexities of our lives:  We are all members of the human family; we belong to our own distinctive families and communities; and we stand alone as individuals, all at the same time. These multiple memberships bring with them widely differing expectations, challenges, and dilemmas and ensure a constant supply of problems with which, if we are to live successful lives, we are expected to cope.

Apart from the biological endowments we share with all other people – we feel pain, we need food, warmth and rest, we have needs for intimacy and have sexual drives, we share a limited number of instincts and reflexes, we are the creators and the products of families – the most important aspect of being “like all other persons” is that we all face problems.  In fact, one of the few things that one person can say to another person that is always true is “I have a problem.”  And, as we have seen, when it comes to the quality of our lives, most of the problems that matter are wicked.

The German philosopher Peter Sloterdilk captured the complex and paradoxical nature of wicked problems when he wrote, “It is characteristic of being human that human beings are presented with tasks that are too difficult for them, without having the option of avoiding them because of their difficulty.”  Here we can see why wicked problems cause us so much grief, especially when we lack the understanding or skills for managing them:  Not only do they come unannounced and unbidden into our lives (though we often play a part in creating them), they turn out to be difficult to understand and impossible to solve.  And yet we must confront them or suffer potentially disastrous consequences.  American poet Jack Gilbert expressed this dilemma with a fable, “In Dispraise of Poetry:”

When the King of Siam disliked a courtier,
he gave him beautiful white elephant.
The miracle beast deserved such ritual
that to care for him properly meant ruin.
Yet to care for him improperly was worse. 
It appears that the gift could not be refused.

Global Warming is a Wicked Problem

Roy Scranton is deeply concerned with one of these tasks that is too difficult for us yet cannot be avoided – global warming.  As quoted earlier, he summarizes the problem we all face:  “Global warming is what is called a wicked problem.  It doesn’t offer any clear solutions, only better or worse responses.” And a large part of its wickedness is that it cannot be addressed by one community or nation. “It is a collective-action problem of the highest order,” he writes. “The entire world must come together to solve global warming.”

Given the nature of this wicked problem and our responses to it up to now, Scranton is convinced that little can be done to avoid a future catastrophe.  “…we have likely passed the point where we could have done anything about it” he writes. “…The odds…of civilization surviving are negligible.  The odds of our species surviving are slim.”  His conclusion? “We’re fucked.  The only questions are how soon and how badly.”  Unless we are willing to drastically change the way we live, he believes, the future will be a place where none of us will want to live.

What Can We Do?

Global warming, when understood as a wicked problem, is representative of  all wicked problems:  it is too big;  it is confusing; people cannot agree on what should be done with it; and we are always part of the problem.  While the hurdle for constructive action with global warming are at present impossibly high  – the prospects of the world coming together to solve it are negligible – and  while we cannot hope to make the wicked problems that trouble us disappear, there is much that we can do.

The Problem is That The Problem is Too Big:

Scranton’s first concern with global warming, that it is too big, is irrelevant.  When we first become aware of what we think is a problem, it is impossible to know if it is too big, too small, or just right.  Why impossible?  Because in the beginning there is no problem for us to examine!  Problems are not like apples hanging from trees waiting to be picked.  Finding problems takes specialized knowledge and dedicated effort.  Tame problems can be discovered by scientists or engineers or other experienced personnel such as electricians or plumbers and plans put in place to solve them.  Wicked problems, on the other hand, can only be created out of the experience, beliefs, preferences and perceptions of those who care about them.

And it gets even more complex.  What is “out there” are not problems at all but “messes”: confusing conglomerations of issues, agendas, arguments, preferences, beliefs, and perspectives which are always in flux. The term “mess” can be defined in two ways.  First the traditional one we are  familiar with, as in a “messy” office, bedroom, car, or mind, where things are piled, scattered, spilled and thrown about everywhere.  When someone walks into a messy room or climbs into a messy car, this kind of “mess” is obvious. The opposite of this messiness is neatness.

The other kind of mess is a technical term that organizational theorist Russell Ackoff introduced in the early 1960’s.  He used the term “mess” to describe those confusing and dynamic situations that people mistakenly call problems.  Global warming is an example, as are drug addiction, terrorism, sex trafficking and spousal abuse.  “[We] are not confronted with problems,” wrote Ackoff, “…but with dynamic situations that consist of changing problems that interact with each other.  I call such situations ‘messes’…[We] do not solve problems; [We] manage messes.”  The opposite of “mess,” as introduced by Ackoff, is actionable problem. According to Ackoff, problems “must be extracted from messes by analysis” and formed into a problem that can be addressed.  This “extraction” and the subsequent forming of a problem from a mess begins when two or more people – and preferably no more than 10 or 12 – sit down together and begin a conversation in which they share their perceptions, beliefs, and values about the “mess” they are concerned about.  It gathers momentum when the group identifies a part of the the “mess” they believe they can do something about and, in their collective opinion, needs to be changed. Ideally, with time and effort, this will lead to the creation of an “actionable problem,” one in which the gap between the present undesirable state and a desirable future state is defined; the primary obstacles that stand in the way of moving from Here to There have been identified; and where plans have been formulated to address these obstacles.  Whether this problem is too big or just right depends entirely upon the group’s judgment that their plans for narrowing the gap between Here and There can be implemented within a reasonable time.  If not, then it is too big and needs to be revisited.

The Problem is That People Want Different Things:

Scranton is pessimistic that progress can be made in addressing global warming because “people want different things.” The fact is that people everywhere always want different things.  For human beings, disagreement is the default position, at least in the beginning.  A group of citizens may come together because they are convinced that something needs to be done about a specific “mess” – for example, high schools are failing and need to be revamped – and discover that when they begin a conversation about what’s wrong with high schools and what needs to be done, there is no agreement.  Unless someone is skilled at helping groups reach consensus and taking action, they probably will never get past disagreeing with each other, wasting their time and efforts.  They may even end up making things worse by  increasing the levels of misunderstanding and tension.

And yet, as discouraging as they may be and as difficult as they may be to manage, our disagreements matter.  Unless we disagree and share our disagreements with others,  there will be no problems.  If there are no problems, there can be no progress.  When we work though our differences and reach agreement – that the Red Sox are the best team in baseball; that Rico’s tacos are the best in town, that Mary is the best choice for CEO; that  it’s time to sell the house; that Richard’s recent behavior is unacceptable and he must leave the company  – it is a sign that together we have met the problem and wrestled it to ground.  Consensus is a “problem found, problem addressed” zone and opens the door to moving forward.

How do we move from disagreement to agreement?  Like most difficult and complex challenges that require both specialized knowledge and specific skills, such a move is simple to describe and difficult to accomplish.  But it is possible. The first step begins with a group of people who are willing to address the situation or issue meet and begin a conversation.  But not just any people and not just any conversation.  The group should include people who care about the situation, people who know about it and have experienced it first hand, people with different perspectives and different backgrounds, and, if the problem is an organizational one, people who represent others in the organization. Formal leadership is a plus when it helps set productive ground rules at the beginning, keeps the group on track, provides clear expectations and explicit goals that provide needed structure, and that holds the group accountable for their efforts.

And then the hard work begins:  Listening, disagreeing, arguing, compromising, creating new possibilities, advocating, exploring, until gradually the group begins to move away from the many opinions and preferences with which they began their conversation and toward a consensus on what the problem is and what should be done about it.

In summary, when the problem is that people want different things,  what is required is for people to find ways to reach agreement on what they want and how to get it.

The Problem is That There Are no Real Answers:

One of the characteristics of tame problems is that eventually there are answers and solutions to be discovered.  And for this the Scienctific Method is among humankind’s greatest creations. Here are some examples of tame problems waiting for solutions to be discovered:  The computer program has been infected by a virus; an unknown bacterium is causing an infectious illness; an elevator stops between floors; an airplane engine disintegrates in flight; the level of lead in a town’s drinking water far exceeds EPA standards.  What needs to be done?  Call a scientist, an engineer, or a technical expert  and ask them to find the cause of the problem and fix it.  As a society, over the past 250 years we have been amazingly successful in finding answers to these kinds of problems as well as others that seem to be even more complex and mysterious. As a result, we enjoy lives of physical comfort and convenience undreamt of by our ancestors.

Managing wicked problems, however, presents us with a different challenge.  For wicked problems there are no “right” or “wrong” answers, only many possible responses, some of which may be better than others.  Human beings must find the “best” answer,  not by offering physical evidence (though that may be helpful), but by making persuasive arguments.  For wicked problems, the “real answers” that we seek are the ones that are imagined, invented, and created by ourselves. They are “real” because they are ours.

The Problem is That The Problem is Us 

Scranton’s worry – that “The problem is that the problem is us” – is worrisome but also irrelevant.  Of course the problem is us.  We are always present in all problems, big or small, tame or wicked. We are, after all, the creators of our problems! If we did not experience them and then give them a name, they would not exist.

The other way that the problem is us, is what Pogo of comic strip fame  meant when he said “We have met the enemy and he is us.”   When we come face-to-face with a serious problem, we are often incompetent, careless, or ignorant.  And so, when we try to “solve” this problem we often make it worse.  Largely because of our way of viewing problems as well as our style in working with others – ignoring,  labeling or demeaning them, and especially blaming them when things fall apart – we frequently become the enemy of constructive action and fruitful collaboration. Under such conditions, we may believe – and even insist vigorously – that we are actually working toward finding and removing the obstacles that block our way forward.  What we often miss is that we ourselves have become the most formidable obstacle in the way.

Stuff Happens 

Stuff happens.  Stuff has always happened, and stuff will always happen in the future.  Our lives are made of stuff happening.  Yet we are aware of only a small part of this “stuff.”  Most of it appears and then disappears unperceived and unexamined.  We don’t see most of what is happening in the world because we lack the necessary physical equipment.  And even when we have the appropriate sensory receptors, often we are not ready.   The basic law of perception is that we see what we are prepared to see.  There are exceptions to this law, of course, as there are to almost all laws:  Some events that occur “out there” in the world are so loud, bright, dramatic, weird, or insistent, that they force their way into our consciousness and demand to be perceived.

Much of what we do see turns out to be uninteresting or irrelevant, and we spend little time with it.  It comes and goes. Once in a while, however, an event or situation catches our attention, and we become interested enough to take a second look.  In some cases, we are drawn in for a closer examination and we may become puzzled, curious, offended, or in some cases, enraged.  And with emotional arousal of one kind or another, a problem begins to emerge.  Here is an example.  As I write these words in June of 2018, the Federal Government is struggling to address the “mess” of the children who have been separated from their parents at the U. S. border and sent to detention centers.  Most people are aware of what is happening. Some are not interested, many are interested but that is the extent of their involvement.  Others are concerned, and a few are outraged and want to see changes made.  Here is a letter to the editor of the New York Times published on June, 19 2018:

“I’m sorry but I can’t seem to put this any other
way.  Or maybe I don’t want to put it any other way.
Because if you hear the voices of those little children
on the audiotape and not be moved to tears – and then
not be moved to moral outrage, righteous indignation,
deeply and strongly felt anger at the horrifically horrible
treatment of children done in the name of our nation –
then I worry about the condition of your soul, your
spirit, your heart, your caring and compassion.

None of us who have children or have grandchildren
or have any concern whatsoever for the children of
anyone else, can possibly not be severely upset at the
God-awful trauma being inflicted on these children.
This must be stopped ?  Whatever it takes – this must
be stopped!

At first, when becoming aware of a situation that offends us, it is difficult to understand what is going on – there is too much happening all at once.  All we know for sure is that we are emotionally engaged. “This is a problem,” we say.  What we miss is that there is no problem.  What we have is a “mess.”  And since messes cannot be solved, but only managed, any attempt to “solve” a non-existent problem can only lead to making things more complicated.

We Can Work With “Stuff”

The only way forward is to create an actionable problem. Creating an actionable problem is a two-part process:  First we identify some issue or situation that we feel strongly enough about to want to see changes made. And second, we claim a small part of this “mess” that is not only interesting to us but seems to be something we can actually do something about.  We are on our way to creating an actionable problem when we have set clear and attainable goals, assessed our present situation with respect to these goals,  identified the obstacles that exist in the gap between the desired future state and the present situation, and have a plan to attack the most import obstacles that are blocking any movement toward our goals.

Here is an example.  John reads in the newspaper that each year hundreds of thousands of animals are euthanized in shelters.  “Interesting,” he thinks.  “Hey, Alice,” he shouts to his wife who is in the kitchen preparing dinner, “did you know that thousand and thousands of dogs and cats are killed each year in shelters.”

“No kidding,” she answers.

“Yeah,” says John, “I just read it in the paper.”  And he moves on to the sports page.

Mary reads the same story and reacts differently.  She is surprised.  She had no idea. As she thinks more about it, she becomes upset. During the next few days, she tells her friends that killing animals in shelters is outrageous and must stop, and that they should do something about it.  Before long, however, her emotional intensity drains away and she loses interest.

Peter reads the same article as John and Mary and is also upset.  What he does next, however, is quite different.  He turns to the internet for more information and is surprised to learn that most animals are killed because there is no room for them in the shelters.  So, he thinks, an important part of this problem is that there are too many abandoned animals.  More searching on the web leads to finding a group of people in his community who are also upset about this.  Peter invites them to a meeting at his house and where they agree that something must be done.  After much discussion, they decide that what makes the most sense to them is to address the problem of too many animals.  They decide to create a nonprofit organization to encourage pet owners to spay and neuter their animals.  They name it “The Hey, Hey, Neuter and Spay Cooperative.”  Their first efforts are directed toward raising funds and they are surprised that there are many people in the community who are not only supportive, but are also willing to give money to help.  Within months, they have the resources to hire a full-time director, rent an office and begin an outreach campaign directed toward the local middle and high schools. Peter learns that he excels in making presentations at schools dressed as a dog and explaining the case for neutering from a dog’s perspective.  Before long Peter has more requests for presentations in the community and in the surrounding towns that he can accept.  Before the year has passed, he has quit his job and is working full-time for “Hey Hey.”  At the end of the second year at the staff retreat the director of “Hey Hey” – which now has 16 employees and an annual budget of $2.5 million – reports that during the past year 2356 cats and dogs were spayed and neutered.  They set a goal for the coming year of 5000.

From the “mess” of the killing of hundreds of thousands of shelter animals each year, Peter has been instrumental in extracting a problem, and then making it actionable by working with others in planning and taking actions that can make a difference. The larger “mess” will continue.  As long as people have pets and then tire of them, there will be abandoned animals.  What “The Hey Hey, Neuter and Spay Cooperative” is after, however, is not to “solve” the larger  problem (the mess) but to be instrumental in reducing the number of animals killed in their communities.  The gap will never be closed, but it can be narrowed.

Q and A Time

Q.  What if the problem is too big?

A.  The “problem” is always too big at first because what most people begin with is not a problem at all but a “mess.”  Ending up with a “right-sized” problem means making it actionable by claiming some part of the mess and  then formulating it into a problem which makes clear the nature of the gap between the present state and a more desirable future one.

Q.  What if people want different things?

A.  People will always want different things.  What is required is the ability to move people – persuade, convince, teach – toward wanting the same things, a difficult but not impossible challenge.

Q.  What are we to do when we learn that nobody has any real answers?

A. Accept the reality that for wicked problems no one has any real answers because there aren’t any.  The “real” ones – those that actually work – are those we create ourselves.  What we need to ensure is that they are the best ones we can come up with.

Q.  Is the problem us?

A.  Yes, at least part of it is.  What is important is that we become aware of how it is that we are “the enemy,” and how we contribute to making the problem even more wicked than it needs to be.  Our challenge is twofold: to make changes in ourselves while we are making changes in the world.