Apocalypse? No! The need for systems engineering thinking to address global challenges and avert global crises

In geological terms, we are in the Holocene, the second epoch of the Quaternary period. There is discussion underway that the end of the twentieth century marks the beginning of a new epoch, the Anthropocene, because the geological column will show not simply the detritus of homo sapiens, but compounds and materials never seen before, and which are the product of human ingenuity and technology. In technological terms, we have progressed through the Immediate (hunter/gatherer) and Urban (trade specialisation) phases of technology and are now leaving the Rational phase (scientifically driven and where production could be mechanised at scale and anything was possible) and we are entering the Systems phase (where the interactions of different physical and social and environmental systems are beginning to be realised actually and conceptually) and where the outcomes are far reaching and often not anticipated. In an anthropological sense, some of the world’s aboriginal peoples still have a systems view of the world, just as in their different ways, all our distant forebears did before a reductionist view took hold.

Nevertheless, as the twentieth century drew to a close and we entered the new Millennium, many held an optimistic view of the future. As we looked back on the latter half of the twentieth century, environmental issues were becoming recognised, the madness of the genocides in the wreckage of Yugoslavia and Rwanda had been admitted, the Ethiopian famine had been recognised and responded to by Live Aid. In 2000, the UN established the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). There were 8 of them. Six were about the Human Condition. One was about the environmental limits that we had to live within. And the eighth was about the partnerships needed to deliver them. Systems! The follow-up UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) added a bit more detail, but the fundamental impetus was all there in the MDGs.

In his 1992 Presidential campaign, Bill Clinton exhorted his team with the mantra ‘It’s the economy, stupid!’.

As we entered the new Millennium, this mantra could be said to have morphed into ‘It’s a System, stupid’.

So, what happened? The first 22 years of the New Millennium are not quite what many of us hoped.

This special issue of the journal sought innovative and inventive submissions to break new ground in our thinking of the role of the engineering profession and radical systems-led approaches to respond to twenty-first century challenges, living within environmental limits and responding to the UN SDGs.

And specifically, to confront the impending climate crisis, the widespread frustration in tackling global poverty, environmental damage and resource depletion and the mass extinction of plant and animal species.

The true costs of centuries of exploitation of what were once considered ‘free goods’ are now all too evident. The roles of the market, regulation and international agreements to bring about the changes necessary to avert future catastrophes are not clear. But many acknowledge the need for linked-up thinking and systems wide solutions.

The Title of this Special Issue – ‘Apocalypse? No!’ – was not a direct reference to the film, but a metaphor for our present condition.

We need to transition from this problem statement to what we have to do! It’s not easy!

The papers in this special issue cover a range of standpoints: optimistic and pessimistic; reflective and prospective; broadly defined systems and systems in particular situations.

In the first of six papers Stewart (2022) highlights the accomplishments of systems-led approaches, their ability to tackle future threats, and suggests optimism from the achievements of the past and the ability of systems thinking to meet future challenges. The paper presents a snapshot of the global trends in the SDGs relevant to engineering and the environment. Reviewing work investigating the effects of climate change on GDP, the narrative follows the general focus of the IMF, OECD and World Bank thinking on economic growth and how climate change may impact on this. The scenarios painted, it concludes, do not ‘spell impending doom’, and we should try to ‘Always Look on the Bright Side of Life’.

Water security is a complex global issue, and so critically linked to climate change. Polaine et al. (2022) draw on four case studies taken from India, Malaysia, Ethiopia and Colombia to show how systems thinking has been adapted and applied to the understanding and management of multiple water security issues. These demonstrate how systems thinking can dissolve sectoral and disciplinary silos, alter the consideration of spatial scales, demand new data and analysis, and require the integration of socio-ecological issues with the more traditional bio-physical aspects of water security.

The application of the Urban System Abstraction Hierarchy (USAH) model, developed by the contributing authors, on three hypothetical hazard scenarios, is presented in Beevers, McClymont, and Bedinger (2022). The model can be applied variously to any threat scenario, but flood, drought and pandemic are selected for discussion in the paper and applied to a generic UK city. The model allows impacts to be tracked and analysed so that priorities can be assigned to build greater resilience by intervention and future planning.

Renowned for his work on systems engineering, Elms (2022) offers clarity in the application of systems thinking to engineering problems. The paper sets out five attributes which are critical to systems engineering approaches: future facing, the stance or attitude, general skills, a range of ways of thinking and skills in tackling complex and novel systems problems. The paper develops each of these in detail before tackling the difficulties of human related hindrances. Finally three case studies amplify the range of issues addressed and highlight successes and failures in given applications.

Using a systems dynamics approach to highlight the material and social elements of the global economic system, and a soft systems approach to changing values, alternatives and the underpinning of ideas, Side (2022) develops a series of propositions relevant to consideration of the SDGs and the climate emergency. These are used syllogistically to suggest that rationalism and universal self-interest will avoid irreversible environmental apocalypse, but conflicting interests and self-interest suggest that achievement of human rights and the UN SDGs will prove rather more intractable.

In the final paper of this Special Issue, Jowitt (2022) argues that civilisation is in the Systems Phase of development. Reviewing human development and the emergence of industry and infrastructure, the paper highlights the nature of human resilience in the experiences of disasters, focussing thereafter on the importance of infrastructure resilience and systems thinking. Infrastructure failures during disasters affecting power, water supply, communications, networks and the emergent properties in their interconnectedness, create overall risks to the system which we can so easily fail to recognise. The paper concludes climate change, resilience and the UN SDGs are all systems level problems in which engineers must play their part in finding solutions.