 Jan 2019

missingdatapoints.com missingdatapoints.com

In the world of planning and wicked problems no such immunity is tolerated. Here the aim is not to find the truth, but to improve some characteristics of the world where people live. Planners are liable for the consequences of the actions they generate; the effects can matter a great deal to those people that are touched by those actions.
"Proposition 10: The planner has no right to be wrong"

In dealing with wicked problems, the modes of reasoning used in the argument are much richer than those permissible in the scientific discourse. Because of the essential uniqueness of the problem (see Proposition 7) and lacking opportunity for rigorous experimentation (see Proposition 5), it is not possible to put H to a crucial test.
"Proposition 9: The existence of a discrepancy representing a wicked problem can be explained in numerous ways. The choice of explanation determines the nature of the problem resolution."

Here lies a difficulty with incrementalism, as well. This doctrine advertises a policy of small steps, in the hope of contributing systematically to overall improvement. If, however, the problem is attacked on too low a level (an increment), then success of resolution may result in making things worse, because it may become more difficult to deal with the higher problems. Marginal improvement does not guarantee overall improvement.
"Proposition 8: Every wicked problem can be considered to be a symptom of another problem"

Of course, for any two problems at least one distinguishing property can be found (just as any number of properties can be found which they share in common), and each of them is therefore unique in a trivial sense. But by "'essentially unique" we mean that, despite long lists of similarities between a current problem and a previous one, there always might be an additional distinguishing property that is of overriding importance. Part of the art of dealing with wicked problems is the art of not knowing too early which type of solution to apply.
"Proposition 7: Every wicked problem is essentially unique"

In such fields of illdefined problems and hence illdefinable solutions, the set of feasible plans of action relies on realistic judgment, the capability to appraise "exotic" ideas and on the amount of trust and credibility between planner and clientele that wilt lead to the conclusion, "OK let's try that."
"Proposition 5: Wicked problems do not have enumerable (or an exhaustively describable) set of potential solutions, nor is there a welldescribed set of permissible operations that may be incorporated into the plan"

Whenever actions are effectively irreversible and whenever the halflives of the consequences are long, every trial counts. And every attempt to reverse a decision or to correct for the undesired consequences poses another set of wicked problems, which are in turn subject to the same dilemmas.
"Proposition 5: Every solution to a wicked problem is a 'oneshot operation'; because there is no opportunity to learn by trialanderror, every attempt counts significantly"

With wicked problems, on the other hand, any solution, after being implemented, will generate waves of consequences over an extendedvirtually an unbounded period of time.
"Proposition 4: There is no immediate and no ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem"

The planner terminates work on a wicked problem, not for reasons inherent in the "logic" of the problem. He stops for considerations that are external to the problem: he runs out of time, or money, or patience.
"Proposition 2: Wicked problems have no stopping rule"
Evokes the notion of a lastmile form of satisficing.

For wicked planning problems, there are no true or false answers. Normally, many parties are equally equipped, interested, and/or entitled to judge the solutions, although none has the power to set formal decision rules to determine correctness. Their judgments are likely to differ widely to accord with their group or personal interests, their special valuesets, and their ideological predilections. Their assess ments of proposed solutions are expressed as "good" or "bad" or, more likely, as "better or worse" or "satisfying" or "good enough."
"Proposition 3: Solutions to wicked problems are not trueorfalse, but badorgood"
Yep, "good enough" is the satisficing threshold.

The information needed to understand the problem depends upon one's idea for solving it. That is to say: in order to describe a wickedproblem in sufficient detail, one has to develop an exhaustive inventory of all conceivable solutions ahead of time. The reason is that every question asking for additional information depends upon the understanding of the problemand its resolutionat that time. Problem understanding and problem resolution are con comitant to each other. Therefore, in order to anticipate all questions (in order to anticipate all information required for resolution ahead of time), knowledge of all conceivable solutions is required.
"Proposition 1: There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem"

The formulation of a wicked problem is the problem! The process of formulating the problem and of conceiving a solution (or resolution) are identical, since every specification of the problem is a specification of the direction in which a treatment is considered.
Context of the problem space and of potential soultions is also important here. Understanding the context also points the way toward participatory design and critical reflective thinking.

By now we are all beginning to realize that one of the most intractable problems is that of defining problems (of knowing what distinguishes an observed condition from a desired condition) and of locating problems (finding where in the complex causal networks the trouble really lies). In turn, and equally intractable, is the problem of identifying the actions that might effectively narrow the gap between whatis and whatoughttobe.
Defining problems to solve and gaps to narrow remains a challenge in public policy, as well as science,

 Jan 2018

maestriadesarrollo.com maestriadesarrollo.com

Pero la pregunta de la relación entre el diseño y la creación de órdenes sociales profundamente desiguales, insensibles y destructivos parece seguir siendo el ‘problema perverso’ del diseño.

 Jun 2017

Local file Local file

For the task is not one of calculating the efficiency of different possible means toward an already determined end. It often involves,rather, deliberation about the end itself – about what would count as a satisfactory,or at least not entirely unacceptable, outcome to a particular “case.” And it may onlybe by action – and not, in the end, by any purely analytic process – that thisdeliberation can really be followed through.
Deeply insightful,
