Fostering complexity thinking - Habits of a complex mind

by Reinette (Oonsie) Biggs

How to go from reductionist thinking to action based complexity research

In hindsight, one could forgive Descartes for not thinking about complex social-ecological systems when he argued that the only sound thinking practice was to isolate phenomena from each other and their environment and apply a process of reduction, simplification and clarification. Well, not anymore. As the world around us becomes more complex, our understanding of how to behave in it is changing accordingly.

Enter complexity thinking, an attempt to meet the challenges of an increasingly complex world where humans and nature are connected on multiple scales. Strong discipline and cross-discipline peer groups now debate, embrace and advocate complexity thinking as imperative to understanding and dealing with pressing current social-ecological challenges.

But what does it mean to apply complexity thinking?

Embrace complexity

In a study recently published in Ecology & Society, centre researcher Oonsie Biggs, together with a team of colleagues from South Africa, presents a number of "habits" that may be used as tools to "unlearn reductionist habits" and embrace the complex reality around us.

Request article

Make no mistake about it, shifting from a more than three century long habit of reductionist thinking to the emerging complexity thinking is hard, but a change is also inevitable, according to the authors.

"It is increaingly apparent that a reductionist approach mismatches our perceptions of the reality of social-ecological systems. No one – not scientists, professionals or lay people – are immune to the consequences of this realisation," Oonsie Biggs says.

But fostering a change in people’s frame of reference is much more than just adding to their knowledge base, it implies changing their mindset and behaviour.

"Our challenge is to enable people to become sufficiently competent in complexity thinking and conscious of the reality it projects so that they have the confidence to unlearn their habits of reductionism," Biggs continues.

Critical habits

Key to this is what Biggs and her colleagues call "habits of mind" which is a "pattern of intellectual behaviour that leads to particular actions".

They recognise three broad frames of mind, each encompassing a set of habits of mind that are critical to participate planning and decision making in complex social-ecological systems. These frames of mind are openness, situational awareness, and a healthy respect for the risks associated with making decisions and taking action.

The first frame, openness, includes the following habits:

• Hold your strong opinions lightly
• Embrace surprise, serendipity and epiphany
• Accept everyone as co-learners, not experts or competitors

The second, situational awareness, includes habits such as:

• Be aware of contingencies, scale and history
• Consider the importance of relationships and interactions
• Reflect often: formally, informally, individually and collectively

The third frame, respect for the restraint and action paradox, includes habits such as:

• Seize the just-do-it moment
• Have courage to take action from which you can learn
• Avoid premature convergence – avoid being too quick to judge

Make it to first base

With these frames in mind, the  next step is a guide to action and learning, all in the spirit of complexity thinking. The scientific literature on social-ecological systems strongly advocates adaptive approaches to decision making.

Such a process typically consists of four main steps: framing the issues and its context, deciding, doing and finally reviewing. On the surface they seem relatively straightforward, but the complexity devil is in the detail.

"Most people rarely make it to complexity’s first base because they are trapped in a dominant linear, causal mode of thinking which is typical of the reductive mindset," Oonsie Biggs warns.

"Intellectual acceptance of the characteristics of complex systems is the foundation on which to start building a new set of thinking patterns and behaviours. The challenge is to be explicit about the types of habits of mind that can help researchers and stakeholders to apply complexity thinking," Biggs concludes.

Request article

Source: http://www.stockholmresilience.org/21/research/research-news/2-18-2014-habits-of-a-complex-mind.html

Reinette (Oonsie) Biggs' research focuses on regime shifts — large, abrupt, long-lasting changes in the dynamics of coupled social-ecological systems that can have dramatic impacts on human economies and societies. Dr Biggs aims to contribute practical scientific theory, methods and insights that can improve society's ability to anticipate high-impact tipping points.

The Wisdom of Tagore

by Satish Kumar is Editor-in-Chief at Resurgence

Tagore’s many songs and stories inspired courage and commitment to act and transform human consciousness and can do the same today. He practised art not for art’s sake, not even as a way of self-expression, least of all just for entertainment. His art was an offering to elucidate the deep meaning of life and to heal the soul. As a master of his craft, Tagore combined the purity of poetry with a purpose for living. He not only healed the sorrow and suffering which he had experienced due to death, depression and disappointment in his own life but he worked too to heal the wounds of injustice and inequality within Indian society.

For Tagore there was no point in writing if it did not lift the human spirit and restore human dignity. Like an alchemist, he turned his base emotions of anger, irritation and rage into the gold of poetry, and through his inspiring songs he transformed social inertia into hope and action. He urged us to rise above our petty identity of race, colour, religion and nation and to identify with our common humanity. He travelled tirelessly from America to Russia, from China to Argentina, proclaiming the oneness of humanity and the paramount importance of freedom, justice and peace. He inspired millions of his countrymen and women to renounce their narrow self-interest and throw away their caste prejudices in order to embrace equality, solidarity and morality. He shunned self-indulgence and worked tirelessly as a healer of social divisions. In particular he tried to heal the split between science and spirituality.

Tagore articulated perennial wisdom and timeless values in word and in action, while seeking truth through science and reason. One of his greatest insights was to affirm that there really is no rift or conflict between reason and religion. He questioned the wisdom of restricting ourselves to one discipline or another – either to reason or religion – when we can enjoy the benefits of both. That is why he was in dialogue with the physicists Heisenberg and Einstein, whilst continuing to study the Upanishads. For Tagore science and spirituality were two sides of the same coin.

He worked for the outer development of human communities through improved agriculture, good schools, comfortable economic conditions, and a better standard of life, but at the same time he emphasised inner development through the renewal of the spirit, caring for the soul, nourishing the heart and nurturing the imagination.

In Tagore’s vision, growth in science, technology and material wellbeing should go hand in hand with spiritual growth. One without the other is like walking on one leg. This balanced and holistic worldview is needed now more than ever, as it is a prerequisite for a sustainable and resilient future for us and for coming generations. Pure reason and pure materialism are as doomed as the pursuit of purely personal salvation. The worldview of Tagore is seeing the unity of reason and religion, spirit and matter and letting them dance together. This is the big vision where science complements spirituality, art complements ecology and freedom complements equality.

http://www.resurgence.org/magazine/article3366-the-wisdom-of-tagore.html

We are all related


by Rabindranath Tagore

The ‘Unity of Life’ underpins the diversity of all existence, wrote Rabindranath Tagore.

The thoughts and sentiments I express in my writings have their philosophical foundation, but I lack the training of the professional philosopher. In India, philosophy infects the very atmosphere we breathe.

Quite unconsciously, I shape all my thoughts and my life on the philosophical teachings of the Upanishads. I can therefore only discuss with you what I consider to be the central idea in our own religion.

The idea is that truth implies unity, a unity expressed through many and varied manifestations, a unity which, when we are able to realise it, gives us freedom. To a man ignorant of a foreign language, the literature contained in it appears to be a stupendous jumble of words, and the speech mere sounds that confuse the mind. When he learns and understands the language, he is freed from the bondage of his ignorance.

Likewise, a path is a meaningless division on a farm unless we understand that, although at first glance it divides, in reality it connects the farm with our neighbour.

When we regard our self as the sole and final end, we separate the self from the great life of the world. As soon as we admit that the self must establish a harmonious relationship with the all, then for the first time, we realise what the word ‘freedom’ means.

Until a poem reveals to us that unity of perfection that permeates the words and the grammar and transcends them, we find no joy in it. The world is like that poem: it is constituted of facts that may themselves constitute new discoveries to the explorer and illustrate new laws to the scientist, but never their significance – a significance which can only be comprehended through our spiritual vision.

Because this truth of perfect interrelation goes far beyond mere facts or the contents of the poem, it carries us instantly across them, making us free, like the beauty of a rose that takes no time in leading our minds beyond the innumerable physical facts of that flower to its ineffable harmony.

We have, in the Upanishads, the great saying

Only he knows the truth

who realises himself in all beings

and all other beings in himself

Let us try to understand this saying, for in understanding it we shall come to a truth which, as I said, lies at the basis of all we call civilisation. An individual who succeeds in dissociating himself from his fellows may imagine that thereby he attains real freedom. But we know from our experience in history that this is not a fact, and that where people live under the compulsion of fear of their neighbours, they cannot attain their full humanity.

Only those who can cultivate a feeling of sympathy with others, of understanding and of cooperation, achieve that relationship which is a great deal more than the numerical fact of their all being on this Earth together. Civilisation, itself the fruit of inter-communication, and of escape from the dungeons of obscurity, is producer of the arts, of literature, of religion and of ethics, all of which can embody external values.

They will never emerge from that kind of crowd which only represents an unrelated or imperfectly related number of people. The best and highest type of society is one that is forever active in trying to solve the problem of mutual relationship. Only thereby can wider areas of freedom for its members be acquired.

For humanity, the perfect relationship is one of love. This truth has itself been the foundation of the teaching of the Buddha. According to him, we can only reach our freedom through cultivating a mutual sympathy. To gain this freedom we need to liberate ourselves from the fetters of self and from all those passions that tend to be exclusive. It is this liberating principle that we must apply to an imprisoned world.

What we call ‘progress’ does not necessarily conform with this ideal. With a purely material progress the greed for things tends to become a passion, thereby promoting unbridled competition and conflict. A reign of ugliness spreads like a callus over the whole world.

A mere addition to the height of skyscrapers or to the velocity of speed can lead only to a savage orgy of boasting and exaggeration. Along this road, the human spirit will be vanquished by the demon of senseless accumulation, and will remain the perpetual victim of a moral slavery.

From a talk Tagore gave in Argentina in 1924.

Rabindranath Tagore was a poet, author and artist.

Learning to Read the World through Other Eyes

• http://www.throughothereyes.org.uk

The methodology of Through Other Eyes is partly based on the principles of the  OSDE Methodology.
This section introduces the theoretical and conceptual frameworks of TOE as they address an audience of student teachers and teacher educators in England. TOE’s theoretical framework is based on 6 metaphors related to the construction of identities, difference, positionality and power. TOE’s conceptual framework consists of four types of learning: learning to unlearn, learning to listen, learning to learn and learning to reach out. TOE’s methodology includes 6 learning components that employ deconstructive strategies to open up possibilities for new interpretations of the concepts addressed in the project. These 6 types of learning activities are mapped against four different levels of engagement: ego-centric, ethno-centric, human-centric and world-centric. However, given space restrictions, the learning components will not be presented or discussed in this article .

THEORETICAL METAPHORS

 

The approach to identity construction adopted in TOE attempts to go beyond culturalism by challenging essentialism and emphasising hybridity. In TOE identity is conceptualised as one’s perceptions and relationships (in relation to the self, to others and to the world). In terms of identity construction, in line with Bhabha’s argument, TOE has adopted the notion that identities are constantly constructed and reconstructed in the different social groups that people belong to in people’s interactions with others. In other words, our identities are ‘written’ in our social contexts, which means that what we know is marked by where we come from . However, we can also participate in this construction and reconstruction by re-writing things ourselves, so we can also ‘rebel’ and choose to be something different or to create perceptions and relationships that are different from those of the different social groups we belong to .  In addition, we also participate in the construction and reconstruction of the identities of others when we relate to and communicate with them. 




As it is often difficult to notice or examine the hands that are writing us, TOE was designed so that learners can develop  tools to enable them  to notice and analyse these hands more easily . These tools should also enable learners: to ‘write’ (their own perceptions and relationships) with more confidence; to think more independently and to examine the effects their writing has on other people and in the world, so that they can decide (for themselves) whether or not they should change their writing . 

The second metaphor used in the project refers to the construction of difference. The colonial notion that difference is defined as deficiency is based on assumptions of individuality grounded in a notion of a self-sufficient individual who is ‘the same’ as other individuals in his/her community and therefore dispensable. In TOE, we use the metaphor of a hand  to re-deploy a notion of difference based on the idea of different, inter-dependent individuals who, like fingers of a hand, are insufficient in themselves, but indispensible in their communities (as they offer a unique contribution to this community). This metaphor aims to open the possibility for learners to look at difference as a source of learning and not as a threat and to appreciate people for their unique contribution.




The third metaphor refers to positionality and the impossibility of putting ourselves in the shoes of others while we still have our own shoes on. On the one hand, we cannot really take our shoes off - as we cannot simply forget all of our own experience, language and concepts and we lack other people’s experience, language and concepts to see 'exactly' what they see. On the other hand, it is really important that we understand that different people will have different shoes and will be coming from different experiences, languages and concepts .  Looking at different people’s shoes (even though we cannot walk in them) reminds us that cultures are context-bound as all shoes are ‘coming from’ somewhere. By engaging with different shoes, despite the difficulties of putting them on, we might understand better where our own shoes might be coming from and where they might be leading to in order to check if we are happy with the ways and paths we are walking.



The fourth metaphor refers to four possible lenses to frame otherness that reinforce unequal relations of power: of the missionary, the teacher, the tourist and the anthropologist. These are related to Spivak’s ideas of the colonial heritage to frame otherness in ways that ‘subalternise’ difference. The lens of the missionary frames engagement with otherness or difference around the motif of ‘salvation’ and increased privilege for the ‘saviour’. The teacher frames engagement with otherness around the motif of ‘enlightenment’ and increased privilege for the holder of knowledge. The tourist, frames engagement with difference around the motif of ‘consumption’ or ‘entertainment’. And, finally, the lens of the anthropologist’ frames engagement with difference around the motif of ‘preservation’. The first two lenses favour intervention for ‘positive’ change defined by those who are intervening. The third and fourth lenses favour ‘preservation’ defined by those who observe. These lesnses tend to block possibilities for equal grounds for meaningful dialogue where the self is open to challenge and be challenged by difference.

The fifth metaphor refers to past and present imbalances in power relations, in the distribution of resources and in the worth attributed to knowledges, cultures and individuals. It invites learners to think about the epistemic violences  inherited from colonialism and its implications in modern competitive societies. It also highlights the complex negotiation of power on the part of indigenous groups and raises the question of what can be learned from different ways of knowing.



The sixth metaphor refers to the partiality of perspectives, the importance of situateedness and the context dependency of language. It draws from poststructuralist theory that informs some of the postcolonial theoretical strands described in the first part of this article,  and the Incan trilogy of perspectives of the condor, the serpent and the jaguar.  This metaphor invites learners to see a village through the eyes of each of these three animal ‘seers’, to explore the limitations and partiality of each way of seeing and to imagine a conversation where these perspectives are brought together. What would happen if one or more of these players decided to claim they could see the whole picture? What languages would be used to communicate each perspective? Would they be able to understand each other? Would they be able to arrive at a consensus? Would their own perspectives change after this conversation? Would they have a better idea of the ‘whole picture’ through this conversation? This questioning process reflects the pedagogical process that TOE aims to facilitate.

PDF version of this section

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

 

Spivak’s work provided the insight for the structure of TOE’s conceptual framework of learning to unlearn, learning to listen, learning to learn and learning to reach out.

Learning to unlearn is defined as learning to perceive that what we consider ‘good and ideal’ is only one perspective and this perspective is related to where we come from socially, historically and culturally. It also involves perceiving that we carry a 'cultural baggage' filled with ideas and concepts produced in our contexts and that this affects who we are and what we see and that although we are different from others in our own contexts, we share much in common with them. Thus, learning to unlearn is about making the connections between social-historical processes and encounters that have shaped our contexts and cultures and the construction of our knowledges and identities. It is also about becoming aware that all social groups contain internal differences and conflicts and that culture is a dynamic and conflictual production of meaning in a specific context.

Learning to listen is defined as learning to recognise the effects and limits of our perspective, and to be receptive to new understandings of the world. It involves learning to perceive how our ability to engage with and relate to difference is affected by our cultural 'baggage‘ - the ideas we learn from our social groups. Hence, learning to listen is about learning to keep our perceptions constantly under scrutiny (tracing the origins and implications of our assumptions) in order to open up to different possibilities of understanding and becoming aware that our interpretations of what we hear (or see) say more about ourselves than about what is actually being said or shown. This process also involves understanding how identities are constructed in the process of interaction between self and other. This interaction between self and other occurs not only in the communities in which we belong, but also between these communities and others.

Learning to learn is defined as learning to receive new perspectives, to re-arrange and expand our own and to deepen our understanding – going into the uncomfortable space of ‘what we do not know we do not know’. It involves creating different possibilities of understanding, trying to see through other eyes by transforming our own eyes and avoiding the tendency to want to turn the other into the self or the self into the other. Therefore, learning to learn is about learning to feel comfortable about crossing the boundaries of the comfort zone within ourselves and  engaging with new concepts to rearrange our 'cultural baggage': our understandings, relationships and desires.

Learning to reach out is defined as learning to apply this learning to our own contexts and in our relationships with others continuing to reflect and explore new ways of being, thinking, doing, knowing and relating. It involves understanding that one needs to be open to the unpredictable outcomes of mutual uncoersive learning and  perceiving that in making contact with others, one exposes oneself and exposes others to difference and newness, and this often results in mutual teaching and learning (although this learning may be different for each party involved). Learning to reach out is about learning to engage, to learn and to teach with respect and accountability in the complex and uncomfortable intercultural space where identities, power and ideas are negotiated. This process requires the understanding that conflict is a productive component of learning and that the process itself is cyclical: once one has learned to reach out in one context, one is ready to start a new cycle of unlearning, listening, learning and reaching out again at another level.

METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK

TOE’s methodological framework was piloted with groups in the UK, Brazil and New Zealand as it was developed. It is mapped against a conceptual tool that makes a distinction between ego-, ethno-, human- and world-centric domains of engagement . Each domain focuses on a way of thinking that emphasises certain perspectives and excludes others. The ego-centric domain highlights one’s own framings, narratives and representations; the ethno-centric domain highlights the framings, narratives and representations of one’s social groups; the human-centric level highlights the framings, narratives and representations of ‘other’ social groups and the world-centric level highlights ‘other’ possible framings, narratives and representations, including those that are non-humanist, non-anthropocentric and non-logocentric.

Each learning unit, consisting of six components, was designed to develop the capacity of learners to articulate complexity, to be exposed to different perspectives, to position themselves in relation to different views, to make connections to different contexts and to develop reflexivity.


The ‘getting started’ component was designed to prompt a brainstorm of individual perspectives and to invite learners to relate these perspectives to dissenting perspectives in their social groups. This component is associated with ‘learning to unlearn’ and operates at the ego-/ethno-centric domains of engagement. In the unit about education, the getting started component invites learners to think about whether education reflects or is reflected by society, to write their own definition of education in their learning journals and to consider different understandings of education in their own social groups.

The ‘mainstream perspectives’ component is an analysis and deconstruction of mainstream notions of the target concepts. It exposes learners to the heterogeneity within the ‘ethno-centric’ narrative and offers an outline of different strands in the debate about the topic. This component is also associated with ‘learning to unlearn’. In the TOE unit on education, learners are invited to examine the assumptions and implications of different ‘mainstream’ perspectives on education and to reflect on key questions in the educational debate related to otherness, such as: who should be involved in the decision making process about the type of education and/or schooling for a specific community; who should education or schooling be primarily accountable to; and the reason and implications of trying to impose a standardised curriculum and qualifications worldwide.

The component ‘different logics’ employs metaphors to enable comparisons between two different possible and logical ways of thinking about the target issue. It aims to illustrate how different ontological choices affect the understanding of the target concept. The ‘alternative’ perspective in this component is the authors’ interpretation of common threads in the interviews with members of the indigenous groups who participated in the baseline research for the project (but it is not represented as a specific indigenous perspective). This component is associated to ‘learning to listen’ and addresses the ethno-/human-/world-centric domains of engagement. In the TOE unit on education, participants are invited to analyse the possibilities and problems created by an understanding of education based on the metaphor of ‘bonsai for sale’ (where individuals are pruned according to pre-dertemined parameters) and education as allowing a forest to grow (where education is about nurturing and supporting the individual to develop its unique contribution to society).

The component ‘through other eyes’ offers excerpts from the interviews with members of indigenous groups related to the target topic that illustrate the depth and complexity of their thinking. Participants are invited to reflect and comment on different aspects of these perspectives. This component is associated to ‘learning to learn’ and addresses the ethno-/human-/world-centric domains of engagement. An example of an excerpt from the unit on education is as follows:

We have an African saying that it takes an entire village to educate a child and when this child receives Western oriented education, he or she meets contradictions between the school and community offers. He or she learns to navigate and negotiate through the school and community cultures all the time. At school, the message is alternative knowledge to school knowledge is ignorance. The child finally becomes a stranger to her or his own community. Our elders have come up with an acronym for this schooling education. It is PHD – permanent head damage (Banda, 2006 cited in TOE, 2008)

The ‘case study’ component was designed to prompt an examination of the perspectives ‘in practice’ focusing on the complexity of issues related to coloniser-colonised relationships. This component is associated to ‘learning to reach out’ and operates at the world-/human-/ethno-centric domains of engagement. In the unit on education, participants are invited to analyse a case study with statements from 1888 to 2007 related to the education of indigenous children in New Zealand. The journal task prompts learners to transfer the analysis to their own contexts by creating a case study which has parallels with the case study presented.

The ‘reading the world again’ component invites learners to examine the definition of education they wrote in their journal entry in the ‘getting started’ component and to comment on what (if anything) they have learned from the exercises about themselves, indigenous knowledges or learning and teaching. This component is also associated to ‘learning to reach out’ and it brings the learner back to thinking about the ego-centric domain of engagement, hopefully incorporating the lessons from the other domains.

Human Diversity Makes Sustainable Organizations

Copyright JFS

• http://www.japanfs.org/en/pages/029013.html
  

Lecturer: Taro Tamura, Representative of Institute for Human Diversity Japan

Today's topic, "Diversity," will be a critical keyword in the next several years. I think everyone will have to consider diversity when they work at any company. I would like to talk about what human diversity means and about the features of communities and organizations that consider human diversity.

Severity of Society without Diversity - Bitter Lessons Learned from Disaster

Two years ago, I established an organization called the Institute for Human Diversity Japan. The company conducts case studies and seminars and provides consultation services to businesses on the theme of "Diversity to Enhance Communities and Organizations." I got into this business because of the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake 14 years ago. During the disaster, I was astonished to learn how hard it is to live in a society without consideration for diversity. Things I felt at that time became the basis of my strong interest in diversity.

One of the seriously damaged areas was the old residential district with low-rent housing units, where many foreign students, single elderly people and physically-challenged people lived. It is a common phenomenon all over the world to have an old town district called "inner city" at the center of an urban city with a high concentration of low-income population including immigrants. When a disaster strikes, these old houses are prone to collapse and fire. From two days after the earthquake, we conducted volunteer activities to provide information in multiple languages for foreigners living in the area who had a hard time gaining support in Japanese.

Subsequently at the Mid Niigata Prefecture Earthquake in 2004, we visited evacuation centers where many foreigners were staying to provide information in multiple languages. School gymnasiums were first converted into evacuation centers, but unlike Japanese who participated in disaster drills from their childhood, foreigners even didn't know the existence of evacuation centers. Elderly people without much physical strength failed to escape swiftly and a nearby school gymnasium was sometimes already completely occupied by the time they arrived there. Therefore, they had to go to other public facilities with the lights on such as city halls or libraries. For example, as many as 40 Brazilians were staying at the lobby of city hall and 120 Chinese were staying at a library. Where we saw many foreigners, we also saw many Japanese elderly people.

Evacuation centers in Japan lack consideration more than the refugee camps in developing countries, such as in Africa. At a refugee camp, refugee workers count the number of people and calculate necessary calories, but at the Japanese evacuation centers, the workers think that bringing in some bread and rice balls would be just fine. When there are many people, some may want to have low-sodium food or non-allergic food, or some may have restriction of their diet for religious reasons. But usually these alternatives are not considered at all.

The sanitary problem is also serious. At the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, some 500 people died after they were displaced into evacuation centers. The temporary Japanese-style toilets installed outside were cold and unfriendly to elderly users. Some people wouldn't drink much water to avoid going to the toilet. With their dried throat, quite a few choked on food to death. At the Mid Niigata Prefecture Earthquake, the economic class syndrome at the evacuation centers, covered by the media, was allegedly caused partly because of the lack of adequate water. Why isn't it possible to consider the needs of different people at an evacuation center?

In Japan, many districts routinely participate in disaster drills, but most of the participants are healthy people in the communities. The public officials who were in charge of disaster prevention planning in the prefectures attacked by the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake were all male. Then it would be difficult to think of necessary services at the evacuation centers including the preferred types of toilet and the places to change diapers or clothes. A group consisting of only healthy males won't be able to come up with an evacuation center where every citizen can feel secure. There are all kinds of people with disabilities or allergies, as well as senior citizens and foreigners. We need to have a variety of members to think together.

No Discrimination is Not Enough

Diversity in an organization means to consider human diversity and to maintain a system promoting it in human affairs, business operations and development of products and services.

Specifically, in the human affairs aspect, we need to consider how to employ diverse people and how to construct diversity strategies at the time of dispatching workers to certain positions and promoting workers. In the business operation, we need to consider how to give instructions and trainings. For instance, about one in forty people has a color deficiency problem. We need to consider if these PowerPoint slides are easy to see for such people too. Some companies consider diversity in the human affairs aspect by employing a certain number of people with disabilities and by having a certain number of female workers in managerial positions. But whether or not a comfortable working environment is actually created every day is a different story at many workplaces. Only hiring is far from enough.

Japanese organizations also need to promote consideration about diversity of customers at the development stage of products and services. For instance, a private railway company in the Kansai region (centered in Osaka) was sued for a lack of consideration for color blindness. The timetable at the platform of station showed red bold outline with white inner color for super express and green bold outline with white inner color for local express. The company did not realize that people who can't distinguish green and red were unable to differentiate one from another.

Consideration for diversity is different from human affairs without discrimination. Coming out even is not good enough. We need to continue to improve the situation. An organization with diverse personnel is consequently strong, because the world we live in is diverse. An organization without diversity will not be able to answer the needs of the world that is diverse.

Aiming at Harmonious Society in which Both Changes

When people with different cultural backgrounds come to our society, there are mainly four types of responses. They are "exclusion," "assimilation," "habitat segregation" and "coexistence." In other words, there are two frameworks, whether or not we accept them, and whether we think they will change or they won't change forever.

The first "exclusion" means "They can stay for a while, but not forever. Please leave sometime soon." The second "assimilation" means "They are different now, but they will change and become like us in a year or so. They have to change."

The third "habitat segregation" means "They can stay, but please don't come into our territory" or "Foreigners must live in their own districts."

The idea of diversity is close to "kyosei" ("coexistence" or "harmony") in Japanese. Both sides change in this case. Societies and organizations that accept strangers will change to work and live together. That is the harmonious diversity. For instance, when a female worker comes to work at an office with only male members, the idea of diversity requires the organization itself to change rather than asking only the female to change.

The example of male and female is rather easy to understand, but the problem is when it comes to the case of accepting foreigners, people suddenly find it impossible to understand. When we say, "Japanese people can change, too" when foreigners come, many people suddenly ask "Why do we have to change?"

Response Needed for Demographically Changing Society

We need to pay attention to demographic changes in addition to climate change. For instance, in about the 1970s, the social system was functioning fine because the birth rate was high due to the second baby boom and the number of workers who pay taxes exceeded that of elderly people who depended on the tax revenue. In 2050, however, the number of elderly people will sharply increase while the number of workers will substantially decrease. The society will not function if the systems including social securities are the same.

According to the demographic forecast of the world, the Asian countries besides those in South Asia have the same problem of low birthrate and an aging population just like Japan. The total fertility rate is dropping faster than that of Japan in some countries. Foreign work force will be needed in China and Korea, but a country like Japan that doesn't consider diversity will not be able to attract foreign workers. Furthermore, I think young people in Japan will also leave such country. In reality, many people still don't realize the Japanese society as a whole will not function anymore if nothing is done.

There is a region that realized this 30 years ago. It is the Northern Europe:

For instance, Sweden is famous for its excellent welfare system although the tax rate is high. In the 1970s, the Swedish government introduced immigration policy along with a high-burden and high-welfare policy. It was an attempt to socialize elderly care and welfare that had been a family responsibility. The country started to accept immigrants who can support the new system.

The Swedish government provides Swedish language education to the immigrants and gives consideration to the environment in which the immigrants can maintain their native language and culture. A friend of mine who is a resident Korean in Japan stayed in Sweden before. He was very impressed about Sweden. He said, "When I told them 'My son's culture is Korean,' a Swedish person came to teach our son the Korean culture. What a wonderful country!"

It has been more than 30 years since the Swedish government introduced these policies, and the female employment rate has risen and the total fertility rate is maintained at almost the same level as before. The improvement of female employment rate and acceptance of immigrants do not contradict but create synergetic effects. Some say, "When the female employment rate rises, the birth rate drops," but it is actually opposite. It is known that countries with a high female employment rate have a high birth rate.

In Sweden where the government developed a system, accepted immigrants, and tackled with comprehensive population policy, people built a culture in which various cultural backgrounds are considered and naturally gender equality is promoted. Thus the country is creating a society that can somewhat respond to a demographically changing society. Japan is 30 years behind. The future of Japan will be devastating if the country can't make such choice now.

Community-wide Social Responsibility

It is impossible for companies alone to promote increasing the ratio of female workers and the number of workers with disabilities. For instance, the female employment rate depends on the number of children waiting to be enrolled in a daycare center. Some communities have no children waiting because the municipality measures and policies are well implemented, but others have many children on the waiting list. Also, some communities have non-profit organizations (NPOs) that provide support to people with disabilities to find jobs, but others don't. It is a huge responsibility companies alone can't fulfill no matter how hard they try.

Companies have been required to fulfill many responsibilities. I would like to suggest that we should stop pressing the responsibilities only on companies in our society. It is about time to think about a community-wide social responsibility, not only the corporate social responsibility.

Sharing situations and information, companies, municipalities and NPOs have to organize a community-wide discussion to explore, for instance, how to raise female employment rate and the employment rate of people with disabilities and how to provide Japanese education to foreigners. Only through these efforts, companies can consider diversity.

I think the major factor that is preventing the consideration for diversity is actually the citizens. A president of a company that manufactures plastic parts for cell phones and printers told me that consumers' demand for cheap products may eventually prevent pay increase of foreign workers in the factory. He thinks it is impossible to provide cell phones and printers at a low price if he considers human diversity. Many of the workers at a factory that make lunch boxes for convenience stores are foreigners. If we want to have the lunch boxes ready at the convenience stores by 7 am, someone must make them during the night, but Japanese people don't want to work under such working conditions. Consequently, because of us, the citizens that seek for too low price and too much convenience, the human diversity is put behind.

During the past 10 years, the environmental problems have gained more consideration. Next is the consideration for human diversity. I think the future of sustainable organizations and sustainable communities depend on whether or not we can establish a community that takes human diversity into consideration within about five years.

Taro Tamura, Representative of Institute for Human Diversity Japan

Taro Tamura participated in the creation of the Foreigners' Earthquake Information Center in response to the Great Hanshin Earthquake in 1995. From there, he went on to create the Center for Multicultural Information and Assistance. In April 2004, he became a research editor for the International Institute for Human, Organization and the Earth (IIHOE) and changed the focus of his activities to supporting the management of NPOs and local governments. His work has focused on a private sector point of view towards societal reform. In 2004, Mr. Tamura created the NPO "edge" (Entrance for Designing Global Entrepreneurship) utilizing his own social entrepreneurial experiences to help support the efforts of other young social entrepreneurs.

In January 2007, he founded Diversity Japan and became the representative. Mr. Tamura is very active in social responsibility research, and regularly offers training and advises about diversity strategies to communities that are facing new diversity challenges.