Then, last week, I had “Wait A Minute!” moment. As I began to update my Designing for Life in Practice Handout, I noticed a curious thing: among these thousands of inspiring people, hardly any describe themselves as a ‘regenerative designer’ or ‘systems thinker’ or ‘transition practitioner’. It’s the same in our Open School for Village Hosts or the Urban-Rural projects. The world of systems thinking shares a different language from the world of those who care for place in practice.
Another anomaly stands out where these two worlds meet – thinking about systems, and caring for place. The uniqueness of place is hard for systems thinking to cope with. Systems thinking aspires to be – well, systematic. But blueprints, canvases and method cards are thin on the ground – literally – among place-caring practitioners. The mismatch here is that mainstream science, management – and therefore funders – need project outcomes to be predictable, controllable, and verifiable. That’s how technoscience works. But that’s not how life works in places.
|