Studies in Radical Biocracy
Flows from Relational Being to Relational, Autonomous Decision-Making
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47061/jasc.v4i2.8206Keywords:
decision-making, biocracy, emergence, symbiotic design, emergent design, relational autonomyAbstract
Work to improve the health of a system should look at decision-making because decisions propagate throughout a system, shaping system dynamics. This is especially true for decisions by those with more power, resources, and relationships in a system. Usually, human collective or group decision-making is conducted from an individualist, objectivist perspective. What happens when we allow the system to sense itself and make group decisions instead of deliberating, negotiating, and voting between individualist positions? What happens when we use an approach based on the radical relationality of Radical Participatory Design and Relational Design? Is it possible to experience a type of relational political ecology in group decision-making?
The term political ecology carries multiple meanings. Here, we use the term political ecology to denote the power dynamics within any ecological system—a geographical population, a community, an ecosystem, etc. We describe three special ingredients or nutrients for a relational political ecology—relationality, emergence-conducive principles, and relational autonomy. On a team of people working for system health, these three ecological nutrients support a relational way of being which then transforms the team’s way of knowing, decision-making, and thus, political ecology. The fourth-person being that emerges from these three ecological nutrients leads to a fourth-person knowing in which individuals do not deliberate and vote on various decisions. Instead the system senses itself and the social field makes the decisions resulting in emergent and symbiotic design. Emergent design refers to design that emerges from consistently following a few basic principles. Symbiotic design occurs over time when deeply, relationally embedded entities or groups retain autonomy and indirectly or directly co-evolve, creating a design that would not have occurred through an individualist, consciously explicit design process. Using two situations from social and service design, we describe three examples of relational, autonomous decision-making or political ecologies. The three examples illustrate participatory futures, service, and systems work that lead to emergent and symbiotic designs.
References
Allan, P., & Smith, H. (2013). Research at the interface: Bicultural studio in New Zealand, a case study. MAI Journal: A New Zealand Journal of Indigenous Scholarship, 2(3), 133–149. http://hdl.handle.net/10453/114909
Almazán, J., McReynolds, J., Saito, N., & StudioLab. (April 12, 2022). Emergent Tokyo: Designing the spontaneous city. Oro Editions.
Anderson, C. M., & Huron, A. (2023). The mixed potential of salvage commoning: Crisis and commoning practices in Washington, DC and New York City. Antipode, 55(4), 1004–1023. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12788
Bartold, M., & Ivanovski, S. (2024). Biological processes and factors involved in soft and hard tissue healing. Periodontology 2000, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12546
Baumeister, D., Tocke, R., Dwyer, J., Ritter, S., & Benyus, J. M. (2014). Biomimicry resource handbook: A seed bank of best practices. Biomimicry 3.8.
Bloom, S. L. (2023). A biocratic paradigm: Exploring the complexity of trauma-informed leadership and creating presence. Behavioral Sciences, 13(5), 355–377. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13050355
Blunden, A. (2016). The origins of collective decision making. Brill.
brown, a. m. (2017). Emergent strategy: Shaping change, changing worlds. AK Press.
brown, a. m. (2021). Holding change: The way of emergent strategy facilitation and mediation. AK Press.
Brown, D., Kloekl, K., & Vidrin, I. (2024). Reimagination: Design, performance, and improvisation [Keynote Presentation]. DRS2024, Boston, MA, United States.
Brown, D. (2006). Noise orders: Jazz, improvisation, and architecture. University of Minnesota Press.
Caldwell, L. K. (2016). Biocracy and democracy: science, ethics, and the law. Politics and the Life Sciences, 3(2), 137–149. https://doi.org/10.1017/s073093840000109x
Caldwell, L. K. (2019). Biocracy: Public policy and the life sciences. Routledge.
Cannon, W. B. (1933). Biocracy: Does the human body contain the secret of economic stabilization? The Technology Review 35, 203–227.
Cavallo, D. (2000). Emergent design and learning environments: Building on Indigenous knowledge. IBM Systems Journal, 39(3.4), 768–781. https://doi.org/10.1147/sj.393.0768
Dark Matter Labs. (2023, July 12). Re:Permissioning the city — Unlocking cities’ growing underutilised spatial assets for an emergent civic economy. Medium. https://provocations.darkmatterlabs.org/re-permissioning-the-city-unlocking-cities-growing-underutilised-spatial-assets-for-an-emergent-1550997714a4
Deneubourg, J. L., & Goss, S. (1989). Collective patterns and decision-making. Ethology Ecology & Evolution, 1(4), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927014.1989.9525500
DiSalvo, C. (2015). Adversarial design. MIT Press.
Donchin, A. (2000). Autonomy, interdependence, and assisted suicide: respecting boundaries/crossing lines. Bioethics, 14(3), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8519.00190
Escobar, A., Osterweil, M., & Sharma, K. (2024). Relationality: An emergent politics of life beyond the human. Bloomsbury Visual Arts.
Escobar, A. (2017). Response: Design for/by [and from] the ‘global South.’. Design Philosophy Papers, 15(1), 39–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14487136.2017.1301016
Escobar, A. (2018). Designs for the pluriverse: Radical interdependence, autonomy, and the making of worlds. Duke University Press.
Fleming, P. (2012). The birth of biocracy. In T. Diefenbach, & R. Todnem By (Eds.), Reinventing hierarchy and bureaucracy From the bureau to network organizations (pp. 205–227). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/s0733-558x(2012)0000035010
Forsyth, T. (2003). Critical political ecology: The politics of environmental science. Psychology Press.
García, A. M., Sullivan, W., & Tsiang, S. (2017). An introduction to relational network theory: History, principles, and descriptive applications. Equinox Publishing.
Girardot, N. J. (1988). Myth and meaning in early Taoism: The theme of chaos. University of California Press.
Gómez-Vírseda, C., De Maeseneer, Y., & Gastmans, C. (2019). Relational autonomy: What does it mean and how is it used in end-of-life care? A systematic review of argument-based ethics literature. BMC Medical Ethics, 20(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-019-0417-3
Goodchild, M. (2021). Relational systems thinking: That's how change is going to come, from our earth mother. Journal of Awareness-Based Systems Change, 1(1), 75–103. https://doi.org/10.47061/jabsc.v1i1.577
Gopalkrishnan, A., Morris, M., Pandit, K., & Udoewa, V. (2023). Making service design future-proof at NASA. Touchpoint, 14(2), 72–75. https://doi.org/10.30819/touchpoint.14-2.13
Gunnlaugson, O. (2023). Advancing the field of presencing: Five principles to inform the development of emerging presencing approaches. Journal of Awareness-Based Systems Change, 3(2), 105–128. https://doi.org/10.47061/jasc.v3i2.5222
Hammersley, M. (2022). Emergent design. In U. Flick (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research design (pp. 55–68). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529770278.n5
Inayatullah, S. (1998). Causal layered analysis: Poststructuralism as method. Futures, 30(8), 815–829. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-3287(98)00086-X
Joffe-Walt, C. (Host). (2020, July 30). Nice white parents. [Audio podcast]. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/30/podcasts/nice-white-parents-serial.html
Lang, M. (2022). Buen vivir as a territorial practice. building a more just and sustainable life through interculturality. Sustainability Science, 17(4), 1287–1299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01130-1
Levy, R. A. (2018). The intersection of economic disadvantage and race and the expanded role of parent-led school-supporting nonprofit organizations in K-12 public schools in the Richmond, Virginia, Metropolitan Area: A mixed methods approach [Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Commonwealth University].VCU Scholars Compass. https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/5566/
Mackenzie, C. (2014). Three dimensions of autonomy: A relational analysis. In A. Veltman, & M. Piper (Eds.), Autonomy, oppression and gender (pp. 15–41). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199969104.003.0002
Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in systems: A primer. Chelsea Green Publishing.
Muray, L. A. (2017). Biocracy and the rights of nature. In L. Lamża, & J. Dziadkowiec (Eds.), Recent advances in the creation of a process-based worldview: Human life in process (pp. 94–103). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Nisbet, E. (2021). Local-level philanthropic partnerships in public education: Dilemmas for equity and public responsibility. Journal of Urban Affairs, 43(2), 251–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2017.1421432
Nitzan, S., & Paroush, J. (1985). Collective decision making: An economic outlook. Cambridge University Press.
OpenStaxCollege. (2013). Anatomy & physiology. Retrieved from https://pressbooks-dev.oer.hawaii.edu/anatomyandphysiology/
Pailthorpe, B. C. (2017). Emergent design. In J. Matthes (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of communication research methods (Vols. 1–2). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118901731.iecrm0081
Papanek, V. (2005). Design for the real world: Human ecology and social change. Chicago Review Press.
Pomeroy, E., & Herrmann, L. (2023). Social fields: Knowing the water we swim in. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 60(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/00218863231174957
Porqueddu, E. (2022). Systemic spatial design: Enhancing the potential of spatial design disciplines to navigate adaptive cycles in cities. Contexts: The Systemic Design Journal, 1. https://doi.org/10.58279/v1003
Posey-Maddox, L., Kimelberg, S. M., & Cucchiara, M. (2016). Seeking a ‘critical mass’: Middle-class parents’ collective engagement in city public schooling. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 37(7), 905–927. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2014.986564
Poznic, M., Stacey, M., Hillerbrand, R., & Eckert, C. (2020). Designing as playing games of make-believe. Design Science, 6(e10). https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2020.8
Rahman, M.H., Yuan, S., Xie, C., & Sha, Z. (2020). Predicting human design decisions with deep recurrent neural network combining static and dynamic data. Design Science, 6(e15). https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2020.12
Robbins, P. (2019). Political ecology: A critical introduction. John Wiley & Sons.
Schaller, S., & Nisbet, E. (2020). Regulating private support for public goods: De-clubbing public schools. Journal of Education Policy, 35(3), 287–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2018.1547423
Scharmer, O., & Pomeroy, E. (2024). Fourth person: The knowing of the field. Journal of Awareness-Based Systems Change, 4(1), 19–48. https://doi.org/10.47061/jasc.v4i1.7909
Sciannamè, M. (2022). The designer as cross-boundaries mediator: Merging machine learning, ethics, and design for the flourishing of humans. In G. Goldschmidt, & E. Tarazi (Eds.), Expanding the frontiers of design: A blessing or a curse? (pp. 139–155). DesignTech, Faculty of Architecture and Town Planning.
Sharma, G., Allen, J. K., & Mistree, F. (2021). A method for robust design in a coupled decision environment. Design Science, 7(e23). https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2021.22
Singh, H., Cascini, G., & McComb, C. (2022). Idea selection in design teams: A computational framework and insights in the presence of influencers. Design Science, 8(e23). https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2022.17
Smith, H. (2020). Collaborative strategies for re-enhancing Hapū connections to lands and making changes with our climate. The Contemporary Pacific, 32(1), 21–46. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/75670
Syeed, E. (2018). There goes the PTA: Building parent identity, relationships, and power in gentrifying schools. Equity & Excellence in Education, 51(3–4), 284–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2018.1563875
Tan, J. J., Otto, K. N., & Wood, K. L. (2017). Relative impact of early versus late design decisions in systems development. Design Science, 3(e12). https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2017.13
Thompson, T. L., & MacDonald, C. J. (2005). Community building, emergent design and expecting the unexpected: Creating a quality eLearning experience. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(3), 233–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.06.004
Udoewa, V., & Gress, S. (2023). Relational design. Journal of Awareness-Based Systems Change, 3(1), 101–128. https://doi.org/10.47061/jasc.v3i1.5193
Udoewa, V. (2022a). An introduction to radical participatory design: Decolonising participatory design processes. Design Science, 8(e31). https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2022.24
Udoewa, V. (2022b). Radical participatory design: Awareness of participation. Journal of Awareness-Based Systems Change, 2(2), 59–84. https://doi.org/10.47061/jasc.v2i2.3816
Udoewa, V. (2023). Equity-infused CX, EX and service health at NASA: Differentiating, defining and measuring equitable experience and operations. Touchpoint, 14(1), 16–21. https://doi.org/10.30819/touchpoint.14-1.03
Udoewa, V. (2024). An Introduction to radical biocracy: A relational, autonomous approach to decision-making towards emergent and symbiotic design. Design Science, 10(e18). https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2024.25
Ulloa, A. (2011). The politics of autonomy of Indigenous peoples of the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, Colombia: A process of relational indigenous autonomy. Latin American and Caribbean Ethnic Studies, 6(1), 79–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/17442222.2011.543874
Vermillion, S. D., Malak, R.J., Smallman, R., Becker, B., Sferra, M., & Fields, S. (2017). An investigation on using serious gaming to study human decision-making in engineering contexts. Design Science, 3(e15). https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2017.14
Vignelli, M. (2010). The Vignelli canon. Lars Müller Publishers.
Watts, M. (2017). Political ecology. In E. Sheppard & T. J. Barnes (Eds.), A companion to economic geography (pp. 257–274). Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405166430.ch16
Webb, H. S. (2012). Yanantin and Masintin in the Andean world: Complementary dualism in modern Peru. University of New Mexico Press.
Wetter-Edman, K. (2014). Design for service: A framework for articulating designers’ contribution as interpreter of users’ experience [Doctoral dissertation, University of Gothenburg]. GUPEA.
White, P.J., Okello, D., Casey, B.P., Najjuuko, C., &, R. (2023). Co-designing with engineers for community engagement in rural Uganda. Design Science, 9(e12). https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.10
Willis, A. M. (2006). Ontological designing. Design philosophy papers, 4(2), 69–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.2752/144871306X13966268131514
Wilson, S. (2020). Research is ceremony: Indigenous research methods. Fernwood Publishing.
Yunkaporta, T. (2019). Sand talk: How Indigenous thinking can save the world. Text Publishing.
Zingale, S. (2016). Design as translation activity: A semiotic overview. In P. Lloyd & E. Bohemia (Eds.), Future focused thinking: DRS international conference 2016, 27–30 June, Brighton, United Kingdom (pp. 1061–1072). Digital Research Society. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2016.401/drs.2016.401
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Victor Udoewa
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
