No abstract

Recently, theoreticians have hypothesized that diverse groups, as opposed to groups that are homogeneous, may have relative merits [S. E. Page, The Diversity Bonus (2019)]—all of which lead to more success in solving complex problems. As such, understanding complex, intertwined environmental and social issues may benefit from the integration of diverse types of local expertise. However, efforts to support this hypothesis have been frequently made through laboratory-based or computational experiments, and it is unclear whether these discoveries generalize to real-world complexities. To bridge this divide, we combine an Internet-based knowledge elicitation technique with theoretical principles of collective intelligence to design an experiment with local stakeholders. Using a case of striped bass fisheries in Massachusetts, we pool the local knowledge of resource stakeholders represented by graphical cognitive maps to produce a causal model of complex social-ecological interdependencies associated with fisheries ecosystems. Blinded reviews from a scientific expert panel revealed that the models of diverse groups outranked those from homogeneous groups. Evaluation via stochastic network analysis also indicated that a diverse group more adequately modeled complex feedbacks and interdependencies than homogeneous groups. We then used our data to run Monte Carlo experiments wherein the distributions of stakeholder-driven cognitive maps were randomly reproduced and virtual groups were generated. Random experiments also predicted that knowledge diversity improves group success, which was measured by benchmarking group models against an ecosystem-based fishery management model. We also highlight that diversity must be moderated through a proper aggregation process, leading to more complex yet parsimonious models.

No abstract

The North American Spine Society (NASS) covered the costs of the meeting. The authors are solely responsible for the contents of this publication and they do not necessarily represent the official views of NASS.

Systems thinking (ST) skills are often the foundation of sustainability science curricula. Though ST skill sets are used as a basic approach to reasoning about complex environmental problems, there are gaps in our understanding regarding the best ways to promote and assess ST learning in classrooms. Since ST learning provides Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) students' important skills and awareness to participate in environmental problem-solving, addressing these gaps is an important STEM learning contribution. We have created guidelines for teaching and measuring ST skills derived from a hybrid of a literature review and through case study data collection. Our approach is based on semi-quantitative cognitive mapping techniques meant to support deep reasoning about the complexities of social-ecological issues. We begin by arguing that ST should be evaluated on a continuum of understanding rather than a binary of correct/incorrect or present/absent. We then suggest four fundamental dimensions of teaching and evaluating ST which include: (1) system structure, (2) system function, (3) identification of leverage points for change, and (4) trade-off analysis. Finally, we use a case study to show how these ideas can be assessed through cognitive maps to help students develop deep system understanding and the capacity to propose innovative solutions to sustainability problems.