When I was in my urban planning masters program they suggested a typology of problems as sort of a 2x2 matrix, or a cartesian plane.
On one margin you can classify problems according to how well the mechanisms for addressing the problem are. On the other margin, you can classify problems according to how much agreement there is on what the aims should be.
Wicked problems, in my view, are problems where you neither have agreement on the desired end state, nor a good understanding/capacity to effect any potential outcome.
As a self-professed geek, I’ve spent a lot of my life thinking hard about how to address technical mechanisms of problem solving, usually with an assumed view of what constitutes “solved.”
At least in the disciplines where I’ve spent time, I’m increasingly convinced that the lion’s share of every problem is political rather than technical.
With that definition of a wicked problem, it seems obvious why we’d suck at solving them. They’re wicked after all!
So the climate is a wicked problem as an example? I think a different way to say this is that wicked problems are by definition either political or ideological.
Absolutely climate change is wicked, but perhaps in superlatively vicious and subtle ways. I mean, it’s not technically hard to stop puttng carbon in the atmosphere, but it is technically hard to do stop putting carbon in the atmosphere and maintain our standard of living.
In my view truly wicked problems have both ideological / political components as you say, as well as mechanistic challenges. In climate both types of challenges abound.
I dont think mechanical challenges are necessary for a wicked problem, but political and ideological challenges always are i think, i would have to think about it some more
The solution isn't stopping it but embracing it! There is no way you're going to put the first world genie back into the bottle. Doing so, by forcing the West into an archaic revival type society will result in revolts that will leave cheerleaders of such political solutions shall I say... more carbon neutral?
No, it would be better to embrace it and engineer around and with it.
On one margin you can classify problems according to how well the mechanisms for addressing the problem are. On the other margin, you can classify problems according to how much agreement there is on what the aims should be.
Wicked problems, in my view, are problems where you neither have agreement on the desired end state, nor a good understanding/capacity to effect any potential outcome.
As a self-professed geek, I’ve spent a lot of my life thinking hard about how to address technical mechanisms of problem solving, usually with an assumed view of what constitutes “solved.”
At least in the disciplines where I’ve spent time, I’m increasingly convinced that the lion’s share of every problem is political rather than technical.
With that definition of a wicked problem, it seems obvious why we’d suck at solving them. They’re wicked after all!