Kirschenmann: Anticipating changes

By FRED KIRSCHENMANN, Leopold Center Distinguished Fellow

Science is even more changeable than theology. No man of science could subscribe without qualification to Gallileo’s beliefs, or to Newton’s beliefs, or to all his own scientific beliefs of ten years ago. − Philosopher Alfred North Whitehead (1861–1947)

How do creative leaps in business, science or art take place? In the book Smart World (Harvard Business School Press, 2007), Richard Ogle presents an interesting theory about the origins of world-changing events, especially those in business. He suggests that we often think significant change occurs as a result of a singular event—a genius such as Einstein comes up with the Theory of Relativity—and forever changes the world of science. This theory of change is grounded in the philosophies of Plato, Descartes and modern rationalism. But our modern science of networks lays out a very different scenario for change. While the science of networks can be traced back to the early 1700s, its application to how change takes place is quite recent. (See, for example, Mark Buchanan, Nexus: Small Worlds and the Groundbreaking Science of Networks, W. E. Norton, 2002.)

Based on this science of networks, Ogle suggests that significant changes in business and other human activities actually take place as a result of “idea-spaces” which evolve through small networks, and create the opportunity for significant changes. For example, we often attribute the evolution of cubism in art to the sole genius of Picasso. However, Ogle points out that small networks of changes were taking place in the world of art at the time, which created the “idea-space” that enabled Picasso to put these innovations on canvas, triggering a revolution in art.

The example of cubism in art reveals how lengthy periods of relative stability can be punctuated by staggering changes in a relatively short period of time. A network of “idea-spaces” creates the context in which singular events can produce significant changes.

What does this have to do with sustainable agriculture? Simply this: Our industrial economy, and the industrial food and agriculture system that has been shaped by it, have enjoyed a rather long period of relative stability. So much so, in fact, that many of us cannot imagine any significant changes taking place in our food system anytime soon—a fact that has sometimes been discouraging to those of us who sense a need for a more sustainable agriculture.

But a network of new idea-spaces definitely has appeared in our food and agriculture world. In a recent article in the New York Review of Books (“The Food Movement, Rising,” June 10, 2010), Michael Pollan has clearly articulated some of the many ideas that have recently emerged in our food culture. While some of these ideas were first put forth in the early 1970s, they only recently have formed an idea-space network. And Pollan, a master of clever one-liners that encapsulate big ideas, refers to this “idea-space” as eating “beyond the barcode.” What will emerge out of such a new food idea-space is, of course, unpredictable. But, what is predictable is that this new idea-space is a fertile environment for significant, unanticipated changes that could radically alter our food and agriculture system, and provide new business opportunities for anyone ready to take advantage of those changes.

Ogle makes another observation that also may be instructive for us as we prepare for an uncertain future in our food and agriculture world. He points out that while new idea-spaces, such as the ones we are seeing in our food culture, set the stage for incredible changes, they also create the conditions for resistance to change. Some of us may be attracted to the new idea-space and embrace it, but others remain confined in their old idea-space and do all they can to prevent change.

The trick here, of course, is determing which idea-space is reflecting what is happening in the real world, and which idea-space is based on unrealistic, wishful thinking. If the new idea-space is a reflection of what is happening in the real world, then it provides us with enormous opportunities for developing new businesses and innovative ways of solving problems, while the businesses locked into the old idea-space will become increasingly dysfunctional.

This is where some insights from Alfred North Whitehead may be additionally instructive. Whitehead pointed out that as our understanding of the inner workings of nature increases, we need to adjust our theories of how the world works to fit the newly discovered realities. Continuing to adhere to the old paradigms, while the real world is revealing new realities, is what he called the “fallacy of misplaced concreteness.” We begin to behave as if the concreteness is in our theories of how the world works, instead of based in the emerging real world. (Science and the Modern World, 1925).

Whitehead went on to point out that adjusting our theories to conform to our ongoing discoveries of how the world works, is a constant “process” and, therefore, we need to constantly anticipate changes in how we view the world. No one can continue to subscribe to the scientific beliefs of ten years ago. The same probably holds true of our sustainable agriculture beliefs of ten years ago.

News

Kirschenmann: Anticipating changes