Complexity Science, Living Systems, and Sensemaking: Linking Prof. Dave Snowden and Fritjof Capra's Work in Understanding Culture and Community Perceptions of Environmental Change

31 Oct

In a world increasingly defined by uncertainty and rapid environmental change, complexity science offers valuable insights into how communities perceive and respond to their local environments. Two key figures who have significantly contributed to this understanding are Prof. Dave Snowden, a prominent thinker in knowledge management and sensemaking, and Fritjof Capra, a systems theorist whose work has shaped our understanding of living systems and ecological interconnectedness. Both Snowden and Capra draw on complexity science to explore how individuals and communities interact with their environments, how they process information, and how cultural systems evolve in response to external pressures.

This article will explore the links between Snowden and Capra’s work, focusing on their contributions to understanding culture, sensemaking, and the role of living systems theory in shaping human relationships with nature. Central to this discussion is the concept of proximity—how close or distant communities are from the ecological impacts of biodiversity loss and climate warming, and how this proximity influences behavioral changes and cultural adaptations. We will examine how complexity thinking provides a framework for understanding these dynamics and explore how sensemaking can foster resilience in the face of environmental crises.

Complexity Science: A Foundation for Understanding Ecological Systems and Cultural Responses

Complexity science focuses on the behavior of systems that are made up of multiple, interconnected components that interact in ways that produce unpredictable, emergent outcomes. Both Snowden and Capra’s work is deeply rooted in this framework, although they approach it from different angles.

Fritjof Capra is best known for his pioneering work on living systems theory, which he elaborated in his book The Web of Life (1996). Living systems theory posits that all life forms are organized as networks of relationships, where the health and resilience of an ecosystem or a society depend on the dynamic interactions between its components. In Capra’s view, nature and culture are not separate entities but deeply intertwined systems that evolve together. This perspective aligns with complex adaptive systems theory, which suggests that both ecological and social systems are constantly adapting to internal and external forces.

Prof. Dave Snowden, on the other hand, focuses on sensemaking—the process by which people make sense of complex, ambiguous situations. His Cynefin framework, a decision-making tool that helps categorize problems into domains of order, complexity, chaos, and disorder, is a direct application of complexity science to human systems. Snowden’s work is particularly concerned with how people in different contexts understand their environments and how this understanding informs their behavior.

Together, Snowden and Capra’s work provides a holistic lens through which to view the challenges posed by climate change and biodiversity loss. Their emphasis on networks, relationships, and emergent properties of systems highlights the need to consider how cultural systems evolve in response to environmental pressures and how communities make sense of these changes.

Living Systems and Community Perceptions of the Environment

Capra’s living systems theory is particularly relevant to understanding how communities perceive their local natural environments. In a living system, no part of the ecosystem can be understood in isolation; rather, it must be seen as part of a larger, interconnected web of life. This applies equally to human societies, where cultural practices, values, and knowledge systems are shaped by the surrounding environment.

In many Indigenous and traditional communities, the concept of interconnectedness is fundamental to their worldview. For example, in the traditional Maori concept of kaitiakitanga, which refers to guardianship and stewardship of the land, the health of the environment is directly linked to the well-being of the community. This sense of responsibility arises from the recognition that human and ecological systems are co-dependent. Such cultural practices reflect what Capra describes as the cyclical, regenerative nature of living systems, where feedback loops maintain the health and balance of both nature and society.

Snowden’s work on sensemaking complements this by showing how communities interpret changes in their environment. When communities are close to the ecological impacts of biodiversity loss or climate warming, such as experiencing changes in water availability, crop failure, or the loss of local species, their lived experience drives sensemaking processes that can result in behavioral and cultural adaptations. For example, farmers who notice shifts in rainfall patterns may change their agricultural practices to suit the new conditions, while fishermen affected by declining fish stocks may develop new management strategies based on their collective knowledge.

The Role of Proximity in Sensemaking and Behavioral Change

A key concept in both complexity science and sensemaking is the idea of proximity—how closely a community is situated to the impacts of ecological change. This proximity can refer to geographical closeness, where individuals experience environmental degradation first-hand, or it can refer to the emotional or cognitive closeness of perceiving a threat as imminent and relevant to one’s daily life.

Snowden’s work emphasizes that people are more likely to engage in sensemaking when the problem they face is proximal, rather than distant or abstract. For instance, the Cynefin framework suggests that communities in the "complex" domain, where outcomes are uncertain and emerge over time, rely on experiential knowledge and adaptive learning. This aligns with Capra’s idea that living systems respond to changes in their environment through continuous feedback loops. As a system detects shifts—whether in climate patterns, biodiversity, or resource availability—it adjusts its behavior in real-time to maintain balance.

In the context of climate change and biodiversity loss, proximity to ecological impacts is crucial for driving behavioral changes. Communities that are more directly affected by these changes are more likely to recognize the urgent need for adaptation. For example, Indigenous Arctic communities that experience the direct effects of melting sea ice and changing migration patterns of animals are already adapting their hunting, fishing, and travel practices in response to these changes. Their sensemaking is grounded in proximal feedback loops, which allow them to respond to environmental cues in ways that mitigate risk and sustain their livelihoods.

By contrast, communities that are more distant from the impacts of ecological change may perceive the problem as less urgent, leading to delayed responses or a lack of behavioral change. For instance, urban populations in industrialized nations, who may not experience the immediate effects of climate warming, often exhibit a cognitive dissonance between abstract knowledge of environmental issues and their everyday practices, which remain largely unchanged. This phenomenon aligns with Snowden’s assertion that problems in the chaos domain—where outcomes are highly uncertain and overwhelming—can lead to paralysis or denial unless broken down into more manageable, understandable parts.

Complexity Science and Cultural Adaptation to Ecological Change

The idea that ecological change requires cultural adaptation is not new, but complexity science provides a framework for understanding how these adaptations emerge and evolve. Both Capra and Snowden’s work suggests that cultural systems are adaptive, responding to changes in their environment through processes of emergence rather than through top-down control. In other words, cultural practices and behaviors shift in response to feedback from the environment, but these shifts are often nonlinear and unpredictable.

In many cases, cultural adaptations to ecological change are mediated by informal networks and local knowledge systems. For example, in the face of increasing drought conditions in parts of sub-Saharan Africa, local farmers have turned to traditional agroecological practices such as intercropping and agroforestry, which enhance soil fertility and conserve water. These practices are not imposed by external authorities but emerge from the collective sensemaking of local communities, who draw on their experiential knowledge of the land to develop sustainable solutions.

Snowden’s work highlights the importance of such distributed knowledge systems in responding to complexity. In his view, top-down approaches to problem-solving often fail in complex environments because they cannot account for the diverse, localized knowledge that exists within a community. Instead, effective solutions emerge from bottom-up processes where individuals and groups experiment with different approaches, share their experiences, and adapt based on the outcomes.

Capra’s emphasis on the networked nature of living systems supports this idea. Just as ecological systems rely on the exchange of nutrients, energy, and information to maintain their health, human systems depend on the flow of knowledge and cultural practices to adapt to change. This flow is facilitated by informal networks of farmers, fishermen, and community leaders, who serve as the connective tissue that links individuals to their broader ecological and social systems.

Conclusion: Complexity, Sensemaking, and Building Resilience in the Face of Ecological Change

The convergence of Snowden and Capra’s ideas offers a powerful lens for understanding how communities perceive and respond to environmental change. Their work underscores the importance of complexity science in navigating the uncertainties of climate change and biodiversity loss, while also emphasizing the role of proximity in driving cultural and behavioral adaptations. Communities that are closer to the ecological impacts of these changes are more likely to engage in sensemaking processes that lead to adaptive behaviors, while those who are more distant may struggle to respond effectively.

Through their focus on living systems, sensemaking, and the dynamics of emergence, Snowden and Capra provide valuable tools for fostering resilience in the face of environmental crises. By recognizing that human systems are embedded within larger ecological networks, and that cultural adaptations arise from bottom-up processes of experimentation and learning, we can begin to build more sustainable and responsive communities that are capable of navigating the complexities of a rapidly changing world.