Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Integrative propositional analysis for understanding and reducing poverty

Integrative propositional analysis for understanding and reducing poverty Current approaches to understanding and resolving the problem of poverty have not proved effective. This paper aims to provide a new explanation of why we have failed and what must be done to improve our understanding, decision-making, action and success.Design/methodology/approachIntegrative propositional analysis is used to evaluate and synthesize theoretical and practical perspectives on poverty from five academic disciplines and five disparate organizations.FindingsIndividual theoretical perspectives were found to have low levels of complexity and systemicity.Research limitations/implicationsClear research directions are shown to accelerate improvements in understanding. Additionally, results may provide a useful guide for developing computer models of poverty.Practical implicationsThe causal knowledge map of synthesized theories suggests where practice may be relatively effective and where unanticipated consequences are more likely to occur.Social implicationsPolicy decision-making to address the problem of poverty is not likely to lead to successful resolution. Thus, poverty is likely to continue until we develop a more systemic understanding.Originality/valueThis interdisciplinary paper provides a new structural perspective on why we have not been able to solve the poverty problem – and shows how far we have yet to go to reach success. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Kybernetes Emerald Publishing

Integrative propositional analysis for understanding and reducing poverty

Wallis, Steven E.; Wright, Bernadette
Kybernetes , Volume 48 (6): 14 – Jun 13, 2019
Download PDF
14 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/integrative-propositional-analysis-for-understanding-and-reducing-iUOdTQbOY7
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
© Emerald Publishing Limited
ISSN
0368-492X
DOI
10.1108/k-03-2018-0136
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Current approaches to understanding and resolving the problem of poverty have not proved effective. This paper aims to provide a new explanation of why we have failed and what must be done to improve our understanding, decision-making, action and success.Design/methodology/approachIntegrative propositional analysis is used to evaluate and synthesize theoretical and practical perspectives on poverty from five academic disciplines and five disparate organizations.FindingsIndividual theoretical perspectives were found to have low levels of complexity and systemicity.Research limitations/implicationsClear research directions are shown to accelerate improvements in understanding. Additionally, results may provide a useful guide for developing computer models of poverty.Practical implicationsThe causal knowledge map of synthesized theories suggests where practice may be relatively effective and where unanticipated consequences are more likely to occur.Social implicationsPolicy decision-making to address the problem of poverty is not likely to lead to successful resolution. Thus, poverty is likely to continue until we develop a more systemic understanding.Originality/valueThis interdisciplinary paper provides a new structural perspective on why we have not been able to solve the poverty problem – and shows how far we have yet to go to reach success.

Journal

Kybernetes – Emerald Publishing

Published: Jun 13, 2019

Keywords: Cybernetics; Poverty; Systems theory; Interdisciplinarity; Conceptual systems science; Integrative propositional analysis

References

  • Using system dynamics to evaluate renewable electricity development in Malaysia
    Ahmad, S.; Bin Mat Tahar, R.
  • The use of cognitive mapping in eliciting and evaluating group cognitions
    Curseu, P.; Schalk, R.; Schruijer, S.
  • Stakeholder diversity and the comprehensiveness of sustainability decisions: the role of collaboration and conflict
    Curșeu, P.L.; Schruijer, S.G.
  • Underlying assumptions of several traditions in systems theory and cybernetics
    Dent, E.B.; Umpleby, S.A.; Trappl, R.
  • Enhancing simulation learning with team mental model mapping
    Goltz, S.M.
  • Re-structuring evaluation findings into useful knowledge
    Houston, D.; Wright, B.; Wallis, S.E.
  • Mental models in cognitive science
    Johnson-Laird, P.N.
  • The emergence and use of diagramming in system dynamics: a critical account
    Lane, D.C.
  • Making change happen: recollections of a systems professional
    Schwaninger, M.
  • Propositional analysis, policy creation, and complex environments in the United States’ 2009 Afghanistan-Pakistan policy
    Shackelford, C.
  • Models and simulations for learning in complex domains: using causal loop diagrams for assessment and evaluation
    Spector, J.M.; Christensen, D.L.; Sioutine, A.V.; McCormack, D.
  • Revolutionary leaders: long-term success as a function of changes in conceptual complexity
    Suedfeld, P.; Rank, A.D.
  • Conceptual/integrative complexity
    Suedfeld, P.; Tetlock, P.E.; Streufert, S.; Smith, C.P.
  • The American welfare state: how we spend nearly $1 trillion a year fighting poverty – and fail
    Tanner, M.
  • The complexity of concept mapping for policy analysis
    Trochim, W.M.K.; Cabrera, D.
  • Cybernetics of conceptual systems
    Umpleby, S.A.
  • The influence of social science theories on the conceptualization of poverty in social welfare
    Vu, C.M.
  • From reductive to robust: seeking the core of complex adaptive systems theory
    Wallis, S.E.; Yang, A.; Shan, Y.
  • The structure of theory and the structure of scientific revolutions: what constitutes an advance in theory
    Wallis, S.E.; Wallis, S.E.
  • Towards the development of more robust policy models
    Wallis, S.E.
  • The complexity of complexity theory: an innovative analysis
    Wallis, S.E.; Allen, P.M.; Richardson, K.A.; Goldstein, J.A.
  • How to choose between policy proposals: a simple tool based on systems thinking and complexity theory
    Wallis, S.E.
  • Creating theories and models that work: An innovative ‘science of conceptual systems’ approach
    Wallis, S.E.
  • Existing and emerging methods for integrating theories within and between disciplines
    Wallis, S.E.
  • Are theories of conflict improving? Using propositional analysis to determine the structure of conflict theories over the course of a century
    Wallis, S.E.
  • Integrative propositional analysis: a new quantitative method for evaluating theories in psychology
    Wallis, S.E.
  • The science of conceptual systems: a progress report
    Wallis, S.E.
  • What is sustainable theory? A luhmannian perspective on the science of conceptual systems
    Wallis, S.E.; Valentinov, V.
  • Integrative propositional analysis: the missing link for creating more effective laws
    Wallis, S.E.; Wright, B.
  • Using integrative propositional analysis to evaluate and integrate economic policies of US presidential candidates
    Wallis, S.E.; Wright, B.; Nash, F.D.
  • The effects of top management team integrative complexity and decentralized decision making on corporate social performance
    Wong, E.M.; Ormiston, M.E.; Tetlock, P.E.
  • Integrative propositional analysis: an emerging methodology for constructing more useful theories of poverty
    Wright, B.; Wallis, S.E.
  • Implications for Beer’s ontological system/metasystem dichotomy
    Yolles, M.
  • Knowledge cybernetics: a new metaphor for social collectives
    Yolles, M.