Peer Journal

Team members have repeatedly emphasized that this project needs greater rigor and clarity, especially if we want funding so that we can engage dedicated resources. I would like to propose a goal of submitting a paper to an appropriate peer-reviewed journal before the end of the year. Two journals that have been suggested are Journal of Biological Engineering or Bioinspiration and Biomimetics.

The project has progressed from exploring the value of 'pattern language' to developing proto-patterns based on the ecosystem principles, most recently the EBBT: Overview analysis based on Maibritt's paper and the application of ideas from Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Given that it will take time to 'flesh out' the pattern language, it may be worthwhile to 'return to our roots' and explore what we can learn from how balanced systems solve problems. This may lead to ideas that designers can apply immediately while providing a foundation for the evolving pattern language.

High Level Structure

Solve

Humans pride themselves as powerful problem solvers. History provides many examples of our ability to analyse problems and devise ingenious solutions. Yet often these solutions have unexpected consequences. Although the complexity of the problem is a key factor, even simple solutions to apparently simple problems can have unintended consequences. In Solving for Pattern (The Gift of Good Land), Berry describes three types of solutions:

• those that create new problems outside the perceived scope of the original problem, such as industrial feed lot operations
• those that worsen the problem itself, such as the positive feedback loop between air conditioners and power plants that are often large emitters of greenhouse gases
• those that create "a ramifying series of solutions [by addressing] the whole complex of problems whose proper solutions add up to health"

Although we may be good at solving problems, we are limited in our ability to analyze and balance the conflicting requirements of complex problems. As Berry points out, problems that appear simple may have hidden aspects that we ignore in our desire for a fast solution. One approach is to embed the problem-solving process into a larger context. Alexander in Notes on the Synthesis of Form argues for an 'evolutionary' approach to change, in contrast to the more 'revolutionary' approach that is now popular. He suggests that tweaking what already exists to remove misfits will result in a dynamic system that adapts to change while incorporating a degree of stability. In comparison, trying to make 'grand statements' or striving for disruptive improvements suggests a 'clean slate' approach, which puts a heavy responsibility on the designer to understand, analyze and balance all aspects of the situation. Alexander argues that most designers have neither the skills nor tools for such a daunting task, leading to poorly integrated solutions with unintended side-effects.

The fossil record does include examples of disruptive change, sometimes imposed from outside, sometimes as a result of significant evolutionary advances. An example might be the evolution of photosynthesis that 'poisoned' the atmosphere until oxygen-breathing organisms evolved. A contemporary example might be the 'hydrogen economy'- the rewards may be high, but so are the risks. Disruptive change also often requires difficult and time-consuming integration before the full value is achieved.

Emphasizing incremental change suggests that the very concept 'solving a problem' may be inappropriate. A better model may involve defining a 'preferred state' and then developing roadmaps from our current state. Alexander points out that it is often easier to get consensus on the overall target form, even if the details and importance of various aspects may be endlessly debated. Allan Savory in Re-Creating the West ... One Decision at a Time (The Holistic Management Institute) emphasizes the importance of developing a holistic goal that incorporates factors such as the quality of life, the future landscape and forms of production. This approach helps develop consensus amongst all stakeholders, creates opportunities to incorporate new tools, supports constant monitoring of progress towards the goal, and supports further refinement of the goal as conditions or knowledge change. Working toward a 'preferred state' is also consistent with Berry's argument that "A good solution is good because it is in harmony with those larger patterns [in which it is contained]" (Solving for Pattern), in the sense of contributing to the health of the larger system. The best 'solution' may be indirect, restoring or regenerating systems back to health. I sent a query to Ask a Biologist at Ducks Unlimited to see if they have any research on the effectiveness of their program.

I want to include a paragraph on goals, to address Fil's concern that 'nature does not design, because nature does not set goals'. There is a chapter in Into the Cool that I think can bridge the divide. If I recall the argument correctly, it suggests that adaptive systems display behavior that appears to be goal-directed, in terms of increasingly better 'fit', greater efficiency/effectiveness and higher organizational complexity.

Analyse and Synthesize

I am struggling with this section. Although Alexander's 'misfit decomposition' process looks interesting, I believe it is too cumbersome and time-consuming to be applied by designers. Fil pointed out that Alexander also glosses over the 'synthesis' step - he almost implies that low level solutions 'fall out' after grouping misfits/requirements into independent clusters and that these low level solutions automatically 'nest' into an overall solution.

A more practical approach may be to provide designers with a pre-defined but evolving pattern language based on principles underlying 'balanced design' (for want of a better term). Designers can fit their specific problem or context into this frame, encouraging them to consider the systems implications of what they are trying to accomplish, which may reveal both challenges and opportunities. Over time, the patterns would incorporate a rich set of examples, further increasing the value of the pattern language.

Communicate

Although an ideal deliverable would be a comprehensive manual that becomes a key part of the designers' bookshelf, a Web-based collaborative approach may deliver benefits faster while being more consistent with the 'pattern language' model. To start, a framework needs to be created that is sufficiently useful to attract the interest and participation of designers. The framework evolves through further research, user feedback and contributions, and analysis of usage patterns.

The process underlying the framework is as important as the technology and the information. Accountability is essential to build trust, suggesting the need for a strong reputation rating system. It is also critical to encourage contributions, ensuring a sufficient quantity of diverse input so that the framework remains fresh and continually grows in value. The requirement in many peer-to-peer networks that consumers must also contribute may be worth evaluating.

Article for August BioInspired! Newsletter

The Patterns from Nature team is planning to submit a paper to a peer-reviewed journal before the end of 2008. The previous three papers and presentations have focused on 'pattern language' as a methodology and initial attempts at creating patterns from 'ecosystem principles'. (although this approach led to some interesting possibilities,

Alexander's 1966 book Notes on the Synthesis of Form suggested two additional directions for exploration:

• a method of analyzing 'misfits'

(looking for