| 1. |
- Burns, Tom, 1937-, et al.
(author)
-
Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation : A Sustainable Development Systems Perspective
- 2017
-
In: Sustainability. - : MDPI AG. - 2071-1050. ; 9:2
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This article considers the concepts of sustainability and sustainable development in relation to disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. We conceptualize sustainability from a social systemic perspective, that is, from a perspective that encompasses the multiple functionalities of a social system and their interrelationships in particular environmental contexts. The systems perspective is applied in our consideration and analysis of disaster risk reduction (DRR), climate change adaptation (CCA), and sustainable development (SD). Section “Sustainability and Sustainable Development” introduces briefly sustainability and sustainable development, followed by a brief presentation of the theory of complex social systems (Section “Social System Model”). The theory conceptualizes interdependent subsystems, their multiple functionalities, and the agential and systemic responses to internal and external stressors on a social system. Section “Case Studies of Response to Stressors” considers disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA), emerging in response to one or more systemic stressors. It illustrates these with disaster risk reduction in the cases of food and chemical security regulation in the EU. CCA is illustrated by initiatives and developments on the island of Gotland, Sweden and in the Gothenburg Metropolitan area, which go beyond a limited CCA perspective, taking into account long-term sustainability issues. Section “Sustainable Development as a Societal Development System” discusses the limitations of DRR and CCA, not only their technical limitations but economic, socio-cultural, and political limitations, as informed from a sustainability perspective. It is argued that DRRs are only partial subsystems and must be considered and assessed in the context of a more encompassing systemic perspective. Part of the discussion is focused on the distinction between sustainable and non-sustainable DRRs and CCAs. Section “Concluding Remarks” presents a few concluding remarks about the importance of a systemic perspective in analyzing DRR and CCA as well as other similar subsystems in terms of sustainable development.
|
|
| 2. |
- Burns, Tom, et al.
(author)
-
Distributive Justice, Legitimizing Collective Choice Procedures, and the Production of Normative Equilibria in Social Groups : Towards a Theory of Social Order
- 2015
-
In: Outlooks And Insights On Group Decision And Negotiation, Gdn 2015. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 9783319195155 - 9783319195148 ; , s. 87-98
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This paper focuses on group normative procedures and distributional norms that are utilized in functioning groups in the production/generation of normative equilibria, that is, the major basis of social order in groups and communities. The group is an organizational arrangement with some degree of division of labor and characterized by group purposes and goals, a normative order and patterns of interaction and output. We identified three patterns of particular interest: (1) legitimation procedures in groups to resolve conflicts and make collective choices; (2) patterns of just outcomes satisfying the normatively prescribed group outcomes/outputs of a principle of distributive justice's; (3) normative equilibria, which are group patterns of interaction or collective decision that tend to stability because they satisfy or realize one or more key group norms.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Burns, Tom, et al.
(author)
-
Paradigm Shift in Game Theory : Sociological Re-Conceptualization of Human Agency,Social Structure, and Agents' Cognitive-Normative Frameworks and Action Determination Modalities
- 2018
-
Reports (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This article aims to present some of the initial work of developing a social science grounded game theory—as a clear alternative to classical game theory. Two distinct independent initiatives in Sociology are presented: One, a systems approach, social systems game theory (SGT),and the other, Erving Goffman's interactionist approach (IGT). These approaches are presented and contrasted with classical theory. They focus on the social rules, norms, roles, role relationships,and institutional arrangements, which structure and regulate human behavior. While strategic judgment and instrumental rationality play an important part in the sociological approaches, they are not a universal or dominant modality of social action determination. Rule following is considered, generally speaking, more characteristic and more general. Sociological approaches, such as those outlined in this article provide a language and conceptual tools to more adequately and effectively than the classical theory describe, model, and analyze the diversity and complexity of human interaction conditions and processes: (1) complex cognitive rule based models of the interaction situation with which actors understand and analyze their situations; (2) value complex(es) with which actors operate, often with multiple values and norms applying in interaction situations;(3) action repertoires (rule complexes) with simple and complex action alternatives—plans, programs,established (sometimes highly elaborated) algorithms, and rituals; (4) a rule complex of action determination modalities for actors to generate and/or select actions in game situations; three actionmodalities are considered here; each modality consists of one or more procedures or algorithms for action determination: (I) following or implementing a rule or rule complex, norm, role, ritual,or social relation; (II) selecting or choosing among given or institutionalized alternatives according toa rule or principle; and (III) constructing or adopting one or more alternatives according to a value,guideline, or set of criteria. Such determinations are often carried out collectively. The paper identifies and illustrates in a concluding table several of the key differences between classical theory and the sociological approaches on a number of dimensions relating to human agency; social structure, norms, institutions, and cultural forms; patterns of game interaction and outcomes,the conditions of cooperation and conflict, game restructuring and transformation, and empirical relevance. Sociologically based game theory, such as the contributions outlined in this article suggest a language and conceptual tools to more adequately and effectively than the classical theory describe,model, and analyze the diversity, complexity, and dynamics of human interaction conditions and processes and, therefore, promises greater empirical relevance and scientific power. An Appendix provides an elaboration of SGT, concluding that one of SGT's major contributions is the rule based conceptualization of games as socially embedded with agents in social roles and role relationships and subject to cognitive-normative and agential regulation. SGT rules and rule complexes are based on contemporary developments relating to granular computing and Artificial Intelligence in general.
|
|
| 5. |
- Burns, Tom R, 1937-, et al.
(author)
-
A Sustainable Development Perspective
- 2017
-
In: Routledge Handbook of Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation. - London : Routledge. - 9781138924567 - 9781315684260
-
Book chapter (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Burns, Tom R., et al.
(author)
-
The Sociology of Creativity: Part I: Theory: : The Social Mechanisms of Innovation and Creative Developments in Selectivity Environments
- 2015
-
In: Human Systems Management. - : IOS Press. - 0167-2533 .- 1875-8703. ; 34:3, s. 179-199
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Creativity is a universal activity, essential in an evolutionary perspective, to adaptation and sustainability. This first part of a three part article on the sociology of creativity has three purposes: (1) to develop the argument that key factors in creative activity are socially based and developed; hence, sociology can contribute significantly to understanding and explaining human creativity; (2) to present a sociological systems approach which enables us to link in a systematic and coherent way the disparate social factors and mechanisms that are involved in creative activity and to describe and explain creativity; and (3) to illustrate a sociological systems theory’s conceptualization of multiple interrelated institutional, cultural, and interaction factors and their role in creativity and innovative development in diverse empirical instances.The article introduces and applies a model stressing the social embeddedness of innovative agents and entrepreneurs, either as individuals or groups, as they manipulate symbols, rules, technologies, and materials that are socially derived and developed. Their motivation for doing what they do derives in part from their social roles and positions, in part in response to the incentives and opportunities – many socially constructed – shaping their interaction situations and domains. Their capabilities including their social powers derive from the culturally and institutional frameworks in which they are embedded. In carrying out their actions, agents mobilize resources including technologies through the institutions and networks in which they participate. Following this theoretical part, Parts II and III focus on the concrete conditions and mechanisms characteristic of the “context of innovation” and the “context of receptivity and institutionalization”, respectively.
|
|
| 8. |
- Burns, Tom R., 1937-, et al.
(author)
-
The sociology of creativity: PART II: Applications: the socio-cultural contexts and conditions of the production of novelty
- 2015
-
In: Human Systems Management. - 0167-2533 .- 1875-8703. ; 34:4, s. 263-286
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This is Part II of a three-part article. The article is predicated on the principle that creativity is a universal activity, essential in an evolutionary perspective, to adaptation and sustainability. This manuscript on the sociology of creativity has three purposes: (1) to develop the argument that key factors in creative activity are socially based and developed; hence, sociology can contribute significantly to understanding and explaining human creativity; (2) to present a systems approach which enables us to link in a systematic and coherent way the disparate social factors and mechanisms that are involved in creative activity and to describe and explain creativity; (3) to illustrate sociological systems theory's (Actor-Systems-Dynamics) conceptualization of multiple interrelated institutional, cultural, and interaction factors and mechanisms and their role in creativity and innovative developments in diverse empirical instances. The preceding segment of this article, Part I, introduced a general model of innovation and creative development stressing the socio-cultural and political embeddedness of agents, either as individuals or groups, in their creative activities and innovative productions. This second part, Part II, investigates the "context of innovation and discovery" considering applications and illustrations ranging from, for instance: (i) "the independent innovator or entrepreneur" who exercises creativity based on absorbing a field of knowledge, concepts, challenges, problems, solution strategies, creativity production functions or programs (and who is likely to be in contact with libraries, relevant journals and may be directly or indirectly in contact with a network of others); (ii) groups in their particular fields operating greenhouse types of organization driving problem-solving and creative activities-both self-organizing groups as well as groups established by external powers (whether a private company, a government, or a non-government organization or movement); (iii) entire societies undergoing transformations and radical development as in the industrial and later revolutions. Part III of this article investigates and analyzes "the context of receptivity, selection, and institutionalization" of novelty. © 2015 IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 9. |
- Burns, Tom R., 1937-, et al.
(author)
-
The sociology of creativity: PART III: Applications - The socio-cultural contexts of the acceptance/rejection of innovations
- 2016
-
In: Human Systems Management. - : IOS Press. - 0167-2533 .- 1875-8703. ; 35:1, s. 11-34
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The three-part article of which this one is Part III is predicated on the principle that creativity is a universal activity, essential in an evolutionary perspective to adaptation and sustainability. This work on the sociology of creativity has three purposes: (1) to develop the argument that key factors in creative activity are socially based and developed; hence, sociology can contribute significantly to understanding and explaining human creativity; (2) to present a systems approach which enables us to link in a systematic and coherent way the disparate social factors and mechanisms that are involved in creative activity and to describe and explain creativity; (3) to illustrate a sociological systems theory's (Actor-Systems-Dynamics) conceptualization of multiple interrelated institutional, cultural, and interaction factors and mechanisms - and their role in creativity and innovative developments in diverse empirical cases. Part I of this article introduced and applied a general model of innovation and creative development stressing the socio-cultural and political embeddedness of agents, either as individuals or groups, in their creative activities and innovative productions. Part II investigated the "context of innovation and discovery" considering a wide range of applications and illustrations. This 3rd segment, Part III, specifies and analyzes the "context of receptivity and institutionalization" where innovations and creative developments are socially accepted, legitimized, and institutionalized or rejected and suppressed. A number of cases and illustrations are considered. Power considerations are part and parcel of these analyses, for instance the role of the state as well as powerful private interests and social movements in facilitating and/or constraining innovations and creative developments in society. In the perspective presented here, generally speaking, creativity can be consistently and systematically considered to a great extent as social, cultural, institutional and material as much as psychological or biological. © 2016 - IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
