Ethical modelling in system dynamics: an interview with Henry Amorocho Daza

You emphasize the importance of stakeholder participation in environmental modelling. Why this is crucial?  How it can be improved?

Unfortunately, participation is often lacking in environmental modelling. A recent review shows 70% of SD models for sustainability are created without any form of participation. This means that decisions affecting local stakeholders are made by people far removed from the problem. To address this, we propose opening up models to stakeholders, inviting them to share perspectives and fostering a dialogue. This stimulates decisions that are informed by a more comprehensive understanding of the socio-environmental context.

Your paper also touches on the concept of intergenerational justice. Why is it essential to consider future generations?

It’s crucial to discuss intergenerational justice from the outset, especially in the context of climate change with long-term and irreversible effects. To achieve this justice, we must design models that help us navigate future scenarios, and express our methods explicitly. It's about leaving a better world for the next generation, and to do that, we need to start considering issues of fairness, justice and equity today.

How can you include future stakeholders when they do not have a voice?

First and foremost, we need to recognise we have a moral imperative to consider future stakeholders. The how is the complicated part. As modelling capabilities and data availability increase, we can use diverse models to capture uncertainties about the future. By engaging stakeholders in discussions about long-term impacts under various scenarios, we can at least start the conversation. We, as academics, have to recognise our responsibility when models are used to influence policy pathways towards sustainable development.

How do you avoid creating scepticism when even scientists say models can be biased?

The key is transparency. We need to have open and honest discussions about the benefits and limitations of our knowledge. By inviting different stakeholders to co-create in interdisciplinary research, we can address this scepticism. It may pose new challenges, but the benefits include diverse perspectives and a more comprehensive understanding of the ethical implications of our models.

You need to employ different kinds of participation at different stages - from defining the scope, to the envisioning, and later formulation. What are your limits? And what kind of future do you want to explore? Finally, as the modelling formulation is technically challenging: you have to explain the considerations behind the model and how it works. Stakeholders' input becomes key for validating the model. The ultimate goal is to ensure that the models, which take significant dedication and time to develop, are actually used to support decisions that promote equitable and sustainable futures.

How can researchers ensure they maintain an ethical stance based on human rights and sustainable development in their modelling?

It starts with being reflective and transparent about our ethical standpoints. Neutrality is often seen as a good quality, but it's almost impossible to achieve. Of course, we can be exhaustive, critical, and thorough in our approach. However, acknowledging and openly expressing the underlying principles, such as human rights and sustainable development, helps researchers recognize the ethical responsibility they hold in their modelling exercises.

In the article, we encourage researchers to be more reflective and transparent when they create models. They should make their ethical standpoints behind the model explicit.

From my experience, these discussions are rarely explicit, especially in quantitative-oriented disciplines. Even though, as water professionals, we often work towards improving human health or protecting the environment, there is little ethical thinking behind it. As researchers and modellers, we need to learn how to include ethics in our practices and engage in ethical discussions with peers. The paper invites researchers to be critical about their own methods, to question their preconceptions and be bold to navigate in the complexities of ethical thinking.

This interview is based on the paper: Ethical considerations of using system dynamics in participatory settings: a social-ecological-systems perspective by Henry Amorocho Daza, Associate Professor Janez Susnik, and Pieter van der Zaag, Professor of Integrated Water Resources Management.