EcoHealth

, Volume 7, Issue 4, pp 414–424 | Cite as

A Reflective Lens: Applying Critical Systems Thinking and Visual Methods to Ecohealth Research

Original Contribution

Abstract

Critical systems methodology has been advocated as an effective and ethical way to engage with the uncertainty and conflicting values common to ecohealth problems. We use two contrasting case studies, coral reef management in the Philippines and national park management in Australia, to illustrate the value of critical systems approaches in exploring how people respond to environmental threats to their physical and spiritual well-being. In both cases, we used visual methods—participatory modeling and rich picturing, respectively. The critical systems methodology, with its emphasis on reflection, guided an appraisal of the research process. A discussion of these two case studies suggests that visual methods can be usefully applied within a critical systems framework to offer new insights into ecohealth issues across a diverse range of socio-political contexts. With this article, we hope to open up a conversation with other practitioners to expand the use of visual methods in integrated research.

Keywords

critical systems approach critical systems heuristics human well-being protected-area management systemic intervention visual methods 

References

  1. Brooke C (2002) What does it mean to be ‘critical’ in IS research? Journal of Information Technology 17:4957CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brosius JP, Tsing AL, Zerner C (1998) Representing communities: histories and politics of community-based natural resource management. Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal 11:157168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Camargo C, Maldonado J, Alvarado E, Moreno-Sanchez R, Mendoza S, Manrique N, et al. (2009) Community involvement in management for maintaining coral reef resilience and biodiversity in southern Caribbean marine protected areas. Biodiversity & Conservation 18:935956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Checkland P (2000) Soft systems methodology: a thirty year retrospective. Systems Research and Behavioural Science 17:S11S58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Checkland PB (1981) Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Chichester, UK: WileyGoogle Scholar
  6. Cleland D, Geronimo R, Dray A, Perez P, Cruz-Trinidad A (2010) Simulating the dynamics of subsistence fishing communities: REEFGAME as a learning and data-gathering computer-assisted role-play game. Simulation and Gaming Google Scholar
  7. Cross K, Kabel A, Lysack C (2006) Images of self and spinal cord injury: exploring drawing as a visual method in disability research. Visual Studies 21:183193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Flood RL, Jackson MC (1991) Critical systems heuristics: application of an emancipatory approach for police strategy towards the carrying of offensive weapons. Systems Practice 4:283302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Folke C, Berkes F, Colding J (1998) Ecological practices and social mechanisms for building resilience and sustainability. In: Linking Social and Ecological Systems, Berkes F, Folke C (editors), London: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  10. Fontana A, Frey H (2005) The interview: from neutral stance to political involvement. In: The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Denzin N, Lincoln Y (editors), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, chapter 27, pp 695–728Google Scholar
  11. Gloor D, Meier H (2000) A river revitalization: seen through the lens of local community members. Visual Sociology 15:119134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Good RB (1992) Kosciuszko Heritage: The Conservation Significance of Kosciuszko National Park, Sydney, Australia: NSW National Parks and Wildlife ServiceGoogle Scholar
  13. Guillemin M (2004) Understanding illness: using drawings as a research method. Qualitative Health Research 14:272289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Irving A (2010) Dangerous substances and visible evidence: tears, blood, alcohol, pills. Visual Studies 25:2435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. ISC (editor) (2004) An Assessment of the Kosciuszko National Park Values: Final Report of the Independent Scientific Committee, Queanbeyan, Australia: NSW National Parks and Wildlife ServiceGoogle Scholar
  16. Jackson M (2000) Systems Approaches to Management, New York: KluwerGoogle Scholar
  17. Kellert SR, Mehta JN, Ebbin SA, Lichtenfeld LL (2000) Community natural resource management: promise, rhetoric, and reality. Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal 13:705715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Leach M, Mearns R, Scoones I (1999) Environmental entitlements: dynamics and institutions in community-based natural resource management. World Development 27:225247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lennon J (1999) The International Significance of the Cultural Values of the Australian Alps, Melbourne: Jane Lennon and AssociatesGoogle Scholar
  20. Mair M, Kierans C (2007) Descriptions as data: developing techniques to elicit descriptive materials in social research. Visual Studies 22:120136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Midgley G (2000) Systemic Intervention: Philosophy, Methodology and Practice, New York: Kluwer AcademicGoogle Scholar
  22. Monk A, Howard S (1998) The rich picture: a tool for reasoning about work context. Interactions 2:2130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Packard J (2008) “I’m gonna show you what it’s really like out here”: the power and limitation of participatory visual methods. Visual Studies 23:6377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Parkes MW, Bienen L, Breilh J, Hsu L-N, McDonald M, Patz JA, et al. (2005) All hands on deck: transdisciplinary approaches to emerging infectious disease. EcoHealth 2:258-272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Prosser J (1998) Introduction. In: J. Prosser (ed.), Image-based Research. London: Falmer Press, pp. 1–6Google Scholar
  26. Prosser J (2007) Visual mediation of critical illness: an autobiographical account of nearly dying and nearly living. Visual Studies 22:185199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Prosser J, Loxley A (2008) Introducing visual methods (NCRM/010). In: NCRM Review Papers. London: National Centre for Research Methods, 65 ppGoogle Scholar
  28. Ulrich W (1983) Critical Systems Heuristics of Social Planning: A New Approach to Practical Philosophy, Bern, Switzerland: Paul HauptGoogle Scholar
  29. Ulrich W (2003) Beyond methodology choice: critical systems thinking as a critically systemic discourse. Journal of the Operational Research Society 54:325342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wagner J (2001) Does image-based field work have more to gain from extending or from rejecting scientific realism? An essay in review. Visual Studies 16:721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wyborn C (2009) Managing change or changing management: climate change and human use in Kosciuszko National Park. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management 16:208217Google Scholar
  32. Wyborn C, Cleland D (2010) Using visual methods to explore conflicts in land and seascape management. In: Tackling Wicked Problems: Using the Transdisciplinary Imagination, Brown V, Harris J, Smith M (editors), London: EarthscanGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association for Ecology and Health 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fenner School of Environment and Society, ANU College of Medicine Biology and EnvironmentAustralian National UniversityCanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations