The paper focused on how a system dynamics modeler could reduce model development and testing time by using “Generic Structures” as an interim benchmark between causal loop diagram and stock flow diagram. Using generic structures as a benchmark could prevent the modeler from including redundant structures to the model and getting affected by personal biases that in turn could reduce repetitive amendments to the model during model testing. Indian Shrimp Industry, during 1990–2010, sequentially showed an early growth, a hasty decline, a combative rejuvenation, and an inexorable re-decline behavior in terms of the annual shrimp production and production capacity. Average Yield continuously fluctuated throughout the Industry’s life cycle during 1990–2010. Breaking such progressive behavior into temporal units, we found that the unit behaviors resemble with the behaviors of generic structures like, exponential growth, goal-seeking, S-shaped growth, limits to success, and overshoot-and-collapse. We, using the related generic structures as the interim benchmarks, illustrated a step-by-step modeling exercise for studying the dynamic behavior of Indian Shrimp Industry during 1990–2010. The paper concluded that using generic structures as the benchmark during system dynamics modeling improved the efficiency and the effectiveness of model building due to reduction in model building and testing time.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Coyle G (2000) Qualitative and quantitative modeling in system dynamics: some research questions. Syst Dyn Rev 16(3):225–244
Ford DN (1999) A behavioral approach to feedback loop dominance analysis. Syst Dyn Rev 15:3–36
Forrester JW (1958) Industrial dynamics. Harvard Bus Rev July–August:37–66
Forrester JW (1961) Industrial dynamics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Forrester JW (1994) System dynamics, systems thinking and soft OR. Syst Dyn Rev 10:245–256
Forrester JW, Senge PM (1980) Tests for building confidence in system dynamics models. TIMS Stud Manag Sci 14: 209–228. North-Holland Publishing Company
Homer JB (1996). Why we iterate: scientific modelling in theory and practice. Syst Dyn Rev 12:1–19. http://wwwu.uni-klu.ac.at/gossimit/pap/sd/wb_sysarch.pdf. Retrieved 9 Nov 2011
Kanheman D (2011) Thinking fast and slow. Penguin Books Ltd., 80, Strand
Lane DC, Smart C (1996) Reinterpreting ‘generic structure’: evolution, application and limitations of a concept. Syst Dyn Rev 12:87–120
Manivannan S, Otta SK, Karunasagar I, Karunasagar I (2002) Multiple viral infection in Penaeus monodon shrimp postlarvae in an Indian hatchery. Dis Aquat Organ 48:233–236
Morecroft JDW (1983) System dynamics: portraying bounded rationality. OMEGA-Int J Manag Sci 11(2):131–142
Nordhaus WD (1973) World dynamics: measurement without data. Econ J 83(332):1156–1183
Prusty SK, Mohapatra PKJ, Mukherjee CK (2013) System archetype to understand unintended behavior in Indian Shrimp Industry and to aid in strategy development. Syst Pract Action Res. doi:10.1007/s11213-013-9288-6
Richardson G (1996) Problems for the future of system dynamics. Syst Dyn Rev 12:141–157
Richmond BM, Vescuso P, Peterson S (1990) iThink™ Distributed by high performance systems, 145 Lyme Road, Suite 300, Hanover, NH, 03755, USA
Roberts N, Anderson D, Deal R, Garet M, Shaffer W (1983) Introduction to computer simulation: a system dynamics modeling approach. Productivity Press Publishers, Portland
Seafood Export Journal (2009) Marine product exports from India records ever time high during 2008–09. XXXIX(7): 13–14
Selvin J, Lipton AP (2003) Vibrio alginolyticus associated with white spot disease of Penaeus monodon. Dis Aquat Organ 57:147–150
Senge PM (1985) System dynamics, mental models, and the development of management intuition. In: Anderson DF, Forrester NB, Warkentin ME (eds) Proceedings of the 1985 international conference of the system dynamics society, vol II. System Dynamics Society, Boston, MA, pp 718–798
Senge MP (1990) The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization. Doubleday, New York
Singh K (1996) S. Jagannath vs. Union of India & Ors. Judgement:, Kuldip Singh and S. Sagar Ahmad on 11 December, 1996. Supreme Court of India
Sterman JD (2000) Business dynamics: systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. McGraw Hill, Boston. ISBN 0-07-231135-5
Vasudevappa C, Seenappa D (2002) Literature review of shrimp farming in India. Individual Partner Report for the Project: Policy research for sustainable shrimp farming in Asia. European Commission INCO-DEV Project PORESSFA No. IC4-2001-10042, CEMARE University of Portsmouth UK and FRS University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore, India
Wolstenholme EF (1992) The definition and application of stepwise approach to model conceptualisation and analysis. Eur J Oper Res 59:123–136
Wolstenholme EF (2003) Towards the definition and use of a core set of archetypal structures in system dynamics. Syst Dyn Rev 19(1):7–26
Wolstenholme EF, Coyle RG (1983) The development of system dynamics as a methodology for system description and qualitative analysis. J Oper Res Soc 34:569–581
The authors thank Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India for funding scholarship to support this doctoral work.
About this article
Cite this article
Prusty, S.K., Mohapatra, P.K.J. & Mukherjee, C.K. Using Generic Structures in System Dynamics Model Building: Reflection from Modeling for Indian Shrimp Industry. Syst Pract Action Res 30, 19–44 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-016-9378-3
- System dynamics
- Causal loop diagram
- Stock flow diagram
- Generic structure
- Indian Shrimp Industry