IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/jorsoc/v62y2011i7d10.1057_jors.2010.28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to use a systems diagram to analyse and structure complex problems for policy issue papers

Author

Listed:
  • T E van der Lei

    (Delft University of Technology)

  • B Enserink

    (Delft University of Technology)

  • W A H Thissen

    (Delft University of Technology)

  • G Bekebrede

    (Delft University of Technology)

Abstract

Many policy problems are complex in the sense that natural, technological, social and human elements interact. Problem exploration and structuring are essential as a basis for deliberate and focused approaches towards problem resolution. The results of problem exploration efforts can be laid down in the form of a policy issue paper. We have developed a systemic, stepwise approach, which has been elaborated and taught for over a decade to hundreds of students. This seven-step approach centers on the construction of a system diagram as a means to provide structure to the conceptualisation of a complex problem situation. The approach is based on a conscious combination of existing relatively straightforward analytical methods including objectives hierarchy, means-ends analysis, causal diagramming, stakeholder analysis, and contextual scenarios. The obtained insights are then summed up in a policy issue paper, which is the basis for further planning and research.

Suggested Citation

  • T E van der Lei & B Enserink & W A H Thissen & G Bekebrede, 2011. "How to use a systems diagram to analyse and structure complex problems for policy issue papers," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(7), pages 1391-1402, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:62:y:2011:i:7:d:10.1057_jors.2010.28
    DOI: 10.1057/jors.2010.28
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/jors.2010.28
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/jors.2010.28?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Duncan Shaw & Alberto Franco & Mark Westcombe, 2006. "Problem structuring methods: new directions in a problematic world," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 757-758, July.
    2. Ralph L. Keeney & Robin S. Gregory, 2005. "Selecting Attributes to Measure the Achievement of Objectives," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 1-11, February.
    3. C Eden & F Ackermann, 2006. "Where next for problem structuring methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 766-768, July.
    4. Bert Enserink, 2004. "Thinking the unthinkable -- the end of the Dutch river dike system? Exploring a new safety concept for the river management," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(7-8), pages 745-757, November.
    5. Eden, Colin, 2004. "Analyzing cognitive maps to help structure issues or problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(3), pages 673-686, December.
    6. Ralph L. Keeney, 1988. "Structuring Objectives for Problems of Public Interest," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 396-405, June.
    7. John M Bryson, 2004. "What to do when Stakeholders matter," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mylène van der Koogh & Emile Chappin & Renée Heller & Zofia Lukszo, 2021. "Are We Satisfying the Right Conditions for the Mobility Transition? A Review and Evaluation of the Dutch Urban Mobility Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-25, November.
    2. Araz Taeihagh, 2017. "Network-centric policy design," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 317-338, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abuabara, Leila & Paucar-Caceres, Alberto, 2021. "Surveying applications of Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA) from 1989 to 2018," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(3), pages 1051-1065.
    2. Rodrigues, Teresa C. & Montibeller, Gilberto & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Bana e Costa, Carlos A., 2017. "Modelling multicriteria value interactions with Reasoning Maps," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1054-1071.
    3. Ashley B. C. Goode & Erin Rivenbark & Jessica A. Gilbert & Conor P. McGowan, 2023. "Prioritization of Species Status Assessments for Decision Support," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 311-325, December.
    4. White, Leroy, 2016. "Behavioural operational research: Towards a framework for understanding behaviour in OR interventions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 827-841.
    5. K N Papamichail & G Alves & S French & J B Yang & R Snowdon, 2007. "Facilitation practices in decision workshops," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(5), pages 614-632, May.
    6. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    7. Etienne Rouwette & Ingrid Bastings & Hans Blokker, 2011. "A Comparison of Group Model Building and Strategic Options Development and Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 781-803, November.
    8. McKenna, R. & Bertsch, V. & Mainzer, K. & Fichtner, W., 2018. "Combining local preferences with multi-criteria decision analysis and linear optimization to develop feasible energy concepts in small communities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1092-1110.
    9. Gilberto Montibeller & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2015. "Cognitive and Motivational Biases in Decision and Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1230-1251, July.
    10. Estévez, Rodrigo A. & Gelcich, Stefan, 2015. "Participative multi-criteria decision analysis in marine management and conservation: Research progress and the challenge of integrating value judgments and uncertainty," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-7.
    11. R Volkema, 2009. "Natural language and the art and science of problem/opportunity formulation: a transportation planning case analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(10), pages 1360-1372, October.
    12. Simon French & Nikolaos Argyris, 2018. "Decision Analysis and Political Processes," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 208-222, December.
    13. Kato, Hironori & Shiroyama, Hideaki & Nakagawa, Yoshinori, 2014. "Public policy structuring incorporating reciprocal expectation analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 233(1), pages 171-183.
    14. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Luoma, Jukka & Saarinen, Esa, 2013. "On the importance of behavioral operational research: The case of understanding and communicating about dynamic systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(3), pages 623-634.
    15. Robin L. Dillon & Genevieve Lester & Richard S. John & Catherine H. Tinsley, 2012. "Differentiating Conflicts in Beliefs Versus Value Tradeoffs in the Domestic Intelligence Policy Debate," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 713-728, April.
    16. Martin Luštický & Martin Musil, 2016. "Stakeholder-Based Evaluation of Tourism Policy Priorities: The Case of the South Bohemian Region," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2016(3), pages 3-23.
    17. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    18. Auriel M. V. Fournier & R. Randy Wilson & Jeffrey S. Gleason & Evan M. Adams & Janell M. Brush & Robert J. Cooper & Stephen J. DeMaso & Melanie J. L. Driscoll & Peter C. Frederick & Patrick G. R. Jodi, 2023. "Structured Decision Making to Prioritize Regional Bird Monitoring Needs," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 207-217, May.
    19. Mark K. McBeth & Donna L. Lybecker & James W. Stoutenborough, 2016. "Do stakeholders analyze their audience? The communication switch and stakeholder personal versus public communication choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 421-444, December.
    20. Timothy L. McDaniels & Stephanie E. Chang & David Hawkins & Gerard Chew & Holly Longstaff, 2015. "Towards disaster-resilient cities: an approach for setting priorities in infrastructure mitigation efforts," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 252-263, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:62:y:2011:i:7:d:10.1057_jors.2010.28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.