Aku Kwamie, Sara Causevic, Goran Tomson, Ali Sie, Rainer Sauerborn, Kumanan Rasanathan, Ole Petter Ottersen
{"title":"为多重危机做好准备?需要复杂性科学和系统思维来解决全球和国家证据差距问题","authors":"Aku Kwamie, Sara Causevic, Goran Tomson, Ali Sie, Rainer Sauerborn, Kumanan Rasanathan, Ole Petter Ottersen","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014887","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Sustainable Development Goals are far off track. The convergence of global threats such as climate change, conflict and the lasting effects of the COVID-19 pandemic—among others—call for better data and research evidence that can account for the complex interactions between these threats. In the time of polycrisis, global and national-level data and research evidence must address complexity. Viewed through the lens of ‘systemic risk’, there is a need for data and research evidence that is sufficiently representative of the multiple interdependencies of global threats. Instead, current global published literature seems to be dominated by correlational, descriptive studies that are unable to account for complex interactions. The literature is geographically limited and rarely from countries facing severe polycrisis threats. As a result, country guidance fails to treat these threats interdependently. Applied systems thinking can offer more diverse research methods that are able to generate complex evidence. This is achievable through more participatory processes that will assist stakeholders in defining system boundaries and behaviours. Additionally, applied systems thinking can draw on known methods for hypothesising, modelling, visualising and testing complex system properties over time. Application is much needed for generating evidence at the global level and within national-level policy processes and structures. All data relevant to the study are included in the article.","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prepared for the polycrisis? The need for complexity science and systems thinking to address global and national evidence gaps\",\"authors\":\"Aku Kwamie, Sara Causevic, Goran Tomson, Ali Sie, Rainer Sauerborn, Kumanan Rasanathan, Ole Petter Ottersen\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014887\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Sustainable Development Goals are far off track. The convergence of global threats such as climate change, conflict and the lasting effects of the COVID-19 pandemic—among others—call for better data and research evidence that can account for the complex interactions between these threats. In the time of polycrisis, global and national-level data and research evidence must address complexity. Viewed through the lens of ‘systemic risk’, there is a need for data and research evidence that is sufficiently representative of the multiple interdependencies of global threats. Instead, current global published literature seems to be dominated by correlational, descriptive studies that are unable to account for complex interactions. The literature is geographically limited and rarely from countries facing severe polycrisis threats. As a result, country guidance fails to treat these threats interdependently. Applied systems thinking can offer more diverse research methods that are able to generate complex evidence. This is achievable through more participatory processes that will assist stakeholders in defining system boundaries and behaviours. Additionally, applied systems thinking can draw on known methods for hypothesising, modelling, visualising and testing complex system properties over time. Application is much needed for generating evidence at the global level and within national-level policy processes and structures. All data relevant to the study are included in the article.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014887\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014887","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Prepared for the polycrisis? The need for complexity science and systems thinking to address global and national evidence gaps
The Sustainable Development Goals are far off track. The convergence of global threats such as climate change, conflict and the lasting effects of the COVID-19 pandemic—among others—call for better data and research evidence that can account for the complex interactions between these threats. In the time of polycrisis, global and national-level data and research evidence must address complexity. Viewed through the lens of ‘systemic risk’, there is a need for data and research evidence that is sufficiently representative of the multiple interdependencies of global threats. Instead, current global published literature seems to be dominated by correlational, descriptive studies that are unable to account for complex interactions. The literature is geographically limited and rarely from countries facing severe polycrisis threats. As a result, country guidance fails to treat these threats interdependently. Applied systems thinking can offer more diverse research methods that are able to generate complex evidence. This is achievable through more participatory processes that will assist stakeholders in defining system boundaries and behaviours. Additionally, applied systems thinking can draw on known methods for hypothesising, modelling, visualising and testing complex system properties over time. Application is much needed for generating evidence at the global level and within national-level policy processes and structures. All data relevant to the study are included in the article.
期刊介绍:
BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.