An official website of the United States government
Abstract Disruption of legacy infrastructure systems by novel digital and connected technologies represents not simply the rise of cyberphysical systems as hybrid physical and digital assets but, ultimately, the integration of legacy systems into a new cognitive ecosystem. This cognitive ecosystem, an ecology of massive data flows, artificial intelligence, institutional and intellectual structures, and connected technologies, is poised to alter how humans and artificial intelligence understand and control our world. Infrastructure managers need to be ready for this paradigm shift, recognizing their systems are increasingly being absorbed into an emerging suite of data, analytical tools, and decisionmaking technologies that will fundamentally restructure how legacy systems behave and are controlled, how decisions are made, and most importantly how workers interact with the systems. Infrastructure managers must restructure their organizations and engage in cross-organizational sensemaking if they are to be capable of navigating the complexity of the cognitive ecosystem. The cognitive ecosystem is fundamentally poised to change what infrastructures are, necessitating the need for managers to take a close look at the functions and actions of their own systems. The continuing evolution of the Anthropocene and the cognitive ecosystem has profound implications for infrastructure education. A sustained commitment to change is necessary that restructures and reorients infrastructure organizations within the cognitive ecosystem, where knowledge is generated, and control of services is wielded by myriad stakeholders.
more »
« less
Lock-in: origination and significance within infrastructure systems
Abstract Infrastructure systems have legacies that continue to define their priorities, goals, flexibility, and ability to make sense of their environments. These legacies may or may not align with future needs, but regardless of alignment, they may restrict viable pathways forward. Infrastructure ‘lock-in’ has not been sufficiently confronted in infrastructure systems. Lock-in can loosely be interpreted as internal and external pressures that constrain a system, and it encourages self-reinforcing feedback where the system becomes resistant to change. By acknowledging and recognizing that lock-in exists at small and large scales, perpetuated by individuals, organizations, and institutions, infrastructure managers can critically reflect upon biases, assumptions, and decision-making approaches. This article describes six distinct domains of lock-in: technological, social, economic, individual, institutional, and epistemic. Following this description, strategies for unlocking lock-in, broadly and by domain, are explored before being contextualized to infrastructure systems. Ultimately, infrastructure managers must make a decision between a locked in and faltering but familiar system or a changing and responsive but unfamiliar system, where both are, inevitably, accepting higher levels of risk than typically accustomed.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10463760
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Environmental Research: Infrastructure and Sustainability
- Volume:
- 3
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 2634-4505
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 032001
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
The value of information (VoI) provides a rational metric to assess the impact of data in decision processes, including maintenance of engineering systems. According to the principle that “information never hurts”, VoI is guaranteed to be non-negative when a single agent aims at minimizing an expected cost. However, in other contexts such as non-cooperative games, where agents compete against each other, revealing a piece of information to all agents may have a negative impact to some of them, as the negative effect of the competitors being informed and adjusting their policies surpasses the direct VoI. Being aware of this, some agents prefer to avoid having certain information collected, when it must be shared with others, as the overall VoI is negative for them. A similar result may occur for managers of infrastructure assets following the prescriptions of codes and regulations. Modern codes require the probability of some failure events be below a threshold, so managers are forced to retrofit assets if that probability is too high. If the economic incentive of those agents disagrees with the code requirements, the VoI associated with tests or inspections may be negative. In this paper, we investigate under what circumstance this happens, and how severe the effects of this issue can be.more » « less
-
Natural infrastructure (NI) and nature-based solutions in urban riverscapes can provide a spectrum of environmental, societal, and economic benefits, but widespread implementation of NI strategies remain limited because of their context-dependent nature. Windows of opportunity have opened through legislation and funding to expand NI solutions that address flooding, water quality, air pollution, extreme heat, and environmental equity. System-level approaches may offer these projects a framework that is flexible yet holistic enough to streamline implementation. In fact, a systems approach is essential to realize the potential of NI for equitably achieving these goals, and a critical step includes identification of vulnerabilities (e.g., exposure to environmental harm). The purpose of this study was to support decision makers and managers in prioritizing their urban riverscapes with multiple vulnerabilities: flood risk, water quality, ecosystem function, and environmental inequity. We conducted an urban stream spatial multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) case study with Charlotte–Mecklenburg Storm Water Services to support equitable and efficient stream reach, floodplain, and watershed planning. Our study assessed the social and ecological characteristics of the system and prioritized vulnerable watersheds and subbasins using a spatial MCDA. We developed an urban stream prioritization framework that could be tailored to complement existing management strategies and also more broadly implemented in other social–ecological systems.more » « less
-
Antonio Martínez Cortizas (Ed.)Due to tightly coupled physical, chemical, and biological processes that often behave in nonlinear, counterintuitive ways, it is argued that soil is an archetype of a complex system. Unfortunately, human intuition and decision making has been shown to be inadequate when dealing with complex systems. This poses significant challenges for managers or policy makers responding to environmental externalities where soil dynamics play a central role (e.g., biogeochemical cycles) and where full ranges of outcomes result from numerous feedback processes not easily captured by reductionist approaches. In order to improve interpretation of these soil feedbacks, a dynamic systems framework is outlined (capturing feedback often excluded from investigation or left to intuition) and then applied to agroecosystem management problems related to irrigation or tillage practices that drive nutrient cycling (e.g., soil water, nitrogen, carbon, and sodium). Key soil feedbacks are captured via a variety of previously developed models simulating soil processes and their interactions. Results indicated that soil system trade-offs arising from conservation adoption (drip irrigation or no-tillage) provided reasonable supporting evidence (via compensating feedbacks) to managers justifying slow adoption of conservation practices. Modeling soils on the foundation provided in the complex systems sciences remains an area for innovations useful for improving soil system managementmore » « less
-
Background The decision making process undertaken during wildfire responses is complex and prone to uncertainty. In the US, decisions federal land managers make are influenced by numerous and often competing factors. Aims To assess and validate the presence of decision factors relevant to the wildfire decision making context that were previously known and to identify those that have emerged since the US federal wildfire policy was updated in 2009. Methods Interviews were conducted across the US while wildfires were actively burning to elucidate time-of-fire decision factors. Data were coded and thematically analysed. Key results Most previously known decision factors as well as numerous emergent factors were identified. Conclusions To contextualise decision factors within the decision making process, we offer a Wildfire Decision Framework that has value for policy makers seeking to improve decision making, managers improving their process and wildfire social science researchers. Implications Managers may gain a better understanding of their decision environment and use our framework as a tool to validate their deliberations. Researchers may use these data to help explain the various pressures and influences modern land and wildfire managers experience. Policy makers and agencies may take institutional steps to align the actions of their staff with desired wildfire outcomes.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1088/2634-4505/acf7e6
