From systems ergonomics to global ergonomics : the world as a socio-ecological-technical system

Our future existence on earth is under threat. Immediate and significant action is required, however, the issues that we face are complex, interrelated, and difficult to solve. The potential role of ergonomics in managing existential threats has been discussed; however, few studies have used ergonomics methods to analyse major global challenges. This article presents the findings from a study that explored the use of a systems ergonomics tool, the abstraction hierarchy from Cognitive Work Analysis, to develop a complex sociotechnical systems model of the world. The aim was to determine whether the method was able to cope with such a large and complex problem space, and to explore what insights the analysis would give on how society can respond to current and future global challenges. The findings demonstrate that the abstraction hierarchy is capable of modelling the world as one large-scale problem space. In particular, the model was able to encapsulate the major global challenges recently outlined by the World Economic Forum. A contribution of the analysis is to show the interrelatedness of the issues underlying these challenges, which in turn demonstrates the difficulties faced when attempting to respond to them. The implications of the model are discussed, along with further work that is required to embed ergonomics in wider multidisciplinary efforts aiming to tackle current and future global challenges.

[1]  F. Racioppi,et al.  Physical Activity and Health in Europe: Evidence for Action , 2006 .

[2]  Michal Krzyzanowski,et al.  Studies on health effects of transport-related air pollution , 2007 .

[3]  K. J. Vicente,et al.  Cognitive Work Analysis: Toward Safe, Productive, and Healthy Computer-Based Work , 1999 .

[4]  Paul M. Salmon,et al.  Simulating the dynamic effect of land use and transport policies on the development and health of populations , 2015 .

[5]  Nancy G. Leveson,et al.  A new accident model for engineering safer systems , 2004 .

[6]  Neville A. Stanton,et al.  Safety in System-of-Systems: ten key challenges , 2014 .

[7]  Ralph Buehler,et al.  Determinants of transport mode choice: a comparison of Germany and the USA , 2011 .

[8]  Patrick Waterson,et al.  State of Science: ergonomics and global issues , 2018, Ergonomics.

[9]  Paul M. Salmon,et al.  Work Domain Analysis applications in urban planning: active transport infrastructure and urban corridors , 2018 .

[10]  D. Banister Unsustainable Transport: City Transport in the New Century , 2005 .

[11]  Mark W. Maier Architecting Principles for Systems‐of‐Systems , 1996 .

[12]  A. Prentice,et al.  Energy and transport , 2007, The Lancet.

[13]  W. Rosamond,et al.  The sociodemographics of land use planning: relationships to physical activity, accessibility, and equity. , 2008, Health & place.

[14]  Neville A Stanton,et al.  Fitting methods to paradigms: are ergonomics methods fit for systems thinking? , 2017, Ergonomics.

[15]  O. Franco,et al.  Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: urban land transport , 2009, The Lancet.

[16]  Guy H. Walker,et al.  Cognitive Work Analysis: Applications, Extensions and the Future , 2017 .

[17]  Arjan van Timmeren,et al.  Social-Ecological-Technical systems in urban planning for a circular economy: an opportunity for horizontal integration , 2018, Architectural Science Review.

[18]  Neville Moray,et al.  Ergonomics and the global problems of the twenty-first century , 1995 .