Mixed Methods and Wicked Problems

As my 5-year tenure as editor of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research comes to an end, I want to use this editorial space to present some challenges for our community of mixed methods researchers. The challenges emanate from the concept of wicked problems and the promises associated with mixed methods to understand complexity through diverse approaches. I borrow the term wicked problems from urban planners Rittel and Webber (1973), who described wicked problems as those that involve multiple interacting systems, are replete with social and institutional uncertainties, and for which only imperfect knowledge about their nature and solutions exist. Hence, they argue that there are no completely right solutions to this type of problem; only better and worse solutions that are in part determined by how the problem is understood. Levin, Cashore, Bernstein, and Auld (2012) added the concept of super wicked problems distinguished by these additional characteristics: problems for which time is running out, there is no central authority, the persons trying to solve the problem are also causing it, and policies to address them discount the future. Methodologically, Camillus (2008) claims that wicked problems cannot be resolved by traditional processes of analyzing vast amounts of data or more sophisticated statistical analyses. Examples of wicked problems include climate change, terrorism and conflict, social inequities, health care, educational access, and poverty. Identification of wicked problems and approaches to the use of research as a tool to inform decisions for action related to them have progressed since Rittel and Webber (1973) first published on this concept. For example, a special issue of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research focused on mixed methods strategies that were used to study social inequities experienced by marginalized populations to address wicked problems such as access to education for Roma populations in Europe (Flecha, 2014), creating safe places for internally displaced gay and bisexual men and transwomen in Columbia (Zea, Aguilar-Pardo, Betancourt, Reisen, & Gonzales, 2014), and building research capacity in the spinal cord injury community in New Zealand (Sullivan, Derrett, Paul, Beaver, & Stace, 2014). Gomez (2014) claims that mixed methods approaches are particularly germane for approaches to address these wicked problems because they allow researchers from diverse groups to have a common language to guide their inquiry, participants from vulnerable groups to be included in culturally appropriate and supportive ways, and policy makers to be part of the process of problem and solution identification and documentation. Another example of the use of mixed methods to address wicked problems comes from the work of the Educational Resilience Approaches section of the World Bank; they have a project to address wicked problems such as lack of access to education and reduction of gender violence in conflict zones and in contexts of adversity by adopting a resilience-focused transformative