Life, the universe and emergence

Complexity theory claims to resolve the classic conflict between vitalists who believe evolution is externally caused by spirit or other vital forces and mechanists who believe evolution is bottom-up, with survival of the fittest or adaptation as the key variable. In contrast, complexity theory asserts that evolution occurs through emergence. New variables naturally develop over time. Organisms, individuals and societies self-organize, ie they do not need an outside force to guide their growth. Thus, from simple conditions emerge complex conditions. This essay explores the meaning of complexity and its implications through a review of three recent books: Roger Lewin's Complexity: Life at the Edge of Chaos; Stuart Kauffman's The Origins of Order; and Mitchell Waldrop's Complexity: the Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos.     

Theory and practice in transformation: The disowned futures of Integral extension

The strength of futures studies is its epistemological pluralism. Integral futures as defined by Slaughter and Riedy loses sight of this strength. Instead of an interpretive dialogue, the “Integral Extension” seeks to frame and define causal layered analysis (CLA) within its own terms. Its proponents do so by constructing their version of Integral as above—more evolved, higher, more… and CLA as lower. Integral, in Riedy and Slaughter's terms, appears to inhabit the totalizing linear modernist paradigm, not to mention the straightjacket of the masculinist discourse. Their strategy is the classic defining of the other within the terms of the person who seeks to define. Riedy's piece in particular makes a strange series of errors in that it: (1) confuses Vedanta with Tantra; (2) misreads subjectivity—arguing that subjectivity does not exist for the poststructural, instead of seeing how the self is contextualized with structure and genealogy (as in Foucault's work); (3) misses the entire work around inner CLA; (4) adopts the Orientalist discourse of constructing CLA as cultural (instead of recognizing that it seeks to move up and down layers of data, systems, worldviews and myths), and (5) is not grounded in the practice of conducting layered analysis with varied groups. This essay concludes by arguing that there is no need for this battle. We do not need to be either for or against Integral or CLA. We can live in multiple spaces, use different theories and methodologies, each having its purpose, each useful depending on the person, time and particular space we inhabit.     

Anticipatory action learning: Theory and practice

Anticipatory action learning (AAL) draws from action learning/research traditions and Futures Studies to develop a unique style of questioning the future with intent to transform organization and society. Case studies from futures workshops are used to illustrate the main points of anticipatory action learning. These are: (1) sensitivity to the environment—workshop dynamics and ways of learning/knowing of participants, (2) questioning leads to anxiety in the organization, (3) anticipatory action learning can be easily appropriated, (4) resistance must be named, understood and transformed, and (5) the future is deepened by authentic understanding of the other.     

The Effect of Overconfidence and Underconfidence on Consumer Value

Although the effect of knowledge miscalibration (i.e., the inaccuracy in subjective knowledge relative to objective knowledge) on consumer purchase decisions has been investigated, its effect in the usage stage of consumption is little understood. This paper examines the effect of knowledge miscalibration in terms of both overconfidence (i.e., when subjective knowledge is inflated) and underconfidence (i.e., when subjective knowledge is deflated) on the dimensions of consumer value (i.e., efficiency, excellence, play, and aesthetics). The paper makes the case that overconfidence and underconfidence should be treated separately as they trigger different consumption consequences. Several hypotheses are tested through two studies: a covariance‐based study (Study 1) and an experimental study (Study 2). In Study 1, overconfidence and underconfidence are measured, while in Study 2 they are experimentally manipulated. Findings of both studies show that underconfidence negatively influences efficiency, excellence, and aesthetics, and overconfidence negatively influences play. Also, Study 1 finds a negative effect of underconfidence on play and Study 2 finds a negative effect of overconfidence on excellence and aesthetics. Findings reveal that knowledge miscalibration negatively impacts consumers’ usage experiences. This implies that in designing product or service experiences suppliers benefit from ensuring that consumers achieve a reduced level of knowledge miscalibration.     

Future generations thinking

Future generations thinking provides a non-Western reading of space, time, nature and self, contrasting itself with the liberal openness of much of futures studies by asserting a non-negotiatable core. This includes a commitment to the family as a basic unit of analysis; inclusion of all sentient beings; belief in the repeatability of time; an inter-generational approach balancing ancestors and future generations; sustainable social and economic practices; a global focus; a spiritual and collective view towards choice and rationality; and the realization of a global ethics beyond postmodernity. In practice, however, future generations thinking often falls short of its claims. Nevertheless, if future generations thinking can become authentically multi-civilizational, it could create a new history for future generations.     

Judicial foresight in the Hawaii judiciary

This report describes the process and the products of the 1991 Hawaii Judicial Foresight Congress, held in Honolulu, Hawaii, 6–8 January 1991. The report aims both to contribute to the dialogue on how to have an appropriate futures conferences and to present futures thinking on the US courts.     

Investment Opportunity Set and Voluntary Disclosure of Prospective Information: A Simultaneous Equations Approach

Abstract:   This paper examines empirically the relationship between the level of disclosure of prospective information and the investment opportunity set for firms in New Zealand. Using a systems (two‐stage least squares) approach that explicitly controls for potential endogeneity between disclosure and IOS, we find that the level of prospective information disclosure is significantly and positively related to IOS in both specifications in our simultaneous analysis. Further, we document that prospective information disclosure is positively related to firm size and new security offerings, and is not related to inside ownership and firm profitability. IOS is positively impacted by a firm's investments in fixed assets and its profitability. Finally, we find that forward looking disclosure levels are positively related to the proportion of outside directors on the board and negatively related to barriers to entry, but these findings are not robust across alternative model specifications.