A Systems Map Depicting the Complex Challenge of Plastics Pollution in the Mediterranean Sea

2021 was a year of systems mapping for ReImagined Futures! After undertaking two significant systems mapping projects, we have learned all sorts of tricks on Kumu and I am starting to see information only in feedback loops! So much so that my partner started calling me Loopita…

ReImagined Future’s keystone mapping project in 2021 was a collaboration with the Catalan Center for Agro-Food Economics and Development (CREDA), with whom we worked on mapping the issue of plastic pollution in the Mediterranean Sea. This project is part of the policy experiments on sustainable development challenges in the Mediterranean region coordinated by the Blue Bio Med consortium. The project also involved the Catalan Government (the Directorate General of Maritime Policy and Sustainable Fisheries and the Waste Management Agency, as well the Area of Economic Promotion) and the BLUENETCAT Catalan Maritime Network.

Using the Omidyar Group Systems Practice methodology and terminology, we created a systems map answering the following question: What forces account for the problem of macro-plastics in the Mediterranean Sea?

You can see the systems map we created, (zoom in to better see elements and connections) and the accompanying presentation at the link below:

https://ReImagined-Futures.kumu.io/macro-plastic-pollution-in-the-mediterranean-sea

First, what is a systems map and why do we need it?

A systems map is one of the main tools available to a systems thinker to work on a complex challenge, such as the one of marine plastic pollution. Complexity requires systems thinking, and systems mapping can help unlock and clarify this kind of thinking.

A systems map helps us to understand the different elements of a system and how they relate to each other. It helps us see how nudging one element or one connection can have a series of ripple effects and (unintended or intended) consequences on the behavior of the whole system. (Systems Innovation, 2022)

We need systems maps because they help us see the whole picture and in this way better understand complex problems. Systems maps can be seen as an important stepping stone before agreeing on a shared agenda for collective impact.

The methodology we use at Reimagined Futures (based on the Omidyar Group Systems Practice Methodology) guides us to create systems maps that look like the one depicted in the picture below. Each map we work on consists of the following components:

• Elements that are connected throughout the system.
• Feedback loops which bring the elements together to follow the upstream causes and downstream effects of the systems’ behaviour.
• Correlations between the elements within loops which can be positive or negative. A positive correlation means that if the first element increases, then the second increases too and vice versa. A negative correlation means that if the first element increases, then the second element decreases and vice versa).
• Deep Structure which provides a high-level core story or narrative and is the center on which the entire map is structured. It does not tell the whole story but provides an initial, high-level opening narrative around which we can then construct the story of the map and provide context to the different regions and loops.

Systems Map on the Issue of Plastic Pollution in the Mediterranean Sea

Second, how did we build the systems map on macro-plastic pollution in the Mediterranean Sea?

The map is built upon academic research done by CREDA, stakeholder input gathered through a series of interviews and expert and practitioner feedback received through three multi-stakeholder workshops. The workshops involved quadruple helix stakeholders from all over the Mediterranean region and we designed them to be very participatory.

The mapping process started with a kick off meeting in which we identified the following individuals with whom we would be collaborating in the course of the project:

1. A core team of 3–4 people who we would work with very closely.
2. An extended team of 6–7 experts who would support us a few times during the project to better understand the system by giving us feedback and expert advice.
3. Finally, we identified a list of external participants who would join the workshops throughout the course of this project. A diverse set of 40–50 stakeholders from a variety of sectors and civil society.

Importantly at the kick-off meeting we also determined what the project’s guiding star, near star and framing question would be.

• The Guiding star is a vision that is framed as the desired future system towards which the team is working. In other words, this is the long-term impact goal towards which the project will contribute. In the case of our project, the guiding star is A Mediterranean Sea without plastic pollution.
• The near star is a 5- to 10-year goal that is framed as a distant, but foreseeable outcome that could be attained. It should be a significant step towards the guiding star. It is the medium-term outcome goal and in this project our near star is: Innovation in the policy, social, business and technology domains which enables macro-plastics waste recovery and recycling.
• The framing question is the question our map will answer — it helps the team focus on understanding the system which we analyze and ultimately affect. In the case of this project, the framing question is: What forces account for the problem of macro-plastics in the Mediterranean Sea?

For the mapping process, it is also important to determine some boundaries. In our case, these were (1) focussing the project mostly on macro plastics and (2) focussing the project on the Northern part of the Mediterranean Sea.

Once we established all these elements we were then ready to start analyzing the literature on the issue (which CREDA provided us). As a result we were able to list the the main enablers and inhibitors to the health of the system, which we then grouped into themes, later prioritizing 4 themes of enablers and 4 themes of inhibitors.

We dived deeper into the prioritized themes and began to explore their upstream causes and downstream effects. We used a tool called SAT analysis — SAT stands for Structural, Attitudinal, and Transactional, for this purpose. This analysis is a holistic way of looking at the system to avoid focusing on just what is obvious to us. It is a time consuming process but is an essential stepping stone to the next part of the process — the creation of the first loops.

Once we completed the SAT analyses for all 8 of the themes, we started observing the patterns — how each of these forces in the system we are analysing has a cause and an effect and how they are interrelated.

We then started creating the first feedback loops by identifying the most important factors and tracing their downstream effects until ultimately they circle back and affect the factor which we started the loop with. We created a large number of loops and this was one of the most time consuming and difficult parts of the mapping.

When we finished the loops we zoomed out and looked for the most important and repeating elements (e.g. factors, causal relationships and even loops as a whole) in order to create our deep structure. The deep structure serves as the anchor point for most of the loops in our systems map; it is the central unifying loop.

Deep structure

We then conducted the first two workshops to review our initial findings and solicit feedback:

Workshop 1 brought together nearly 50 people with the objective to socialise the map and enrich it.

Workshop 2 brought together the same group of participants and focused on identifying leverage points by collectively answering 4 key questions — of course, using the map.

The 4 questions included:

1. Where is the system frozen? Looking for places where system behavior is deeply entrenched and unlikely to change in the near future.
2. Where is there potential energy for change? Looking for opportunities which can disrupt the status quo.
3. Where are there places that seem like bright spots? Looking for places where positive change is happening already, despite an overall trend to the contrary.
4. Where are you seeing ripple effects? Looking for strong factors and dynamics which have the potential to affect any other factors or dynamics downstream.

After Workshop 2, we analyzed all the inputs and came up with 7 leverage points. We developed a leverage hypothesis for each of the points, explaining how a change in that particular element can affect further changes in the system and ultimately lead to systems change.

Finally, we used Workshop 3 (designed as a creative design thinking based session) to develop possible project ideas to trigger a few of the leverage points and start shifting the system which is currently causing the growing levels of plastic pollution in the Mediterranean Sea.

The project concluded with two deliverables — a complete systems map and an accompanying report. In addition to supporting the Blue Bio Med consortium to better understand the system, an important outcome of our systems mapping process is also to bring a diverse set of stakeholders together and to create a shared understanding and agenda for change in a systemic, participatory and collaborative manner.

If you would like to learn more about our systems mapping work, get in touch on viliana@reimaginedfutures.org or on Linkedin.