Managing Systemic Risk in Legal Systems

The American legal system has proven remarkably robust even in the face of vast and often tumultuous political, social, economic, and technological change. Yet our system of law is not unlike other complex social, biological, and physical systems in exhibiting local fragility in the midst of its global robustness. Understanding how this “robust yet fragile” (RYF) dilemma operates in legal systems is important to the extent law is expected to assist in managing systemic risk—the risk of large local or even system-wide failures—in other social systems. Indeed, legal system failures have been blamed as partly responsible for disasters such as the recent financial system crisis and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. If we cannot effectively manage systemic risk within the legal system, how can we expect the legal system to manage systemic risk elsewhere? This Article employs a complexity science model of the RYF dilemma to explore why systemic risk persists in legal systems and how to manage it. Part I defines complexity in the context of the institutions and instruments that make up the legal system. Part II defines the five dimensions of robustness that support functionality of the legal system: (1) reliability, (2) efficiency, (3) scalability, (4) modularity, and (5) evolvability. Part III then defines system fragility by examining the internal and external constraints that impede legal system robustness and the fail-safe system control strategies for managing their effects. With those basic elements of the RYF dilemma model in place, Part IV defines systemic risk and explores the paradoxical role of increasingly organized complexity brought about by fail-safe strategies as a source of legal system failure. There is no way around the RYF dilemma—some degree of systemic risk is inherent in any complex adaptive system—but the balance between robustness and fragility is something we can hope to influence. To explore how, Part V applies the RYF dilemma model to a concrete systemic risk management context—oil drilling in the deep Gulf of Mexico. The legal regime governing offshore oil exploration and extraction has been blamed as contributing to the set of failures that led to the catastrophic Deepwater Horizon spill and is at the center of reform initiatives. Using this case study, I argue that the RYF dilemma model provides valuable insights into how legal systems fail and how to manage legal systemic risk

Managing Systemic Risk in Legal Systems

The American legal system has proven remarkably robust even in the face vast and often tumultuous political, social, economic, and technological change. Yet our system of law is not unlike other complex social, biological, and physical systems in exhibiting local fragility in the midst of its global robustness. Understanding how this “robust yet fragile†(RYF) dilemma operates in legal systems is important to the extent law is expected to assist in managing systemic risk — the risk of large local or even system-wide failures — in other social systems. Indeed, legal system failures have been blamed as partly responsible for disasters such as the recent financial system crisis and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. If we cannot effectively manage systemic risk within the legal system, however, how can we expect the legal system to manage systemic risk elsewhere? This Article employs a complexity science model of the RYF dilemma to explore why systemic risk persists in legal systems and how to manage it. Part I defines complexity in the context of the institutions and instruments that make up the legal system. Part II defines the five dimensions of robustness that support functionality of the legal system: (1) reliability; (2) efficiency; (3) scalability; (4) modularity, and (5) evolvability. Part III then defines system fragility, examining the internal and external constraints that impede legal system robustness and the fail-safe system control strategies for managing their effects. With those basic elements of the RYF dilemma model in place, Part IV defines systemic risk, exploring the paradoxical role of increasingly organized complexity brought about by fail-safe strategies as a source of legal system failure. There is no way around the RYF dilemma — some degree of systemic risk is inherent in any complex adaptive system — but the balance between robustness and fragility is something we can hope to influence. To explore how, Part V applies the RYF dilemma model to a concrete systemic risk management context — oil drilling in the deep Gulf of Mexico. The legal regime governing offshore oil exploration and extraction has been blamed as contributing to the set of failures that led to the catastrophic Deepwater Horizon spill and is at the center of reform initiatives. Using this case study, I argue that the RYF dilemma model provides valuable insights into how legal systems fail and how to manage legal systemic risk

Generative design in building information modelling (BIM) : approaches and requirements

The integration of generative design (GD) and building information modelling (BIM), as a new technology consolidation, can facilitate the constructability of GD’s automatic design solutions, while improving BIM’s capability in the early design phase. Thus, there has been an increasing interest to study GD-BIM, with current focuses mainly on exploring applications and investigating tools. However, there are a lack of studies regarding methodological relationships and skill requirement based on different development objectives or GD properties; thus, the threshold of developing GD-BIM still seems high. This study conducts a critical review of current approaches for developing GD in BIM, and analyses methodological relationships, skill requirements, and improvement of GD-BIM development. Accordingly, novel perspectives of objective-oriented, GD component-based, and skill-driven GD-BIM development as well as reference guides are proposed. Finally, future research directions, challenges, and potential solutions are discussed. This research aims to guide designers in the building industry to properly determine approaches for developing GD-BIM and inspire researchers’ future studies

Managing Systemic Risk in Legal Systems

The American legal system has proven remarkably robust even in the face vast and often tumultuous political, social, economic, and technological change. Yet our system of law is not unlike other complex social, biological, and physical systems in exhibiting local fragility in the midst of its global robustness. Understanding how this “robust yet fragile (RYF) dilemma operates in legal systems is important to the extent law is expected to assist in managing systemic risk, the risk of large local or even system-wide failures in other social systems. Indeed, legal system failures have been blamed as partly responsible for disasters such as the recent financial system crisis and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. If we cannot effectively manage systemic risk within the legal system, however, how can we expect the legal system to manage systemic risk elsewhere? This Article employs a complexity science model of the RYF dilemma to explore why systemic risk persists in legal systems and how to manage it. Part I defines complexity in the context of the institutions and instruments that make up the legal system. Part II defines the five dimensions of robustness that support functionality of the legal system: (1) reliability; (2) efficiency; (3) scalability; (4) modularity, and (5) evolvability. Part III then defines system fragility, examining the internal and external constraints that impede legal system robustness and the fail-safe system control strategies for managing their effects. With those basic elements of the RYF dilemma model in place, Part IV defines systemic risk, exploring the paradoxical role of increasingly organized complexity brought about by fail-safe strategies as a source of legal system failure. There is no way around the RYF dilemma some degree of systemic risk is inherent in any complex adaptive system but the balance between robustness and fragility is something we can hope to influence. To explore how, Part V applies the RYF dilemma model to a concrete systemic risk management context oil drilling in the deep Gulf of Mexico. The legal regime governing offshore oil exploration and extraction has been blamed as contributing to the set of failures that led to the catastrophic Deepwater Horizon spill and is at the center of reform initiatives. Using this case study, I argue that the RYF dilemma model provides valuable insights into how legal systems fail and how to manage legal systemic risk

Forum: Complex Systems and International Governance

That we live in an age of complexity and transition is hardly news. Ours is the age of interconnections, ambiguity, and uncertainty; of the diffusion of authority; of various kinds of revolutions: military, technological, social, political, economic, and even philosophical. What springs from these developments is the feeling of a lack of control. Decision-makers either think they have no other option but to act as they do or are paralyzed by the uncertainties and conflicting pressures they face. The usual solution is to try to reassert control, which leads to new problems. Paradoxically, as our tools to make sense and control societies and our environment increase, our ability to do so diminishes

Identification of Serotonergic Neuronal Modules that Affect Aggressive Behavior

SummaryEscalated aggression can have devastating societal consequences, yet underlying neurobiological mechanisms are poorly understood. Here, we show significantly increased inter-male mouse aggression when neurotransmission is constitutively blocked from either of two subsets of serotonergic, Pet1+ neurons: one identified by dopamine receptor D1(Drd1a)::cre-driven activity perinatally, and the other by Drd2::cre from pre-adolescence onward. Blocking neurotransmission from other Pet1+ neuron subsets of similar size and/or overlapping anatomical domains had no effect on aggression compared with controls, suggesting subtype-specific serotonergic neuron influences on aggression. Using established and novel intersectional genetic tools, we further characterized these subtypes across multiple parameters, showing both overlapping and distinct features in axonal projection targets, gene expression, electrophysiological properties, and effects on non-aggressive behaviors. Notably, Drd2::cre marked 5-HT neurons exhibited D2-dependent inhibitory responses to dopamine in slices, suggesting direct and specific interplay between inhibitory dopaminergic signaling and a serotonergic subpopulation. Thus, we identify specific serotonergic modules that shape aggression

BGP-Multipath Routing in the Internet

BGP-Multipath, or BGP-M, is a routing technique for balancing traffic load in the Internet. It enables a Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) border router to install multiple ‘equally-good’ paths to a destination prefix. While other multipath routing techniques are deployed at internal routers, BGP-M is deployed at border routers where traffic is shared on multiple border links between Autonomous Systems (ASes). Although there are a considerable number of research efforts on multipath routing, there is so far no dedicated measurement or study on BGP-M in the literature. This thesis presents the first systematic study on BGP-M. I proposed a novel approach to inferring the deployment of BGP-M by querying Looking Glass (LG) servers. I conducted a detailed investigation on the deployment of BGP-M in the Internet. I also analysed BGP-M’s routing properties based on traceroute measurements using RIPE Atlas probes. My research has revealed that BGP-M has already been used in the Internet. In particular, Hurricane Electric (AS6939), a Tier-1 network operator, has deployed BGP-M at border routers across its global network to hundreds of its neighbour ASes on both IPv4 and IPv6 Internet. My research has provided the state-of-the-art knowledge and insights in the deployment, configuration and operation of BGP-M. The data, methods and analysis introduced in this thesis can be immensely valuable to researchers, network operators and regulators who are interested in improving the performance and security of Internet routing. This work has raised awareness of BGP-M and may promote more deployment of BGP-M in future because BGP-M not only provides all benefits of multipath routing but also has distinct advantages in terms of flexibility, compatibility and transparency