Systemic intervention

This paper describes the practice of systemic intervention, emphasizing (1) the need to explore stakeholder values and boundaries for analysis; (2) responses to the challenges of marginalization processes; and (3) a wide, pluralistic range of methods from the systems literature and beyond to create a flexible and responsive systemic action research practice. After presenting an outline of systemic intervention, the author discusses several other well-tested systems approaches with a view to identifying their potential for further supporting systemic intervention practice, and action research more generally. Two practical examples of systemic intervention are provided to illustrate the arguments

Systemic intervention for computer-supported collaborative learning

This paper presents a systemic intervention approach as a means to overcome the methodological challenges involved in research into computer-supported collaborative learning applied to the promotion of mathematical problem-solving (CSCL-MPS) skills in schools. These challenges include how to develop an integrated analysis of several aspects of the learning process; and how to reflect on learning purposes, the context of application and participants' identities. The focus of systemic intervention is on processes for thinking through whose views and what issues and values should be considered pertinent in an analysis. Systemic intervention also advocates mixing methods from different traditions to address the purposes of multiple stakeholders. Consequently, a design for CSCL-MPS research is presented that includes several methods. This methodological design is used to analyse and reflect upon both a CSCL-MPS project with Colombian schools, and the identities of the participants in that project

State intervention, local indebtedness, investment overheating and their systemic background during global crisis in China

This paper focuses on the immediate economic and systemic reasons of steadily increasing local government indebtedness and investment overheating in China. These two phenomena emerged between 2008 and 2011 as a direct consequence of an external shock caused by the global crisis and the subsequent internal reaction in the form of intensified stimulating state intervention. New chances for resource distribution and investments through state intervention mobilized distribution priorities and politically rational economic behavior of actors, characteristic to party-state systems. Locations of mobilization were defined by the decentralized Chinese system specifics along the intertwined institutional party-state structure. Systemic characteristics and its Chinese specifics together resulted in investment overheating, and steadily growing local indebtedness through large and state-owned enterprises and local governments. This process was further amplified by the characteristics of transforming economy in China as actors in the private sphere were mobilized by the increased input demand of those privileged by the systemic priorities of state intervention

Knowing differently in systemic intervention

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. This paper makes the case for extended ways of knowing in systemic intervention. It argues that the deployment of formal (even reflective) thinking and dialogue methods are inadequate, on their own, to the critical tasks of comprehending larger wholes and appreciating others' viewpoints. Theory and techniques need to go further and access other forms of knowing, held in experiential, practical or symbolic ways. This could offer a better basis to incorporate marginalized people and other phenomena that are affected by interventions but do not have a voice, such as ecosystems and future generations

Regulating Systemic Risk: Towards an Analytical Framework

The global financial crisis demonstrated the inability and unwillingness of financial market participants to safeguard the stability of the financial system. It also highlighted the enormous direct and indirect costs of addressing systemic crises after they have occurred, as opposed to attempting to prevent them from arising. Governments and international organizations are responding with measures intended to make the financial system more resilient to economic shocks, many of which will be implemented by regulatory bodies over time. These measures suffer, however, from the lack of a theoretical account of how systemic risk propagates within the financial system and why regulatory intervention is needed to disrupt it. In this Article, we address this deficiency by examining how systemic risk is transmitted. We then proceed to explain why, in the absence of regulation, market participants cannot be relied upon to disrupt or otherwise limit the transmission of systemic risk. Finally, we advance an analytical framework to inform systemic risk regulation

Resilience of the Interbank Network to Shocks and Optimal Bail-Out Strategy: Advantages of "Tiered" Banking Systems

This paper studies systemic risk and the scale of systemic breakdown in the frequently observed tiered banking system. The banking network is constructed from a number of banks which are linked by interbank exposures with a certain predefined probability. In this framework, the tiered structure is represented either by a network with negative correlation in connectivity of neighboring banks, or alternatively, by a network with a scale-free distribution of connectivity. The main findings of the paper highlight the advantages of tiering in terms of both the resilience of the banking network to systemic shocks and the extent of necessary government intervention should a crisis evolve.

How and why systemic inflammation worsens quality of life in patients with advanced cancer

Introduction: The presence of an innate host systemic inflammatory response has been reported to be a negative prognostic factor in a wide group of solid tumour types in both the operable and advanced setting, both local and distant. In addition, this host systemic inflammatory response is associated with both clinician reported patient performance status and self-reported measures of quality of life in patients with cancer. Areas covered: A variety of mechanisms are thought to underlie this, including the influence of the host immune response on physical symptoms such as pain and fatigue, its effect on organ systems associated with physical ability and well being such as skeletal muscle, and bone marrow. Furthermore, this innate inflammatory response is thought to have a direct negative impact on mood through its action on the central nervous system. Expert commentary: It is clear that the host systemic inflammatory response represents a target for intervention in terms of both improving quality of life and prognosis in patients with advanced cancer. Based on this paradigm, future research should focus both on pathways which might be targeted by novel agents, but also on whether existing anti-inflammatory drugs might be of benefit

Safety and patient satisfaction of abobotulinumtoxinA for aesthetic use. A systematic review

A systematic review of the published literature (from January 2000 to January 2016) to ascertain the safety of, and patient satisfaction with, the aesthetic use of abobotulinumtoxinA was conducted. In addition to the licensed indications, other special populations were considered for discussion. The potential impact of neutralizing antibodies and systemic toxicity were also addressed. A total of 364 papers were screened and 86 were found to be relevant to the population, intervention(s), and outcomes stipulated in the protocol. The safety and patient satisfaction data from these publications are discussed in this review