Wicked Problems: 1973 Version

Reading the news is depressing. I’m tempted to cocoon in my own bubble world. Surprisingly, this is easier to do today. Working from home, I don’t have to deal with commute traffic. I can order groceries to be delivered. I can choose only to access feel-good stories in the news, or ignore it completely. And since I’m not teaching a summer class or taking on summer research students, my time is mostly my own, at least until the new semester begins.

 

Two major issues are dominating the U.S. airwaves: the continuing coronavirus woes, and the George Floyd aftermath. These, among many other issues both domestic and abroad, are “wicked problems”. Anything that involves government and public policy today might fall under this category. Even engaging in university-wide planning in a year without Covid might qualify, although perhaps less anxiety-inducing. But wicked problems are not new. They’ve likely existed as long as society has existed, and have become increasingly untameable with increasing complexity.

 

The phrase “wicked problem” has also increased in popularity as all manner of things are ascribed to this category. I don’t know who first formulated the phrase, but it is given some definition by Rittel and Webber in their 1973 article: “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning” (citation and abstract in Figure).

 

It’s an excellent article; I recommend reading it in full. The principles mentioned will resonate with anyone who is flabbergasted with the depressing news of our times. The prose is clear, accessible, and hard-hitting, as illustrated by the quote below.

 

Planning problems are inherently wicked. As distinguished from problems in the natural sciences, which are definable and separable and may have solutions that are findable, the problems of governmental planning – and especially those of social or policy planning – are ill-defined; and they rely upon elusive political judgment for resolution. (Not “solution.” Social problems are never solved. At best they are only re-solved – over and over again.)

 

Even the parenthetical statements pack a punch. When wearing my administrator hat, I am hereby resolved to discuss Resolutions to such planning problems, and not Solutions. It’s so easy for me as a chemistry professor to fall back on talking about “solutions”, be they chemical substance solutions or (more importantly to students) solutions to the latest problem set.

 

Rittel and Webber articulate ten properties that set wicked problems apart. I would call them ten dilemmas. We should be alert to them, even as we cannot solve them and only resolve them in a limited way. Before getting to their list, the authors carefully define what it means to be wicked.

 

We are calling them “wicked” not because these properties are themselves ethically deplorable. We use the term “wicked” in a meaning akin to that of “malignant” (in contrast to “benign”) or “vicious” (like a circle) or “tricky” (like a leprechaun) or “aggressive” (like a lion, in contrast to the docility of a lamb). We do not mean to personify these properties of social systems by implying malicious intent. But then, you may agree that it becomes morally objectionable for the planner to treat a wicked problem as though it were a tame one, or to tame a wicked problem prematurely, or to refuse to recognize the inherent wickedness of social problems.

 

Here is my very quick summary of these properties, but I recommend the interested reader to consult the full article.

 

(a) Defining the problem is the problem, and inherently includes biased solutions based on the ideology or vantage point of the problem (re)solver. There is no clearly defined end point to the problem that tells you you’re done.

 

(b) There are no “correct” or unambiguous solutions. Nor can you test them without consequences. You can’t exhaust the “solution space”. Wicked problems are interconnected to each other, perhaps even in one vast system.

 

(c) A wicked problem is unique, and although there might be overlap with related problems, as the authors state: despite long lists of similarities between a current problem and a previous one, there always might be an additional distinguishing property that is of overriding importance.

 

I close with a final quote from the article, that I think is wise advice, but has become increasingly difficult in our internet age of near-instant rage.

 

Part of the art of dealing with wicked problems is the art of not knowing too early which type of solution to apply.