System Thinking

SYSTEMS THINKING

intro/

22

08

Systems-thinking is a relatively simple premise: to approach solving a problem by considering of inputs as part of a connected whole. But systems-thinking meets with a very complicated reality when you need to actually accept and execute that premise.

The reality of the built environment needs to adapt in order to accommodate this change. It needs to mend the disconnect between the traditional approach to architecture and dynamic social and technological systems.

Most fifth graders know the natural world is an ecosystem, the economy is a financial system, and getting from A to B across any distance requires an effective transportation systems.

Architecture should shift from the goal of rigid object creation. The ROI of buildings should be seen in a larger context, rather than be treated as singular managed assets. Systems thinking presents a lens to recognize how our built world exists within social, environmental and business realities, which are changing at a rate that traditional architecture can no longer support.

But as decision-makers, we often function differently.

Perhaps it is easier to isolate, to channel analytic methods on specific factors or inputs, to focus on one part in a way that excludes the mess of variables and complexity of a system as a whole. This approach has defined much of modern problem solving. Companies organize their functions into department. Education divides curriculum into separate subjects. Politicians thrive on single-issue, talking-point policy. Engineers are trained to be technical specialists. In all of our institutions, we are directed to operate upon parts, not systems.

Problem-solvers guided by measurable results, we at MKThink subscribe to systems-thinking as the essential method in solving for intelligent places.

Perhaps a pretentious and hyperbolic position, I like to think that it is the only way for a creative problem-solving OR solution-seeking company to operate.

Facing a technology-driven world of explorationand rapid change, these institutions are beginning to change. Leading educators are shifting to inquiry-based learning approaches. Business leaders are exploring design-thinking to break-down operationalsilos. Environmental preservationists are embracing multi-dimensional analytics to enable sustainability. There is a resurgence in urban living

14

Mark Miller CEO, Founder | FAIA, LEEDAP MKThink

contents 04

Gaming Systems Thinking

12

Using games to teach and foster systems thinking

08

Matri-Architecture Architecture inspired by maternal wisdom

14

Systems Thinking Seeing the trees through the forest

School Systems Thinking

A supply chain for re-invisioned school lunches

20

Building Data Dance

Considering building systems beyond HVAC

22

Eating Oil “Blood of the earth�

Editor Ashley Wells

Photographer Think Team

Creative Director Adam Everton

Art Director Adam Everton

Questions and feedback: 1500 Sansome St San Francisco CA 94111 415.402.0888 info@mkthink.com www.mkthink.com www.mkink/issuu.com

gaming systems thinking/ using games to teach and foster systems thinking Allan Donnelly, Senior Strategist, MKThink

BUILD YOUR OWN APARTMENT GAME In this game, participants were assigned roommates and as a group given 100 Slugs. All groups started by picking a baseline unit either a 4-bedroom or 2-bedroom unit. Both unit types consisted of single bedrooms. If groups chose the 2-bedroom unit, they used 25 Slugs towards the unit. Using your remaining Slugs, groups then were instructed to trade for features to add to the unit.

Unit LeveL Upgrade

Dedicated Parking Spot

SUStainabiLity Upgrade

50 SlugS

Do you drive a lot and have trouble finding a place to park? Upgrade to a single dedicated parking space for you to share with your roommates.

At the most basic level, a system is a set of interrelated components that, in concert, produce something greater than the sum of its parts. The relationships between these individual components define the operations of the system.

Through these operations, system properties emerge. These emergent properties ensue not from the properties of the individual components but from their interrelation. Seeds, soil, water, and sunlight do not by themselves create a tree.

A tree results from the interplay between them.

The tree is a system, and its bark, roots, rings, and leaves are its properties.

Systems thinking is a way of understanding everything as a system–a network of complex relationships rather than a collection of distinct parts. It uses objective observation and relational analysis to see the whole picture, to undercover the underlying structure of inputs and outputs, and understand the key feedback loops that define the system’s properties.

Systems exist everywhere and on every level.

4

MK{ink}

Any and every thing is part of a system, and any and every thing can be viewed as a system in and of itself. There are physical systems (buildings on a campus), natural systems (the natural environment the buildings occupy), and cultural systems (the people and organizations that inhabit the buildings). Where the real magic comes in is when you employ systems thinking to understand how each of these systems interact–how physical, environmental, and cultural systems function as one larger system with distinct system properties. A system of systems, if you will.

That’s where MKThink does its work.

In practice, cultural systems are often the hardest to map into broader whole.

Different stakeholders aren’t always predisposed to think of themselves as part of a system, especially when the system’s components include stakeholders with opposing views. Applied to stakeholder engagement, systems thinking identifies

Shared Upgrade

Net Zero Building

Energy conservation measures are combined with on-site renewable sources to meet all of the project’s energy needs. Total amount of energy used by the building is roughly equal to the amount of renewable energy on-site.

important interdependencies and uncovers unforeseen alignments between groups with conflicting viewpoints and objectives. As such, systems thinking can help organizations cultivate a shared vision among stakeholders to improve the system in which they collectively belong.

Systems thinking is not always intuitive, and it’s not always easy. So the best way to introduce into a group or organization is to make it fun.

Stakeholder Engagement-University of California SantaCruz The University of California Santa Cruz, maintains a culture of healthy contention among its constituents, who tend to see themselves as factions rather than components of a larger whole. The University’s very livelihood and identity are defined by a culture of critique, debate, and protest. But when it came to building new residential facilities on an open green space, that culture of opposition presented a major obstacle.

75 SlugS

Outdoor Social Space

5

SlugS

Want a nice place to sit and chat with some friends under the sun? Add a shared outdoor social space to your housing complex.

With growing enrollments, there was a demand for more student housing. The student body was largely opposed to the development and degradation of natural spaces. UCSC needed to develop a planning strategy that met the demand for student housing while still supporting its students’ commitment to environmentalism as well as the University’s own sustainability goals, both environmental and financial. Developing that plan required that school’s stakeholders come to an agreement on the goals and priorities of the new facilities.

MKThink, in collaboration with SCB Architects, facilitated the stakeholder engagement process.

In a series ofworkshops, the project team guided stakeholders through a group decision-making process–to set priorities, identify opportunities, and discuss options and tradeoffs. The workshops presented games designed to engage participants in collaboratively working through the challenges.

Systems Thinking 5

Working in teams of four, participants were charged with designing their ideal residential unit.

The Design Your Own Apartment game was designed specifically for UCSC’s housing challenge. The game presented Amenity Cards.

Each featured an amenity option, which was assigned a value (correlated to cost) in a fictional currency, dubbed “slugs” for the UCSC mascot.

Working in teams of four, participants were charged with designing their ideal residential unit. They started by selecting a base use–two bedrooms or four–and then trading slugs for different features. The challenge was to reach a group consensus on how to budget their slugs.

6

MK{ink}

These small group negotiations forced participants to consider the amenities they valued most and to realize the need for tradeoffs.

The results were surprising. Most stakeholders chose to invest points in high levels of sustainability. Fewer stakeholders than expected chose the highest levels of sustainability, opting to budget their slugs to other amenities. The facilities planning team assumed students would prefer two bedroom units over four.

That proved not to be the case. The preference for four bedroom units made for higher density housing, which reduced the built area by 75,000 ft2 and slashed construction costs by $30,000,000.

And therein lay the solution.

In essence the game is about valuing values. It is easily adaptable to any stakeholder conflict. Simply enumerate the issues at play. Assign each a numeric value and present them to the pertinent stakeholders in a group decision making workshop.

The Design Your Own Apartment game went a long way in aligning stakeholders with disparate points of view around a shared vision for the campus. It’s an example of how to bring systems thinking to organizational culture to find the sweet and sustainable spot where that culture and its natural and built environments converge.

Systems Thinking 7

Case in point, the Brooklyn Bridge. It “was made of physics [and] embodied a literal and genuinely religious leap of faith in 19th century American engineering”. Built in 1883, it marked the beginning of an era in which the most monumental structures were commercial, not religious. Spanning the East River to connect the Manhattan and Brooklyn, the Brooklyn Bridge made New York City the most significant commercial center in the United States, and ultimately the world.

“Brooklyn Bridge: Painters on Suspenders”

Before “science was raised to the status of a secular priesthood,” early civilizations formed their mental models of the universe from revelation not research.

They held cycical worldviews, rooted in the natural world and its circadian and seasonal rhythms. The central role that woman played in reproduction inspired a belief in the divine feminine and the worship of mother goddesses who personified nature, fertility, and creation.

Recent architecture has seen the return of feminine and organic forms in buildings with fluid features that rebel against the “dictate of straight lines”. Renzo Piano’s California Academy of Sciences resembles the round burial mounds found in many early civilizations.

Foster + Partners’ Virgin Galactic Terminal at Spaceport America exudes femininity with soft contours that blend seamlessly into the surrounding landscape. The building calls to mind the natural landscapes and feminine symbology in the art of Georgia O’Keefe.

The straight line is godless and immoral.

matri-architecture/

architecture inspired by maternal wisdom Ashley Wells, Brand Strategist, MKThink “The straight line is godless and immoral,” professed the artist and architect Friedensreich Hundertwasser.

A forerunner of environmentalism, he denounced the “dictate of geometrical straight lines and sterile grid systems that hurt nature and man” and “lead to the downfall of humanity.” He championed for life in harmony with the laws of nature and its “non-regulated irregularities”.

We have science to blame for this dictate. The theories of Galileo, Darwin, and Newton, among others, advanced a “non-living, coldly mechanical model of the universe” and presented life as a linear process of

8

MK{ink}

decay”. This mechanical worldview took hold of the collective conscious and replaced the “’hypothesis’ of God” and “any notion of Nature” with the drive for technological progress and material prosperity.

Modern architecture, with its straight lines and grid systems, mirrors this mechanical worldview.

Skyscrapers and bridges exemplify it best. Their structures impose upon the natural landscape with sharp lines that clearly demarcate the human from the natural world. Temples to technology and industry, they represent the triumph of science and commerce over Nature and God.

Systems Thinking 9

And like the Megalithic Temples of Malta, its entrance is through a womb-like “gorge cut from the building’s circular ellipse.”

These buildings are feminine not only in form but also in their functional imitation of (Mother) Nature. They are living systems, “intelligently designed” to naturally regulate temperature, filter water and air, and generate energy. They are models of green building: California Academy of Sciences is LEED-Platinum certified; Virgin Galactic Terminal, LEED-Gold. Green building is in essence the architectural practice of spiritual ecology—the field that joins ecology and environmentalism with the awareness of the sacred within creation. Spiritual ecology (long practiced by indigenous peoples) is a response to the environmental crisis. It calls for a reexamination of our mechanistic worldview and a spiritual reconnection to nature. While green building may emphasize science and engineering, it tacitly acknowledges the sacred in its imitation of nature’s design.

MKThink’s “informed creativity” is also spiritual ecology in practice. It unifies data and the spiritual nature of creativity. In its

architectural work, MKThink considers the buildings’ connection to the environment and by extension that of its human users.

The Harmony Building is one example. It mimics the Ohio River Bluffs with engineering systems that emulate the watershed that naturally filters water and air. It brings the Ohio River Bluffs to the urban center to connect the citizens of Louisville to Kentucky’s natural landscape.

Spaceport America

In the design of workplaces, MKThink replaces the grid systems of cubicle farms with layouts that adapt to the rhythms of the workday. These fluid configurations are spatially matriarchal and nurture a professional ecosystem that values collaboration over competition and flat organizational structure over hierarchy. These layouts reflect the increasing shift in business from aggressive, linear competition to the virtuous cycles of cooperation found in natural ecosystems.

Hundertwasser’s would no doubt endorse spiritual ecology and MKThink’s own “informed creativity,” for these practices are realizing his vision of a cyclical and “stable relationship between man, the built world and nature”.

Neolithic Temples, Malta

MKThink’s “informed creativity” is also spiritual ecology in practice.

10 MK{ink}

www.magazineonline.com

11

systems thinking/ Satchita Melina, Artist in Residence, MKThink

seeing the trees through the forest The proverb “can’t see the forest through the trees” refers to the disadvantage of focusing on small details and disconnecting them from one another and the larger picture. The flipside of this is: “seeing the forest through the trees.” From this perspective one has the capacity to understand complex interrelationships and dynamic interdependencies between many parts.

Systems thinking is a holistic approach that values understanding how different processes impact each other and are intrinsically related in a macro-system. In this image each person may be perceived as a solitary tree, but together as a whole they create a forest.

12 MK{ink}

Systems Thinking 13

school systems thinking/ a supply chain for re-envisioned school lunch Rachel Bramwell, Strategist, MKThink In San Francisco, the obesity rate among children ages 5 – 18 is 33%. That rate is similar to the national average and has stayed the same for roughly a decade. Diabetes, obesity and other harmful health conditions could cost San Francisco’s health system as much as $28 million a year.

San Francisco Unified School District is well positioned to address this issue. It serves 58,270 children, of which 61% qualifies for free or reduced lunch. Since January 2013, SFUSD’s Student Nutrition Services has taken concerted measures to improve its food system, starting with $9 million contract with Revolution Foods, a national vendor that provides pre-plated meals that meet USDA child nutrition

14 MK{ink}

pre-plated meals that meet USDA child nutrition standards.

Sesame chicken wraps, veggie taco salad, Hawaiian meatballs with island style rice now replace the previous fare of frozen corn dogs, pizza, chicken nuggets, and french fries. But each meal come at an average cost of $3, which exceeds the budgeted $2.74 per meal cost. While only a $0.26 difference, 4.8 million meals and 1 million snacks annually quickly adds up to a budget deficit. The meals provided by Revolution Foods address the singular issue of meal nutrition and but fail to present a financially sustainable solve to what is a systems-level problem.

obesity has become a national epidemic

SFUSD identified a pressing need to systematically reform the school lunch program into a “studentcentered, financially-stable system that engages kids in eating good food”. Funded by a grant from the Sara and Evans Williams Foundation, SFUSD’s Student Nutrition Services contracted the design consultancy IDEO to re-envision the school dining experience. The firm devised a long-term, multi-pronged strategy made up of ten design recommendations ranging from space renovation to communal eating to healthy vending machines to supply chain consolidation.

SFUSD awarded MKThink a contract to investigate in detail IDEO’s recommendations for a regional kitchen strategy to insource meal preparation and delivery. The strategy called for identifying and equipping central kitchen hubs for meal preparation and equipping satellite kitchens to reheat and serve meals. Under the current operating model, kitchens will need to have the capacity to produce 3,100 meals a day increase to 10,000- 11,000 meals as student participation grows.

Systems Thinking 15

DISTRICT INPUTS

DELIVERY INPUTS

TOTAL STUDENTS ENROLLED

DELIVERY COST WAREHOUSE TO REGIONAL KITCHEN

24,759 CURRENT PARTICIPATION RATE

40%

MIDDLE

8,261

HIGH

16,498

STUDENTS PARTICIPATING

10,003

SCHOOL DAYS PER YEAR

180

Based on Webb Food Service Design advice and SFUSD’s current production rates

We started by visualizing the system to define the system’s boundaries, map the inputs and outputs, and identify the key feedback loops. The supply chain itself made up of individual components, nestled within a large the school lunch program, which in turn is nestled within the even larger food system that includes food deserts, the welfare system. The focus on the supply chain part of the system defined the boundaries. We pinpointed the inputs and outputs and feedback loops as follows.

The system map informed our research objectives and strategy: 1 . Produce a kitchen and dining area assessment to survey, analyze and evaluate 105 schools.

2. Document current equipment conditions and space utilization of each site. Provide equipment upgrade costs.

3. Identify kitchen spaces at existing school sites that could be utilized as regional kitchens for high volume production.

Systems strategies are designed to be sustainable long-term solutions, not quick fixes so they require phased implementation. They replace vicious cycles or feedback loops with virtuous ones that improve the human condition over time. Fresh and nutritious school lunches can have a lifetime impact. Healthier food improves academic performance which in turn increases pursuit of higher education which translates to higher earning potential that breaks the cycle of poverty.

Nutrition education can influence lifelong eating habits that improve health and wellness, reduce disease rates, and limit demands on the healthcare system. Cumulatively, this makes for a longer, healthier, and more fulfilling life.

MEALS CURRENTLY MADE BY SNS

MEALS TARGETED TO BE MADE BY SNS

50%

75%

MEALS COSTS BREAKFAST - FREE

$1.89

BREAKFAST - REDUCED

$1.59

BREAKFAST - PAID

$0.28

LUNCH - FREE

$3.01

LUNCH - REDUCED

$2.61

LUNCH - PAID

$0.36

MEALS PER VAN

2,240

1,120

meals

RENOVATION COST PER SQ FT

NEW BUILD COST PER SQ FT

$550

$650

LABOR INPUTS LABOR COST PER HOUR

SHIFTS PER DAY

$27

2

MEALS PER LABOR HOUR

Regional Kitchen Central Kitchen Rate 1 Central Kitchen Rate 2

MEAL EQUIVALENTS

Lunch = 1 meal equivalent Breakfast (hot) = 1 meal equivalents Breakfast (cold) = 0.6 meal equivalents TYPES OF BREAKFASTS SERVED

MEALS PER TRUCK

2,619

1.5-2.0 sq ft

Streamlined Growth tests the scenario of one central kitchen. It assumes the same student participation and meal production growth rate over a nine year period. It estimates space needs of 1.5 sq ft per meal and a rate of 25 meals per labor hour will be achievable in a kitchen of this size (15,600 sq ft).

$35.00

AVERAGE REGIONAL KITCHEN CAPACITY

SPACE NEEDED TO PRODUCE ONE MEAL

Flexible Growth tests the scenario of five kitchens to produce 12,798 meals per day. It is assumes growth in student participation in the meal program to 60% and a SNS meal production growth of 75% over over a nine year period. It estimates space needs of 1.5 sq ft per meal.

$35.70

FACILITY INPUTS

MEAL INPUTS

MKThink applied a systems-thinking approach to develop a scenario model that explored renovation of the district’s existing kitchens to support preparation and delivery. The approach examined the components of the supply chain systems to understand the interconnected and interdependent feedback loops that define the properties of the system as a whole.

DELIVERY COST REGIONAL KITCHEN TO SCHOOLS

Hot = 25% Cold = 75%

8

20 30 35

LABOR AND DELIVERY COST GROWTH RATE

1.0%

annually

to account for inflation

FIXED COST INPUTS Equipments Costs (Regional Kitchen) Equipments Costs (Central Kitchen) Contingency Costs (Regional Kitchen) Contingency Costs (Central Kitchen) Soft Costs all content is proprietary

16 MK{ink}

SHIFT LENGTH (HOURS)

AS A PERCENTAGE OF INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS

25% 20% 10% 20% 20%

39 Systems Thinking 17

Scenerios For Growth SCENARIO 3: FLEXIBLE GROWTH

SCENARIO 4: STREAMLINED GROWTH

STUDENTS PARTICIPATING

SCENARIO PARTICIPATION RATE

KITCHEN AREA NEEDED

60%

14,954

MEAL EQUIVALENTS NEEDED PER DAY PRODUCED BY SNS

PERCENT OF MEALS PRODUCED BY SNS

22,600 sq ft at 2.0 sq ft/meal

YEAR 4

YEAR 0

10,393 75% POTENTIAL REGIONAL KITCHEN LOCATIONS

KITCHEN STAFF NEEDED

Lincoln HS Galileo HS Denman MS Washington HS Aptos MS Asawa HS Visitacion Valley MS Marshall HS

13 staff 7 staff 8 staff 8 staff 8 staff 8 staff 7 staff 7 staff

20

MEALS PER LABOR HOUR

SCENARIO PARTICIPATION RATE

STUDENTS PARTICIPATING

KITCHEN AREA NEEDED

60%

14,954

MEAL EQUIVALENTS NEEDED PER DAY PRODUCED BY SNS

PERCENT OF MEALS PRODUCED BY SNS

15,600 sq ft at 1.5 sq ft/meal MEALS PER LABOR HOUR

30

10,393 75%

AVERAGE ANNUAL DELIVERY COSTS

AVERAGE ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS

$92,000

$4,248,000

KITCHEN STAFF NEEDED

FIXED INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS (KITCHEN RENOVATION)

$19,243,000

43

staff

AVERAGE ANNUAL REVENUE

AVERAGE ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS

$132,000

$3,761,000

FIXED INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS (KITCHEN RENOVATION)

$12,940,000

AVERAGE ANNUAL REVENUE

AVERAGE ANNUAL DELIVERY COSTS

$16,213,000

$12,940,000

ANNUAL AVERAGE AND FIXED COSTS AND REVENUE

ANNUAL AVERAGE AND FIXED COSTS AND REVENUE

30 M

30 M

25 M

25 M

20 M

20 M

15 M

15 M 10 M

Total Participation Revenue Versus Toal Costs (Assets, Operations, and Delivery)

Total Participation Revenue Versus Toal Costs (Assets, Operations, and Delivery)

10 M 5M 0 -5 M -10 M Total Revenue

-15 M -20 M

Fixed Costs Operating Costs Delivery Costs

-25 M -30 M 0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

5M 0 -5 M -10 M Total Revenue

-15 M -20 M

Fixed Costs Operating Costs Delivery Costs

-25 M -30 M 0

Year

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

all content is proprietary

9

57 all content is proprietary

18 MK{ink}

8

Year 63

Systems Thinking 19

Patterns / Behaviors / Norms

Skin Ears

Sensors

Eyes

Air Temperature

Standards / Expectations / Policies

Relative Humidity

Wind Speed

Exploring an Example

Sunlight

Our systems-thinking approach to this problem followed four key steps:

Weather Technology

Controls

Operators / Users

Lights

Plug Load

Operations & Maintenance

Equipment

HVAC Lighting Systems Operating Standards

Air Changes

Set Point

Sensors / Controls

2. Determine which data is accessible and valuable.

Map the factors that impact or that are impacted by the building schedule.

Visualizing the system helps to uncover inter-relationships between inputs and outputs and the iterative feedback loops they generate.

In this particular case, door key card entry data was identified as an underutilized data stream. Used primarily for security. Combining this data with other qualitative cultural data painted a more holistic picture of building usage patterns The result was data-informed and more efficient mechanical conditioning schedule.

3. Introduce new data collection devices where lacking.

4. Analyze the data for patterns to uncover actionable insights.

Employing a range of different sensors, we captured factors missing from the data collection model. Temperature sensors were installed to identify hot and cold spots in the building to better understand temperature gradients throughout the day and week.

Marrying occupancy and energy data showed that building conditioning remained the same independent of the number of occupants. Therefore, we implemented zone heating and cooling schedules to better align with occupancy and occupant activity.

Orientation

Building Building Systems

1. Create a system diagram.

Openings

Building Envelope Insulation

Air

Barriers

Materials

Vapor

Water

building data dance/ considering building systems beyond hvac Amy Nagengast PH.D., LEED AP, Senior R&D Engineer, MKThink When you shoot from the hip, you’ll probably hit something, chances are it won’t be your target. The same holds true for building operations and maintenance decisions. Uninformed decisions might bea quick fix for something, but will likely fail in solving larger, more systemic issues.

Today’s building managers are awash in data. The vast availability of data has outpaced the ability to derive actionable insights. Navigating the data sea is a significant undertaking to begin with; using it to define, understand, and address concrete problems demands an entirely different and whole new kind of thinking.

Systems thinking is the key to effectively using data to make complex decisions about complex problems.

20 MK{ink}

Open-ended scenarios with many possible solutions demand an approach as open-ended and diverse as the problem at hand. Systems thinking is a mindset shift that widens the understanding to a more global view that takes into account interdependencies between different inputs and outputs. At its core, systems thinking is about asking a diversity of questions from different points of view.

MKTHINK worked with a client to strategize an effective and efficient heating and cooling schedule for an existing building. The one-story building functions as a work space, with a combination of closed and open offices, conference rooms, and a training center. The building has multiple conditioned zones intended to provide sufficient conditioning for an influx of occupants 24 hours a day.

Actions are simple to implement provided that the insights are valid. Arriving at actionable insights demands a systems understanding of inputs and outputs, and a data collection model that properly monitors and measures the effects of the system’s key feedback loops.

Systems thinking is not an intuitive process. It takes practice to develop and continued application to internalize. Best to start small: A building manager might consider a new input or output or gather data from a different source. The reward of hitting your target and pinpointing the underlying problem is well worth the mindset shift.

Systems Thinking 21

eating oil/ Satchita Melina, Artist in Residence, MKThink

blood of the earth The U’wa tribe of Columbia believes that oil is the “blood of the earth” and that draining and consuming the earth of oil will imbalance the natural rhythms and equilibrium. This is a portrait of a young student disturbed by the interconnectedness of the consumption of fossil fuels and the consumption of food. Equipping schools with learning kitchens and making wholesome and locally-sourced lunches can be initially costly, but the lifelong health impacts of a poor childhood diet and environmental degradation are even more expensive.

Intensive technology-enhanced agriculture not only uses enormous amounts of fuel and hydrocarbons, but also erodes our top soil, pollutes and drains ground and surface water sources, and through the use of toxic pesticides has created public health and environmental problems. Industrial food systems are huge producers of greenhouse gases, and have displaced many communities and people.

22 MK{ink}

Systems Thinking 23