The Inquiry-based Approach (IBA) – what and why?

1. The Inquiry-based Approach (IBA)– what and why? • Designed to handle complexity – “wicked situations”

2. Wicked situations “typically involve power relations between a diversity of stakeholders from a multitude of sectors who often have diverging interests. Confronted with wicked situations stakeholders need to handle problems that are difficult to define, contested and ever changing. The understanding of the nature, causes and solutions in these kinds of situations varies among stakeholders” (IBA Handbook, page 90).

3. In isolation and in theory, many problems related to sustainability have technical solutions already – but implementation is lacking in wicked situations and within rigid systems. • Both changes in systems and behavioural changes are needed. • Single institutions can not solve the challenges on their own. • Social innovations and learning needed. • Start with small steps from where you are.

4. What is the IBA? Cyclical learning process in multi-stakeholder teams revolve around inquiries. An inquiry is a question that enables both learning and changes on the ground.

5. “How can we improve the quality of life in informal settlements around lakes and ponds in Ahmedabad?” (SUS 2011)

6. We know what ‘improvement’ looks like Situation ‘messy’, complex & dynamic, framing contested We know what the solution looks like & how to do it Solutions not known in advance The risks are knowable & predictable Risks are uncertain or unknowable Many stakeholders are impacted Solution is acceptable to stakeholders… …or stakeholder ownership not required Stakeholder ownership is key to implementation Inquiry-based cyclical process Planned, linear management process

7. Rhythm of opening up and closing down

8. SUS and GAIA – test beds for IBA

9. IBA rationale Compared to linear process towards predefined objectives, we believe that pursuing an inquiry: • Can give stronger shared ownership across stakeholders • Can ensure relevance across stakeholders • Can allow for more flexibility – easier to adjust scope based on new insights • Can make it easier to build on and incorporate existing initiatives • Can make it easier to include additional stakeholder along the way • Invites to continuous reflection

10. IBA objectives

11. Theoretical underpinnings • Inquiry-based learning (mainly in formal education) • Action inquiry – discourse within business management (e.g. Torbert 2004).

12. Collaborative learning • Reframing and improved mutual understanding • Pooling of expertise -> new knowledge • Concerted action • Research has highlighted risks and difficulties in implementing collaboration. Understanding of context is crucial, as is good facilitation.

13. Collaborative learning draws on action learning theory • Action research: the researcher/facilitator is open about his/her agency. Researcher participates in activities, participants participate in research.

14. Collaborative learning tries to enable double loop learning

15. Systems thinking See greater context Analysing and synthesising: • pulls things apart and examine parts • recognizing reoccurring patterns that link the parts - find causal relationships

16. Systems thinking: soft vs hard systems

17. Governance • Multi-stakeholder setup a way to find new forms of governance • Broader involvement -> better informed decisions backed by wider consensus -> deeper democracy • Acknowledging role of elected bodies • Emphasizing participation of marginalised groups • Flexibility in decision making to accommodate new knowledge

18. Hart’s Ladder of Participation

19. Other components of IBA that will be discussed tomorrow: • Valuation, preferences • Power analysis • Conflict management