DIVERSITY
| Collection | International Encyclopedia of Systems and Cybernetics |
|---|---|
| Year | 2004 |
| Vol. (num.) | 2(1) |
| ID | ◀ 970 ▶ |
| Object type | General information, Methodology or model |
The presence of different types of elements in a system, or of systems in an environment.
This is a quasi-synonym for heterogeneity, or in a slightly different sense, for variety. Diversity is a condition for “check-and-balance” and helps to maintain dynamic stability. As noted by J.T. BONNER it can be viewed as a measure of complexity (1988, p.101). Man is presently suppressing much natural diversity and is thus engaged unconsciously in a possibly dangerous experience. It is however for the moment impossible to judge the possible results of the artificial diversity he is introducing through, for example, genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, etc., all of which can be considered as disturbances, in a very general sense.
A wider definition refers to the presence of numerous different types of elements in some extension of space .
Diversity results basically from the slowing down and more complete use of the potential of energy flows . This is obvious in the meandrous circulation of energy in ecosystems (A. LOTKA's world engine). It may however even be the case in cosmic, stellar and planetary diversification. LAVILLE's subdividing vortexes and STULMAN's fields within fields are related subjects.
A cybernetic theory of diversity has been constructed by W. Ross ASHBY, under the name of variety .
An important degree of diversity is a basic condition for dynamic stability in ecosystems . Thus the present massive elimination of many kinds of natural animal and vegetal species by man is probably conducive to a greater general instability of all ecosystems .
C. WILLS writes: “Safety lies in diversity, and evolution should increase this diversity” (1996, p.41)
Range of diversity
J. WARFIELD uses the concept of diversity in his “Interpretive Structural Modeling” and in his “Generic Design” methodology to measure the range of diversity of beliefs and ideas in any group participating in ISM or GD.
He uses a scale from 1 to 10 to measure the degree of agreement or disagreement among participants on evaluations and ideas. A diversity range of more than 5,0 is quite frequent and shows that disagreement is more common than consensus. This knowledge is important to avoid underconceptualization by a superficial assessment of situations and opinions.