Is Energy a Wicked Problem

Wicked problems are the types of problems that get my creativity going and my whole mind engaged. Here is a brief description of what a wicked problem is (for more discussion see the links below):

From http://www.cph127.com/cph127/2006/02/dont_worry_abou.html
"A new class of problems arising from extreme degrees of uncertainty, risk, and social complexity...Not only was there no clear answer, there was not even a clear understanding of the problem they were trying to solve."

"Wicked problems go beyond these in terms of difficulty, largely because they are inherently social in nature. Rittel identified several key aspects which, once listed, you will likely recognize as features of your toughest business decisions (this is not an exhaustive list, I'm paraphrasing a bit):

1. There is no definitive statement of the problem; in fact, there is broad disagreement on what ‘the problem’ is
2. Without a definitive statement of the problem, there can be no definitive solution and therefore no “stopping rule” signaling when an optimum solution has been reached. In actuality, there are competing solutions that activate a great deal of discord among stakeholders
3. The only way to really understand the problem is by devising solutions and seeing how they further knowledge about the problem (thus reversing the normal flow of thinking: with wicked problems, a solution must come before the problem!)
4. Solutions to wicked problems are not right or wrong, merely better, worse, good enough or not good enough. There is a high degree of subjectivity and each stakeholder brings their own perception to the table, causing discord.

Because they are so difficult to identify and define, wicked problems tend to go unaddressed, even if there is an underlying sense that something needs to be done (though about what exactly no-one can say)."

Also check out http://richardsona.squarespace.com/display/ShowJournal?moduleId=412462&categoryId=28834
for more discussion about wicked problems.

Now to the question posed in the title to this post; is Energy a Wicked Problem? Let's test it against the four criteria from above:

1. There is no definitive statement of the problem; in fact, there is broad disagreement on what ‘the problem’ is. I believe that this applies in regard to energy as we seem to still have substantial disagreement on things such as peak oil, global warming, oil drilling in ecologically sensitive areas, energy cost, fairness of energy accessibility, etc even if the camp dismissing these concerns is growing smaller every day.
   
2. Without a definitive statement of the problem, there can be no definitive solution and therefore no “stopping rule” signaling when an optimum solution has been reached. In actuality, there are competing solutions that activate a great deal of discord among stakeholders. Again I believe this applies to energy. Do we focus our attention on bio-based solutions (ethanol, algae), technology based solutions (solar, wind, geo-thermal) or conservation based programs (energy star, insulation, fuel efficiency in cars, etc)? How do we know when we've achieved reductions in emissions that will halt things such as global climate change and how do we know when we've reached fairness in access to the new technologies and capabilities that this effort produces?
   
3. The only way to really understand the problem is by devising solutions and seeing how they further knowledge about the problem (thus reversing the normal flow of thinking: with wicked problems, a solution must come before the problem!). We are seeing solutions to a whole host of differently defined energy problems popping up around the world. Only after the solution exists do we really get a sense for its ability to change the landscape and therefore the nature of the problems we dealing with. There is no silver-bullet solution to these problems even though each new innovation looks like it may hold that promise.
   
4. Solutions to wicked problems are not right or wrong, merely better, worse, good enough or not good enough. There is a high degree of subjectivity and each stakeholder brings their own perception to the table, causing discord. Should we power our cars with corn and soy based ethanol or with electricity generated by wind and solar? Both will work, at least to some degree. Do we need to only pick one?
   

My feeling is that Energy qualifies as a wicked problem and that the more we try to simplify the problem (and therefore the solutions) the more difficult it is for us to design solutions that have any impact. I believe that acknowledging up front that this is a wicked problem will allow us to recognize that a diversity of solutions and approaches is the only way to approach this task.