Kalle reflects on why we cannot use flawed arguments about FSSD to explain why it needs AI assistance.

The Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD) is unique. It is published and validated as one of its kind Operative System for systematic organizational and regional developments towards a full and robust definition of sustainability. The design is there to make change profitable because of this, not despite it, and to help users manage the benefits from upfront. The Operative system is also arguably easier to understand than any framework or “app”, because it is intuitively systemic (all of civilization), systematic (stepwise processes towards goals modelled within precise boundary conditions) and strategic (improving on bottom lines from upfront). So, it avoids suboptimizations and blind alleys and solving one problem by inventing another. During 35+ years, the Operative System is validated scientifically as well as in private and public operative practices across the globe. In large numbers of PhD Dissertations, Scientific Publications on case studies, Hands-on Manuals, University Curricula, Master’s programs, and web-courses, the Operative System has been shown to function in real life practices as intended.

Summarizing what the Platform is not

So, our current developments of AI assistance of FSSD are not primarily about improving the FSSD itself, though also that may of course follow as a natural part of the process. Here follows some not too uncommon misunderstandings we have come across when presenting the above summary of what the FSSD is, until we explain why it needs AI assistance.

1. “The FSSD is scientifically derived”. But so are plenty of the myriad frameworks and concepts for Sustainable development out there, which we consider as “apps” for different purposes like Science-Based Targets, Ecological Foot printing, Circular Economy, UN SDGs, LCA…. These are often clever and designed to cover disparate parts of the sustainability challenge. So “science derived” is clearly not the added value of the FSSD Global platform. However, it has been clearly validated how the FSSD can easily show exactly what each of the “apps” do, and what they cannot do, and how they can therefore be cohesively used for FSSD informed change.

2. “It is too academic” This suggests that the language presenting FSSD would not be for non-scientists to understand. But it is the opposite way around. First, there are no simpler and comprehensive ways of strategic performance than to access clear overviews of complex goals in complex systems as well as possible transition paths to such goals. This is not the least when scientific developments have not only been about the systemic, systematic and strategic breakthroughs per se, but also to make explanations as simple as possible (but not any simpler!). To further the simplicity into hands-on manuals for practical use, presentations are enriched with plenty of analogies and concrete examples from real-life uses.

3. “It’s not used by organizations and, or doesn’t generate enough income”

But the FSSD has been successfully applied to generate billions in organizations and regions. Examples of such successes are, for instance, documented on the FSSD Global homepage under “Testimonials”, and in numerous academic papers and case reports under “Academic References”. So, again, this is not what the AI assistance is there to deliver, see next paragraph.

So, the intention of AI assistance is not about amending or improving the FSSD. Instead, the time has now come to take the next step, from development and validation and support of numerous test-pilots, to scaling and visibility. All to spread the success stories to become mainstream across the globe. We believe that for this to happen on sufficient scales, and in time to help organizations and civilization avoid huge cost-increases and lost market opportunities from unsustainable practices, digitalization and AI are the only options. For a more detailed overview of this new challenge, look at www.fssd.global.

The Real Barriers

So, again, the true challenges are:

Scaling: The need to expand FSSD use faster by help of AI is that the current number of experts will not suffice for a global mission of real change in time for avoiding hugely increasing impacts and costs for unsustainable practices.
Visibility: Many competing frameworks, that we regard as “apps”, have gained traction faster, largely due to bigger marketing budgets and strategic promotion.

We are now working with a Due Diligence plan to engage with advisors and presumptive sponsors to effectively respond to the two challenges.