Engineers and their problems

I bought Wicked Problems: How to engineer a better world by Guru Madhavan because of a column by the author in the FT, The Truth About Maximising Efficiency: it argues that governments, like engineered artefacts and indeed our bodies need some redundancy and safety marging. How true!

I enjoyed reading the book but in terms of analysis didn’t get much out of it beyond the FT column. It advocates a systems engineering approach even to ‘hard’ problems ie. well-definable ones. It classifies problems into hard (solvable), soft (only resolvable) and messy (need redefining) and takes wicked problems as the union of these categories. It was interesting to me to read a critique of engineering similar to the one I apply to economics, namely that engineers too often ignore the normative or political context for their solutions. The book sort of makes the case that engineering is social but not in a particularly clear way.

Having said that, the book has lots of examples of messiness and wickedness from the world of engineering, and particularly aircraft training and engineering. It focuses on the career of Ed Link – whom I had never heard of – who went from making player pianos to inventing the first on the ground flight training simulator to inventing and building submersible vessels. The book is full of the kind of fact that pleases me no end – for example that black boxes are orange and were created by Lockheed Air Services along with food company General Mills and a waste disposal company, Waste King. Also – tragically relevant – that engines are tested for resilience against bird strikes by lobbing chickens at them – real birds rather than imitation ones, and freshly killed rather than frozen and defrosted. A cited paper by John Downer, When the Chick Hits the Fan, observes that birds have adapted to devices meant to scare them away, so there is a sort of arms race between engineers and birds. (The paper is fascinating – there is an expert debate about how many birds of what size and being lobbed in how fast constitute an adequate test. The resulting pulp is known as ‘snarge’.)

Most of the examples of wicked problems in the book involve engineering rather than social problems. On the one hand, that’s an issue because we tend to think of wicked problems as social and political – paying for the groing need for adult social care, for example, On the other hand, the one main example of that type, reducing homelessness among veterans in the US, discusses how to get the different agencies and stakeholder to talk to each other and respect their differences. but doesn’t in the end describe a solution. Perhaps the moral one is meant to take is that wicked problems don’t have a solution?

All in all, an enjoyable read, and I for one am on board with systems engineering approaches, resilience and organisational flexibility.

81VmZuPb1LL._AC_UY436_QL65_

The Enlightened Economist Prize for 2024

This decision – again, entirely arbitrary and my own – was harder than ever this year because I left the long/shortlisting so late I had little time to mull it over. So I’m going to follow last year’s precedent and select two: The Unaccountability Machine by Dan Davies and The Ordinal Society by  Marion Fourcade and Kieran Healy. Both speak to my own preoccupations – measurement and decision-making – but you don’t need to be as obsessed as me to derive a lot of interest and enjoyment from both books.

Screenshot 2024-03-02 at 10.20.4471fHwWaT0hL._SL1500_

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The prize is that I buy the winners lunch when we’re in the same location. I haven’t met Dan or Kieran before, but had the pleasure of meeting Marion when I visited Berkeley in the autumn. I hope to get back there to deliver the prize before too long. Dan I guess is London-based or close by and Kieran is at Duke, so please do both contact me to discuss delivery?

In case anyone is interested, here are previous winners.

Last year it was Ed Conway (Material World) and Paul Johnson (Follow the Money); in 2022 James Bessen for The New Goliaths and Brad Delong for Slouching Towrds Utopia (I saw Brad briefly in Berkeley too); in 2021 I picked Amartya Sen’s memoir A Home in the World; for 2020 it was William Quinn and John Turner with Boom or Bust. In 2019, the winner was Richard Davies with Extreme Economies.

Even earlier winners were:

2018 Kaushik Basu, The Republic Of Beliefs.

2017 Jean Tirole, Economics for the Common Good (I helped with the English translation so it got a closer read than usual!)

2016 Rebecca Spang, Stuff and Money in the Time of the French Revolution

2015 Josh Angrist and Steve Pischke for Mastering Metrics

2014 David Colander and Roland Kupers, Complexity and the Art of Public Policy

In 2013 it went to Jeremy Adelman for his biography of Albert Hirschman

And the very first in 2012 went to Ariel Rubinstein’s Economic Fables.

I think they’ve all stood the test of time. And here I am at lunch with Profs Angrist and Pischke, celebrating their receipt of this important award – the prize is real! (I took them to Delaunay.)

IMG_3251

2024 in reading: The Enlightened Economist Prize shortlist

There has been a long gap since my last post, which coincided with the start of Michaelmas Term – suggestive timing. Life was indeed very busy, and although I carried on reading, sitting tapping away at the laptop had diminished appeal during the autumn. However, the end of the year approaches and it’s past time to produce the shortlist for the Enlightened Economist annual prize. As ever, the contenders are books I read during the year (regardless of publication date), the selection is arbitrary, and the prize is that I offer lunch to the winner when we are in the same city.

First, a quick catch-up on relevant reading since early October (omitting the various detective novels I relax with):

On Freedom by Timothy Snyder – I rather enjoyed this, although agree with the many reviews that pointed out its lack of any analytical structures. As a cri de coeur about the precipice the world finds itself sliding over, it’s well-written and passionate. And probably too late.

Your Life is Manufactured by Tim Minshall – this is a wonderfully informative book about the how of manufacturing by my Cambridge colleague, and also funny and super-readable. It’s out in late February – I read a proof to do a blurb. It’s the kind of book where pretty much every page has an amazing new piece of information.

The Gambling Animal by Glenn Harrison and Don Ross- out in late January, another book I read to provide a quote for. It’s a fascinating interpretation of human evolution in terms of risk taking and the way short-term socially-successful risk-taking piles up long-term giant risks – such as extinction risks due to climate damage.

Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Genius by Ray Monk – a now quite old biography still widely agreed to be an excellent introduction to the life and ideas of W. It was a terrific read, and probably took me as close as I will ever get to the philosophical ideas. I was particularly taken by the account of a debate between Wittgenstein and Turing in Cambridge in 1939: were mathematical propositions a ‘grammar’ (W) or statements about underlying objects (T)? I read this book because I’m giving the Wittgenstein Lectures in Bayreuth in June 2025, about the use of ML/AI in public decisions.

Equality: WHat it is and why it matters by Thomas Piketty & Michael Sandel – out very soon, this is a transcript of TP being interviewed by MS, the latter mildly challenging the former about some of his views on the reason it’s important to attack inequality. It’s a nice summary of their mainly shared views but less interesting due to the fact that they fundamentally agree with each other, so the debates are over relatively minor points.

Now for the long/shortlist – in no special order (but with a few obvious themes). Two marked * are by colleagues of mine:

Fancy Bear Goes Phishing – Scott Shapiro (my mini-review)

AI Snake Oil – Arvind Narayanan and Sayash Kapoor (my review)

The Atomic Human – Neil Lawrence* (my review)

AI Needs You – Verity Harding* (my review)

The Tech Coup – Marietje Schaake (I haven’t written this up

Underground Empire – Henry Farrell & Abraham Newman (my review)

The Ordinal Society – Marion Fourcade & Kieran Healy (my review)

The Unaccountability Machine – Dan Davies (my review)

The Grid – Gretchen Baake (my review)

How Infrastructure Works – Deb Chachra (my review)

Cuckooland – Tom Burgis (I didn’t write about this – a very readable and shocking account of the way London is – as we all know – a haven for global criminality and corruption)

Kaput – Wolfgang Munchau (haven’t written this up yet – it’s out last month)

Late Soviet Britain – Abby Innes (my mini-review)

Failed State – Sam Freedman (my review)

The Tyranny of Nostalgia – Russell Jones (my review)

Winner to be revealed in the next few days. But finally, a reminder that my next book, The Measure fo Progress, is out in April! It’s made the New Scientist list of best books to look out for in 2025.

Coyle_The Measure of Progress_final jacket copy

The narrow path from votes of despair

I read Sam Freedman’s Failed State: Why Nothing Works and How We Fix It with a mixture of nods of recognition and gasps of disbelief. It’s all too apparent  that – as the subtitle puts it – nothing works in aspects of life in the UK dependent in some way on the successful design and implementation of government policy (which is most aspects tbh). Those of us who have engaged with the policy world in some way will have our own experiences; the relevant chapters of the book reflect my own very accurately. What makes this an incredibly sobering book (although well-written, with humour) is the accumulation of evidence across all eight chapters, covering everything from parliament and the excessive growth of executive power, the House of Lords, political parties and the character of MPs, the judiciary, the criminal justice system, the civil service, local government, non-departmental public bodies and the media. A relentless accumulation of depressing dysfunction.

I’m very much on board with the book‘s main recommended fix, substantial devolution of power from central to sub-national governments – this is a journey I’ve been advocating since first getting involved with Greater Manchester’s case for greater powers from 2008 on. But this is not a simple matter. Many people point to the hollowing out of capacity in local government – true to some extent but one can see how to tackle that. Harder are the questions of accountability that raises. But – as the book argues – it’s hard to see any other plausible change that would shift the dial on interconnected institutional reforms. And equally hard to see how nothing can change: “Public trust in politicians and politics – never high – has crashed through the floor.” The governance travails of the Labour Government in the few weeks since the election suggest the time for something to change can’t be far away – surely? There has at least being slowly growing consensus about the need for decentralisation from Whitehall and Westminster, as a potentially feasible path for reducing the powers of an over-dominant executive branch that can’t deliver and can’t cope.

This book joins other incisive critiques and reviews of how the UK is governed – my colleague Mike Kenny led a major inquiry into the constitution, the Institute for Government documents failures across the board, and others such as Martin Stanley are excellent on specific aspects (the civil service and regulatory state in his case). It’s cold comfort that other countries are experiencing similar failures against a background of slow growth and hyper-fast social media, and colder still that in so many extremist parties are capturing the votes of despair. It’s a narrow path from today’s failures to a less disturbing outcome. The book ends posing a question to those in central government with the power and opportunity to start the process of change: if the UK goes down the path of crisis and reaction, “Politicians will find themselves asking: why didn’t we do things differently when we had the chance?”

Screenshot 2024-10-09 at 14.13.02

The welcome application of good sense to AI hype

Summer over in a flash, autumn wind and rain outside – perhaps cosy evenings will speed up both my reading and review-posting.

I just finished AI Snake Oil by Arvind Narayanan and Sayash Kapoor, having long been a fan of the blog of the same name. The book is a really useful guide through the current hype. It distinguishes 3 kinds of AI: generative, predictive and content moderation AI – an interesting categorisation.

On the generative AI so much in the air since ChatGPT was launched in late 2022, and the persuasive debunking here is of the idea that we are anywhere close to ‘general’ machine intelligence, and of the notion that such models pose existential risks. The authors are far more concerned with the risks associated with the use of predictive AI in decision-making. These chapters provide an overview of the dangers: from data bias to model fragility or overfitting to the broad observation that social phenomena are fundamentally more complicated than any model can predict. As Professor Kevin Fong said in his evidence to the Covid inquiry last week, “There is more to know than you can count.” An important message in these times of excessive belief in the power of data.

The section on the challenges of content moderation were particularly interesting to me, as I’ve not thought much about it. The book argues that content moderation AI is no silver bullet to tackle the harms related to social media – in the authors’ view it is impossible to remove human judgement about context and appropriateness. They would like social media companies to spend far more on humans and on setting up redress mechanisms for when the automated moderation makes the wrong call: people currently have no recourse. They also point out that social media is set up with an internal AI conflict: content moderation algorithms are moderating the content the platform’s recommendation algorithms are recommending. The latter have the upper hand because it doesn’t involve delicate judgements about content, only tracking the behaviour of platform users to amplify popular posts.

There have been a lot of new books about AI this year, and I’ve read many good ones. AI Snake Oil joins the stack: it’s well-informed, clear and persuasive – the cool breeze of knowledge and good sense are a good antidote to anybody inclined to believe the hyped claims and fears.

Screenshot 2024-09-29 at 17.31.57