Mini Symposia 2025-2026
Please join us for the weekly mini symposia!
The speaker schedule is posted below so please check back regularly. We always send out email reminders to current and past ISSS members with an alert for the upcoming sessions.
Sessions, until Dec 31, 2025, will be held each Thursday at 17.00 UTC.
From January to June 2026, they will be held each Wednesday at 18.00 UTC.
Please use a timezone converter such as the one below to convert this time to your location.
Timezone Converter
Timezone Converter
| Date | UTC Time | Presenter | Title | Abstract | Bio |
| 9 Oct | 17:00 | Paul Pangaro |
Cybernetics Escapes the Laboratory:
Cybernetics as Anti-Wicked Praxis
|
When members of the School of Architecture at Carnegie Mellon University were invited to initiate a “laboratory” to situate their research, many probative questions arose for today’s presenter: If Cybernetics is a discipline that forefronts effective action in the world rather than pursuit of verifiable knowledge—then what is a “Laboratory for Cybernetics”?
That puzzle loomed larger than the School’s requirements for launching any new lab: Could its mission be defined in connection to the School’s 21st-century pedagogy of climate change, social justice, and artificial intelligence? Yes—bring it on. Can there be at least three research projects consistent with its mission? Not a problem. Can it identify future funding to support the lab? Will do.
Launched in January 2025, the Laboratory for Cybernetics (Lab4C) opened its virtual doors with a semester-long studio course, an ecosystem of documents, and a dose of audacity. Engaging Wicked Challenges is its studio course, serving as an on-ramp to its digital resources and scaffolding student-scholars to collaborate with its human resources, that of in-world practitioners, all to support addressing “wicked challenges.” Lab4C’s 2025 Cybernetics Prize has awarded $5000 for the best design proposal that embraces Heinz von Foerster’s “Ethical Imperative”, that is, increasing human agency and human potential through design. The most ambitious project of Lab4C may be Re-Braiding Cybernetics & AI, intent on bringing the two fields into conversation and even cooperation, catalyzed by a book exhibit, a symposium, and a publication, all occurring in 2027.
Today’s mini-symposium begins with glimpses into the intentions and projects of Lab4C and segues to the proposal of “praxis-sourcing”, an evolutionary model for impact that is not confined to a single laboratory. Can a cybernetic approach to “designing design” across a collective of organizations—academic design programs yet also NGOs and corporations—better untangle our 21st-century’s wicked challenges? How might we define the necessities for 21st-century design education? What advantages would come from bridging the boundaries of disciplines, geographies, and generations?
While much neglected, Cybernetics has recently been called out as something to revive, to teach, to practice, to help a world gone wild. What degree of practicality, in balance with an appropriate scale of audacity, forms an energetic tension for an open-source, anti-wicked praxis of Cybernetics, to respond to the wicked pandemics of our time?
|
Paul Pangaro's[9] career spans startups, teaching, performance, and consulting. He has been applying models of conversation to the design of interactions and organizations since his PhD in Cybernetics (Brunel UK) with Gordon Pask. His research and making are grounded in the twin goals of “design as conversation” and “design for conversation”, increasing possibilities for the designer or user to be or to become whom they wish. Pangaro and TJ McLeish, as master fabricator, created a full-scale, faithful visual and behavioral replica of Gordon Pask’s Colloquy of Mobiles, displayed at Centre Pompidou in Paris in 2020 and is now in the permanent collection of ZKM in Karlsruhe, Germany. After three years as Professor of the Practice in the Human-Computer Interaction Institute at CMU, in July 2022 Pangaro moved to the College of Fine Arts and has recently launched the Laboratory for Cybernetics (Lab4C)[10] with the intention of becoming a global resource for student-scholars particularly focused on “wicked challenges.” He is President of the American Society for Cybernetics since 2021 and co-lead of the #NewMacy Initiative where his personal commitment is to respond to the pandemic of today’s AI algorithms. His work can be found at pangaro.com.
|
| 16 Oct | 17.00 | John Ingram |
The Food System and Food Systems Thinking
Systemic innovation for food system transformation
|
The 45 minute presentation will introduce how adopting a systems approach helps to identify how to transform food system outcomes related to health and other social and economic interests, and the environment. This draws on an understanding of the wide range of food system activities from primary production through to consuming food, the actors involved, and the drivers that influence their decisions. In addition to considering the consequences of these activities on the range of outcomes, the presentation will highlight how, in turn, these outcomes need to be better balanced given the inherent trade-offs within the ‘diets-health-climate’ discourse. To this end, the presentation will unpack the notions of ‘food system’, ‘food system thinking’ and ‘transforming the food system’. Using the BeanMeals project as an example, it will stress the need for ‘systemic innovation’ involving the food system actors and public and private policy makers, and the food system challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. It will close with asking the questions of how the food system approach can contribute to systems thinking and how systems science can enrich food system thinking. |
Dr John Ingram is an Associate Professor and a Senior Research Fellow at Somerville College, University of Oxford, and Associate Professors at Stellenbosch University, South Africa and the University of Birmingham, UK. His interests are in the conceptual framing of food systems; the interactions among the many food system actors and their varied activities, and the outcomes of their activities for nutrition and other aspects of food security, livelihoods, enterprise and business, and environment; scenario analysis; and food system resilience. Having established the Food Systems Transformation Research Group within Oxford’s Environmental Change Institute, he conceived and led the multi-university post-graduate ‘Interdisciplinary Food Systems Teaching and Learning’ (IFSTAL) programme, the £2m BeanMeals project, and coordinated the UK Global Food Security 5-year £15m programme ‘Resilience of the UK Food System’. He now co-leads the Foresight4Food (F4F) and Food System Impact Valuation (FoodSIVI) programmes, the Eu-Horizon FOSTER and FoSSNet projects, and the Ireland-UK Food Co-Centre.
https://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/person/dr-john-ingram
|
| 23 Oct | 17.00 | Abel Mavura | Resilience and Participatory Urban Futures: Systems Approaches to Migration and Informal Housing |
This presentation examines how displaced populations build resilient communities within informal urban housing, focusing on the adaptive strategies migrants develop in restrictive environments. Drawing on three years of ethnographic research in Paris for a PhD in Development Studies specialising in Migration, the researcher traced the lived experiences of young male migrants, revealing how agency and resilience emerge under precarious conditions. Part of this work received the 2025 Margaret Mead Memorial Award from the International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS) for advancing systems thinking and social justice in migration studies.
Building on this foundation, ongoing research at the University of Cambridge investigates how spatial design, community planning, and social networks foster a sense of “home” for displaced populations. The study applies systems science to conceptualise resilience as a dynamic property emerging from the interplay of individual agency, collective solidarity, and systemic exclusion (Holling, 2001; Masten, 2014). It also integrates Lefebvre’s (1996) Right to the City and Harvey’s (2012) Urban Commons to examine how migrants exercise spatial agency, collective governance, and resistance to exclusionary urban policies.
Using mixed methods including spatial mapping, co-creation workshops, and scenario planning, the study evaluates informal housing models such as Fender Squat, Canal Saint-Denis, and La Kunda. Informed by Turner’s (1976) community-driven design and contemporary work by UN-Habitat (2020) and Awuor (2019), it positions migrants as co-producers of urban commons rather than passive recipients of aid.
Amid rising global migration and urbanisation, the project offers practical insights for policymakers, planners, and architects seeking inclusive, adaptable urban spaces. The presentation shares findings from Paris, introduces emerging Cambridge research on participatory urbanism, and proposes a “systemic inclusivity” framework integrating built-environment design, social networks, and equitable governance. Visual case study materials will enrich dialogue and invite attendees to explore how systems science can shape more just, adaptable urban futures for displaced populations.
|
Abel Mavura is a Clutton-Brock Scholar at the University of Cambridge, where he is pursuing an MPhil/PhD in Architecture and Urban Studies. Awarded the Clutton-Brock Scholarship by the Cambridge Commonwealth, European and International Trust, his current programme builds on his first PhD in Development Studies (Migration), extending his focus from the lived experiences of young male migrants in Paris’ informal housing to the spatial, architectural, and systemic dimensions of participatory urban futures.
In 2025, Abel became the first African researcher to receive the Margaret Mead Memorial Award from the International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS) for his pioneering research on migrant resilience, recognised for advancing systems thinking and social justice.
Abel’s interdisciplinary work explores migration, urban informality, and the co-design of inclusive, safe, and smart cities. Using resilience theory, systems thinking, and participatory methods, he investigates how marginalised communities navigate and transform precarious urban spaces.
A graduate of Sciences Po Paris (Paris School of International Affairs), Abel blends development, architecture, and social policy. He is a Student Member of the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) and an active member of the British Sociological Association (BSA), the Development Studies Association (DSA), Systems and Complexity in Organisation (SCiO), and the International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS). He also serves as Vice President for Communications and Membership at the Institute for 21st Century Agoras.
With more than 13 years as a development practitioner and youth advocate, Abel founded the Marvel Act Youth Organisation (MAYO) in Zimbabwe and has consulted for CIVICUS, IREX, and ActionAid International. Through his research, advocacy, and creative practice, Abel bridges systems thinking, participatory design, and lived experience to co-create equitable and resilient urban futures.
|
| 30 Oct | 17.00 | Roelien Goede | Introducing Critical Systems Heuristics 2.0: A Third Boundary Extending CSH From Reflections on Critical Realism in Information Systems Research | Poorly designed information systems compel employees to find workarounds for the system in order to do their work properly. However, such workarounds compromise the enforcement of organisational governance. In our sense-making of this specific phenomenon, we considered critical realism as a framework for understanding based on its adoption in the information systems research community. Traditionally, critical systems heuristics considers two boundaries: resources versus environment and involved versus affected. For a third boundary, we propose reflecting on the potential causal structures in organisations and possible feedback loops with a view to uncover more conditioned realities and to better understand the unintended consequences of activities of a system. We advocate complementarism at the methodological level, where all methods are applied from a critical ontological perspective, focusing on the totality of conditioned realities and giving a voice to the affected. We hope that our extension, CSH 2.0, can achieve even greater recognition and acceptance of the core tenets of critical systems heuristics, namely, the totality of conditioned realities, and the impact of unintended consequences on those affected but not involved in the planning of a system. |
Roelien Goede is the Director of the Unit of Data Science and Computing at North-West University, South Africa and a Past-President of the International Society of Systems Sciences. Her research interests include Critical Systems Thinking applied to Business Intelligence and Programming Education. She has a keen interest in research paradigms focusing on applying Action Research in Information Systems Research.
She is an independent assessor for the L7 ST apprenticeship in the UK. She had been involved as a systems specialist in various international projects and frequently presents workshops and keynote addresses on Critical Systems Heuristics.
Her current research project is on the extension of Critical Systems Heuristics to explicit on the boundary aspect of traditions and internal policies of organisations.
She holds a PhD in Information Technology from the University of Pretoria, South Africa. Her PhD focus was on Systems Thinking in Decision Support Systems. She has supervised 10 PhD students and 14 Master’s students. She is recognised by the South African Research Foundation as a scholar with considerable international recognition for the high quality and impact of her work.
|
| 6 Nov | 17.00 | Terence Love | Variety Dynamics: Because Systems Science Cannot Address Most Real-World Systems Problems |
This presentation introduces Variety Dynamics and demonstrates its practical application to highly complex problems, revealing both its effectiveness and efficiency in situations where conventional systems thinking approaches typically prove inadequate or fail entirely.
The axioms of Variety Dynamics indicate that most difficult, interesting or important real-world situations do not conform to the foundational assumptions on which Systems Science methods are based. Yet practitioners routinely apply these methods regardless, leading to demonstrable failure. This challenges the field's foundational belief that systems approaches can address any situation regardless of complexity.
Variety Dynamics is epistemologically more valid and much faster than causal systems approaches for complex and hyper-complex systems, providing more insightful, rapid guidance for professional decision-making in situations involving power asymmetries: disaster management, diplomacy, user interface design, epidemics, climate change, transport management, urban planning. Variety Dynamics identifies leverage points through variety distributions, revealing solutions invisible to causal methods. Easy for managers, decision-makers and designers to understand and use, the fundamental shift to variety-based thinking marks a useful change from causal systems methods.
Five case studies demonstrate rapid, effective application of Variety Dynamics across diverse domains, achieving in minutes what conventional approaches require weeks or months—when they succeed at all. In each case, Variety Dynamics provides rapid insights for situations that would be intractable and slow using conventional causal Systems methods.
Variety Dynamics works without requiring massive technical resources or specialist expertise that other Systems methods demand. It requires thinking in options (variety) rather than causes. It integrates well with AI: gathering information, applying Variety Dynamics axioms, and analysing situations faster than humans while being easily questioned. Practical experience with Claude AI demonstrates this is valuable and effective for real-world complexity.
The presentation concludes with implications for systems science. If highly complex problems can be addressed more effectively without causal analysis, what does this suggest about our methodological toolkit? How should practitioners be trained? What research becomes possible beyond the causal paradigm?
This presentation challenges fundamental assumptions of Systems Science and offers Variety Dynamics as a practical, demonstrable alternative for addressing the majority of real-world complex challenges which are in reality beyond the reach of causally-based Systems Science methods.
|
Professor Dr. Terence Love, CMath, is CEO of Love Services Pty Ltd. He received his education in mathematics, engineering, and computer science at Lancaster University and the University of Western Australia and has been engaged in systems research and practice since the 1970s.
His early research included programming artificial intelligence systems for mechanical engineering design optimization (1971-5), developing one of the earliest word processors (1972), and contributing to future vehicle design for a UK manufacturer.
During the 1980s, he contributed to AI systems for managing French natural gas production, renewable energy systems development, early hypertext-based learning software, and early applications of desktop publishing and CAD technologies.
During the 1990s, Professor Love undertook research spanning the natural sciences, engineering, social sciences, and arts, focusing on the social, technical, environmental, psychological, philosophical and ethical aspects of design activities. In the late 1990s, working with Professor Trudi Cooper, he began developing Variety Dynamics as a non-causal analytical framework for highly complex and hyper-complex situations that exceed the scope of conventional systems thinking methodologies.
Since then, he has continued research into design processes, supervising and assessing numerous doctoral, masters and honours research projects. This work has increasingly focused on how systems approaches contribute to design decision-making, particularly the cognitive neuroscience underlying creative thinking, emotion, and human cognitive limitations. His current professional practice focuses on crime prevention through environmental design, having provided strategic advice on developments valued at over $13 billion and delivering training to police forces, local governments, urban planners, and other professionals across Australia, Europe, and the Middle East.
|
| 13 Nov | 17.00 | James (Jamie) Rose | Using General System modeling to analyze the Health of a human social organization - SGSR/ISSS: ISSS 2025 …. is a diying organization. (What are you going to do about it? |
And then .. in simple English words every child and youth and adult and mature human can understand:
"YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THE WORLD in a very special way!!!! ....
Imagine a "tree". you have to be able to understand and describe it as a thriving organism in nature -- separate and within -- the natural world around it. But ALSO! .. as a painter would, as a carpenter would -- who understands the timber can be used to build a house, or chair or bowl or spoon or wooden le.g. An engineer can see the "wood" as a lever.or wheel or boat. ALSO; as a farmer sees it -- some "trees" produce food,, some are used to hold sol and moisture in the ground,. A farm worker knows "tree" as where to rest from summer heat, or shelter from wind or rain. A BIRD and insects --know "tree" as where to safe- build a nest. A squirrel where to forma hole and nest -inside-. also -- you must KNOW a tree for all its living functions - "breathing" leaves, 'water drinking roots --xylem and floem bringing nutrients to all branches. Flowers and reproduction parts. SEEDS .. as .. FUTURE POTENTIAL .. in metabolic processes interacting with the sun and seasons on an ever progressing planet moving through space.. and the moon .. which stabilizes tides and seasons of the earth's tilt and rotation.
A 'tree' .. is not one thing. You can . carve your name into it an historical marker.. or guide someone following your path through the woods. And you can mash it ito pulp and make PAPER ... for human culture and information preservation.
You have to think about ALL these aspects and more ... (.. your name goes here..) .. if you hope to understand Life and this World."
THIS is what your colleague was EDUCATED from earliest memories .. to engage and think about this world.
"General Systems" were words he never heard or used. Yet he was educated from day-one to BE a mind at home in the encyclopaedia of existence. It is not a profession. or career compared to others. Or "academic" pigeon hole. It was an embedded WAY OF CONCEIVING AND CONSIDERING .. to be deeply explored and coordinated and UNIFORMLY MADE SENSE OF. and to communicate about in in-depth ways.
Today's CONVERSATION ENGAGEMENT with you .. expects YOU to rise to this emcompassing way of thinking .. to talk about ISSS and it's "future".
It started within AAAS in 1956 with several THOUSAND high academics joining in the first organized years. It is now a poor remnant of about ~150 aged geriatric "residuals". It is a DYING organization.
YOU need to ACT NOW to make changes to save it .. or stop the tragedy and sing its death dirge.
Provided ID could not be validated.
|
Your General Systems colleague Jamie Rose came to General Systems completely differently from your own entre' into the subject. You all were exposed to it or guided into it during your high school (normal education) or college education years.
Jamie instead was raised to be an essential "concepts of the universe" thinker from his earliest childhood years. His values of conceptual thinking were guided by ideas Albert Einstein shared with his parents during Einstein's early years at Princeton "Institute for Advance Studies" circa. 1938-39 during personal gatherings at Einstein's home at private parties.
As a youngster between the ages of 5-10 years old, after dinner 'conversation games" included the 1950's popular game "20 questions" -- how to hone inquiries into sharp careful questions to solve challenging unknowns in LESS THAN "20 questions".
Jamie was always reminded -- there are THREE kinds of people: 1) those who talk about people. 2) those who talk about things. 3) those who talk about IDEAS. With the best human being those who discuss and explore and consider ... ideas.
At 6-7-8 years old, his parent's challenged Jamie to think on and really try to answer some of human science-philosophy's most exotic high intellect questions:
The "easiest" was .. 'Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" But after that "basic" query ... came the next: "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to"hear" it .. is there any 'sound'?"
Which led to the extraordinary extreme conundrum: "What happens if~when an IRRESISTIBLE force ... meets in IMMOVABLE object?"
{... consider the nature and attributes of the full expansive universe .. as a 6-7-8 year old .. and carry the concerns with you through your entire life ...}
|
| 20 Nov | 17.00 | Pavel Luksha |
Peaceful Futures: The Evolutionary Imperative and the Pathways Ahead
|
Humanity is entering a phase of unprecedented systemic stress. In 2024–2025, the world saw the highest number of armed conflicts since 1946, several involving nuclear-armed states. Polarization, erosion of trust, and the accelerating speed of social and technological change have pushed many societies into chronic instability. Peace is no longer merely a moral aspiration — with exponentially growing destructive potential of weaponry, it has become an evolutionary imperative for the continuity of human civilization.
This session presents the ongoing Peaceful Futures initiative, a joint programme of the Learning Planet Institute and Global Education Futures. Launched with the 2022–23 Peaceful Futures Roadmap, the initiative proposes that peace must be understood as a systemic capability — a state of social, ecological, technological, and cultural coherence. Peace therefore requires intentional design: new competencies, new civic architectures, and new feedback loops that support sense-making, dialogue, resilience, and non-violent transformation.
At the center of the current phase of the programme is the Atlas of Peaceful Futures Practices, a living, co-created resource that curates pioneering peace-building practices from around the world. Designed for youth leaders, educators, and community innovators — especially in conflict-affected or fragile regions — the Atlas highlights educational, social, digital, and institutional approaches that strengthen a culture of peace. It invites global contributors to expand the Atlas into a shared infrastructure for learning, collaboration, and continual renewal.
Building on this foundation, the programme also explores the rapidly evolving frontier of AI for Peace and Democratic Resilience. As artificial intelligence reshapes communication, governance, and collective intelligence, it holds both risks and profound opportunities: from enabling radical inclusivity and new forms of civic dialogue, to supporting conflict prevention, early warning systems, and youth empowerment. We present emerging use cases and frameworks for ensuring that AI becomes a force for peace-capability rather than division.
The session invites system scientists, educators, technologists, and practitioners to explore how these strands — roadmap, Atlas, AI for Peace, and educational programs for next gen peace practitioners — can converge into a coherent architecture for peace-capable societies. Together, we will examine pathways for collaborative research, action, and global co-creation toward Peaceful Futures.
|
Pavel Luksha is a system thinker, foresight practitioner and educator working at the intersection of complex systems, regenerative development, and futures literacy. He is the co-founder of Global Education Futures (GEF) and the University for the Earth, and serves as a Strategic Advisor to multiple international initiatives on the future of education, regenerative economy, and youth empowerment. Over the past two decades, Pavel has worked with governments, universities, and global networks across more than 20 countries to design learning ecosystems and long-term development strategies. Pavel co-leads the Peaceful Futures initiative, a collaboration between the Learning Planet Institute and GEF, which develops systemic frameworks and practical tools to empower young leaders to build peace-capable societies. His work in this context includes the 2022–23 Peaceful Futures Roadmap, the recently-published Atlas of Peaceful Futures Practices, and research on the convergence of AI, civic dialogue, and democratic resilience. |
| 27 Nov | 17.00 | NO SYMPO | |||
| 4 Dec | 17.00 | Carlos FLORES ALCOCER | Systemic Strategic Thinking as an Effective Tool for Fostering Integral Development of Regions |
Strategic Management consultant (i.e. Strategic Planning), with more than 40 years of
multicultural experience and a holistic and comprehensive vision, which have allowed me to
generate competitive advantages in the organizations where I have worked. My Strategic
Management model, under a systemic approach (derived from my PhD) is based on the use
of cutting-edge technologies and key information for timely decision-making. I have extensive
experience, as a change agent, in the business, government, and organized civil society
sectors, at the local, national and international levels. I have a solid academic background
totally oriented to action, covering engineering (computer science and ICTs), management
and humanities.
I have launched major initiatives of broad national and international significance. I have
extensive experience in managing complex situations, leading groups of high-level decision-
makers, and an updated global vision. I have very good skills in convening, negotiation,
persuasion and leadership.
|
Strategic Management consultant (i.e. Strategic Planning), with more than 40 years of multicultural experience and a holistic and comprehensive vision, which have allowed me to generate competitive advantages in the organizations where I have worked. My Strategic Management model, under a systemic approach (derived from my PhD) is based on the use of cutting-edge technologies and key information for timely decision-making. I have extensive experience, as a change agent, in the business, government, and organized civil society sectors, at the local, national and international levels. I have a solid academic background totally oriented to action, covering engineering (computer science and ICTs), management and humanities. Carlos has launched major initiatives of broad national and international significance. I have extensive experience in managing complex situations, leading groups of high-level decision- makers, and an updated global vision. I have very good skills in convening, negotiation, persuasion and leadership. |
| 11 Dec | 17.00 |
Luka Maksić
Ilija Zubac
Uroš Kačarević
|
Using Systems Science and Stanford Beer's concepts to design a citizens movement in Serbia |
This presentation applies Stafford Beer’s Viable System Model (VSM) to analyse the contemporary student movement in Serbia and assess its capacity to function as a viable political and organisational actor within a turbulent socio-political environment. The study positions the student movement as a complex, adaptive system that must continuously balance internal coherence with responsiveness to external pressures, including state institutions, political parties, media ecosystems, and civil society networks. Using the VSM framework, the paper examines the five systemic functions—Operations, Coordination, Control, strategy, and Policy and evaluates how effectively the movement fulfils each of them in practice.
At the Operational level, the analysis explores how student groups organize protests, communicate demands, and mobilize membership across universities. The Coordination function is assessed through mechanisms for harmonizing activities across independent faculties, informal networks, and grassroots clusters, where variability often challenges unified action. System 3 (Control) is evaluated through resource allocation, internal accountability, and the capacity to enforce shared norms while avoiding fragmentation. System 4 (strategy) is analysed through the movement’s ability to interpret political dynamics, anticipate state responses, and integrate expert knowledge from academia and allied organisations. System 5 (Policy) is examined through the articulation of a long-term vision, such as the formulation of the “drustveni dogovor” platform and the emerging idea of a broader socio-political front.
By mapping strengths and structural deficits within each systemic layer, the paper identifies key bottlenecks that threaten long-term viability, including high turnover of activists, reliance on spontaneous mobilisation, vulnerability to co-optation, and limited institutional memory. Conversely, the movement demonstrates significant adaptive capacity, particularly in its decentralised structure, high legitimacy among the public, and the ability to rapidly integrate diverse social actors into a unified strategic narrative.
The application of VSM provides a diagnostic lens that reveals both the movement’s emergent patterns of self-organisation and the systemic conditions necessary for sustaining effectiveness over time. The paper concludes by proposing recommendations for enhancing viability, such as formalizing feedback loops, strengthening intelligence functions, and clarifying long-term policy direction which could enable the student movement not only to persist but to evolve into a stable agent of democratic transformation in Serbia.
|
Luka:
Student at faculty of organizational sciences, 4th year of studies. Representative of Serbia in world university debating championship.
Uroš:
Student at faculty of organizational sciences, 3rd year of studies. Active member of the case study club that is contributing to multiple international projects including but not limited to route2launch.
Ilija:
Student at faculty of electrical engineering, 4th year of studies with a major in signals and systems.
|
| 18 Dec | 17.00 | Bai Li | LEVERAGE: Guidelines for reporting the use of systems approaches in health studies and projects |
Internationally, governments and inter-governmental organisations (particularly the WHO) are calling for systems approaches to tackle the most pressing and complex challenges such as pandemic preparedness, non-communicable diseases (NCDs), food insecurity and climate change. Although an increasing number of health studies and projects have utilised a systems approach in various subject areas, systematic reviews of these studies have consistently identified poor reporting and inconsistent/inaccurate use of terminology as two common issues. This lack of transparency and standardisation creates confusion for researchers, readers, journal editors, reviewers, funders, and policymakers, stifling the potential of systems science to inform effective solutions.
To address this pressing need, LEVERAGE reporting guidelines were developed through a consensus-based Delphin study following EQUATOR’s guidance for developing health research reporting guideline.
In the first half of this mini symposium, I will explain why the urgent need for these guidelines is clear and present the process for developing the LEVERAGE guidelines. In the second half of this symposium, I will invite participants to preview and use the developed guidelines in small groups facilitated by members of the LEVERAGE executive group.
In this festive reason where reunion and celebration are the common language we speak, this mini symposium offers a friendly environment for scholars, specialists practitioners and other key stakeholders from various disciplines, methodological domains, specialist societies and sectors to share each other’s experience and perspectives in writing, publishing and using systems science. I hope this would be a welcomed continuation and extension from the LEVERAGE global forum and feedback workshop which was held in October this year. We welcome and value feedback from members and friends of the ISSS!
|
Bai Li is a global health scientist specialised in the development and evaluation of complex interventions and policies to tackle global challenges such as obesity, sedentary behaviour and climate change. She has co-authored with policy makers from 46 countries and led multi-nation research consortia to generate impactful scientific outputs used by international (e.g. WHO) and national authorities.
Bai is a member of the World Obesity Federation Policy and Prevention Committee which guides and shapes global obesity policies. She is an international leader in the advocacy, methodology and guidelines (development) of systems science methods in public health. She developed systems methods to understand Global Syndemic that co-exist and interact with each other in time and place (SYSTAM consortia) and leads the development of the 1st guidelines for reporting and writing the use of systems science methods in public health (LEVERAGE project). She launched and co-edited the 1st journal collection dedicated to systems approaches to tackling global nutrition challenges, and chaired international symposia in different countries to share the empirical experience of applying systems science in health research.
In 2025, Bai published ‘The iceberg of childhood obesity system - conceptualising levels of interventions through systems thinking’, supporting the theme of 2025 World Obesity Day, and led World Obesity Federation’s Position Paper calling Heads of United Nations Member States to implement systemic actions to tackle obesity and other leading non-communicable diseases.
Bai's contributions to global health have been recognised by prestigious awards from the ISBNPA, The Lancet, UKSBM, SBRN and UKCO.
|
| Jan | 14 | NA | |||
| Jan | 21 | Daniel Christian Wahl & Tom Flanagan | Coming home to life, or exploring appropriate participation in nested complexity |
Tom Flanigan and Daniel Wahl met in 2016 at a two day exploration of the relevance of second order science to policy making organised by the Finnish futures foundation SITRA and the International Futures Forum of which both Tom and Daniel are members. In this mini-symposium, Tom and Daniel will be in conversation about past and present work, but more importantly the personal dimension of what it means to participate with more appreciation and awareness in the nested complex systems we emerge from and are co-creators in while fully embracing uncertainty, un-predictability and the paradox of humility and audacity that comes with living into how systems shape us as we cannot but shape the systems we participate in through our thoughts, worlds and actions. Daniel's work spans from his long-term commitments over the last 20 years to living systems informed education with the N.G.O. Gaia Education, past academic work on salutogenic design for human and planetary health, collaboration with Anthony Hodgeson on the World Systems Mandala and World Game (of the International Futures Forum), collaboration with Bill Sharpe in the development and application of the 3 Horizon framework, co-curation with Tobias Luthe of ETH Zürich's 'Designing Resilient Regenerative Systems' MOOC series and advanced studies masters in regenerative systems, co-hosting the 'Coming Home to Life' podcast with Philipa Duthie (now offered through the Arne Naess Foundation), consulting various n.g.o.s on the bioregional regeneration of the Mallorca and the Balearic archipelago and working with them to create community resilience, economic vitality, social cohesion and healing of ecological landscape functions, to gardening an 1ha regenerative agro-forestry research site he calls 'home' with his wife and eight year old daughter.
After an initial conversation between Tom and Daniel, the symposium will open up to a Q&A format.
|
Daniel Christian Wahl is one of the catalysts of the rising reGeneration and the author of Designing Regenerative Cultures - so far translated into seven languages. He works as a consultant, educator and activist with NGOs, businesses, governments and global change agents. With degrees in biology and holistic science, and a PhD in Design for Human and Planetary Health, his work has influenced the emerging fields of regenerative design and salutogenic design. Winner of the 2021 RSA Bicentenary Medal for applying design in service to society. Awarded a two year Volans-Fellowship in 2022.
Tom Flanagan served as president of the Institute for 21st Century Agoras between 2007-2021. Currently, Tom serves as treasurer. He has authored multiple articles and books about the practice of SDD. His research, product development, and management career has spanned marine science, insect physiology, environmental engineering, biomedical products, and behavioral healthcare, He lives in Warren, Rhode Islan, USA with his wife Jenny and son Danniel and continues scholarly research on SDD and related practices of design dialogue. His local missions include enhancing connections between the arts and participatory journalism, philanthropic community building, and behavioral self-care through times of civic stress. Tom leads a local initiative for enhancing awareness and support for alternative and complementary self-care for grief, depression, loneliness and pre-clinical anxiety (www.BlueskiesRI.org). Tom holds a PhD in neuroscience from Wesleyan University and an MBA in technology management from MIT. In addition to his local service on boards and committees, Tom is an active member of the AGORAS, International Society for Systems Science, and the National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation. |
| Jan | 28 | Jindra Monique Čekan & Margaret Spearman MPP | Sustainability |
Sustainability of results is often assumed hoped for but unproven. Ex-post evaluations are enormously rare. While we promise sustainability to our participants in partners in the global south far less than 1% of the time has 60 years of global foreign assistance (valued at over $5 trillion of public funded OECD projects) been evaluated for what lasts. Much can be learned from evaluating the sustainability, and how local communities and former aid partners sustained results often in different emerging pathways than what was designed, but which can be far more effective. Čekan/ová founded Valuing Voices 16 years ago to advocate for more ex-post sustainability evaluations, and lead teams of national evaluators, thereby building national capacities.
Climate change & weather variability has also added shocks and stresses to already fragile contexts, and resilience to these shocks is also rarely measured. Čekan/ová and Spearman were tasked with designing systems and tools for evaluating sustainability and resilience for the Adaptation Fund and Čekan/ová went on to do so for the Climate Investment Funds. Those lessons are included in this presentation.
Further, Spearman‘s and IPCC’s recognition that our planet’s carrying capacity is far overwhelmed by our consumption and Čekan/ová ‘s finance-experience understanding that a Return on Equity (ROE) needs to be changed into a Return on Environment (ROEn) led to the two proposing a new way to prioritize investable projects that are we generative. We propose including ecosystem services in financial balance sheets for our collective survival. NB: Society member Friend is in talks with Čekan/ová and Spearman on how her Compass work could be used to help corporations evaluate their readiness for such a shift in priorities, but that is not in the scope of the presentation.
|
Jindra Monique Čekan/ová, Ph.D. trained at the Fletcher School (Tufts, Harvard and Cambridge Universities) is a political economist with 37 years of experience in international development with a focus on sustainability. She has learned from villagers, businesspeople and ministers in 32 countries in Africa, Latin America/ Caribbean, Asia, and Central Asia.
Advisory clients have included Red Cross Movement, climate multilateral funds (Adaptation Fund, Climate Investment Fund, Global Climate Fund), Foundations (Rockefeller, Bill and Melinda Gates and the Agha Khan Foundation), USAID, and a dozen international non-profits (e.g. Catholic Relief Services, CARE, LWR, Save the Children) and local NGOs. Since 2013, she has focused on ex-post-project evaluation and what her firm Valuing Voices at Cekan Consulting LLC can show Global North and South clients about sustained and emerging impacts years after projects close, and before they do. Lately, Valuing Voices’ national evaluators have been evaluating ex-post project sustainability and climate resilience. She presents regularly at conferences and writes articles, including keynotes at Climate and Finance conferences in 2025. Also, since 1996, she has managed a 535-hectare forest in her family for 150 years in the Czech Republic where she primarily resides. Jindra Čekan/ová is a dual citizen (Czech Republic/USA), presenter and writer, (grand)mother, Buddhist, and loves giraffes. |
| Feb | 4 | ||||
| Feb | 11 | Daniel Christian Wahl | Tom Flanigan and Daniel Wahl met in 2016 at a two day exploration of the relevance of second order science to policy making organised by the Finnish futures foundation SITRA and the International Futures Forum of which both Tom and Daniel are members. In this mini-symposium, Tom and Daniel will be in conversation about past and present work, but more importantly the personal dimension of what it means to participate with more appreciation and awareness in the nested complex systems we emerge from and are co-creators in while fully embracing uncertainty, un-predictability and the paradox of humility and audacity that comes with living into how systems shape us as we cannot but shape the systems we participate in through our thoughts, worlds and actions. Daniel's work spans from his long-term commitments over the last 20 years to living systems informed education with the N.G.O. Gaia Education, past academic work on salutogenic design for human and planetary health, collaboration with Anthony Hodgeson on the World Systems Mandala and World Game (of the International Futures Forum), collaboration with Bill Sharpe in the development and application of the 3 Horizon framework, co-curation with Tobias Luthe of ETH Zürich's 'Designing Resilient Regenerative Systems' MOOC series and advanced studies masters in regenerative systems, co-hosting the 'Coming Home to Life' podcast with Philipa Duthie (now offered through the Arne Naess Foundation), consulting various n.g.o.s on the bioregional regeneration of the Mallorca and the Balearic archipelago and working with them to create community resilience, economic vitality, social cohesion and healing of ecological landscape functions, to gardening an 1ha regenerative agro-forestry research site he calls 'home' with his wife and eight year old daughter. After an initial conversation between Tom and Daniel, the symposium will open up to a Q&A format. |
Daniel Christian Wahl is one of the catalysts of the rising reGeneration and the author of Designing Regenerative Cultures - so far translated into seven languages. He works as a consultant, educator and activist with NGOs, businesses, governments and global change agents. With degrees in biology and holistic science, and a PhD in Design for Human and Planetary Health, his work has influenced the emerging fields of regenerative design and salutogenic design. Winner of the 2021 RSA Bicentenary Medal for applying design in service to society. Awarded a two year Volans-Fellowship in 2022.
|
|
| Feb | 18 |
Mark Enzer
|
Connect to change – advancing systems thinking in the built environment
It’s time that we saw the built environment differently, not as a series of construction projects, but as a system of systems whose explicit purpose is to enable people and nature to flourish together for generations. This is not just a nice concept; it is a powerful necessity because the key challenges of our generation are systemic: facing climate change, providing resilience and achieving a circular economy are all systems-level challenges that demand systems-based solutions. Therefore, we must use all the means at our disposal to understand our built and natural systems better and to intervene more effectively. This presentation will explore the connection between outcomes, systems and interventions and make a case for advancing systems thinking and driving positive systems change in the built environment.
|
Mark Enzer OBE FREng Mark is a keen champion of outcomes-focused systems thinking, collaborative delivery models, digitalisation, connected digital twins and the circular economy in the built environment. As a Mott MacDonald Fellow, Mark provides advice to key clients on digitalisation and broader industry transformation. Previously, Mark was the CTO of Mott MacDonald and the Director of the Centre for Digital Built Britain, where he was the Head of the National Digital Twin programme. Mark is a visiting professor at the University of Cambridge and Imperial College London, and he is a member of the Prime Minister's Council for Science and Technology. |
|
| Feb | 25 |
Norma Romm
|
The importance of recognizing the systemic thinking of Indigenous sages and scholars | In this presentation, I will discuss the systemic thinking of Indigenous sages and scholars’, which is grounded in a relational ontoepistemology and attendant axiology. The argument is that at the moment of “knowing/inquiring” we co-constitute with other agents (and not only human ones) the worlds that are brought forth. Otherwise expressed, there are never spectators, only participants in ongoing world-construction. This is the meaning (for them) of saying we live in a participative universe. One implication is that the language we use and the mental models we create already make a difference (constructive or destructive), to the worlds of which they are part. For example, the language of “natural resources” means that we do not recognize the sacred life forces of all of creation as our kin (family). They are seen as something to be exploited for human use. Likewise, the language of “growth” in our dominant economic models has consequences for the displacement of Indigenous people from their lands in the name of “development”. The language excludes consideration of this as indeed part of the polycrisis facing humanity, but which normally does not feature in accounts of this crisis. The systemic thinking of Indigenous sages and scholars recognizes that our knowing processes cannot be divorced from generating outcomes in human-to-human and human-to-more than-human relations. One of the qualities of Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS) is the recognition that knowing (as a collective process) needs to be tied at the outset, to “making the world better”. In other words, given that knowing is already consequential, we need to consider the values underpinning the knowing endeavor. In the presentation I will indicate the strength of Structured Dialogical Design (SDD) as a methodology which incorporates this intention. I will show how it is a form of systemic thinking which resonated, inter alia, with African participants in a re-invent democracy project organized by the Future World Center (2016-2018). I will also show how the triggering questions now formulated for the SDDs to take place in 2026 (organized by the 21st Century agoras, the FWC, and ISSS) contain the understanding that knowing (even at the moment of mapping challenges facing humanity, and of course at the moment of actively seeking leverage points for the most influential action towards systemic transformation) is never a detached exercise (as also understood in IKS). | Norma RA Romm (DLitt et Phil) is author of The Methodologies of Positivism and Marxism (1991), Accountability in Social Research (2001), New Racism (2010), Responsible Research Practice (2018), People’s Education in Theoretical Perspective (with V McKay 1992), Diversity Management (with R Flood 1996), and Assessment of the Impact of HIV and AIDS in the Informal Economy of Zambia (with V McKay 2006). She has co-edited six books—Social Theory (with M Sarakinsky 1994), Critical Systems Thinking(with R Flood 1996), Balancing Individualism and Collectivism (with J McIntyre-Mills and Y Corcoran-Nantes 2017), Mixed Methods and Cross-Disciplinary Research (with J McIntyre-Mills 2019), Democracy and Governance for Resourcing the Commons(with J McIntyre-Mills and Y Corcoran-Nantes 2019), and Covid-19: Perspectives Across Africa (with A Fymat and J Kapalanga 2022). She has published over 120 research articles on social theorizing, transformative research towards social and ecological regeneration, and Indigenous paradigms of knowing. |
| Mar | 4 | Janet McIntyre | Re-imagining our world , making friends and making a difference |
The short presentation is aimed at inspiring conversation. As members of ISSS and members of the community of practice are scattered in many different time zones a short presentation will be recorded on sources of practical inspiration, intergenerational leadership and case studies that have made a difference to people’s lives. We will also reflect on our own efforts to do community engagement and what we learn together as a community of practice. We will pose some questions for a conversation and invite responses as part of a synchronous conversation and an asynchronous metalogue.
If we do not develop equanimity and solidarity – what are the implications for social and environmental justice ? What will it mean for the future of life ( as we know it ) on this planet?
|
Prof. McIntyre research focuses on systemic representation, accountability and regeneration applied to social and environmental justice concerns and includes several articles in accredited journals as well as edited and sole-authored volumes such as From Polarisation to Multispecies Relationships, Springer (2021); Planetary Passport: Re-presentation, Accountability and Regeneration (2017); and Systemic Ethics and Non-anthropocentric Stewardship (2014), Springer, New York.
Janet has supervised 30+ PhD students to successful completion and continues to mentor and facilitates research with colleagues, graduates and higher degree students. In August 2019 she was nominated ‘Sociologist of the Month’ by the Current Sociology Journal in recognition of her paper: ‘Recognising our hybridity and Connectedness’. |
| Mar | 11 | Péter Érdi |
Péter Érdi teaches a class INTRODUCTION TO COMPLEX SYSTEMS (25th time this year) at Kalamazoo College.
During the minisymposium, the students will present their group project. While the exact projects are not known, the call is here:
|
In this project, students will explore agent-based modeling software, NetLogo, through its applications to complex systems in daily life. You will have the opportunity to model complex systems without coding knowledge. Examples of models include population dynamics, social networks (e.g., voting), chemical kinetics, epidemics, economics (e.g., wealth distributions, cash flow), medicine (e.g., kidney health, disease spread, CRISPR), and animal collective behavior.
Six eight-minute-long presentations will be delivered, followed by a Q/A session.
|
|
| Mar | 18 | ||||
| Mar | 25 | Andreas Nicolaides | Speciation through Genomic Reorganisation: The Phylogenetic Meta-Programme Hypothesis | Darwin’s On the Origin of Species left unresolved the problem named in its title: how new species arise. The Modern Synthesis, though uniting Mendelian genetics with natural selection, has produced no coherent theory of speciation. Instead, evolutionary biology has accumulated a patchwork of mechanisms, often treating anomalies—such as long periods of evolutionary stasis, apparently sudden transformations, reticulated phylogenies (branching complicated by cross-lineage gene flow), and recurrent hybridisation (interbreeding between distinct lineages)—as exceptions rather than signals of a deeper order. This presentation introduces the Phylogenetic Meta-Programme Hypothesis: the claim that speciation is not the incidental by-product of auxiliary processes linked to natural selection, but is structured by higher-order regulatory systems, encoded in the germline, that govern the mode and tempo of evolution. These are not fixed typological essences but dynamic, multi-scale architectures intrinsic to life’s organisation. Framed within the broader perspective of Genomic Essentialism, the hypothesis advances the view that biological organisation is driven by genomic programmes that are constitutive of life itself, rather than by emergent properties alone. Four systemic functions illustrate this architecture: 1. Initiators: timers and triggers that delimit and precipitate transformation, including tandem-repeat turnover, germline resets, hybridisation, duplication, and viral invasion. 2. Generators: mechanisms that expand and rewire genomic material, such as bursts of transposons, endogenous retroviruses, segmental duplications, retrocopying, and 3-D architectural change. 3. Coordinators: processes that synchronise transformations across populations, including viral and symbiotic dynamics and germline programmes that align thresholds. 4. Stabilisers: systems that preserve lineage coherence, such as centromeric divergence with drive suppression, piRNA surveillance, inversions, supergenes, imprinting, and incompatibility complexes. These functions do not direct development itself but transform the regulatory logic that structures it. In this sense, the system constitutes a meta-programme: a higher-order genomic architecture that converts existing developmental programmes into novel ones, linking organisms across space and time. Crucially, they also resolve the anomalies: stasis reflects stability maintained by stabilisers, sudden transformations occur when initiators cross thresholds, reticulated histories arise from coordinating processes across lineages, and hybrid dysfunction stems from divergence in stabilising systems. On this basis, the hypothesis yields distinctive predictions: genomic turnover should track clade-specific tempos of speciation; bursts of mobile elements and duplications should cluster around radiation events; shared viral or symbiotic agents should generate concordant genomic change; and hybrid dysfunction should correlate with divergence in coherence-preserving systems. Evolutionary anomalies, on this view, are not noise but signatures of a genomic meta-programme in action. |
Andreas Nicolaides studied Medicine at Manchester University (1982) and Philosophy at London University (2024). He is currently employed part-time at York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust as a Consultant Head and Neck Surgeon and is affiliated with Hull York Medical School as an Honorary Senior Lecturer. He has had a lifelong interest in evolutionary theory, which he has pursued independently of his clinical work. This has led him to advance a systems biology approach to the anomalies of speciation at the molecular level. Through this, he has developed the idea of Genomic Essentialism, based on the Constitutive Genomic Programmes hypothesis: systems-level regulatory architectures encoded in all genomes that direct both the reliable unfolding of embryonic development and the patterned transformation of species. This project has firm foundations in the naturalised teleology of Aristotle, which recognised the purposiveness of organisms but lacked a mechanism to parallel that of natural selection. By showing how genomic programmes act through well-recognised regulatory pathways, Genomic Essentialism supports an internalist explanation of life’s organisation that subsumes, rather than denies, the externalism of natural selection. Dr Nicolaides draws on sources from classical philosophy, evolutionary theory, and molecular biology to argue that life’s anomalies — such as episodic bursts in the fossil record, synchrony in molecular evolution, and the peculiar molecular logic observed in the germline — only make sense when understood as parts of an integrated programme. His work aims to bring together systems science, genomics, and philosophy in order to offer a unifying account of life’s organisation. |
| Apr | 1 | ||||
| Apr | 8 | ||||
| Apr | 15 | ||||
| Apr | 22 | ||||
| Apr | 29 | ||||
| May | 6 | Barbara Schmidt-Abbey | Connecting Evaluation and Systems Science: Learning, Feedback, and Practice Across Communities |
Across systems science and cybernetics, concerns are frequently raised about weak learning and ineffective feedback in democratic governance. While these issues are extensively theorised, they are often explored within disciplinary and community boundaries that rarely intersect with the everyday practices of public policy.
This presentation introduces evaluation as a neighbouring - but not always visible - practice field in which questions of feedback, learning, and systemic inquiry are already being worked out in real governance settings. In most democratic systems, evaluation is institutionally embedded: public policies and programmes are expected to be evaluated, resources are allocated for this purpose, and findings are intended to inform future decisions. In this sense, evaluation already functions as an organised feedback practice. Whether it operates as effective feedback - supporting regulation, adaptation, and learning - however, remains contested.
Over the past decade, evaluation practitioners have increasingly engaged with systems thinking and complexity-informed approaches. Contemporary evaluation practice grapples with themes deeply familiar to the systems and cybernetics communities: nonlinearity, emergence, boundary judgement, multiple perspectives, power, and learning under uncertainty. Yet engagement often remains partial, frequently centred on systems mapping tools rather than deeper cybernetic principles such as feedback, recursion, and second-order learning.
Drawing on insights from my ongoing doctoral research on practice constellations in the European knowledge-for-policy ecosystem, the presentation offers practitioner-facing reflections on how evaluation professionals are navigating these challenges in their everyday work. Particular attention is given to evaluation as a situated practice shaped by constraints of accountability, standardisation, and political timing - conditions that profoundly influence how feedback and learning are enacted in practice.
Beyond sharing research insights, the session aims to open a dialogue between evaluation and systems science communities. Building on learning initiatives developed through the European Evaluation Society’s Systems Approaches in Evaluation work - in collaboration with partners including American Evaluation Association’s SETIG and the International Federation for Systems Research - the session concludes as a facilitated co-thinking space.
Participants are invited to explore how closer integration between our communities might strengthen feedback, learning, and reflexivity in public governance, and how shared inquiry could continue across conferences, working groups, and collaborative platforms.
|
Barbara Schmidt-Abbey is a practitioner-scholar working at the intersection of systems thinking, evaluation, and public policy. She is currently completing her PhD in Systems Thinking in Practice at The Open University (UK), where her research examines how knowledge and evidence are produced, shaped, and mobilised within complex knowledge- for-policy environments. Her doctoral work explores practice constellations across organisational, networked, and professional settings, with particular attention to evaluation as a systemic practice at the science–policy interface. Alongside her academic work, Barbara has over three decades of professional experience in European public policy contexts, including long-term roles within EU agencies supporting research, monitoring, and evaluation for policymaking. Her practitioner background strongly informs her research orientation, with a sustained interest in reflexive practice, second-order inquiry, and the practical conditions under which systems thinking - including cybernetic ideas of feedback and learning - is enacted.
Barbara is a co-founder and co-leader of the Thematic Working Group on Systems Approaches in Evaluation in the European Evaluation Society (EES), and a Board member of EES. With this group, she is actively involved in international practitioner network building linking evaluation and systems communities, including shaping an ongoing systemic inquiry co-designed with the American Evaluation Association’s Systems in Evaluation Topical Interest Group and the International Federation for Systems Research. Her work focuses on strengthening dialogue between systems science and evaluation practice in support of learning-oriented, democratically grounded governance.
|
| May | 13 | ||||
| May | 20 | ||||
| May | 27 | ||||
| Jun | 3 | ||||
| Jun | 10 | ||||
| Jun | 17 |
Calendar item here