Ian Brooks' phd thesis (viva)

.

I'm happy to have been one of two external examiners for Ian Brooks' phd thesis this past week (Tuesday Jan 7), "The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals as Requirements in Systems Engineering: Listening to All the Stakeholders". Ian has been a long-time management consultant but is now "Senior Lecturer in Sustainable IT" at the University at the West of England (UWE) in Bristol and his thesis passed the viva (oral examination) with "minor amendments". 

Being an external examiner for a phd thesis in the UK differs significantly from how things are done in Sweden. Here are some of the main differences:

• The examination was not open to the public. There were in fact only five persons present; ph.d. student Ian Brooks himself, two external examiners (me and University of Zürich Professor Emeritus of Informatics and Sustainability Lorenz Hilty, Director of Studies and Emeritus Professor of Environmental Science James Longhurst and independent chair Associate Professor in Economics Timothy Hinks.   
• Ian's supervisor Associate Professor Mohammed Odeh was not present at the viva and this would be totally impossible (would never happen) in Sweden. I assume he was not invited/supposed to be present at the viva.
• A Swedish compilation thesis consists of a number of scientific articles and an introductory chapter. This was also the case with Ian's thesis but the proportions were all topsy-turvy (from my point of view). In Sweden it's the 4-6 scientific articles that are The Thing, but in the UK it's the introductory chapter that is The Think, but it's hard to call it "the introductory chapter" since it's The Thing. Ian's introductory chapter (thesis) was 150 pages long and his articles were unceremoniously published in "Appendix 3 – Papers published from this research project".
• The viva version is not the final thesis. Ian passed with minor amendments and now has some time to work with his text before he hands in the final version. This differs from Sweden where it's the final version of the ph.d. thesis that is presented. As apart from how we do things in Sweden, I think it's better to have the opportunity to work with the text after the examination.
• I complain a lot about admin and about bureaucracy at KTH, but UWE might in fact win a bureaucracy battle between KTH and UWE.

I have met Ian several times at the International ICT For Sustainability (ICT4S) conferences and the last time was in Stockholm this past summer. Ian has worked with his thesis part time (besides teaching at UWE) and has at times had such a heavy teaching load that the thesis has had to be put on hold. He started his research back in 2015 and has finally - after 10 years - managed to finish and present it. I congratulate him for this feat and for his endurance - since it's not easy to work on a project for 10 years and manage to maintain interest and drive and to manage to finish it!

Here are a few examples of things I learned from reading Ian's thesis:

• Volkswagen's "Dieselgate" was an important motivator for Ian's choice of topic:
• "2015 [...] was the year which saw Volkswagen admit to using software to cheat emissions tests for some of its diesel engine models. [...] What became known as ‘Dieselgate’ [was] An object lesson in how software-intensive software engineering has significant negative impacts on sustainability" and at the hart of his study is the question of weather the "newly adopted [2015] SDGs [could] be used as requirements in SE [Systems Engineering]?"
• There are 9 required characteristics of well-formed requirements as stated by ISO 29148:2018. Well-formed requirements should be 1) Necessary, 2) Appropriate, 3) Unambiguous, 4) Complete, 5) Singular, 6) Feasible, 7) Verifiable, 8) Correct and 9) Conforming. I love these and some of these characteristics (or the very idea of having characteristics) could serve as inspiration for quality criteria of academic texts - although academic texts are of course not "actionable" the way input/requirements to a technical system are.
• Besides the 17 SDG goals, there are also 169 SDG targets but only five of these targets can be considered compliant with the characteristics of well-formed requirements (above).
• The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) play a very important role in the thesis and while i have many objections to the SDGs, Ian include a (not-so-funny) funny-mirror conspiracy-theory version of each SDG. It sounded so bizarre I actually looked it up (so you don't have to) and exemplify below:
• SDG 1 - No Poverty = Welfare Dependence
• "End poverty in all its forms everywhere" actually means Centralized banks, IMF, World Bank, Fed to control all finances, digital one world currency in a cashless society
• SDG 2 - Zero Hunger = GMO / Codex Alimentarius
• SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being = Forced Vaccinations
• SDG 4 - Quality Education = Mass Indoctrination
• SDG 5 - Gender Equality = Destroy Family
• SDG 6 - Clean Water and Sanitation = Water Rationing
• "Ensure accesss to water and sanitation for all" actually means Privatize all water sources, poison with fluoride and other toxic elements
• SDG 7 - Affordable and Clean Energy = Smart Grid Surveillance
• SDG 8 - Decent Work and Economic Growth = No Property Rights
• SDG 9 - Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure = Slave Labour
• "Build resilient infrastructure, promote sustainable industrialization and foster innovation" actually means Toll roads, push public transit, remove free travel, environmental restrictions
• SDG 10 - Reduced Inequalities = Communism
• SDG 11 - Sustainable Cities and Communities = Prison-like Cities
• "Make cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable" actually means Big brother big data surveillance state (Comment: this might in fact not be too far from the truth though...)
• SDG 12 - Responsible Consumption = One Currency
• SDG 13 - Climate Action = Energy Rationing
• SDG 14 - Life Below Water = Control Wildlife
• SDG 15 - Life On Land = Control Resources
• SDG 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions = Perpetual War
• SDG 17- Partnership for the Goals = One World Government
• "Revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development" actually means Remove national sovereignty worldwide, promote globalism under the “authority” and bloated, Orwellian bureaucracy of the UN

Abstract

This study explored the use of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as requirements in Systems Engineering (SE). It used Design Science Research Methodology (DSRM) in the development of artefacts for transforming the SDGs into systems requirements. Five case studies, including rigorous, plan-based projects, generated design knowledge for using the SDGs including the importance of working at target level and the difficulty of transforming the SDGs into business-relevant, well- formed requirements. The cases included Additive Layer Manufacturing (3D printing) and Cancer Care Informatics, both having safety-critical impact. Findings showed the elicitation of requirements covering ten SDGs compared to four SDGs covered by a Business-As-Usual method and the critical role of systems impact assessment using a broad scope. This is the first study to have used all seventeen SDGs as an integrated set for requirements elicitation and shown their potential to increase sustainability-driven requirements for software-intensive systems. The SDGs enable systems engineers to ‘listen to’ a global set of stakeholders, articulating the “World We Want” by 2030. The thesis contributes “how to” knowledge for SDG SE methods and recommendations for theory and practice. It emphasises the urgency for the United Nations to clarify the post- 2030 agenda if the SDGs are to continue to be of value in SE.