Table 6 Using congruence analysis to understand party preference to change from current world to preferred world
From: Using systems thinking to design actionable futures: a nuclear weapons example
From F3L2I5M3N3S3 | To F4L1I1M1/3N1/3S2 | Pakistan | Intervening Government |
|---|---|---|---|
F3 Weak Islamic faction | F4 Ineffective Islamic faction | + + | + + |
L2 Strong Loyalist | L1 Dominating Loyalists | + + | + |
I5 No intervention | I1 Welcomed and effective intervention | + | + + |
M3 Supported but weak militants | M1/3 Supported / not supported but weak militants | + | + |
N2 Known and unsafe nuclear weapons | N1/3 Known or unknown and Safe nuclear weapons | + | + |
S3 Shaky internal stability | S2 Stable internal stability | + | + + |