Why Indigenous Philosophy Helps Us Grapple with “Wicked Problems” And How It Can Help the Reach Alliance to Redefine Impact

Author: Adrian Little, University of Melbourne

Julius Mugwagwa invites readers to consider the ways in which the Reach Alliance can offer collaborative examples of impactful research that reflect the kinds of obstacles that universities face in addressing today’s global challenges.^[1] Importantly, he emphasizes the relational dimension of Reach’s work, highlighting the complex web of connected people, capacities, institutions, and policies involved in addressing such challenges.

Mugwagwa’s “provocation” shows how traditional modes of disciplinary academic research and accompanying techniques of simply applying it to the “real world” are no longer fit for purpose. In so doing he advances our understanding beyond the common parlance in public policy of “wicked problems” — that is, emerging policy problems that cannot be resolved by traditional models of public policy.^[2] Instead, he points to “wicked interdependencies” which suggests a more agential account of the ways that individuals, collectives, their organizational forms, and their strategies and techniques are radically challenged in responding to the “wicked problems” they encounter.

Relational Futures and Why Relationships Matter

The most powerful element of Mugwagwa’s challenge involves rethinking the future in terms of relational capabilities. If complex problems cannot be solved through any single disciplinary expertise, how do we build capabilities that engage across numerous scholarly fields and have the adaptive capacity to transform alongside the dynamic nature of the policy challenges we face? After all, it is not just relationships between humans, institutions, and technologies that are “wicked.” The very problems we address are often related to one another and emergent properties are constantly emanating within many of these fields as they interact. As Mugwagwa’s essay makes clear, the challenges we address are not static so researchers much be capable of adapting to changes in these dynamic policy domains as they work.^[3]

What then are the relational capabilities we need to engender? Mugwagwa argues for the importance of “uniquely human capacities such as empathy, judgment, ethical reasoning, and relationship building” which will enable researchers to “connect knowledge across domains and translate it into socially meaningful action.” These insights are immensely valuable and point to the ways in which human ingenuity and collaborative practices must accompany technological “fixes” if researchers are seriously going to address complex social issues. The interdependencies he alludes to not only suggest cross-disciplinary engagement, but a humility among researchers regarding what they can and can’t know. No longer can the academy achieve sustained social impact through the brilliance of individual researchers and/or their teams alone.

Relationships in Indigenous Philosophy and Practice

While the focus on relationships is a relatively novel approach in the 21st-century academy, its origins are actually much older and much deeper. Indigenous knowledges and “ways of knowing” have only begun to be taken seriously as “proper” forms of knowledge in university settings.^[4] From environmental management to astronomy to migration policy, only recently has Indigenous philosophy and its ontological grounding been given the attention it deserves.^[5] And here we can see that knowledges from time immemorial that have been neglected in universities have much to offer in addressing the kinds of “wicked problems” that challenge policymakers today. The simple fact is that these Indigenous epistemologies are deeply relational — Indigenous philosophy is not just about different forms of knowledge but, just as importantly, different ways of knowing that are deeply ontological and relational.

The fundamental form of relational epistemology in Indigenous thought is through connection to land and sea. This place-based foundation of knowledge connects Indigenous and First Nations people to particular places, whether they live in those places or not. The connections are deeply temporal through relations to ancestors who cared for land and sea in particular places through to ethical responsibilities to future generations.^[6] The deep implications of this ontological connection to place are becoming more widely understood — the connections are dynamic, evolving, and deeply relational. At the same time, Indigenous relational knowledge and connection to place have historically played out in a number of other ways: through relations between different Indigenous peoples, relations with overseas visitors such as traders and other seafarers, and, of course, relations with colonizers and settlers.^[7]

Reach at Melbourne

Reach research at the University of Melbourne has placed Indigenous philosophy and methodology at the core of its program. From projects working with marginalized Indigenous communities in Guatemala through research in Indigenous communities in Australia to Indigenous Reach researchers working across the world, the university has placed Indigenous theory and methods at the heart of its program. ^[8] Relational thinking is now the core of Reach at Melbourne and something we are keen to share throughout the Alliance. The focus on relationality has been augmented by the recent establishment of the Centre for Truth-telling and Dialogue as the institutional home of our Reach work.

The mainstay of this approach is the leadership and ethical research training that the university provides to all Reach researchers. Regardless of whether their project is related to Indigenous issues or not, all Reach researchers now undertake a bespoke Indigenous-led training program at the outset of their project in Melbourne. The program was developed and is delivered by Tully Mahr, an Indigenous Reach alumna who is a Gundundurra woman, and embeds Indigenous knowledges and relational practices in the work of all Reach researchers at the university. This is a distinctive feature of the Reach program at Melbourne and provides key insights in how to further embed relationality at the heart of Reach’s work in the future.

Conclusion

Julius Mugwagwa has provided an invitation to the Reach Alliance to articulate further the ways in which a relational approach to our work can help us to think about the specific capabilities that Reach can engender in the future. It provides a different way of looking at academic research that promises to be more impactful and meaningful for the communities our researchers relate to, work with, and learn from.

If I can conclude with a provocation of my own, maybe we have reached the stage where we need to relinquish the language of “problem solving.” Perhaps our work in the Reach network is best understood if we do not think of resolving the questions we encounter but instead consider impact in a different way: how does Reach research change the communities we work with and relate to?

Perhaps relational research impact might be better understood in terms of how we transform the challenges we grapple with alongside our community partners rather than how we resolve them once and for all. Certainly, that is a different kind of relational impact, but it might be a better reflection of the dynamic nature of the issues that communities are wrestling with than the more traditional understanding of academic researchers resolving problems in isolation from the communities they work with.

“From projects working with marginalized Indigenous communities in Guatemala through research in Indigenous communities in Australia to Indigenous Reach researchers working across the world, the university has placed Indigenous theory and methods at the heart of its program. Relational thinking is now the core of Reach at Melbourne and something we are keen to share throughout the Alliance. ”

– Adrian Little, University of Melbourne

References

[1] Julius Mugwagwa, “Wicked Interdependences and Relational Futures in Education and Innovation: Why the Reach Alliance Is Ready,” Reach Alliance Faculty Mentor “Provocation,” Toronto, Summer 2026.

[2] Brian Head, “The Rise of ‘Wicked Problems’ — Uncertainty, Complexity and Divergence,” in Wicked Problems in Public Policy: Understanding and Responding to Complex Challenges (Singapore: Springer, 2022), 21–36; Guy B. Peters, “What Is So Wicked About Wicked Problems? A Conceptual Analysis and a Research Program,” Policy and Societ, 36, no. 3 (2017): 385–96.

[3] Robert Geyer and Samir Rihani, Complexity and Public Policy (London: Routledge, 2010).

[4] Lauren Tynan,  “What Is Relationality? Indigenous Knowledges, Practices and Responsibilities with Kin,” Cultural Geographies 28, no. 4 (2021): 597–610.

[5] Michael-Shawn Fletcher, Anthony Romano, Simon Connor, Michela Mariani, and Shira Yoshi Maezumi, “Catastrophic Bushfires, Indigenous Fire Knowledge and Reframing Science in Southeast Australia,” Fire 4, no. 3 (2021); Adrian Little and Sana Nakata, “Mobile Relations and Temporal Politics: Navigating the Case for Indigenous Nationhood and the Ethos of the Open Society,” Migration Studies 13, no. 4 (2025); Ray P. Norris and Duane W. Hamacher, “The Astronomy of Aboriginal Australia,” in The Role of Astronomy in Society and Culture, 260 (2011): 39–47.

[6] Adrian Little,  Temporal Politics: Contested Pasts, Uncertain Futures (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2022).

[7] Adrian Little,  “Indigenous Philosophy and the Politics of Ontology,” Journal of Social and Political Philosophy 3, no. 2 (2024): 125–144.

[8] Daniela Guraieb Elizalde, Arshia Jain, Anggi Putri, Darren Suryawijaya Ong, Devyani Vadke, Carolina Bermúdez, and Steve Fisher, Fellows for Change, “Empowering Education Leaders in Rural Guatemalan Communities,” Reach Alliance, November 2023, https://reachalliance.org/reports/fellows-for-change-empowering-education-leaders-in-rural-guatemalan-communities/ ; Maisa Binte Haque, Siqi Li, Anggi Arinta Putri, Braven Rathesh, Belinda Thompson, and Maria Rodrigues, “Elders for Change: Engaging Incarcerated Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women,” Reach Alliance, October 2024, https://reachalliance.org/reports/elders-for-change/; Safana Ahmad, Violet Denham-Blau, Thiri Hlaing, Ashi Khetan, Aisyah Mohammad Sulhanuddin, Mrish Muralidharan, Maria Rodrigues, and Kirsty McKellar, “Community-Led Teacher Orientation in Kowanyama: The Kowie Card Initiative,” Reach Alliance, November 2025, https://reachalliance.org/reports/community-led-teacher-induction-in-kowanyama-the-kowie-card-initiative/; Lilik Andriyani, Kaavya Jha, Tully Mahr, Kailin Tan, Iga Bagus Jaya Wardhana, Yi Yi Yeap, Maria Rodrigues, and Kirsty McKellar, “Empowering Chile’s Grassroots Recyclers: Asociación Movimiento Nacional de Recicladores de Chile,” Reach Alliance, Novemebr 2024, https://reachalliance.org/reports/empowering-grassroots-recyclers-in-chile/; Akanksha Agarwal, Ajak Diing, Sujeetkumar Ranjeet Kadam, Brigalow McIntosh, Shifa Nathani, Jacinta Patel, Carolina Bermúdez, and Maria Rodrigues, “Seeding Change: Semillas de Apego and Reaching Caregivers Impacted by Conflict in Colombia,” Reach Alliance, October 2024, https://reachalliance.org/reports/semillas-de-apego-nurturing-resilience-in-colombias-youngest-amid-conflict-and-displacement/.

About the Faculty Mentor Paper Series

This paper is part of the Reach Alliance’s second faculty reflection series, Is Reach the Model for Teaching and Research in the 21st Century?, in response to Julius Mugwagwa’s “Wicked Interdependences and Relational Futures in Education and Innovation: Why Reach Alliance is Ready.” Featuring contributions from leading faculty scholars across the Reach Alliance global academic consortium, the series opens a timely dialogue on the future of higher education, research, and innovation. Developed as part of Reach’s commitment to advancing research-to-impact and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, these reflections aim to engage higher education professionals in the emerging discussions around new models of teaching and learning, knowledge creation, and societal impact.