so basically  you need to start off explaining climate change as a wicked problem and then transition into how we are going to approach this wicked problem of climate change through these different types of thinking so the argument is about how these ways of thinking approach wicked problems and how that elucidates discussions about climate change. How these ways of thinking elucidates discussions about climate change you will use as a case study the Kyoto protocol and the Paris agreement. So start off with climate change as a wicked problem which is a very smooth place to transition into wicked problems to ways of thinking about them .. complexity thinking, elegant simplicity and simplistic thinking is the main part of this whole paper. After this then talk about the kyoto and the paris agreement and link it back to these three different frameoworks of thinking !! everything is expained in so much detail please read ... I provided pdfs called feedback  and feedback 2 which basically shows again and again with many details how this paper should be written please use as you are writing..  also please now check the sources that I have provided. I will even look into complexity thinking and simplistic thinking etc sources to help you write this paper.I gave really clear feedback and I really feel as if you haven’t taken it into account .. as I said before this paper needs to be unpacked so much more it is just all very general it needs to go so much more in-depth. This paper is grander than ‘just’ a discussion of the event. I would like to explain you what my paper is about because I feel as if we are not on the same page (nothing bad towards you): I believe that climate change is one of the most urgent global challenge we have now is it truly a wicked problem so how are we go- ing to approach this wicked problem of climate change ? we are going to approach this wicked problem through three different type of thinking (complexity, elegant and simplis- tic) so the argument is about how these three ways of thinking approach wicked problems and how that elucidates discussions about climate change. How these three ways of thinking elucidates discussions about climate change you will use as case study the Ky- oto protocol and the Paris agreement to showcase how these three types of thinking have affected discussions about climate change .. Kyoto and the Paris agreement both have provided a new foundation for meaningful progress on climate change it is like a key step toward reducing the threat of global climate change ... it is important to see how such ways of thinking affect how action is taken how we fix such a global challenge like climate change. How can we see complexity thinking in the P aris agreement and how did we see it in the Kyoto protocol? Or is there elegant simplicity or simplistic thinking?Also at the very beginning I gave you an outline of the thesis and then with the feedback even provided a whole structure to improve the paper which came to this: reader needs to understand the urgency of climate change and they need to understand wicked prob- lems and they need to understand these three frameworks of thinking and how they relate to wicked problems. Clearly define these frameworks of thinking as well as differentiating them (elegant simplicity, complexity and simplistic thinking).So right after you talk about climate change you should take a step back and talk about how to think about ‘climate change’ so you start of with the urgency of climate change and why is is an important issue and why it is a wicked problem and this is a very smooth place to transition into ‘wicked problems to ways of thinking about them’. I told you that is it helpful to to make a table out of these three types of thinking so Reductionist, Ele- gant Simplicity and Complexity ways of thinking. Make three columns and put all the fea- tures of each thinking so Reductionist thinking features; Elegant Simplicity thinking and all the Complexity thinking features. And then see if you can put similar things on the same line. Similar on the same issues. Each line covers an issue or a point of view on a feature. WITH FEATURES I am referring what it entails what do the features entail. After you made these three lists with the features of these types of thinking, then see which points of the list are similar or opposite and then put those on the same line. So how to make such a table make a list of what complex thinking looks like, what reductionist thinking looks like and what this elegant simplistic thinking looks like. How do you know if you are in the realm of complex thinking. How do you know that you are in the realm of reductionist thinking and how do you know you are in the realm of simplistic thinking. And then when you have these lists set up with the features of these different type of thinking; then you can look at each points of these lists and see which ones should be next to each other and in that way you are going to have a table with three columns and then each line cor- responds too something comparable in those three ways of thinking or corresponds too something opposite in those three ways of thinking. So after everything has been put in the table it makes it easier for you to write about it because you can keep referring back to this table throughout the paper.Then I said to start talking about why you are looking at Kyoto and Paris why are these inadequate sample to discuss - talk about sample which is these two summits; why arethese summits emblematic; why do they really demonstrate what you want to discuss - and some of that is kind of scattered throughout the paper but you really need to focus on that since this is an empirical paper. You need to show what your method is to ap- proach the empirical kind of setting. Why is this the right setting and how did you ap- proach it and how did you analyse this. This part shouldn’t be too long it should be like it should be like a page and a half sine its pretty straight forward. Point of method is to right up the manual for someone who is going to replicate your research so they can find what you found and a method section can show transparency about what you did.After the method - then you go to results and in results you have Kyoto section so think- ing about Kyoto (assume that the reader knows absolutely nothing) so explain with half a page this is what they were thinking about and this is what happened there like the out- comes of it and then show how complexity, elegant simplicity and reductionist (simplicity thinking) have been used .. go into details so in this point they managed to be this way ... and that point they happened to be the other way and this is why I see that - consider that the reader is struggling against you in the sense that they are not convinced - you have to convince them you have to demonstrate it . It needs to be unpacked more. And this is the same for the Paris Agreement; this was what the Paris agreement was about and this is what happened and when people are thinking about the Paris agreement they think about it this decision that decisions this failure just give a good summary which can just be half a page. And then this was where it was complex, elegant and simplistic and then talk about these different forms of thinking. You can refer back to the table of the features of these types of thinking. And how this is shown in these summits. So here you are first demonstrating how Kyoto demonstrated complexity (and perhaps, elegant sim- plicity) and where they were simplistic. Demonstrate the results from these approaches in Kyoto. Finally, demonstrate how Paris improves, how it continues mediocre and where it is worse. Finally, discuss how to use complex thinking and avoid simplistic thinking. With discussing how to use complex thinking and avoid simplistic thinking ups have men- tioned that networks are a solution and cooperation is great but it is so complex but there are so many benefits as well so really embracing networks is embracing complexity. This is a great point so sell it really show the complexity of this. This could be in fact a re- ally strong conclusion in the sense that if you are going to think about complexity or even think through an elegant simplicity, relying on network building and cooperation turns it into action (turn things into action). Remember as I said before in this paper you need to argue for complexity thinking.So in saying all of this lets talk about the structure .. at the very beginning I gave you a thesis template to follow. It starts off with (1) title (2) abstract which is 250 words (3) table of contents (4) introduction which should just be short and powerful (5) literature review theoretical framework (6) method (7) body sections (8) conclusions (9) bibliography⁃ (1) Title I thought of is this “wicked problem of climate change: how complexity, ele-gant simplicity and simplistic thinking frameworks approach and elucidates discus-sions about this global challenge” (if you have a better one in mind then use that)⁃ (2) Abstract 250 words⁃ (3) Table of contents (as a tip you can make ‘headers’ in wordand this makes thetext so much more clear it makes the whole paper so much more structured andclearer⁃ (4) introduction you have not established a research topic question once in thesepapers so I thought of one (which ofc you have a better one in mind then use that) : Can complexity thinking contribute to understanding and explaining the wicked problem of climate change? So please this section needs to focus on that becausenow it is just going on about climate change .. this whole section can be so much shorter because the paper is about so much more than this. In fact I think it is im- portant to now just make half a page of the global challenge of climate change and the urgency and also already include and talk about wicked problems and these frameworks of thinking and how it is all connected .. please do this because it so much more clearer. Because now it just seems as if you are jumping into different section of the paper it all needs to be connected..⁃ (5) literature review - Clearly define these frameworks of thinking as well as differen- tiating them (elegant simplicity, complexity and simplistic thinking). Make the table. This table has zero sources .. where are you getting this information from? This is even the first comment I made that there needs to be a lot more citations. On a lot of sentences bold claims are made. It Is important to understand that every claim you make has to be traced to something. It could be traced back to critique of litera- ture or it can be traced back to the empirics. It has to be traced back to something. You can’t just write it because it makes sense .. citations are crucial ! There are not enough which is very problematic. This section as they need to understand these three frameworks of thinking and how they relate to wicked problems and after that you take a step into the empirical so basically the part about these three frameworks should be finished around somewhere page 7 it is one of the most important parts from the paper and you basically wrote nothing about it like two small paragraphs when this is the most important part !!⁃ (6) method which is even what I came up with in the previous revision which I told you to do this - why you are looking at Kyoto and Paris - why are these inadequate sample to discuss - talk about sample which is these two summits; why are these summits emblematic; why do they really demonstrate what you want to discuss - and some of that is kind of scattered throughout the paper but you really need to fo- cus on that since this is an empirical paper. You need to show what your method is to approach the empirical kind of setting. Why is this the right setting and how did you approach it and how did you analyse this. This part shouldn’t be too long it should be like it should be like a page and a half sine its pretty straight forward. Point of method is to right up the manual for someone who is going to replicate your research so they can find what you found and a method section can show trans- parency about what you did.⁃ (7) body sections and (8) conclusion - then you go to results and in results you have Kyoto section so thinking about Kyoto (assume that the reader knows abso- lutely nothing) so explain with half a page this is what they were thinking about and this is what happened there like the outcomes of it and then show how complexity, elegant simplicity and reductionist (simplicity thinking) have been used .. go into de- tails so in this point they managed to be this way ... and that point they happened to be the other way and this is why I see that - consider that the reader is struggling against you in the sense that they are not convinced - you have to convince them you have to demonstrate it . It needs to be unpacked more. And this is the same for the Paris Agreement; this was what the Paris agreement was about and this is what happened and when people are thinking about the Paris agreement they think about it this decision that decisions this failure just give a good summary which can just be half a page. And then this was where it was complex, elegant and simplistic and then talk about these different forms of thinking. You can refer back to the table of the features of these types of thinking. And how this is shown in these summits. So here you are first demonstrating how Kyoto demonstrated complexity (and perhaps, elegant simplicity) and where they were simplistic. Demonstrate the results from these approaches in Kyoto. Finally, demonstrate how Paris improves, how it contin- ues mediocre and where it is worse. Finally, discuss how to use complex thinkingand avoid simplistic thinking. With discussing how to use complex thinking and avoid simplistic thinking ups have mentioned that networks are a solution and co- operation is great but it is so complex but there are so many benefits as well so real- ly embracing networks is embracing complexity. This is a great point so sell it really show the complexity of this. This could be in fact a really strong conclusion in the sense that if you are going to think about complexity or even think through an ele- gant simplicity, relying on network building and cooperation turns it into action (turn things into action). Remember as I said before in this paper you need to argue for complexity thinking.The paper needs to be unpacked so much more. It is all just very general .. it needs to go more in depth. For instance, this paper is grander than ‘just’ a discussion of an event. Also some very interesting points are made which can be unpacked so more for example when you talk about climate change as a nightmare with developing countries and you talk about alienation and you talk about shallow minds and those are moments when I was reading and thinking that you should tell more. Like what do you mean? Where are you getting this? Furthermore, you talk about two phenomena (emissions and pollutions) and the way you talk about it is like a ‘simple silver bullet’ kind of simplistic thing but it is not simplistic (reductionism) you are actually opening up to complexity so you can un- pack it a lot more unpack the wickedness .. so for instance climate change is related to emissions so then just reduce emissions and that is not as simple as it sounds .. open up the wickedness !! So when you start talking about emissions this is a great way to really illustrate what a wicked problem is in climate change .. so just saying let reduce emis- sions you can show why that is not as simple as it sound. (Better just focus on emissions rather than pollution because both the Kyoto and the paris agreement focus on reducing global emissions ).Tips for table:will be so helpful for the empirical part (for the results) something that crosses the three forms of thinking and the two protocols (the two summits)⁃ One is the three types of thinking (quite abstract; very theoretical)⁃ The other one is the example of how Kyoto did it (the different types of thinking) (ex-amples like this is where Kyoto was complex this was where Kyoto was simplisticand this is where Kyoto was elegant)⁃ Lines should be line of thinking and columns should be the protocols (after youmade the different lists then you can make them line up on similar themes and that makes it easier to compare and it will give you more to write about since you have more insight )important to keep in mind is that you need to focus on researching about what complexity thinking is (three frameworks of thinking), wicked problems and how these two related and focusing on climate change and the kyoto and paris agreement it is just very important because all can be connected. I will attached the file called 'paper that was written and needs editing /rewriting' this was how it was written and the other file attachedthe feedback2  which is basically the editing or rewriting what you need to do for this paper. please take everything into account. I have also uploaded thesis template which you need to follow and the article of rittel webber and weber khademain which I already provided from the start. the other uploaded files are for you to use or not to use but im providing them so that you can understand what kind of sources I have in mind or just to show you what kind of sources you need to be looking for.