At a geological time-scale, seas rise aloft and mountains crumble. We are currently in the middle of a debate on whether—in order to acknowledge the pervasive and geologically significant traces of human action on the planet—our present era should be labelled the “Anthropocene”, and if so, what would be the cut-off date for the commencement of that era. At the same moment, we are already contemplating its possible human-induced end, in our own lifetime or that of our children. Action is both vital and urgent, so it matters that we identify not only which interventions are likely to be feasible, effective or leading to desirable results, but also the appropriate timing. Yet common approaches in systemic design practice, such as identifying potential leverage points through causal loop diagrams, offer limited guidance on this aspect.

This paper uses “timesheds” as a metaphor drawn from hydrology and water catchments to designate “opportune time for action”. The use of this metaphor, accompanied by a discussion of a hypothetical dam burst, will serve to illustrate how both distance and position play a role in the otherwise opaque and implicit coupling of cause and effect often represented in systems mapping. While the original metaphor of “watershed boundaries” suggests a simple and easily identified bifurcation in pathways and events that follow a “watershed moment”, I will here instead attempt to untangle some of the implications of the relative, relational and situated nature of leverage points and distributed agency. The conceptual boundaries through which we value, perceive and situate critical “events” in time, as well as opportunities to act within or across communities, will depend on our position—in time/space and in society. Timesheds are, therefore, always multiple, and awareness of their multiplicity has significance for systemic design practice.

Importantly also, the position of actors and observers matters with respect to where we stand in causal flows: on higher ground, close to the “timeshed” where causal flows are set in motion or can be mitigated, compared to lower grounds where their effects are felt the most. To achieve meaningful concerted interventions that will not lead to unintended negative impacts, it is argued that not only do actors from various positions need to be involved, but that systemic design may benefit particularly from practices of empathetic imagination.