Hostname: page-component-797576ffbb-bqjwj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-12-03T05:40:06.828Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": true, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can ecosystem services lead ecology on a transdisciplinary pathway?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2010

BELINDA REYERS ,
DIRK J. ROUX  and
PATRICK J. O'FARRELL
BELINDA REYERS*
Affiliation:
Natural Resources and the Environment, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, PO Box 320, South Africa
DIRK J. ROUX
Affiliation:
Water Research Node, Monash South Africa, Private Bag X60, Roodepoort 1725, South Africa
PATRICK J. O'FARRELL
Affiliation:
Natural Resources and the Environment, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, PO Box 320, South Africa
*
*Correspondence: Dr Belinda Reyers e-mail: breyers@csir.co.za
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The discipline of ecology has evolved through several phases as it has developed and defined itself and its relationship with human society. While it initially had little to do with human concerns, it has become more applied, and is today more integrated with the human element in the way it conceptualizes complex social-ecological systems. As the science has developed, so too have its relationships with other disciplines, as well as people and processes outside the domain of science. However, it is unclear how far ecology has progressed in developing these relationships and where it should best focus its efforts in the future in order to increase its relevance and role in society. The concept of ecosystem services (the benefits people get from nature) has the potential to further this integration and clarify ecology's role and relevance in society, however doubt remains as to whether the concept has helped ecology in developing disciplinary and societal relationships. This review assesses the progress of ecology in relation to a transdisciplinary knowledge hierarchy (empirical, pragmatic, normative and purposive) where all levels of the hierarchy are coordinated on the basis of an overall purpose introduced from the purposive level down. At each of the levels of the knowledge hierarchy, the principles of transdisciplinarity, ecology's progress, the contribution of ecosystem services to this progress and future directions for a transdisciplinary ecology are explored. Ecology has made good progress in developing an interdisciplinary dialogue between the natural and social sciences and sectors. It is well-integrated with empirical and pragmatic disciplines and coordinates research at these two levels. At the normative level, the absence of collaborative frameworks and planning instruments is a major gap limiting the influence that ecology can have on land and resource use decisions at this level. At the purposive level, ecology has limited interactions with a narrow set of values associated with ecological ethics and economics. There is an obvious need for ecology to engage with the purposive disciplines of philosophy, ethics and theology, but also a need for ecological research to transform itself into a social process dealing with values and norms of both society and science. Ecosystem services have helped ecology to make links with many disciplines at the empirical and pragmatic levels, provided a useful concept and framework for interactions at the normative level requiring further examination, and helped make values explicit, allowing ecologists to begin to interact with the purposive level. The Western ecological economic origins of the ecosystem service concept presents a potential constraint to interactions at the purposive level, and must be considered and addressed if ecosystem services are to further the development of a transdisciplinary ecology, the joint ecology-society debate and the formulation and execution of policy.

Keywords

complex systemsinterdisciplinarynorms and valuessocial-ecological
Type
THEMATIC ISSUE: Interdisciplinary Progress in Environmental Science & Management
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 37 , Issue 4: Thematic section. Interdisciplinary Progress in Environmental Science and Management , December 2010 , pp. 501 - 511
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abel, T. & Stepp, J.R. (2003) A new ecosystems ecology for anthropology. Conservation Ecology 7: 12 [www document]. URL http://www.consecol.org/vol7/iss3/art12Google Scholar
Allenby, B. (2006) The ontologies of industrial ecology? Progress in Industrial Ecology 3: 28–39Google Scholar
Andersen, B. (2008) Research in the journal Landscape Ecology, 1987–2005. Landscape Ecology 23: 129–134Google Scholar
Balmford, A. & Cowling, R.M. (2006) Fusion or failure? The future of conservation biology. Conservation Biology 20: 692–695.Google Scholar
Blignaut, J. & Aronson, J. (2008) Getting serious about maintaining biodiversity. Conservation Letters 1: 12–17.Google Scholar
Boyd, J. & Banzhaf, S. (2007) What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics 63: 616–626.Google Scholar
Bunting, A.H. & Wynne-Edwards, V.C. (1964) Editorial. Journal of Applied Ecology 1: 1–2.Google Scholar
Caillon, S., & Degeorges, P. (2007) Biodiversity: negotiating the border between nature and culture. Biodiversity and Conservation 16: 2919–2931.Google Scholar
Carpenter, S.R. & Folke, C. (2006) Ecology for transformation. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 21: 309–315.Google Scholar
Carpenter, S.R. & Turner, M.G. (2007) A decade of ecosystems. Ecosystems 10: 519–522.Google Scholar
Carpenter, S.R., De Fries, R., Dietz, T., Mooney, H.A., Polasky, S., Reid, W.V. & Scholes, R.J. (2006) Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: research needs. Science 314: 257–258.Google Scholar
Carpenter, S.R., Mooney, H.A., Agard, J., Capistrano, D., DeFries, R.S., Diaz, S., Dietz, T., Duraiappah, A.K., Oteng-Yeboah, A., Pereira, H.M., Perrings, C., Reid, W.V., Sarukhan, J., Scholes, R.J. & Whyte, A. (2009) Science for managing ecosystem services: beyond the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106: 1305–1312.Google Scholar
Castilla, J.C. (2000) Roles of experimental marine ecology in coastal management and conservation. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 250: 3–21.Google Scholar
Costanza, R. (2008) Ecosystem services: multiple classification systems are needed. Biological Conservation 141: 350–352.Google Scholar
Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O'Neil, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P. & can den Belt, M. (1997) The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253–260.Google Scholar
Costanza, R. & Farber, S. (2002) Introduction to the special issue on the dynamics and value of ecosystem services: Integrating economic and ecological perspectives. Ecological Economics 41:367–373.Google Scholar
Costanza, R., Fisher, B., Ali, S., Beer, C., Bond, L., Boumans, R., Danigelis, N.L., Dickinson, J., Elliott, C., Farley, J., Gayer, D.E., Glenn, L.M., Hudspeth, T., Mahoney, D., McCahill, L., McIntosh, B., Reed, B., Rizvi, S.A.T., Rizzo, D.M., Simpatico, T. & Snapp, R. (2007) Quality of life: an approach integrating opportunities, human needs, and subjective well-being. Ecological Economics 61: 267–276.Google Scholar
Cowling, R.M., Egoh, B., Knight, A.T., O'Farrell, P., Reyers, B., Rouget, M., Roux, D., Welz, A. & Wilhelm-Rechman, A. (2008) An operational model for mainstreaming ecosystem services for implementation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105: 9483–9488.Google Scholar
Daily, G.C. (1997) Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems Washington, DC, USA: Island Press.Google Scholar
Daily, G.C. & Ehrlich, P.R. (1999) Managing Earth's ecosystems: an interdisciplinary challenge. Ecosystems 2: 277–280.Google Scholar
Daily, G.C., Polasky, S., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P.M., Mooney, H.A., Pejchar, L., Ricketts, T.H., Salzman, J. & Shallenberger, R. (2009) Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment 7: 21–28,Google Scholar
De Groot, R., Wilson, M.A. & Boumans, R.M. (2002) A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics 41: 393–408.Google Scholar
Drew, J.A. & Henne, A.P. (2006) Conservation biology and traditional ecological knowledge: integrating academic disciplines for better conservation practice. Ecology and Society 11: 34 [www document]. URL http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art34/Google Scholar
Egoh, B., Rouget, M., Reyers, B., Knight, A.T., Cowling, R.M., van Jaarsveld, A.S. & Welz, A. (2007) Integrating ecosystem services into conservation assessments: a review. Ecological Economics 63: 714–721.Google Scholar
Ehrenfeld, D. (1987) Editorial. Conservation Biology 1: 6–7.Google Scholar
Ehrlich, P.R. & Levin, S.A. (2005) The evolution of norms. Public Library of Science Biology: 6: 943–948.Google Scholar
Faber, M. (2008) How to be an ecological economist. Ecological Economics 66: 1–7Google Scholar
Folke, C., Hahn, T., Olsson, P. & Norberg, J. (2005) Adaptive governance of social– ecological systems. Annual Review of Environmental Resources 30: 441–473.Google Scholar
Fox, H.E., Christian, C., Nordby, J.C., Pergams, O.R.W., Peterson, G.D. & Pyke, C.R. (2006) Perceived barriers to integrating social science and conservation. Conservation Biology 20: 1817–1820.Google Scholar
Gragson, T.L. & Grove, M. (2006) Social science in the context of the long term ecological research program. Society and Natural Resources 19: 93–100.Google Scholar
Hadorn, H.G., Bradley, D., Pohl, C., Rist, S. & Wiesmann, U. (2006) Implications of transdisciplinarity for sustainability research. Ecological Economics 60: 119–128.Google Scholar
Hodgson, S.M., Maltby, L., Paetzold, A. & Phillips, D. (2007) Getting a measure of nature: cultures and values in an ecosystem services approach. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 32: 249–262.Google Scholar
Horlick-Jones, T. & Sime, J. (2004) Living on the border: knowledge, risk andt ransdisciplinarity. Futures Transdisciplinarity 36: 441–456.Google Scholar
Jantsch, E. (1972) Towards Interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in education and innovation. In: Interdisciplinarity. Problems of Teaching and Research in Universities, pp 97–121. Paris, France: OECD.Google Scholar
Kessler, W.B. & Thomas, J.W. (2006) Conservation biology from the perspective of natural resource management disciplines. Conservation Biology 20: 670–673.Google Scholar
Knight, A.T., Cowling, R.M. & Campbell, B.M. (2006) An operational model for implementing conservation action. Conservation Biology 20: 408–419.Google Scholar
Kremen, C. & Ostfeld, R.O. (2005) A call to ecologists: measuring, analyzing, and managing ecosystem services. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment 3: 540–548.Google Scholar
Kumar, M. & Kumar, P. (2008) Valuation of the ecosystem services: a psycho-cultural perspective. Ecological Economics 64: 808–819.Google Scholar
Lawrence, R.J. & Despres, C. (2004) Futures of transdisciplinarity. Futures 36: 397–405.Google Scholar
Le Maitre, D.C., Milton, S.J., Jarmain, C., Colvin, C.A., Saayman, I. & Vlok, J.H. (2007) Linking ecosystem services and water resources: landscape-scale hydrology of the Little Karoo. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment: 5: 261–270.Google Scholar
Lengwiler, M. (2006) Between charisma and heuristics: four styles of interdisciplinarity. Science andPublic Policy 33: 423–434.Google Scholar
Liu, S., Costanza, R., Farber, S. & Troy, A. (2010) Valuing ecosystem services: theory, practice, and the need for a transdisciplinary synthesis. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1185: 54–78.Google Scholar
Lovell, S.T. & Johnston, D.M. (2009) Designing landscapes for performance based on emerging principles in landscape ecology. Ecology and Society. 14: 44 [www document]. URL http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art44/Google Scholar
Lowe, P., Whitman, G. & Phillipson, J. (2009) Ecology and the social sciences. Journal of Applied Ecology 46: 297–305.Google Scholar
Lubchenco, J. (1998) Entering the century of the environment: a new social contract for science. Science 279: 491–497.Google Scholar
Ludwig, D. Mangel, M. & Haddad, B. (2001) Ecology, conservation, and public policy. Annual Review of Ecological Systems 32: 481–517.Google Scholar
MA (2003) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: a Framework for Assessment Washington, DC, USA: World Resources Institute, Island Press.Google Scholar
MA (2005 a) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Opportunities and Challenges for Business and Industry. Washington, DC, USA: World Resources Institute, Island Press.Google Scholar
MA (2005 b) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Washington, DC, USA: World Resources Institute, Island Press.Google Scholar
MA (2005 c) Business industry perspective on the findings of the MA. http://www.millenniumassessment.org/documents/document.706.aspx.pdfGoogle Scholar
Mangel, M., Talbot, L.M., Meffe, G.K., Agardy, M., Alverson, D.L., Barlow, J., Botkin, D.B., Budowski, G., Clark, T., Cooke, J., Crozier, R.H., Dayton, P.K., Elder, D.L., Fowler, C.W., Funtowicz, S., Giske, J., Hofman, R.J., Holt, S.J., Kellert, S.R., Kimball, L.A., Ludwig, D., Magnusson, K., Malayang, B.S., Mann, C., Norse, E.A., Northridge, S. P., Perrin, W. F., Perrings, C., Peterman, R.M., Rabb, G.B., Regier, H.A., Reynolds, J.E., Sherman, K., Sissenwine, M.P., Smith, T.D., Starfield, A., Taylor, R.J., Tillman, M.F., Toft, C., Twiss, J.R., Wilen, J. & Young, T.P. (1996) Principles for the conservation of wild living resources. Ecological Applications 6: 338–362.Google Scholar
Mascia, M.B., Brosius, J.P., Dobson, T.A., Forbes, B.C., Horowitz, L., McKean, M.A. & Turner, N.J. (2003) Conservation and the social sciences. Conservation Biology 17: 649–650.Google Scholar
Max-Neef, M.A. (2005) Foundations of transdisciplinarity. Ecological Economics 53: 5–16.Google Scholar
May, R.M. (2004) Ecology. Ethics and amphibians. Nature 431: 403–403.Google Scholar
McCauley, D.J. (2006) Selling out on nature. Nature 443: 27–28.Google Scholar
Meffe, G.K., Ehrenfeld, D. & Noss, R.F. (2006) Conservation Biology at twenty. Conservation Biology 20: 595–596.Google Scholar
Mooney, H.A. & Ehrlich, P.R. (1997) Ecosystem services: a fragmentary history. In: Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems, ed. Daily, G., pp. 11–22. Washington, DC, USA: Island Press.Google Scholar
Nicholson, E., Mace, G.M., Armsworth, P.R., Atkinson, G., Buckle, S., Clements, T., Ewers, R.M., Fa, J.E., Gardner, T.A., Gibbons, J., Grenyer, R., Metcalfe, R., Mourato, S., Muuls, M., Osborn, D., Reuman, D.C., Watson, C. & Milner-Gulland, E.J. (2009) Priority research areas for ecosystem services in a changing world. Journal of Applied Ecology 46: 1139–1144.Google Scholar
Norton, B.G. (2008) Beyond positivist ecology: toward an integrated ecological ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics 14: 581–592.Google Scholar
Noss, R.F. (1996) Conservation biology, values, and advocacy. Conservation Biology 10: 904.Google Scholar
O'Farrell, P.J. & Anderson, P.M.L. (2010) Sustainable multifunctional landscapes: a review to implementation. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2: DOI 10.1016/j.cosust.2010.02.005Google Scholar
Ormerod, S.J. (2003) Current issues with fish and fisheries: editor's overview and introduction. Journal of Applied Ecology 40: 204–213.Google Scholar
Ormerod, S.J. & Watkinson, A.R. (2000) Large-scale ecology and hydrology: an introductory perspective from the editors of the Journal of Applied Ecology. Journal of Applied Ecology 37: 1–5.Google Scholar
Phillipson, J., Lowe, P. & Bullock, J.M. (2009) Navigating the social sciences: interdisciplinarity and ecology. Journal of Applied Ecology 46: 261–264.Google Scholar
Raymond, C.M., Bryan, B.A., Hatton MacDonald, D., Cast, A., Strathearn, S., Grandgirard, A. & Kalivas, T. (2009) Mapping community values for natural capital and ecosystem services. Ecological Economics 68: 1301–1315.Google Scholar
Ramadier, T. (2004) Transdisciplinarity and its challenges: the case of urban studies. Futures 36: 423–439.Google Scholar
Redford, K.H. & Adams, W.M. (2009) Payment for ecosystem services and the challenge of saving nature. Conservation Biology 23: 785–787.Google Scholar
Redman, C.L. (1999) Human dimensions of ecosystem studies. Ecosystems 2: 296–298.Google Scholar
Reid, W. (2006) Nature: the many benefits of ecosystems services Nature 443: 749.Google Scholar
Reyers, B., Roux, D.J., Cowling, R.M., Ginsburg, A.E., Nel, J.L. & O’ Farrell, P. (2010) Putting conservation plans to work: conservation planning as a transdisciplinary process. Conservation Biology 24: 957–965.Google Scholar
Robinson, J.G. (2006) Conservation biology and real-world conservation. Conservation Biology 20: 658–669.Google Scholar
Ropke, I. (2004) The early history of modern ecological economics. Ecological Economics 50: 293–314.Google Scholar
Rose, K.A. & Cowan, J.H. (2003) Data, models, and decisions in US Marine Fisheries management: lessons for ecologists. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 34: 127–151.Google Scholar
Roux, D.J., Ashton, P.J., Nel, J.L. & MacKay, H.M. (2008) Improving cross-sector policy integration and cooperation in support of freshwater conservation. Conservation Biology 22: 1382–1387.Google Scholar
Satake, A. & Iwasa, Y. (2009) Preface to special feature: interface between ecology and social sciences in global environmental change. Ecological Research 24: 477–478.Google Scholar
Saunders, C.D., Brook, A.T. & Eugene Myers, O. (2006) Using psychology to save biodiversity and human well-being. Conservation Biology 20: 702–705.Google Scholar
Scheffer, M., Brock, W. & Westley, F. (2000) Socioeconomic mechanisms preventing optimum use of ecosystem services: an interdisciplinary theoretical analysis. Ecosystems 3: 451–471.Google Scholar
Serafy, S.E. (1998) Pricing the invaluable: the value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Ecological Economics 25: 25–27.Google Scholar
Steffen, W. (2009) Interdisciplinary research for managing ecosystem services. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106: 1301–1302.Google Scholar
Termorshuizen, J.W. & Opdam, P. (2009) Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development. Landscape Ecology 24: 1037–1052.Google Scholar
Theobald, D.M., Hobbs, N.T., Bearly, T., Zack, J.A., Shenk, T. & Riebsame, W.E. (2000) Incorporating biological information in local land-use decision making: designing a system for conservation planning. Landscape Ecology 15: 35–45.Google Scholar
Theobald, D.M., Spies, T., Kline, J., Maxwell, B., Hobbs, NT. & Dale, V.H. (2005) Ecological support for rural land-use planning. Ecological Applications 15: 1906–1914.Google Scholar
Tisdell, C.A. (1989) Environmental conservation: economics, ecology, and ethics. Environmental Conservation 16:107–112.Google Scholar
Tress, B., Tress, G. & Fry, G. (2005) Researchers’ experiences, positive and negative, in integrated landscape projects. Environmental Management 36: 792–807.Google Scholar
Tscharntke, T., Klein, A.M., Kruess, A., Steffan-Dewenter, I. & Thies, C. (2005) Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity: ecosystem service management. Ecology Letters 8: 857–874.Google Scholar
Turner, M.G. & Carpenter, S.R. (1999) Tips and traps in interdisciplinary research. Ecosystems 2: 275–276.Google Scholar
Turner, R.K., Paavola, J., Cooper, P., Forber, S., Jessamy, V. & Georgiou, S. (2003) Valuing nature: lessons learned and future research directions. Ecological Economics 46: 493–510.Google Scholar
van Wyk, E., Roux, D.J., Drackner, M. & McCool, S.F. (2008) The impact of scientific information on ecosystem management: making sense of the contextual gap between information providers and decision makers. Environmental Management 41: 779–791.Google Scholar
Vitousek, P.M., Mooney, H.A., Lubechenco, J. & Melillo, J.M. (1997) Human domination of earth's ecosystems. Science 277: 494–499.Google Scholar
von Hauff, M. & Wilderer, P.A. (2008) Industrial ecology: engineered representation of sustainability. Sustainability Science 3: 103–115.Google Scholar
Wendland, K.J., Honzák, M., Portela, R., Vitale, B., Rubinoff, S. & Randrianarisoa, J. (2010) Targeting and implementing payments for ecosystem services: opportunities for bundling biodiversity conservation with carbon and water services in Madagascar, Ecological Economics 69: 2093–2107.Google Scholar
Wilson, R.S. (2008) Balancing emotion and cognition: a case for decision aiding in conservation efforts. Conservation Biology 22: 1452–1460.Google Scholar
Wu, J. (2006) Landscape ecology, cross-disciplinarity, and sustainability science. Landscape Ecology, 21: 1–4.Google Scholar