Prediction in ecology: promises, obstacles and clarifications
Prediction in ecology: promises, obstacles and clarifications
复制标题
生态学预测：承诺、障碍和澄清
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
V. Devictor
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
V. Maris;P. Huneman;Audrey Coreau;S. Kéfi;R. Pradel;V. Devictor
在当前全球变化和生物多样性危机的背景下，人们越来越需要在科学文献和科学政策界面上提高生态学的预测能力。隐含的假设是，这将增加知识，从而导致更好的决策。然而，这一假设的理由仍然不确定，尤其是因为“预测”的定义不清楚。我们建议区分两种类型的预测：确证性预测与理论的验证有关;预期性预测与可能的未来的描述有关。然后，我们讨论了与生态系统的具体特征相关的四类预测障碍：1）它们是历史实体，2）它们是复杂的，3）它们的动态是随机的，4）它们受到社会经济驱动因素的影响。对生态科学的天真理解表明，这两种类型的预测只是一个序列中的两个阶段，科学家首先通过确证性预测来提高他们对生态系统的知识，然后通过预期性预测来应用这些知识来预测生态系统的未来状态，以帮助政策制定者做出决策。然而，这一顺序并不简单，部分原因是确证和预期并不以同样的方式受到预测障碍的影响。因此，我们邀请重新考虑生态预测的作用，将其作为决策的审议模型中的工具，而不是旨在启发政治过程的外部科学信息。这样做将有利于预期性预测的政策相关性和确证性预测的理论相关性。
In the current context of global change and a biodiversity crisis, there are increasing demands for greater predictive power in ecology, in both the scientific literature and at the science–policy interface. The implicit assumption is that this will increase knowledge and, in turn, lead to better decision‐making. However, the justification for this assumption remains uncertain, not least because the definition of ‘prediction’ is unclear. We propose that two types of prediction should be distinguished: corroboratory‐prediction is linked to the validation of theories; and anticipatory‐prediction is linked to the description of possible futures. We then discuss four families of obstacles to prediction, linked to the specific features of ecosystems: 1) they are historical entities, 2) they are complex, 3) their dynamics are stochastic, and 4) they are influenced by socio‐economic drivers. A naive understanding of ecological science suggests that the two types of predictions are simply two phases in a sequence in which scientists first improve their knowledge of ecological systems via corroboratory‐predictions, and then apply this knowledge in order to forecast future states of ecosystems via anticipatory‐predictions in order to help policy makers taking decisions. This sequence is however not straightforward, partly because corroboration and anticipation are not affected by the obstacles to prediction in the same way. We thus invite to reconsider the role of ecological prediction as a tool in a deliberative model of decision‐making rather than as external scientific information aimed at enlightening the political process. Doing so would be beneficial for both the policy‐relevance of anticipatory‐prediction and the theoretical‐relevance of corroboratory‐prediction.