Diversity in Current Ecological Thinking: Implications for Environmental Management
Diversity in Current Ecological Thinking: Implications for Environmental Management
复制标题
当前生态思维的多样性：对环境管理的影响
DOI：
10.1007/s00267-008-9187-2
复制
发表时间：
2009
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
M. Westoby
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Moore;T. Wallington;R. Hobbs;P. Ehrlich;C. S. Holling;S. Levin;D. Lindenmayer;C. Pahl‐Wostl;H. Possingham;M. Turner;M. Westoby
当前的生态学思想强调系统是复杂的、动态的、跨越时空的不可预测的。今天的生态学家对这些观点的不同解释是什么？这对环境管理意味着什么？本研究使用政策德尔菲调查生态学家探讨他们的观点对一些当前的主题生态学。结果与非平衡态的观点基本一致。人们一致认为，干扰是生态系统普遍存在的正常特征，具有历史上偶然的反应。认识到组织的多层次和功能多样性在环境变化中的作用的重要性也得到了广泛承认。关于演替发展的可预测性、“斑块性”是否是一个有用的概念以及将重点从物种转移到生态系统过程的好处，人们的看法存在分歧。由于它们在环境管理中的中心地位，这些不同的观点值得管理者和生态学家的特别关注。考虑到科学（这里是生态学）与环境政策和管理之间的不良联系受到广泛关注，这种分歧尤其成问题，这种联系被归因于科学的不确定性和科学家之间缺乏共识，两者都危及科学向管理的转移。提出了一些建议，以帮助管理人员处理这些差异，特别是需要在基于地点的评估的背景下解释更广泛的理论。这些差异造成的不确定性要求对环境管理采取积极主动的方法，包括明确确定环境目标、仔细设计实验和有效监测。
Current ecological thinking emphasizes that systems are complex, dynamic, and unpredictable across space and time. What is the diversity in interpretation of these ideas among today’s ecologists, and what does this mean for environmental management? This study used a Policy Delphi survey of ecologists to explore their perspectives on a number of current topics in ecology. The results showed general concurrence with nonequilibrium views. There was agreement that disturbance is a widespread, normal feature of ecosystems with historically contingent responses. The importance of recognizing multiple levels of organization and the role of functional diversity in environmental change were also widely acknowledged. Views differed regarding the predictability of successional development, whether “patchiness” is a useful concept, and the benefits of shifting the focus from species to ecosystem processes. Because of their centrality to environmental management, these different views warrant special attention from both managers and ecologists. Such divergence is particularly problematic given widespread concerns regarding the poor linkages between science (here, ecology) and environmental policy and management, which have been attributed to scientific uncertainty and a lack of consensus among scientists, both jeopardizing the transfer of science into management. Several suggestions to help managers deal with these differences are provided, especially the need to interpret broader theory in the context of place-based assessments. The uncertainty created by these differences requires a proactive approach to environmental management, including clearly identifying environmental objectives, careful experimental design, and effective monitoring.