Systems Ecology and Environmental Policy
Hadjibiros, K. 2012. Systems Ecology and Environmental Policy. Proc. Int. Conf. “Ecology, Interdisciplinary Science and Practice”, Sofia, 25-26/10/12
Systems Ecology and Environmental Policy
AUTHOR: KIMON HADJIBIROS
Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, 5, Iroon Polytechniou, 15780, Athens Greece
e-mail:
Abstract. Human Ecology formulates propositions and predictions associated with complex social, economic and environmental issues. It emphasizes problems of overpopulation, pollution and resource depletion. On the other hand, a systemic approach allows the detection of basic concepts that can contribute to the understanding of complex phenomena as well as to pointing out inconsistencies and misunderstandings. Subjects such as holism, carrying capacities, predictions about the collapse of industrial civilization etc. have been propounded by ecological agents but uncertainties of competences and methods and also the drift from critical thinking to practical ideology are not always avoided. Today, however, it is ascertained that the ominous predictions of the ‘70s about future environmental doom have not been verified. This is connected with the insufficiencies of the approaches as well as with the effective mediation of social interventions and technological progress.
Key words: Human Ecology, carrying capacity, resources, Malthousianism, holism, collapse of industrial civilization.
INTRODUCTION
According to “Encyclopedia Britannica”, the subject matter of Human Ecology is man’s collective interaction with his environment. Although it is a small branch of scientific knowledge and does not use a sociological methodology, it examines the biological, environmental, demographic (Ehrlich and Ehrlich 1970) and technological life conditions of social systems and emphasizes their dependence on resources as well as the overpopulation and pollution problems. It is based on ecological science’s approaches and on material from many scientific fields, but not on an expressed and recognized interdisciplinary approach. It focuses on man’s nature as an animal organism of an artificial ecosystem and formulates propositions for sustainability, quality of life and environmental responsibility. A basic idea of Human Ecology (Odum 1971) is that “populution” (population+pollution) increases faster than natural resources do, leading humanity to a dead-end. Thus, in order to achieve the conservation of resources, it proposes a transformation of the positive feedbacks (knowledge, power, productivity) of economic life to negative ones, aiming at an ecological control of life quality and environmental degradation. Resources are considered to be subject to the saturation-depletion principle and this is assumed to be true in the case of a biological community dynamics as well as in the cases of pollution phenomena or of socio-economic problems such as the saturation of urban transportation. The startling contrast with natural systems revealed by considering the situation with respect to resources reveals the unstable nature of current human situation (Watt 1973). Nevertheless, most respective approaches were largely based on a priori ethical attitudes and ideological positions (Ramade 1974).
METHODOLOGY
Systems’ study requires a special methodology (Levins 1968). A system is defined as a finite total of interacting parts that can be considered as one unity. Its fundamental properties are: 1) it has limits; 2) it consists of different parts; 3) it displays interactions among the parts; 4) it constitutes a new entity, on a description level that is different from that of its parts (Hadjibiros 2007). The concept of system contributes to a theoretical approach to the organization of the differences observed in various description levels of the world, such as physicochemical, biological, psychological, social (Rossis 1979). The laws of each lower level are completely compatible with the phenomena of higher level descriptions, but they do not contain all the necessary concepts for understanding the phenomena. The General Systems’ Theory searches for the general properties and characteristics of systems’ behavior (Bertalanffy 1973). A system’s response to an external perturbation can play an important role to its behavior’s regulation. Cybernetics is defined as the science of control and communication in animals and machines (Wiener 1948). Of special interest is the negative feedback, where an external perturbation causes a feedback that leads the system to equilibrium, serving the control. Negative feedback plays a fundamental role in the regulative processes of many systems. On the contrary, a positive feedback leads the system to an explosive behavior, that is, out of control. In an organized system, cohesion, structure and hierarchy serve a plan (Rossis 1986). Because of that, the fallacy of holism (F1) lurks on a philosophical level, where the insufficiency of classical analysis and the need for a systemic approach lead to the false assumption that the whole constitutes a separate entity.
The state of a system is defined by the total of n variables that suffice for a complete system description. Its temporal behavior may be depicted by n two-dimensional graphic representations in relation to time. It can also be depicted by a curve in the phase space of n dimensions with the elimination of time, where the axes correspond to the variables. The system is in an equilibrium point if it remains in the same state in the next temporal moment too. Interactions of internal and external factors can cause perturbations, leading the system temporarily or permanently away from a state of equilibrium. If a factor, able to overturn the equilibrium, affects it, the system could possibly find a new equilibrium. Interactions of predator-prey type can cause permanent oscillations (Hadjibiros 2007). An equilibrium point is stable when the system’s state tends to return to it after having departed from it. There are various degrees of stability, depending on the amount of perturbation that the equilibrium point can withstand. The system has the property of resilience (Cancela da Fonseca 1977) when it is able to absorb great perturbations. A system can display a continuous propensity for increase, called impulse. An inverse propensity, constraint, may be displayed due to environment limitations and hinder the system’s growth (Hadjibiros 2005). Some ecological or social systems display a succession of states, namely an increase under the influence of impulse, equilibrium under the influence of constraint, degradation due to catastrophe (Thom 1972), new development towards equilibrium. In general, the course towards equilibrium is slow whereas the course towards catastrophe is rapid. If the systemic nature of phenomena is underestimated there may be fallacy (F2) and, consequently, a false interpretation of equilibrium, stability, oscillations, catastrophe, resilience etc.
A system’s temporal alteration gives time series of elements. A time series can usually be analyzed (Usher 1973) in partial components: 1) long-term trend, that is, general curve slope; 2) periodic (daily, seasonal, yearly or others) oscillations around the slope; 3) random movements. If the temporal scale of the observations is much smaller that the temporal scale of an alteration component (e.g. of an oscillation), the observer can come to ungrounded conclusion (e.g. interpret a seasonal decline as a permanent trend) and thus fallacy may be caused (F3).
A system’s progress towards equilibrium can be described by a logistic model of the following type:
dN K - N
----- = r N ------
dt K
where N is the system’s size and t is time. The constant r is the increase rate while K is the carrying capacity, which is each time determined by the current limiting factor. An ecological or an economic system can increase exponentially, but if the available environmental resources are not unlimited, sooner or later a limiting factor will appear. In other words, there is a development of competition among the system’s elements that claim the limited resource. The limiting factor is defined in a certain time scale. Generally, there is one in each system development phase, but it can be replaced by another one; consequently, when conditions change, consecutive limiting factors may appear as well as corresponding carrying capacities (Hadjibiros 2007). If the current carrying capacity is interpreted as an insurmountable limitation, fallacy is created (F4).
A fallacy (F5) on a level of political philosophy is connected with phenomena where the activism of social movements conduces to situations where the necessary critical thinking for approaching complex human systems is degenerated to practical ideology. In this case the social movement, confined in itself, may be cut off the evolving real world (Althusser 1976).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The criticism against development employed by political ecology is fed by the conclusions of the science of Human Ecology. The ecological discourse, starting from a scientific basis, soon acquires ideological extensions, such as, e.g. “small is beautiful” (Schumacher 1977). Political ecology forms the ideology of a large part of the ecological and environmental movement and the “Green” parties. As a rule, there is a more or less intense smouldering opposition towards the industrial civilization and the modern western thinking. The opposition is connected with a romantic sensitivity and reaction against the industrial revolution and its consequences. The science of Ecology adopts analyses (Odum 1971) based on the Malthusian view (Malthus 1798); as a result, it creates reservations versus the trust towards scientific and technical progress. During the 70s, there was a barrage of ominous predictions that converged to the estimation that, in the beginning of the 21st century, the planet’s condition would not be livable, that an environmental doom was to be expected (Taylor 1970). Political ecology (Samuel 1973) developed propositions about almost all fields of human activity, opposed development, asked for abolition of tensions and promoted relaxation. Characteristically, during the 70s, it was estimated that after 30 years no oil or aluminium would be used (Gorz 1978). The main statement of political ecology was: industrial societies generate contradictions (population, energy, raw materials, water, foodstuffs, pollution) that will soon lead them to collapse. How can a continuous economic growth be possible since natural resources are limited? The question is obviously a modern version of the classic Malthusian idea. The presence of limits in the magnification of human activity was documented by plotting mathematical models for the world population, natural resources and pollution, in the classical study of the Club of Rome (Meadows et al. 1972). As an antidote, zero growth was proposed. Later, more advanced and detailed analyses specified relevant approaches to a multitude of fields (Brown 1988-1998).
Ecological stands and predictions contain weak points that are partially connected with the fallacy cases F1, F2, F3, F4 and F5, as they are analyzed in the methodology section of this paper.
Preoccupied by the environmental crisis, distinguished theorists of ecological thinking propose a return to the past and moral values (Rifkin 1998). Trust in the power of reason and the materialistic and mechanistic view of the world are questioned, the return to the metaphysical spiritual tradition is suggested: new values should be adopted on the basis that everything is connected with anything else, that we are all one and we form an evolving, instantly and enduringly interconnected fundamentally integral reality; leading-edge science rediscovers and reaffirms a perennial insight that occurs and recurs in the world’s spiritual and cultural traditions (Laszlo 2010). Similar views appear also in the antisystemic thinking: the specific each time natural and socioeconomic reality in space and time composes the uninterrupted dialectic unity of the multidimensional and complex relations, interdependencies and interactions of elements, phenomena and actions that compose them in an organic whole, which is not the total of the discrete parts that, supposedly, constitute them if they are mechanistically added up (Rokos 2003). The development of metaphysical ecological approaches was partially based on a nostalgia for Arcadia, a mythological idyllic world where man and nature lived in perfect harmony (Arditi 1997). The idea of nature as an entity organized by a hidden power attracts all those who feel uncomfortable with the skepticism of modern science and are frightened by the absence of design in a Darwinian mechanistic universe. The utilitarian, instrumentalist scientific attitude is rejected. It is expected, e.g., that a forest is something more than a regulated mechanism, a system of interacting parts that can be studied separately, replaced by others and perform through integrated management. In fact, this expectation suggests that the presence of the forest’s order and harmony should refer to a deeper unity of things, a kind of forest’s soul. The polymorphism of the structure and function of the complex biological and social systems is interpreted as a transcendental entity, which requires a holistic approach (F1). Holism, strongly related to metaphysical views, lies at the opposite of an integrated systemic approach. The example of Gaia hypothesis (Lovelock 1992) is characteristic: it proposes that the planet behaves as a super-organism that is environmentally self-regulated, just as living organisms regulate their vital functions; the functionality that preserved the natural environment suitable for life, today is turned against humanity due to its abuses; the world has already passed the point of no return and it is improbable that civilization may survive. Strangely, nuclear power is presented as the only solution for the salvation of, e.g., the planet’s climate (Lovelock 2006); this position constitutes a huge discrepancy, since the rejection of nuclear power was a central pillar for the development of the ecological movement.
Criticism may also be applied for the fact that science, without the necessary supports, takes on a role of ideology (F5) supplying the system with “ecological laws” that, to a significant degree, are arbitrary. Expecting prognostic characteristics from the relevant ecological activity is not sound. Moreover, the systemic nature of the phenomena is underestimated (F2). The futuristic distortion, with the excuse of the importance and emergency of the purpose, causes self-feeding catastrophology. Human Ecology is a complicated field that uses concepts of physical and social sciences and tends to absorb new fields without making theoretically clear the implications that ensue (Enzensberger 1975). Simplistic Manichaeistic dipoles are produced, among others, such as civilization – bucolism (Stamou 2001). Moreover, interpretation based on short-term data can lead to hasty conclusions that probably ignore periodicity or the long-term trend of the phenomena (F3). In reality, the predictions about collapse were not verified (Pantis 2001), because the linear relation between development and environmental burdening (consumption of natural resources, pollution) did not continue, society did not stand like an immobilized spectator but played an active role, technology brought about significant structural changes. In the case of human population, carrying capacity changes because it is socially determined (Stamou 2002). Thus, it is not insurmountable (F4), it is significantly connected with the degree of development of productive forces, especially technology.
According to a positivist philosophical position, spreading the scientific attitude can be an effective antidote to the exaggerations of ideologists (Kolakowski 1972). A relevant thesis was formulated by the “Heidelberg Appeal”, on the occasion of the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, in 1992 ( it was signed by 4.000 scientists from 106 countries, with 72 Nobelists among them; they express their concern about the emergence of an irrational ideology which is opposed to scientific and industrial progress and impedes economic and social development; they argue that the environmental damage caused by science can be healed with more and not with less science and technology and that only in this way overpopulation, starvation and worldwide diseases will be overcome. The publication of the text caused high-spirited discussions and reactions, but the Media did not give it any special publicity, in spite of the significant support by the international scientific community.
The contemporary scientific practice proceeds in a utilitarian manner; the huge accumulation of knowledge and technological development was thus realized. Today, the idea, connected with the old technological optimism, that anything is possible if enough energy and technology are available, can partly rest on existing possibilities of decoupling environmental burdening from economic growth. Indeed, modern technology presents increasing possibilities for pollution abatement, reuse of waste, resources saving, cleaner production of goods, prevention or dealing with environmental impacts, application of environmental management tools. Spearheads towards this direction are non-material development, recycling, as well as renewable energy sources which could cover up to 100% of power production in the future. The predicted depletion of oil has been postponed for a few decades not only due to the discovery of additional deposits but also due to reduction of energy waste. A significant refutation of the negative predictions has to do with aluminium, for which the utilization of the appropriate technology, in this case recycling, reverses the Malthusian view (F4). In the future, technology is expected to create prospects of economic activities with lessening environmental burdening that will gradually tend to zero (Hadjibiros 2009). New prospects are also created in the social sciences, which are today benefitted by technology as well as by a great amount of data that offer the possibility of studying human behavior with an objective and quantitative way. The science of networks will possibly give the means for the simulation of the behavior of human societies’ systems aiming at the prevention or alleviation of crises (Barabasi 2010). Consequently, new roads are paved even for the development of the mythical science of Hari Seldon’s Psychohistory (Asimov 1951) where advanced mathematical approaches could be used to predict the general course of future human history.
CONCLUSIONS
The predictions about collapse have not been verified mainly because the approaches on which they were based had not taken into consideration the complexity of the systems, the abilities of technology to widen the limits and also the social adaptation of the development process due to the negative feedback from the Malthusian concerns. Progress gradually substitutes natural harmony with artificial stability that can be the result of a rational management of the human systems’ equilibrium. A modern critique of Human Ecology can be based on the criterion of reality both in relation to what has happened in the last forty years and the choices of people about the modern or not way that they want to live, about the place of their living etc; the choices certainly take account of the ecological concerns, which are widely available in the Media.
Further predictions about trends of environmental state, resource abundance, economic and social sustainability as well as relevant environmental policies should take into account the technological evolution and be based on systemic methodology, collaboration of many scientific fields and interdisciplinary, even transdisciplinary approach where a sound socioeconomic component is involved.