When was the concept of ecosystem first put forward? 1935.
chat/talk show
Adapting to ecosystem management
Although people have a new understanding of the term "ecosystem management", there are still some disputes about its connotation. In order to demonstrate these problems, IUCN interviewed three experts.
Dr Christina vogt.
Dr Kristiina Vogt, a professor of forest ecosystem ecology at the College of Forestry, Yale University, co-edited the book Ecosystem: Balanced Science and Management.
Dr Gerardo Budowski, an expert on tropical land use in Venezuela, lives and works in Costa Rica. 1969+ 1976 was the chairman of the World Conservation Union (IUCN) from February to June, and is currently the vice chairman of the IUCN Ecosystem Management Committee.
Sir Martin Holdgate, a British ecologist, is currently the chairman of the United Nations Panel of Forestry Experts and once the chairman of the 1988- 1994 Alliance.
The following is their conversation with Ricardo Bayon (RB) in the Washington office of the World Conservation Union.
Rb: First of all, I want to talk about the meaning of the term "ecosystem management". As far as I know, there is still some debate about its definition. Dr Vogt, I find it interesting that you clearly point out in your book that in order to implement it, we don't need to define "ecosystem management". Can you elaborate on it?
Vogt: I think people have spent a lot of time defining this term accurately. Assuming it is a broad concept, when we only look at the components of the system, its advantage lies in that it can make us give up the narrow focus that we sometimes value. Ecosystem management should be based on seeking a lot of knowledge about how to realize natural systems. When we study the ecosystem with a narrow vision and insufficient understanding, we always take what I call "the focus of the problem", such as pollution and species extinction-something that covers everything. The whole meaning of ecosystem is to review and understand the whole system, so as to distinguish the key change factors that affect special systems from those that do not affect all systems. One of the difficulties in defining technical terms like ecosystem management is that its meaning varies from person to person. However, this imprecise meaning will not affect our ecosystem management. This is why we object to spending too much time defining this technical term in the book, but forget its true meaning and purpose.
Dr. Geraro Budovski
Budovski: As for the term "ecosystem management", it is composed of two phrases that are difficult to define. "Ecosystem" is an ancient word, which was first applied by Tansley in 1935. It involves the dynamic and complex interaction between animals and plants themselves and between them and the natural environment. Based on this definition, you will consider production ecosystem, island ecosystem, forest ecosystem and even bio-industrial ecosystem. When the word "management" is added, it includes social and economic aspects, which further complicates things. The combination of these two words refers to the complex interaction between social and biological components. If we understand this term in a broad sense, we should not waste too much time looking for a more accurate definition.
Rb: Sir Rb: Martin, first of all, I want to ask if you agree. Secondly, if we don't define what an ecosystem is, how can we manage it? If the above definition, an ecosystem may simply refer to a small nest where plants and insects interact on a tree, then may it also refer to a large watershed connecting 10 countries? Therefore, do we need to understand the long-term interaction between animals and plants? Or in other words, don't we need to know the time and space scope of our work?
Holdgate: The concept is quite clear. According to Tansley, what delimits the system boundary is essentially an interactive nature. There is a hypothesis that the interaction between organisms in the system and natural and environmental components is greater than that between components and the adjacent environment outside the system.
When we discuss ecosystem management, we are discussing a completely different management method, involving social, economic and other very important management concepts and actions, rather than discussing the management ecosystem referred to by Tansley concept. I like to use the term "ecosystem-based management", although it is difficult to define it.
Sir Martin Holdgate
In a word, I agree with Dr. vogt. As we all know, we should use the knowledge of ecology and other disciplines to protect and make sustainable use of biological resources on the earth, so as to benefit all aspects of different societies in an all-round way.
Rb: So, how do you determine the best scope of work?
Holdgate: This can only be done as it is. Sometimes our work is suitable for adopting a management plan for a special area of the environment, which may be a mangrove forest or a small lake; Sometimes, our work is suitable for taking a broad view and taking into account a fairly large area now called the biota, including all the diverse ecosystems referred to in Tansley's concept. We must admit that ecosystem management needs the strength of the whole society, and the goal of management should be chosen by the society. The scope of our work depends on the characteristics of the system, the characteristics of human society and the purpose of your management.
Rb: Dr. vogt, would you mind commenting on this question of space and time?
Vogt: We need to treat each system as a unique system. One of the problems we find now is a problem that happened in the past, that is, when we enter a forest or a farmland, we take it as our unit of analysis. Sometimes it is important to broaden our thinking. For example, a problem we are discovering is that all ecosystems have what we call "heritage", that is, traces left by past land use activities in the system. In other words, one of the things we set out to do is to determine what those heritages are and how to study them. Once a woodland, it has been used as farmland for many years, so the existing soil conditions do not allow it to have the function of the past forest. When we want to manage the system, we need to consider this legacy.
Another example: a natural resources protection organization in the United States bought a prairie surrounded by farmland. They found that just looking at this prairie, we can't manage this land well, because there are many influences on this prairie surrounded by farmland-some of us call it "zone influence". If you only look at the prairie, you will completely ignore what is happening in this system.
Therefore, each system must be regarded as a unique system. This will make management difficult, but it is the only way to achieve our goal.
The moderate scope of management depends on the object of our study, which is also the importance of social components.
The moderate scope of management depends on our research object, which is also the importance of social components. By determining our research object and our demand for the system, we can determine the best management scope. This may be a piece of wood or a hole in a tree, or something bigger. One problem of Tansley's concept is to try to draw a clear line for the ecosystem and regard the world as a set of interconnected ecosystems. The world doesn't work that way. Now we know that we must understand what is happening outside the system (expanding the spatial scope) and understand the past land use activities in detail (expanding the time scope).
A strange phenomenon of this scope problem is that every time the scope is expanded, the information needed to predict what is happening in the system is actually less and less. In other words, the wider you study, the less important each variable is. What is really needed to predict the function of an ecosystem in enough time and space is to understand the climate. But knowing the climate, do you really understand what is happening in the system? I don't think so.
When we study only one or two main variables, we must never assume that we have understood all aspects of these systems.
Budovski: It depends on why you manage this system. You can manage it on a global scale and make the whole earth an ecosystem. Or it can be managed in a small area, such as the family garden around your home. Both of them are ecosystems, but their management purposes are completely different.
RB: You all say that ecosystem management depends on the purpose of the managed ecosystem, but who decides the purpose of using the ecosystem?
Holdgate: The short answer is that anyone who belongs to the area will decide how to use it. The reality is complicated. Usually you also need to consider people who are particularly interested in the future of this land. You need to consider a wide range of social interests and admit that what happens in the system is sometimes beneficial and meaningful to people who are far away from the system. Despite the jargon, the forestry expert group between * * * thinks that "all resource trustees should be considered", but the interests of all kinds of people in society should be weighed very carefully and flexibly.
Bo Dovski: I think the main question is not only who decides, but also the process of making a decision. I also think that when trying to absorb the opinions of relevant resource custodians, we should not only consider the opinions of contemporary resource custodians, but also consider the opinions of future resource custodians. I realize that this is a very complicated process, but it is necessary. We need to take a long-term view and coordinate the current short-term interests. In any case, we are eager to get short-term benefits from ecosystem management, even if it will lead to a certain degree of degradation of the ecosystem. I only hope that even in this case, we should consider the long-term prospects.
As far as human values are concerned, ecosystem management is the first priority.
Vogt: The question of resource trustee makes us consider the central issue of ecosystem management. Sooner or later, it is necessary for us to realize that the biological/ecological balance will not delay our management decision. I strongly feel that in terms of human values, ecosystem management is the first priority. First, we evaluate a specific system or resource, and then decide how to use them. If we evaluate a kind of wood, we can manage the ecosystem from one aspect; If we evaluate an endangered species, we may manage the ecosystem from a completely different perspective. If you look at any specific laws and policies, you will find that ecosystem management is either out of people's desire to protect species or out of people's desire to enhance a special resource. Therefore, perhaps the most important task of ecosystem managers is to explain the potential impact of their actions to legislators, policy makers or decision makers. People need to realize that what they do to the ecosystem will have a short-term, medium-term or long-term (usually harmful) impact on the future function of the system. Most human behavior will have a serious impact on the ecosystem, and science can inform the possible impact through decision-making.
Holdgate: I agree that there are some groups in any particular ecosystem that can bring short-term benefits to mankind, and people have an unrealistic desire to benefit from the system. Therefore, one of the important functions of science is to attract the attention of free users, whose free use of ecosystems is limited by natural processes. Although you can't tell them what to do, you can help them and provide them with the necessary information so that they can choose the most suitable management method to manage their natural ecosystem. At the same time, we need to balance many competing interests. For example, many people living in tropical forest areas benefit from these forests in many ways. Their use of forests is still outside the formal economic system. Other natural resource management institutions, including the Central Committee, are also interested in obtaining hard currency income from these forest areas. This is mainly through collecting assets and exporting them to the markets of developed countries in the form of logs. In other words, we need a referee or some kind of conflict resolution system, which can provide a way to combine science with short-term and long-term interests and be widely accepted by all relevant departments as a part of social structure.
Rb: Brdowski, do you think there is a difference in ecosystem management between terrestrial ecosystems and aquatic or marine ecosystems?
Ecosystem management needs the participation of social resource trustees.
This is a beautiful temple on the Oshube River in Nigeria, which shows how religious values contribute to ecosystem management.
Budovski: No, at least not in terms of methods. They have different environmental factors and many movements to consider, but the general method is the same.
I agree. The tidal current of the ocean makes it very difficult to monitor and measure the system, because the necessary parameters change rapidly. One of the problems of ecosystem management is to identify the most critical changing factors of useful substances in special systems. Such as the importance of nutrient flow or content, or should we know some other changing factors, such as diversity, succession or other things? With such a flow system, the problem is to find the correct change factor, but the final method is still the same.
Holdgate: When you think deeply about how to connect the system of Tansley concept with the system, the problem comes out. In a sense, the ocean system is different. Due to the flow of water masses, many marine species eventually form firmly attached surface larvae in the system. At the same time, chemistry has changed a lot, and so on. There is no way to set boundaries in the ocean like setting maps on land. Or use the same standard ecological principles. You need to look at the system as a whole, observe the network of interactive factors and so on. The principle is the same, but the application is different.
Rb: How has our concept of ecosystem management changed over time?
Threatening mangroves all over the world. The picture shows the Kamagu secondary mangrove forest in Bala Bay, Philippines.
Holdgate: A fundamental change is our understanding of ecology. When Tansley put forward the definition of ecosystem in 1935, compared with today, we had a completely different understanding of the characteristics of many ecosystem processes. People tend to consider the whole ecosystem, perhaps especially the vegetation composition. After an orderly and almost predictable succession sequence, it reaches the so-called succession top. Once in this top state, we think that the ecosystem-tropical rain forest, temperate forest, whatever-is in an infinite state. If disturbed, it is easy to return to that peak state, and we no longer believe this statement. We now think that most systems are dynamic and constantly changing, and most of them appear in this form. In short, we think that ecosystems are difficult to predict. Therefore, the rather rigid and fixed concepts we are used to in the ecosystem have lost their application significance. In other words, the ecology itself has changed.
Rb: Some scientists suggest that in order to determine which ecosystems need attention, we should compare them to determine which ecosystems are more fragile and dangerous. How to treat this view?
Vogt: I think it is very difficult to compare ecosystems. We tend to observe two ecosystems and assume that they have the same species composition and roughly the same age, so we can say that they are the same ecosystem. They may look exactly the same, but they are often not. In fact, their functions may be completely different. Because one has experienced some form of land use activities before the other, or because of different interactions between species.
Rb: But do you think one ecosystem is more or less threatened than another?
Holdgate: In some cases, it can be said that both of them were obviously threatened, and both of them were destroyed, leaving only remnants. Mata Atlantic is a famous example of the Atlantic coastal forest in Brazil. Only 3% of the original forest area, the ecosystem is highly threatened. The same example happened on many islands. On the other hand, for other systems. It may be difficult to say this, because the threat is not obvious, and it can be skillfully said that it is caused by the invasion of disturbing creatures or similar things. I think anyone who wants to compare ecosystems has got a meaningful and challenging job. I'm not saying that this comparative ecosystem can't or shouldn't be done, but I think it's a very difficult job.
Vogt: Don't talk about the comparison of ecosystems. We should understand that the limit of threats to ecosystems is the main one. In other words, beyond this limit, a system loses its function, or it can't operate normally or according to our will. Obviously, different systems and different parts of the system have different tolerance limits. But once we know these limits, it will improve our ability to predict whether the system will degenerate, and also make people better classify and compare the systems.
It's easier said than done, and we can understand the tolerance of some systems? Can you give some examples?
Vogt: I'm talking about the limit that the system can withstand threats. Beyond this limit, the system will collapse. Now, these restrictions vary from species to species, and the situation is different. We need to identify them well.
For example, we are now caught in a problem about how to manage the sugar maple forest that produces syrup in the United States. Our wish is to expand production. We planted sugar maple trees in the ecosystem where sugar maple trees could not grow normally, which increased the number of sugar maple trees in the forest of this system from less than 30% to 95%. Recently, due to the drought, we began to find that the mortality rate of sugar maple trees in woodland is very high. Obviously, these systems are beyond the limits of threats and cannot withstand changing climate conditions. We need to fully understand these limits and how to explain these limits that are being drastically changed by human beings.
Ecosystem management is a very old profession.
Rb: Any concluding comments?
Holdgate: I think it is very important to remember that ecosystem management is a very old profession. Since human beings began to exert influence on the surrounding environment, they have been engaged in ecosystem management. They deliberately disturb and change the structure of animal and plant communities according to their own wishes, so that they can serve their own interests. Sometimes they do the right thing, and sometimes they do the wrong thing. Therefore, the principle of ecosystem management is firmly rooted in human civilization and people handed down from generation to generation. So from this perspective, almost from the beginning of human history, human beings have been the managers of ecosystems.
Now we must acknowledge today's challenge. Man dominates the biosphere more than ever before. This challenge gives us a greater responsibility, not to do things badly, but to apply the ecological knowledge of any operation of the ecosystem. This knowledge will show what the potential structure, potential productivity and potential benefits are in an ecosystem or mosaic community (usually we study the latter). What is the impact of the changes we have seen due to total interference in the biosphere, such as climate change? In my opinion, when studying what choices to make or which choices may be beneficial to some special types of communities and trustees of special resources, I think there needs to be a main connection between ecological and sociological scientists in a narrow sense.
Therefore, what IUCN should probably keep in mind is that it is useless for a group of ecologists to ask questions according to their own ideas. They can't do that. IUCN needs to mobilize ecologists from different disciplines to cooperate with sociologists, economists, agronomists, foresters and traditional land managers in the collaborative network to ensure that no matter who is the resource custodian, as much information as possible can be obtained.
In a word, we can't save ourselves by ecology alone, but we must combine ecology with other natural and social sciences.
Vogt: Yes, while ignoring the social factors that affect these systems, we still lack ecologists who are committed to ecosystem management. Ecosystem management is not a management plan based on biological information. These are far from enough. But I don't want to blame biologists entirely. The sociologists I work with also think that this is purely a social problem. If we directly remove the biological constraints that are not conducive to the operation of the system, it will not succeed.
Budovski: We support this important argument. I think ecosystem management needs an interdisciplinary approach, in which sociologists and economists cooperate with ecologists to find solutions to problems. As we mentioned above, it is necessary to consider the views of all relevant resource custodians who are interested in the managed system. Obviously, this requires some kind of consultation. Only by combining society and biology can we truly achieve the purpose of ecosystem management.
(Fu Yanfeng, Wang Siyu School World Conservation 97 (3): 19-22)
Who first put forward the concept of state capitalism? Lenin put forward "state capitalism" in the article "Catastrophe Law and Prevention" written in September 19 17.
Who first put forward the concept of burial? Hello, burial wine has existed since ancient times. The famous "Daughter Red" wine is buried in the ground and only taken out when drinking. However, why no merchants hide wine in this way should be related to the type of wine. As far as I know, Daughter Red is yellow rice wine, and ordinary white wine is cellar-stored. I haven't drunk the wine you mentioned buried in the soil, but according to the principle of static storage at constant temperature and humidity, as long as it is buried in place, the taste of the wine should be fine.
Who first put forward the cultivation of party spirit? In a speech to students of Yan 'an Marxist-Leninist College in July 1939, Comrade * * put forward the concept of "training * * * members" and wrote the famous "On the Training of * * * members".
Who first put forward "microeconomics"? After Keynes founded the school of macroeconomics, it should be after 1935 relative to macroeconomics.
Who first put forward the concept of atom? Around the 5th century BC, the ancient Greek philosopher democritus and others first proposed that all kinds of substances in Qian Qian in the world are composed of the smallest, impenetrable and inseparable particles. This particle is called "atom", which means "inseparable" in Greek. Newton clearly pointed out in the late17th century that all substances are composed of tiny particles. However, these arguments have not been proved by scientific experiments, which can neither be generally accepted by the scientific community nor applied. Dalton, a British scientist, studied the air composition in many areas through chemical analysis, and came to the conclusion that the air everywhere is mixed with countless tiny particles of four main substances: oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide and water vapor. He called these small particles "atoms" in Greek philosophical terms. 1803, Dalton put forward his atomism: ① the final particle of the element (simple materials) is called a simple atom, which is extremely tiny and invisible; It cannot be created, destroyed or divided. They keep their nature unchanged in all chemical changes; (2) Atoms of the same element have the same properties and mass; Atoms of different elements have different properties and masses; (3) The atoms of different elements combine in a simple number ratio to form a chemical combination phenomenon; The atoms of a compound are called "composite atoms". This theory reasonably explained the law of conservation of mass, the law of definite composition and the law of multiple proportion discovered at that time, and initiated a new era of chemistry. However, Dalton's view that atoms are "the last particle" and "absolutely inseparable" particles was strongly impacted by a series of important scientific discoveries at the end of 19. The discovery of electrons opened the door inside the atom, and the discovery of radioactivity further revealed the mystery of the nucleus. With the deepening of scientific research, the modern atomic concept has been gradually developed and improved.
Who first put forward the concept of non-inductive video parking? What are the advantages? Monti smart parking solution developed by Xiang Jun, member of the Economic Work Committee of the Standing Committee of Shenzhen Municipal People's Congress, visiting professor of Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, and CEO of Monti Smart Transportation, includes smart roadside parking, smart parking lot, three-dimensional parking garage, * * enjoy parking, new energy charging pile and other subsystems. By integrating cutting-edge scientific and technological achievements such as artificial intelligence, Internet of Things, big data, cloud computing and financial technology. , developed China's first truly "no in and out, unattended, no payment" artificial intelligence parking app-palm parking, providing convenient services for the majority of car owners to "stop at will".
Who first put forward the concept of metabolic syndrome? 1988, when a variety of metabolic diseases accumulated in a person, Reaven called it "syndrome X", and later it was named "insulin resistance syndrome". In recent years, scholars call it "metabolic syndrome".
Who first put forward the word' Shenma'? Maybe it's grassroots, and it's impossible to prove it, just like saying who put forward sensitive words first.