Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T01:13:48.134Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ecological Stability, Model Building, and Environmental Policy: A Reply to Some of the Pessimism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Jay Odenbaugh
Jay Odenbaugh*
Affiliation:
University of Calgary
*
†Send requests for reprints to the author, Department of Philosophy, University of Calgary. 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 4G5; email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recently, there has been a rise in pessimism concerning what theoretical ecology can offer conservation biologists in the formation of reasonable environmental policies. In this paper, I look at one of the pessimistic arguments offered by Kristin Shrader-Frechette and E. D. McCoy (1993, 1994)—the argument from conceptual imprecision. I suggest that their argument rests on an inadequate account of the concepts of ecological stability and that there has been conceptual progress with respect to complexity-stability hypotheses. Such progress, I maintain, can supply important resources for conservation biologists in determining environmental policies.

Type
Science and Values
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 68 , Issue S3: No. 3 Supplement: Proceedings of the 2000 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part I: Contributed Papers Sep., 2001 , 2001 , pp. S493 - S505
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 2001

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.)

Footnotes

‡

I thank Marc Ereshefsky, Greg Mikkelson, and Anya Plutynski for their help with the manuscript.

References

Armstrong, R. A. (1982), “The Effects of Connectivity on Community Stability”, American Naturalist, 120 (3): 391–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandon, Robert (1991), Adaptation and Environment. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
DeAngelis, D. L. (1975), “Stability and Connectance in Food Web Models”, Ecology 55:238–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, M. R. and Ashby, W. R. (1970), “Connectance of Large, Dynamical (Cybernetic) Systems: Critical Values for Stability”, Nature 228: 784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilpin, M. (1975), “Stability of Feasible Predator-prey Systems”, Nature 254:137–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Anthony W. and Pimm, Stuart L. (1983), “Complexity and Stability: A Reconciliation of Theoretical and Experimental Results”, American Naturalist 122:229–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawlor, John (1978), “A Comment on Randomly Constructed Model Ecosystems”, American Naturalist 112:445–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNaughton, S. J. (1977), “Diversity and Stability of Ecological Communities: A Comment on the Role of Empiricism in Ecology”, American Naturalist 111:515–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
May, Robert (1972), “Will a Large Complex System be Stable?”, Nature 238:213–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
May, Robert (1973), Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Orians, Gordon (1975), “Diversity, Stability, and Maturity in Natural Ecosystems”, in van Dobben, W. H. and Lowe-McConnel, R. H. (eds.), Unifying Concepts in Ecology. The Hague: W. Junk, 139–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, Robert H. (1991), A Critique for Ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pimm, Stuart L. (1979), “Complexity and Stability: Another Look at MacArthur's Original Hypothesis”, Oikos 35:139–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimm, Stuart L. (1982), Food Webs. London: Chapman and Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimm, Stuart L. (1984), “The Complexity and Stability of Ecosystems”, Nature 307:321–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimm, Stuart L. (1991), The Balance of Nature: Ecological Issues in the Conservation of Species and Communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Pimm, Stuart L. and Gilpin, Michael (1991), “Theoretical Issues in Conservation Biology”, in Robert, May and Levin, Simon (eds.), Perspectives in Ecological Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 287–305.Google Scholar
Sagoff, Marc (1992), “Ethics, Ecology, and the Environment: Integrating Science and Law”, Tennessee Law Review 56:77–229.Google Scholar
Sarkar, Sahotra (1995), “Ecological Theory and Anuran Declines”, Bioscience (March): 199–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrader-Frechette, Kristin (1995), “Practical Ecology and Foundations for Environmental Ethics”, Journal of Philosophy 92:621–635.Google Scholar
Shrader-Frechette, Kristin and McCoy, Earl D. (1992), “Community Ecology, Scale, and the Instability of the Stability Concept”, PSA 1992, Vol. 1. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association, 184–199.Google Scholar
Shrader-Frechette, Kristin and McCoy, Earl D. (1993), Method in Ecology: Strategies for Conservation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrader-Frechette, Kristin and McCoy, Earl D. (1994), “Applied Ecology and the Logic of Case Studies”, Philosophy of Science 61:228–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar