Ecosystems

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 161–171 | Cite as

Integrating Social Science into the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network: Social Dimensions of Ecological Change and Ecological Dimensions of Social Change

  • Charles L. Redman
  • J. Morgan Grove
  • Lauren H. Kuby
Original Article

Abstract

The integration of the social sciences into long-term ecological research is an urgent priority. To address this need, a group of social, earth, and life scientists associated with the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network have articulated a conceptual framework for understanding the human dimensions of ecological change for the LTER Network. This framework explicitly advocates that what is often divided into “natural” and human systems be considered a single, complex social-ecological system (SES). In this paper, we propose a list of core social science research areas, concepts, and questions; identify the need for multiscale investigatory frameworks crucial for implementing integrated research; and suggest practical approaches for integration. In sum, this paper is a general outline for empirical and cross-site research projects where investigators agree that bringing together social, biological, and earth scientists can lead to synthetic approaches and a unified understanding of the mechanisms regulating SES. Although the motivation for this goal is specific to the LTER Network and similar projects, we believe that the issues and ideas presented here are widely applicable to other interdisciplinary SES studies.

Keywords

Social-ecological systems integration interdisciplinary long-term ecological research Baltimore Phoenix LTER multi-scale urban ecology social patterns and processes 

Notes

Acknowledgements

In January 2000, LTER scientists and colleagues from other large interdisciplinary projects funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) gathered in Tempe, Arizona, to craft a networkwide approach to the integration of social science into long-term ecological research (supported by NSF Award 9714833 and the LTER Network office). Workshop participants and their affiliations included Charles L. Redman, Nancy Grimm, Ann Kinzig, Lauren H. Kuby, and Ed Hackett (Central Arizona–Phoenix LTER); J. Morgan Grove, Bill Burch, and Steward Pickett (Baltimore Ecosystem Study); Steve Carpenter and Peter Nowak (North Temperate Lakes LTER); F. Stuart Chapin (Bonanza Creek Experimental Forest); Ted Gragson (Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory); Craig Harris (Kellogg Biological Station); Bob Waide (LTER Network); Tom Baerwald (NSF/Division of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences); Anthony de Souza (National Research Council); Grant Heiken (Los Alamos National Laboratories); Peter Kareiva (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration); Emilio Moran and Elinor Ostrom (Indiana University); Sander van der Leeuw (Sorbonne); Tom Wilbanks (Oak Ridge National Laboratory); and Brent Yarnal (Penn State).

Contributors to this manuscript include Steve Carpenter, Ted Gragson, Edward Hackett, Craig Harris, Nancy Grimm, Peter Kareiva, Ann Kinzig, Elinor Ostrum, Pete Nowak, Steward Pickett, and Sander van der Leeuw. This article further benefited from the insightful comments of three anonymous reviewers.Contributors to this manuscript include Steve Carpenter, Ted Gragson, Edward Hackett, Craig Harris, Nancy Grimm, Peter Kareiva, Ann Kinzig, Elinor Ostrum, Pete Nowak, Steward Pickett, and Sander van der Leeuw. This article further benefited from the insightful comments of three anonymous reviewers.

References

  1. 1.
    Agarwal C, Green GM, Grove JM, Evans TP, Schweik CM. 2001. A review and assessment of land-use change models: dynamics of space, time, and human choice. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report NE-297. Center for the Study of Institutions, Population, and Environmental Change, Indiana University, Bloomington (IN) and USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, South Burlington (VT). Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allen, TFH, Hoekstra, TW 1992Toward a unified ecology: complexity in ecological systems.Columbia University PressNew York384Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bazzaz F, Ceballos G, Davis M, Dirzo R, Ehrlich PR, Eisner T, Levin S, and others. 1998. Ecological science and the human predicament. Science 282:879 (In Letters)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berkes, F, Folke, C 1998Linking social and ecological systems: management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience.Cambridge University PressNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berkes, F, Folke, C 2002

    Back to the future: ecosystem dynamics and local knowledge.

    Gunderson, LHHolling, CS eds. Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems.Island PressWashington (DC)12146
    Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burch, WR Jr, DeLuca, DR 1984Measuring the social impact of natural resource policies.New Mexico University PressAlbuquerque (NM)216Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Callahan, JT 1984Long-term ecological research.BioScience343637Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carpenter, S, Brock, W, Hanson, P 1999Ecological and social dynamics in simple models of ecosystem management.Conserv Ecol3(2)4Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, and others. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253–60.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dasgupta, P, Levin, C, Lubchenco, J 2000Economic pathways to ecological sustainability.BioScience5033945Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Diamond, JM 1997Guns, germs, and steel: the fates of human societies.NortonNew York480Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Duncan, OD 1961From social system to ecosystem.Socio Inq311409Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Duncan, OD 1964

    Social organization and the ecosystem.

    Faris, REL eds. Handbook of modern sociology.Rand McNallyChicago3782
    Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Field, DR, Burch, WR Jr 1988Rural sociology and the environment.Greenwood PressNew York135Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Firey, W 1960Man, mind and land; a theory of resource use.Free PressGlencoe (IL)256Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Folke C, Carpenter S, Elmqvist T, Gunderson L, Holling CS, Walker B, Bengtsson J, and others. 2002. Resilience and sustainable development: building adaptive capacity in a world of transformations.A scientific background paper on resilience for the process of the World summit on the Environmental Advisory Council to the Swedish Government. 74 p. Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Foster, DR, Swanson, F, Aber, J, Tilman, D, Brokaw, N, Burke, I, Knapp, A 2002The importance of land-use legacies to ecology and conservation.BioScience531:7788Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Franklin, J, Bledsoe, C, Callahan, JT 1990Contributions of the LTER program.BioScience407Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Grimm, NB, Grove, JM, Redman, CL, Pickett, STA 2000Integrated approaches to long-term studies of urban ecological systems.BioScience7057184Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grove, JM 1999

    New tools for exploring theory and methods in human ecosystem and landscape analyses: computer modeling, remote sensing and geographic information systems.

    Cordell, HKBergstrom, JC eds. Integrating social sciences and ecosystem management.SagamoreChampaign (IL)21936
    Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grove, JM, Burch, WR Jr 1997A social ecology approach and applications of urban ecosystem and landscape analyses: a case study of Baltimore, Maryland.Urban Ecosyst125975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Grove, JM, Hinson, K, Northrop, R 2002

    Education, social ecology, and urban ecosystems, with examples from Baltimore, Maryland.

    Berkowitz, ARNilon, CHHollweg, KS eds. Understanding urban ecosystems: a new frontier for science and education.Springer-VerlagNew York6786
    Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gunderson, LH, Holling, CS 2002Panarchy: understanding transformations in systems of humans and nature.Island PressWashington (DC)450Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Holling, CS, Carpenter, SR, Brock, WA, Gunderson, LH 2002

    Discoveries for sustainable futures.

    Gunderson, LHHolling, CS eds. Panarchy: understanding transformations in systems of humans and nature.Island PressWashington (DC)395417
    Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jenerette, GD, Wu, J 2001Analysis and simulation of land-use change in central Arizona–Phoenix region, USA.Landscape Ecol1661126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kinzig, AP 2001Bridging disciplinary divides to address environmental and intellectual challenges.Ecosystems470915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kottak, CP 1999The new ecological anthropology.Am Anthropol1012335Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lambin EF A. Turner BL, Geist HJ, Agbola SB, Angelsen A, Bruce JW, Coomes OT, and others. 2001. The causes of land-use and land-cover change: moving beyond the myths. Global Environ Change 11(4):261–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Levin, SA 1999Fragile dominion: complexity and the commons.PerseusReading (MA)250Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Likens, GE 1991Human-accelerated environmental change.BioScience41(3)130Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Low, B, Costanza, R, Ostrom, E, Wilson, J, Simon, CP 1999Human ecosystem interactions: a dynamic integrated model.Ecol Econ3122742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Machlis, GE, Force, JE, Burch, WR Jr 1997The human ecosystem as an organizing concept in ecosystem management.Soc Nat Resources1034767Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Marsh, GP 1864Man and nature. Reprinted in 1965.Belknap Press of Harvard University PressCambridge (MA)472Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    McDonnell, MJ, Pickett, STA 1993Humans as components of ecosystems: the ecology of subtle effects and populated areas.Springer-VerlagNew York364Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Michener, WK, Baerwald, TJ, Firth, P, Palmer, MA, Rosenberger, JL, Sandlin, EA, Zimmerman, H 2001Defining and unraveling biocomplexity.BioScience51101823Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    [NRC] National Research Council. 1992. Global environmental change: understanding the human dimensions. In: Stern PC, Young OR, Druckerman D, editors. Washington (DC): National Academy Press. 308 p.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    [NRC] National Research Council. 1998. People and pixels: linking remote sensing and social science. In: Liverman D, Moran E, Rindfuss R, Stern P, editors. Washington (DC): National Academy Press. 244 p.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    [NRC] National Research Council. 1999. Our common journey: a transition towards sustainability. Policy Division, Board of Sustainable Development. Washington (DC): National Academy Press. 363 p.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    [NSF] National Science Foundation. 2002. Long-term ecological research twenty-year review. http://intranet.lternet.edu/archives/documents/reports/20_yr_review.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ostrom, E 1999Coping with tragedies of the commons.Annu Rev Polit Sci2493535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Pickett, STA 1993

    An ecological perspective on population change and land use.

    Jolly, CLTorrey, BB eds. Population and land use in developing countries: report of a workshop.National Academy PressWashington (DC)3741
    Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pickett, STA, Burch, WR Jr, Dalton, SE, Foresman, TW, Grove, JM, Rowntree, R 1997A conceptual framework for the study of human ecosystems in urban areas.Urban Ecosyst118599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pickett, STA, Burch, WR Jr, Grove, JM 1999Interdisciplinary research: maintaining the constructive impulse in a culture of criticism.Ecosystems23027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pickett, STA, Cadenasso, ML, Grove, JM, Nilon, CH, Pouyat, RV, Zipperer, WC, Costanza, R 2001Urban ecological systems: linking terrestrial ecology, physical, and socioeconomic components of metropolitan areas.Annu Rev Ecol Sys3212757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Redman, CL 1999aHuman dimensions of ecosystem studies.Ecosystems22968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Redman, CL 1999bHuman impact on ancient environments.University of Arizona PressTucson (AZ)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Redman CL, Kinzig A, Foster D, Gutmann M, Kareiva P. 2002. Agricultural landscapes in transition: a cross-scale approach. A proposal to the National Science Foundation’s Biocomplexity program. http://ces.asu.edu/agtrans.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Russell, EWB 1993People and land through time: linking ecology and history.Yale University PressNew Haven (CT) and London306Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Scheffer, MS, Carpenter, S, Foley, JA, Folkes, C, Walker, B 2001Catastrophic shifts in ecosystems.Nature4135916CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Scoones, I 1999New ecology and the social sciences: what prospects for a fruitful engagement?Annu Rev Anthropol28479507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Thomas, WL Jr 1956Man’s role in changing the face of the earth. Volume 1, with the collaboration of Sauer CQ, Bates M, Mumford L.University of Chicago PressChicago1193Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Turner, BL II, Clark, WC, Kates, RW, Richards, JF, Mathews, JT, Meyer, WB 1990The earth as transformed by human action: global and regional changes in the biosphere over the past 300 years.Cambridge (UK)Cambridge University Press1990713Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    van der Leeuw, SE 1998The ARCHAEOMEDES Project B: understanding the natural and anthropogenic causes of land degradation and desertification in the Mediterranean basin.Office of Publications of the European UnionLuxemburgGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    van der Leeuw, SE, Redman, CL 2002Placing archaeology at the center of socio-natural studies.Am Antiq67597605Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Vayda, AP 1969Environment and cultural behavior; ecological studies in cultural anthropology.Natural History PressGarden City (NY)xixviGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Vitousek, PM, Mooney, HA, Lubchenco, J, Melillo, JM 1997Human domination of earth’s ecosystems.Science2774949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Watson, RA, Watson, PJ 1969Man and nature: an anthropological essay in human ecology.Harcourt Brace & WorldNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Wilbanks, TJ, Kates, RW 1999Global change in local places: how scale matters.Clim Change4360128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Wu, J, Levin, S 1994A spatial patch dynamic modeling approach to pattern and process in an annual grassland.Ecol Monogr6444764Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Wu, J, David, JL 2002A spatially explicit hierarchical approach to modeling complex ecological systems: theory and applications.Ecol Model153726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Wu, J, Loucks, O 1995From balance-of-nature to hierarchical patch dynamics: a paradigm shift in ecology.Q R Biol7043966CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles L. Redman
    • 1
  • J. Morgan Grove
    • 2
  • Lauren H. Kuby
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Environmental StudiesCentral Arizona–Phoenix (CAP) LTER, Box 873211, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona 85282USA
  2. 2.Baltimore Ecosystem StudyUSDA Forest Service, 705 Spear Street, South Burlington, Vermont 05403USA

Personalised recommendations