GeoJournal

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 299–325 | Cite as

Enhancing the credibility of ecology: Is interdisciplinary research for land use planning useful?

  • Castri Francesco di 
  • Hadley Malcolm 
Article

Abstract

Interdisciplinary approaches involving inputs from both the natural and social sciences represent one operational and social response to the complexity of today's environmental and land use problems. The resulting amalgam can be useful to both science and society, given the right mix of ingredients. Important steps in the planning and conduct of interdisciplinary research include problem indentification; definition of a precise scientific theme derived from the social demand; choice of relevant disciplines; selection of study area and spatial scale; ensuring that the project is adaptable to changing circumstances; obtaining the involvement of scientists, planners and local people; developing a continuum of actions from basic and applied research through to training and information diffusion; early and explicit definition of the criteria for evaluation. Though interdisciplinary approaches have shown their worth, they founder easily. Obstacles include the behavioural and psychological characteristics of individual scientists, differences in scientific method, and bottlenecks of a more administrative, institutional, political and financial nature.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Auerswald, E.H.: Interdisciplinary versus ecological approach. Family Process 7, 202–215 (1968)Google Scholar
  2. Bayliss-Smith, T.; Bedford, R.; Brookfield, H.; Latham, M.: Islands, islanders and the world: the colonial and post-colonial experience of eastern Fiji. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (in press)Google Scholar
  3. Bertalanffy, H.: Problems of general systems theory. Human Biology 23, 302–312 (1951)Google Scholar
  4. Boyden, S.: An integrative ecological approach to the study of human settlements. MAB Technical Notes 12, Unesco, Paris 1979.Google Scholar
  5. Boyden, S.: Integrated studies of cities considered as ecological systems. In: di Castri, F.; Baker, F.W.G.; Hadley M. (eds.), Ecology in Practice. Vol. 2. The social response, pp. 7–29. Tycooly, Dublin and Unesco, Paris 1984.Google Scholar
  6. Boyden, S.; Millar, S.; Newcombe, K.; O'Neill, B.: The ecology of a city and its people. The case of Hong Kong. Australian National University Press, Canberra 1981.Google Scholar
  7. Brightman, H.: Differences in ill-structured problem-solving along the organizational hierarchy. Decision Sciences 9, 1–18 (1978)Google Scholar
  8. Brookfield, H. (ed.): Population-environment relations in tropical islands: the case of eastern Fiji. MAB Technical Notes 13, Unesco, Paris 1980.Google Scholar
  9. Brookfield, H.: Man, environment and development in the outer islands of Fiji. Ambio 10, 2–3, 59–67 (1981)Google Scholar
  10. Brugger, E.A.; Furrer, G.; Messerli, B.; Messerli, P. (eds.): Umbruch in Berrggebeit/Les régions de montagne en mutation. Haupt, Berne 1984.Google Scholar
  11. Campbell, D.T.: Ethnocentrism of disciplines and the fish-scale model of omniscience. In: Sherif, M.; Sherif, C.W. (eds.), Interdisciplinary relationships in the social sciences, pp. 328–348. Aldine, Chicago 1969.Google Scholar
  12. Canada House of Commons: Still waters: the chilling reality of acid rain. Report of the Sub-committee on Acid Rain of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Forestry. Minister of Supply and Services, Ottawa 1981.Google Scholar
  13. Cant, G.; Porteous, M.: The contribution of the social sciences to the MAB Programme in New Zealand, 1971–83: discussion and evaluation. Unesco, Bangkok 1984.Google Scholar
  14. Carter, L.J.: A new and searching look at NSF. Science 204, 1064–1065 (1979)Google Scholar
  15. Clark, W.C.; Majone, G.: The critical appraisal of scientific inquiries with policy implications. Science, Technology and Human Values (in press)Google Scholar
  16. Cousens, R.: Theory, hypothesis and experimental design in ecology. Bulletin of the British Ecological Society 16, 2, 76–77 (1985)Google Scholar
  17. Darbellay, C.: Ecological problems in the Swiss Apls. The Pays d'Enhaut project. International Social Science Journal 93, 427–439 (1982)Google Scholar
  18. di Castri, F.: International, interdisciplinary research in ecology: some problems of organization and execution. The case of the Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme. Human Ecology 4, 235–246 (1976)Google Scholar
  19. di Castri, F.: Planning international interdisciplinary research. Science and Public Policy 5, 254–266 (1978)Google Scholar
  20. di Castri, F.: Mediterranean-type shrublands of the world. In: di Castri, F.; Goodall, D.W.; Specht, R.L. (eds.), Mediterranean-type shrublands, pp. 1–52. Ecosystems of the World 11, Elsevier, Amsterdam 1981.Google Scholar
  21. di Castri, F.: L'écologie dans les années 90. Conférence “A. Buzzati”. Paper presented to the second congress of the Italian Society of Ecology, 26 June 1984.Google Scholar
  22. di Castri, F.: Quelques considérations sur l'organisation de la recherche interdisciplinaire sur l'environnement. In: Jacques, G. (ed.), Recherches sur l'environnement rural: bilan et perspective, pp. 207–218. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris 1985a.Google Scholar
  23. di Castri, F.: Les recherches interdisciplinaires sur l'environnement: forces et faiblesses. In: Hommage au Professeur René Truhaut, pp. 194–199. Imprimerie Tardy, Quercy, Cahors, 1985b.Google Scholar
  24. di Castri, F.: Changes in terrestrial ecosystems and associated changes in the chemistry of the atmosphere. Paper presented to ICSU Global Change Symposium. Berne, 17 September 1986.Google Scholar
  25. di Castri, F.; Baker, F.W.G.; Hadley, M. (eds.): Ecology in practice. Vol. 1. Ecosystem management. Vol. 2. The social response. Tycooly, Dublin and Unesco, Paris 1984.Google Scholar
  26. di Castri, F.; Hadley, M.: A typology of scientific bottlenecks to natural resources development. GeoJournal 3, 6, 513–522 (1979)Google Scholar
  27. di Castri, F.; Hadley, M.: Making land management more scientific: experimenting and evaluating approaches. In: di Castri, F.; Baker, F.W.G.; Hadley, M. (eds.), Ecology in practice. Vol. 1. ecosystem management, pp. 1–22. Tycooly, Dublin and Unesco, Paris 1984.Google Scholar
  28. di Castri, F.; Hadley, M.: Enhancing the credibility of ecology: can research be made more comparable and predictive? GeoJournal 11, 4, 321–338 (1985)Google Scholar
  29. di Castri, F.; Hadley, M.; Damlamian, J.: MAB: The Man and Biosphere (MAB) Program as an evolving system. Ambio 10, 2–3, 52–57 (1981)Google Scholar
  30. Fedra, K.: Interactive water quality simulation in a regional framework: a management oriented approach to lake and watershed modelling. Ecological Modelling 21, 209–232 (1984)Google Scholar
  31. Fedra, K.; Maini, J.S.: Sustainable use and management of the international biosphere reserve: Neusiedlersee/Lake Fertö. IIASA, Laxenburg 1984.Google Scholar
  32. Frankel, E.: Energy and social change: an historian's perspective. Policy Sciences 14, 59–73 (1981)Google Scholar
  33. Giacomini, V.; Hinrichsen, D.: New perspectives on the eternal city. Ambio 10, 2–3, 79–85 (1981)Google Scholar
  34. Glaser, G.; Damlamian, J.: Improving the scientific basis for land management in developing countries: a case study in arid northern Kenya. Environmental Professional 7, 143–153 (1985)Google Scholar
  35. Guillaumet, J.L.; Couturier, G.; Dosso, H. (eds.): Recherche et aménagement en milieu forestier tropical humide: le Project Tai de Côte-d'Ivoire. Notes Techniques du MAB 15, Unesco, Paris 1984.Google Scholar
  36. Hadjej, M.S.; Hadji, A.; Bouhawach, T.: Integration of market and subsistence economies and its ecological consequences in grazing and marginal lands of the arid zones of Tunisia. In: di Castri, F.; Baker, F.W.G.; Hadley, M. (eds.), Ecology in practice. Vol. 1. Ecosystem management, pp. 288–305. Tycooly, Dublin and Unesco, Paris 1984.Google Scholar
  37. Halffter, G.: Biosphere reserves and national parks: complementary systems of natural protection. Impact of Science on Society 30, 269–277 (1980)Google Scholar
  38. Hall, C.A.S.; DeAngelis, D.L.: Models in ecology: paradigms found or paradigms lost? Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 66, 3, 339–346 (1985)Google Scholar
  39. Herrera, R.; Jordan, C.F.; Klinge, H.; Medina, E.: Amazon ecosystems. Their structure and functioning with particular emphasis on nutrients. Interciencia 3, 223–232 (1978)Google Scholar
  40. Holdgate, M.W.: Information needs for the decision-making process. In: di Castri, F.; Baker, F.W.G.; Hadley, M. (eds.), Ecology in practice. Vol. 2. The social response, pp. 249–263. Tycooly, Dublin and Unesco, Paris 1984.Google Scholar
  41. Holling, C.S. (ed.): Adaptive environmental assessment and management. Wiley, Chichester 1978.Google Scholar
  42. Holling, C.S.: Predicting the unpredictable. Is it possible to identify the variables that trigger surprise and change? Unesco Courier, August-September 1982, 60–63 (1982)Google Scholar
  43. Holling, C.S.: Perceiving and managing the complexity of ecological systems. United Nations University Newsletter 8, 3, May 1985, 6 (1985)Google Scholar
  44. Hughes, P.J.; Hope, G.; Latham, M.; Brookfield, M.: Prehistoric man-induced degradation of the Lakeba landscape: evidence from two inland swamps. In: Brookfield, M. (ed.), Lakeba: environmental change, population dynamics and resource use, pp. 93–110. Unesco-UNFPA Fiji Island Reports 5, Australian National University, for Unesco, Canberra 1979.Google Scholar
  45. IIASA: Expect the unexpected. An adaptive approach to environmental management. Executive Report 1, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg 1979.Google Scholar
  46. IIASA: Options, Spring 1982. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg 1982.Google Scholar
  47. India Department of Environment: Proceedings of 2nd annual workshop of MAB projects. New Delhi, 23 – 25 March 1984. Department of Environment, New Delhi 1984.Google Scholar
  48. Issar, A.S.: A space-time-mind continuum. Speculations in Science and Technology 3, 595–601 (1980)Google Scholar
  49. Jackson, J.B.; Steiner, F.R.: Human ecology for land-use planning. Urban Ecology 9, 177–194 (1985)Google Scholar
  50. Jacques, G. (ed.): Recherches sur l'environnement rural: bilan et perspective. Actes du colloque. Programme Interdisciplinaire de Recherche sur l'Environnement. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris 1985.Google Scholar
  51. Jantsch, E.: Technological planning and social future. Cassel Business Programmes, London 1972.Google Scholar
  52. Kartawinata, K.; Soedjito, H.; Jessup, T.; Vayda, A.P.; Colfer, C.J.P.: The impact of development on interactions between people and forests in East Kalimantan: a comparison of two areas of Kenyah Dayak. IUCN Occasional Papers 4, Supplement 7, 87–95 (1984)Google Scholar
  53. Latham, M.; Brookfield, H.C.: Iles Fidji orientales. Etude du milieu naturel, de son utilisation et de son évolution sous l'influence humain/The eastern islands of Fiji. A study of the natural environment, its use and man's influence on its evolution. Travaux et documents de l'ORSTOM No. 162, ORSTOM, Paris 1983.Google Scholar
  54. Léna, P.: Le développement des activités humaines. In: Guillaumet, J.L.; Couturier, G.; Dosso, H. (eds.), Recherche et aménagement en milieu forestier tropical humide: le Project Tai de Côte-d'Ivoire, pp. 59–112. Notes Techniques du MAB 15, Unesco, Paris 1984.Google Scholar
  55. Lisle, E.A.: Validation in the social sciences by international comparison. International Social Science Journal 103, 19–29 (1985)Google Scholar
  56. Lusigi, W.J.; Glaser, G.: Desertification and nomadism. A pilot approach in eastern Africa. Nature and Resources 20, 1, 21–31 (1984)Google Scholar
  57. Miller, A.: Cognitive styles and environmental problem-solving. International Journal of Environmental Studies 26, 21–31 (1985)Google Scholar
  58. Moser, W.; Peterson, J.: Limits to Obergurgl's growth. Ambio 10, 2–3, 68–72 (1981)Google Scholar
  59. Newcombe, K.; Pohai, T.: The Lae project: an ecological approach to Third World urbanization. Ambio 10, 2–3, 73–78 (1981)Google Scholar
  60. Nicholson, M: The ecological breakthrough. New Scientist, 25 November 1976, 460–463 (1976)Google Scholar
  61. Norton, G.A.; Walker, B.H.: A decision analysis approach to savanna management. Journal of Environmental Management 21, 15–31 (1985)Google Scholar
  62. Passmore, J.: Man's responsibility for nature. Ecological problems and western traditions. Scribner, New York 1974.Google Scholar
  63. Perry, J.S.: Interantional institutions: managing the world environment. Environment 28, 1, 10–15 and 37–40 (1986)Google Scholar
  64. Platt, J.R.: Strong inference. Science 146 (3642), 16 October 1965, 347–353 (1964)Google Scholar
  65. Prigogine, I.: From being to becoming: time and complexity in the physical sciences. Freeman, San Francisco 1980.Google Scholar
  66. Ralf Yorque: Notes for a report: the analysis of surprise. Mimeographed. Institute of Resource Ecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver 1986.Google Scholar
  67. Rezsohazy, R.: Recent social developments and changes in attitudes to time. International Social Science Journal 107, 33–48 (1986)Google Scholar
  68. Rittel, H.W.J.: Webber, M.M.: Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4, 155–169 (1973)Google Scholar
  69. Roederer, J.G.: Tearing down disciplinary barriers. Renewable Resources Journal 3, 4, 14–19 (1985)Google Scholar
  70. Sajise, P.E.: Strategies for transdisciplinary research on ecosystem management: the case of the UPLB Upland Hydroecology Program. In: Rambo, A.T.; Sajise, P.E. (eds.), An introduction to human ecology research on agricultural systems in Southeast Asia, pp. 312–327. University of the Philippines, Los Banos 1985.Google Scholar
  71. Schmink, M.: The scope of MAB: an analysis of projects sponsored by US-MAB Directorate for Tropical Forests. Mimeographed. University of Florida, Gainesville 1986.Google Scholar
  72. Sebillote, M.: Changement écologique et socio-économique en région de grande culture: le cas du canton du Guiscard (Oise). In: Jacques, G. (ed.), Recherches sur l'environnement rural: bilan et perspective, pp. 40–59. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris 1985.Google Scholar
  73. Sonntag, N.C.; Bunnell, P.; Everitt, R.R.; McNamee, P.; Staley, M.: Review and evaluation of Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management 1982. Environmental and Social Systems Analysts, for Environment Canada, Vancouver 1982.Google Scholar
  74. Southwood, T.R.E.: The state of ecology. Science 228, 871–873 (1985).Google Scholar
  75. Spooner, B.: Ecology in perspective; the human context of ecological research. International Social Science Journal 93, 395–410 (1982)Google Scholar
  76. Spooner, B.: The MAB approach: problems, clarifications and a proposal. In: di Castri, F.; Baker, F.W.G.; Hadley, M. (eds.), Ecology in practice. Vol. 2. The social response, pp. 324–339. Tycooly, Dublin and Unesco, Paris 1984a.Google Scholar
  77. Spooner, B.: Ecology in development: a rationale for three-dimensional policy. United Nations University, Tokyo 1984b.Google Scholar
  78. Spooner, B.: MAB urban and human ecology digest. Unesco, Paris 1986.Google Scholar
  79. Swift, M.J. (ed.): Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility (TSBF): planning for research. Biology International, Special Issue No. 9, International Union of Biological Sciences, Paris 1985.Google Scholar
  80. Unesco: Task force on the contribution of the social sciences to the MAB Programme. MAB Report Series No. 17, Unesco, Paris 1974.Google Scholar
  81. Unesco: International Co-ordinating Council of the Programme on Man and the Biosphere. Seventh session. 30 September –2 October 1981. Final Report. MAB Report Series No. 53, Unesco, Paris 1981a.Google Scholar
  82. Unesco: Ecology in Action: an exhibit. Unesco, Paris 1981b.Google Scholar
  83. Unesco: Task force on methods and concepts for studying man-environment interactions. MAB Report Series No. 55, Unesco, Paris 1983.Google Scholar
  84. Unesco: Programme on Man and the Biosphere. General Scientific Advisory Panel. Final Report. MAB Report Series No. 59. Unesco, Paris 1986.Google Scholar
  85. Unesco: Programme on Man and the Biosphere. General Scientific Advisory Panel. Final Report. MAB Report Series N°59. Unesco, Paris 1986.Google Scholar
  86. Vayda, A.P.: Progressive contextualization: a method for integrated social and biological research in the Man and Biosphere (MAB) Program. In: Lee Su Lee; Lai Food See; Abd. Rahman Md. Derus; Sheikh Ali Abod (eds.), Proceedings of workshop on ecological basis for rational resource utilization in the humid tropics of Southeast Asia, pp. 13–28. Universiti Pertanian Malaysia, Serdang 1982.Google Scholar
  87. Vayda, A.P.: Progressive contextualization: methods for research in human ecology. Human Ecology 11, 3, 265–281 (1983)Google Scholar
  88. Vayda, A.P.: Holism and individualism in ecological anthropology. Reviews in Anthropology 13, 4 (1986, in press)Google Scholar
  89. Whyte, A.: The integration of natural and social sciences in the MAB Programme. International Social Science Journal 93, 411–426 (1982)Google Scholar
  90. Whyte, A.: Integration of natural and social sciences in environmental research: a case study of the MAB Programme. In: di Castri, F.; Baker, F.W.G.; Hadley, M. (eds.), Ecology in practice. Vol. 2. The social response, pp. 298–323. Tycooly, Dublin and Unesco, Paris 1984a.Google Scholar
  91. Whyte, A.V.: Community participation: neither panacea nor myth. In: Bourne, P. (ed.), Water and sanitation: economic and sociological perspectives, pp. 221–241. Academic Press, New York 1984b.Google Scholar
  92. Whyte, A.: Ecological approaches to urban systems: retrospect and prospect. Nature and Resources, 21, 1, 13–20 (1985)Google Scholar
  93. Whyte, A.V.; Burton, I. (eds.): Environmental risk assessment. SCOPE 15. Wiley, Chichester 1980.Google Scholar
  94. Whyte, A.; Hadley, M.; Glaser, G.: Science and regional planning: experiences in communication from arid zones, tropical islands and alphine valleys. In: Maini, J.S. (ed.), Dialoguing with decision-markers, Background papers presented to IIASA-Unesco/MAB task force meeting (Laxenburg, 7–10 October 1984). PaperGoogle Scholar
  95. Wiens, J.A.; Crawford, C.S.; Gosz, J.R.: Boundary dynamics: a conceptual framework for studying landscape ecosystems. Oikos 45, 421–427 (1985)Google Scholar
  96. Young, M.D.: Rangeland administration. In: Harrington, G.N.; Wilson, A.D.; Young, M.D. (eds.), Management of Australia's rangelands, pp. 157–170. CSIRO, East Melbourne 1984.Google Scholar
  97. Zube, E. (ed.): Social sciences, interdisciplinary research and the US Man and Biosphere Program. Department of State, Washington, D.C. 1980.Google Scholar
  98. Zube, E.: Increasing the effective participation of social scientists in environmental research and planning. International Social Sciences Journal 93, 481–492 (1982)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© D. Reidel Publishing Company 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Castri Francesco di 
    • 1
  • Hadley Malcolm 
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre d'Etudes Phytosociologiques et Ecologiques Louis Emberger (CNRS-CEPE)Montpellier CedexFrance
  2. 2.Division of Ecological SciencesUnescoParisFrance

Personalised recommendations