Abstract
As defined by Ascher, biocomplexity results from a “multiplicity of interconnected relationships and levels.” However, no integrative framework yet exists to facilitate the application of this concept to coupled human–natural systems. Indeed, the term “biocomplexity” is still used primarily as a creative and provocative metaphor. To help advance its utility, we present a framework that focuses on linkages among different disciplines that are often used in studies of coupled human–natural systems, including the ecological, physical, and socioeconomic sciences. The framework consists of three dimensions of complexity: spatial, organizational, and temporal. Spatial complexity increases as the focus changes from the type and number of the elements of spatial heterogeneity to an explicit configuration of the elements. Similarly, organizational complexity increases as the focus shifts from unconnected units to connectivity among functional units. Finally, temporal complexity increases as the current state of a system comes to rely more and more on past states, and therefore to reflect echoes, legacies, and evolving indirect effects of those states. This three-dimensional, conceptual volume of biocomplexity enables connections between models that derive from different disciplines to be drawn at an appropriate level of complexity for integration.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
TFH Allen TB Starr (1982) Hierarchy: perspectives for ecological complexity University of Chicago Press Chicago
TFH Allen TW Hoekstra (1992) Towards a unified ecology Columbia University Press New York
C Amoros G Bornette (2002) ArticleTitleConnectivity and biocomplexity in waterbodies of riverine floodplains Freshwater Biol 47 761–76 Occurrence Handle10.1046/j.1365-2427.2002.00905.x
W Ascher (2001) ArticleTitleCoping with complexity and organizational interests in natural resource management Ecosystems 4 742–57 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s10021-001-0043-y
SY Auyang (1998) Foundations of complex-systems theories in economics, evolutionary biology, and statistical physics Cambridge University Press Cambridge (UK)
P Bak (1996) How nature works: the science of self-organized criticality Springer-Verlag New York
FJ Bruggeman HV Westerhoff FC Boogerd (2002) ArticleTitleBioComplexity: a pluralist research strategy is necessary for a mechanistic explanation of the “live” state Philos Psychol 15 411–40 Occurrence Handle10.1080/0951508021000041996
ML Cadenasso STA Pickett KG Weathers CG Jones (2003) ArticleTitleA framework for a theory of ecological boundaries BioScience 53 750–58
M Cadwallader (1988) ArticleTitleUrban geography and social theory Urban Geog 9 227–51
AB Carey SM Wilson (2001) ArticleTitleInduced spatial heterogeneity in forest canopies: responses of small mammals J Wildlife Manage 65 1014–27
SR Carpenter JF Kitchell (Eds) (1988) Complex interactions in lake communities Springer-Verlag New York
R Colwell (1998) ArticleTitleBalancing the biocomplexity of the planet’s living systems: a twenty-first century task for science BioScience 48 786–87
Colwell RR. 1999. Complexity and connectivity: a new cartography for science and engineering. Address to American Geophysical Union fall meeting. San Francisco, CA, USA, 13 December, 1999. Available online at: http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/forum/colwell/ra991213agu.htm. Accessed 6 February 2002
B Commoner (1971) The closing circle: nature, man and technology Bantam New York
K Cottingham (2002) ArticleTitleTackling biocomplexity: the role of people, tools, and scale BioScience 52 793–99
A Covich (2000) ArticleTitleBiocomplexity: the need to unite disciplines BioScience 50 1035
F Csillag S Kabos (2002) ArticleTitleWavelets, boundaries and the analysis of landscape pattern Ecoscience 9 177–90
B Drayton RB Primack (1996) ArticleTitlePlant species lost in an isolated conservation area in metropolitan Boston from 1894 to 1993 Conserv Biol 10 30–9 Occurrence Handle10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10010030.x
M Fortin B Boots F Csillag T Remmel (2003) ArticleTitleOn the role of spatial stochastic models in understanding landscape indices in ecology Oikos 102 IssueID1 203–12 Occurrence Handle10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12447.x
TM Frost DL DeAngelis SM Bartell DJ Hall SH Hurblert (1988) Scale in the design and interpretation of aquatic community research SR Carpenter (Eds) Complex interactions in lake communities Springer-Verlag New York 229–58
KJ Gaston TM Blackburn (2000) Pattern and process in macroecology Blackwell Science Cambridge (MA)
PM Groffman GE Likens (Eds) (1994) Integrated regional models: interactions between humans and their environment Chapman & Hall New York
LH Gunderson (2000) ArticleTitleEcological resilience—in theory and application Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31 425–39 Occurrence Handle10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.425
CS Holling (2001) ArticleTitleUnderstanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems Ecosystems 4 390–405 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s10021-001-0101-5
K Jax CG Jones STA Pickett (1998) ArticleTitleThe self-identity of ecological units Oikos 82 253–64
S Johnson (2001) Emergence: the connected lives of ants, brains, cities, and software Simon & Schuster New York
P Krugman (1996) The self-organizing economy Blackwell Maiden (MA)
R Lewin (1992) Complexity: life at the edge of chaos Macmillan New York
H Li J Reynolds (1995) ArticleTitleOn definition and quantification of heterogeneity Oikos 73 280–84
J Mervis (1999) ArticleTitleBiocomplexity blooms in NSF’s research garden Science 286 2068–69 Occurrence Handle10.1126/science.286.5447.2068 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaK1MXotFGnurg%3D Occurrence Handle10617417
WK Michener TJ Baerwald P Firth MA Palmer JL Rosenberger EA Sandlin H Zimmerman (2001) ArticleTitleDefining and unraveling biocomplexity BioScience 51 1018–23
RF Noss (1990) ArticleTitleIndicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach Conserv Biol 4 355–64 Occurrence Handle10.1111/j.1523-1739.1990.tb00309.x
RF Noss AY Cooperrider (1994) Saving nature’s legacy: protecting and restoring biodiversity Island Press Washington (DC)
STA Pickett ML Cadenasso (2002) ArticleTitleEcosystem as a multidimensional concept: meaning, model and metaphor Ecosystems 5 1–10 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s10021-001-0051-y
STA Pickett KH Rogers (1997) Patch dynamics: the transformation of landscape structure and function JA Bissonette (Eds) Wildlife and landscape ecology: effects of pattern and scale Springer-Verlag New York 101–27
STA Pickett J Kolasa CG Jones (1994) Ecological understanding: the nature of theory and the theory of nature Academic Press San Diego
J Wiens (2000) Ecological heterogeneity: an ontogeny of concepts and approaches MJ Hutchings EA John AJA Stewart (Eds) Ecological consequences of habitate hetrogenecity: the annual symposium of the British Ecological Society Blackwell Malden (MA) 9–31
EO Wilson FM Peter (1988) Biodiversity National Academy Press Washington (DC)
JT Wootton (2002) ArticleTitleIndirect effects in complex ecosystems: recent progress and future challenges J Sea Res 48 157–72 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S1385-1101(02)00149-1
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation through its support for the Baltimore Ecosystem Study LTER (DEB 97-14835). This is a contribution to the program of the Institute of Ecosystem Studies, with partial support from the Mary Flagler Cary Charitable Trust and the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. We also thank the organizers of the Olga Nalbandov Symposium at the University of Illinois for giving us the opportunity to compose these thoughts.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pickett, S., Cadenasso, M. & Grove, J. Biocomplexity in Coupled Natural–Human Systems: A Multidimensional Framework. Ecosystems 8, 225–232 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-004-0098-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-004-0098-7