Skip to main content
Log in

Biocomplexity in Coupled Natural–Human Systems: A Multidimensional Framework

  • Published:
Ecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • TFH Allen TB Starr (1982) Hierarchy: perspectives for ecological complexity University of Chicago Press Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • TFH Allen TW Hoekstra (1992) Towards a unified ecology Columbia University Press New York

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • W Ascher (2001) ArticleTitleCoping with complexity and organizational interests in natural resource management Ecosystems 4 742–57 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s10021-001-0043-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SY Auyang (1998) Foundations of complex-systems theories in economics, evolutionary biology, and statistical physics Cambridge University Press Cambridge (UK)

    Google Scholar 

  • P Bak (1996) How nature works: the science of self-organized criticality Springer-Verlag New York

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ML Cadenasso STA Pickett KG Weathers CG Jones (2003) ArticleTitleA framework for a theory of ecological boundaries BioScience 53 750–58

    Google Scholar 

  • M Cadwallader (1988) ArticleTitleUrban geography and social theory Urban Geog 9 227–51

    Google Scholar 

  • AB Carey SM Wilson (2001) ArticleTitleInduced spatial heterogeneity in forest canopies: responses of small mammals J Wildlife Manage 65 1014–27

    Google Scholar 

  • SR Carpenter JF Kitchell (Eds) (1988) Complex interactions in lake communities Springer-Verlag New York

    Google Scholar 

  • R Colwell (1998) ArticleTitleBalancing the biocomplexity of the planet’s living systems: a twenty-first century task for science BioScience 48 786–87

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • K Cottingham (2002) ArticleTitleTackling biocomplexity: the role of people, tools, and scale BioScience 52 793–99

    Google Scholar 

  • A Covich (2000) ArticleTitleBiocomplexity: the need to unite disciplines BioScience 50 1035

    Google Scholar 

  • F Csillag S Kabos (2002) ArticleTitleWavelets, boundaries and the analysis of landscape pattern Ecoscience 9 177–90

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • KJ Gaston TM Blackburn (2000) Pattern and process in macroecology Blackwell Science Cambridge (MA)

    Google Scholar 

  • PM Groffman GE Likens (Eds) (1994) Integrated regional models: interactions between humans and their environment Chapman & Hall New York

    Google Scholar 

  • LH Gunderson (2000) ArticleTitleEcological resilience—in theory and application Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31 425–39 Occurrence Handle10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CS Holling (2001) ArticleTitleUnderstanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems Ecosystems 4 390–405 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s10021-001-0101-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • K Jax CG Jones STA Pickett (1998) ArticleTitleThe self-identity of ecological units Oikos 82 253–64

    Google Scholar 

  • S Johnson (2001) Emergence: the connected lives of ants, brains, cities, and software Simon & Schuster New York

    Google Scholar 

  • P Krugman (1996) The self-organizing economy Blackwell Maiden (MA)

    Google Scholar 

  • R Lewin (1992) Complexity: life at the edge of chaos Macmillan New York

    Google Scholar 

  • H Li J Reynolds (1995) ArticleTitleOn definition and quantification of heterogeneity Oikos 73 280–84

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • WK Michener TJ Baerwald P Firth MA Palmer JL Rosenberger EA Sandlin H Zimmerman (2001) ArticleTitleDefining and unraveling biocomplexity BioScience 51 1018–23

    Google Scholar 

  • RF Noss (1990) ArticleTitleIndicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach Conserv Biol 4 355–64 Occurrence Handle10.1111/j.1523-1739.1990.tb00309.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RF Noss AY Cooperrider (1994) Saving nature’s legacy: protecting and restoring biodiversity Island Press Washington (DC)

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • STA Pickett J Kolasa CG Jones (1994) Ecological understanding: the nature of theory and the theory of nature Academic Press San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • EO Wilson FM Peter (1988) Biodiversity National Academy Press Washington (DC)

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

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

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. T. A. Pickett.

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-004-0098-7

Keywords

Navigation