Ecosystem health and malfunctions: an organisational perspective
- PMID: 37720550
- PMCID: PMC10501940
- DOI: 10.1007/s10539-023-09927-9
Ecosystem health and malfunctions: an organisational perspective
Abstract
A recent idea of "ecosystem health" was introduced in the 1970s and 1980s to draws attention to the fact that ecosystems can become ill because of a reduction of properties such as primary productivity, functions and diversity of interactions among system components. Starting from the 1990s, this idea has been deeply criticized by authors who argued that, insofar as ecosystems show many differences with respect to organismic features, these two kinds of systems cannot share a typical organismic property such as health. In recent years, an organisational approach in philosophy of biology and ecology argued that both organisms and ecosystems may share a fundamental characteristic despite their differences, namely, organisational closure. Based on this kind of closure, scholars have also discussed health and malfunctional states in organisms. In this paper, we examine the possibility of expanding such an organisational approach to health and malfunctions to the ecological domain. Firstly, we will see that a malfunction is related to a lower effectiveness in the functional behaviour of some biotic components with respect to other systemic components. We will then show how some introduced species do not satisfactorily interact in an organisational closure with other ecosystem components, thus posing a threat to the self-maintenance of the ecosystem in which they are found. Accordingly, we will argue that an ecosystem can be said to be healthy when it is a vital environment organisationally grounded on its intrinsic capacity to ensure, under favourable conditions, appropriate functional behaviours for ecosystem components and ecosystem self-maintenance.
Keywords: Ecosystem; Health; Malfunction; Normativity; Organisational approach.
© The Author(s) 2023.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of interestThe authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Similar articles
-
Trophic-dynamic considerations in relating species diversity to ecosystem resilience.Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2000 Aug;75(3):347-76. doi: 10.1017/s0006323100005508. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2000. PMID: 11034015 Review.
-
From individuals to ecosystem function: toward an integration of evolutionary and ecosystem ecology.Ecology. 2008 Sep;89(9):2436-45. doi: 10.1890/07-1030.1. Ecology. 2008. PMID: 18831165
-
What can ecosystems learn? Expanding evolutionary ecology with learning theory.Biol Direct. 2015 Dec 8;10:69. doi: 10.1186/s13062-015-0094-1. Biol Direct. 2015. PMID: 26643685 Free PMC article.
-
The 'Is' and the 'Ought' of the Animal Organism: Hegel's Account of Biological Normativity.Hist Philos Life Sci. 2022 Apr 29;44(2):17. doi: 10.1007/s40656-022-00498-8. Hist Philos Life Sci. 2022. PMID: 35488068 Free PMC article.
-
H. A. Gleason's 'individualistic concept' and theory of animal communities: a continuing controversy.Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 1995 May;70(2):317-57. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185x.1995.tb01069.x. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 1995. PMID: 7605849 Review.
References
-
- Acosta AL (2015) Bombus terrestris chegará ao Brasil? Um estudo preditivo sobre uma invasão em potencial. Dissertation, University of São Paulo. 10.11606/T.41.2015.tde-22092015-080256
-
- Akinnawo SO. Eutrophication: Causes, consequences, physical, chemical and biological techniques for mitigation strategies. Environ Chall. 2023;12:100733. doi: 10.1016/j.envc.2023.100733. - DOI
-
- Archibald S, et al. Biological and geophysical feedbacks with fire in the earth system. Environ Res Lett. 2018;13:033003. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aa9ead. - DOI
-
- Barandiaran XE, Di Paolo E, Rohde M. Defining agency: individuality, normativity, asymmetry, and spatio-temporality in action. Adapt Behav. 2009;17(5):367–386. doi: 10.1177/1059712309343819. - DOI
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources