Biodiversity Group Archive

Biodiversity Bibliography by Steve Polasky, our founder.

Biodiversity and Biocomplexity: Paradigms Lost? Session Summaries

• Part II, Friday, January 12, 2007

  A panel discussion addressed the questions, "Has 20 years of biodiversity research and discussion had an effect on natural resources management? How do biodiversity considerations effect management and activities in the agricultural, forest, and marine sectors?"

  • Conditions in marine environments - Mark Hixon, Zoology, OSU

    Hixon focused his comments around the importance of biodiversity from marine environments in producing food, medicine, chemicals, and ecosystem services, noting that these contributions represented 60% of the economic value from the biosphere. He then discussed approaches for protecting biodiversity and assessed how well these approaches were working. Hixon finished by recommending an article on research priorities for protecting marine biodiversity.

  • Experiences in forestry - Rick Fletcher, Forestry Extension, OSU

    Fletcher pointed out that forest biodiversity had not been carefully reviewed. Public forests are promoting biodiversity with less harvest and more attention to ecosystem services. Private forests are increasingly considering certification, in which biodiversity is an important consideration. Much of forest biodiversity has a very local dimension. Biodiversity is included in programs like the Corvallis Greenbelt, Benton County's Natural Features Overlay and Wildlife Habitat Zoning, and the Cardwell Hills Cooperative Landowner Plan sponsored by Oregon Trout and the Marys River Watershed Council working with local landowners.

  • Considerations in agriculture - Karen Strohmeyer, Cascade Pacific RC&D

    Strohmeyer emphasized the importance of private lands in terrestrial biodiversity conservation. Interest in biodiversity is highly specific to the farm situation. Incentives are needed to get biodiversity conservation on private lands. Many of the Farm Bill programs promote biodiversity in riparian, wetland, and groundwater management. Achieving biodiversity conservation goals requires regional and watershed integration in creating and implementing habitat conservation plans.

  ---

• Part I, Friday, September 29th, 2006

  Mary Santelmann introduced the discussion by giving some of the history of the Biodiversity Group, the biodiversity concept, and why we are asking these questions now. Concern for biodiversity is about 20-years old. During this time has biodiversity been integrated into scientific practice or has it been superceded by other concepts and topics?

  The term biodiversity was coined by Walter Rosen in the early 1980s, and Edward O. Wilson of Harvard University edited the proceedings of the first American forum on biological diversity, organized by the National Research Council in 1986. Biodiversity increased consciousness of species extinction that was occurring during the final decades of the 20th century.

  Biodiversity has been adopted as a theme by NGOs. For example, the Biodiversity Economics site was originally developed by IUCN. The site has been revamped and is now managed in association with the World Wildlife Fund.

  The 1990s appear to have been the high point of activity that focused specifically on biodiversity as an endpoint. Since then EPA has narrowed its focus significantly. In EPA, interest in the concept of biodiversity is being replaced by OMB pressure for "accountability". That means regulatory endpoints and other measurable indications that EPA actions are doing something. Biodiversity is only suggested as an EPA concern by language in the Clean Water Act, for example, about the health and integrity of the nation's fish and wildlife being a reason, among others, for desiring clean water. The Forest Service (at least the PNW station) had a short term biodiversity program the lasted only a few years before it ended with two conferences and their publications, but no plans to proceed. The USFWS GAP program continues but certainly with less visibility and flair than earlier, and one has to ask whether their work has had any important effect on federal policy or management (as opposed to use of their data by states and NGOs). Nevertheless, a symposium issue, "Biodiversity," of the Northwestern Naturalist (87[1]:1-85, Spring 2006) was passed out at the session.

  She then introduced the panelists.

  Bill Robbins, History
  Selina Heppell, Fisheries & Wildlife
  Bill Jaeger, Agricultural & Resource Economics

  The panel began with each panelist looking at the status of biodiversity and biocomplexity as concepts. Are they useful? Are the relevant in thinking about today's ecological problems? How do biodiversity and biocomplexity affect theory and practice in a variety of disciplines? Have science and society moved past an interest in biodiversity and/or biocomplexity? Have other concepts superseded biodiversity and biocomplexity?

  Robbins emphasized the invasive plants brought by Euroamericans to the Northwest. He identified the ironies that history points out. For example, the Willamette Valley has changed from the native grass prairies that early settlers marveled at, to being the leading exporter of non-native grasses to the world market. Robbins also raised the issue of how the capitalist values of domination of nature, commodification of nature, and the creation of winners and losers in economic activity.

  Heppell noted that from a marine scientist's perspective, biodiversity was an essential component of ecosystem management. In Heppell's view biodiversity is gaining momentum. Biodiversity has become a key concept in conservation biology, which has a record of success in improving ecological conditions. Heppell noted that biodiversity is sometimes too general and over simplistically presented. Biocomplexity is emerging as a concept to correct for this simplicity. Problems remain in the oceans such as offshore aquaculture.

  Jaeger dealt with misunderstandings about the perspectives of economists. He pointed out that economists do not question people's values. They take people's preferences as given and objectively and scientifically review changes to human welfare from different policy approaches. Jaeger identified two groups of ecological economists. One is more European where the approach is more systemic and interdisciplinary. In the US, some ecological economists pursue an advocacy agenda and have left the scientific approach. In looking at biodiversity and biocomplexity from an economic perspective, flows (income) and stocks (assets) have to be looked at together. While biodiversity problems are complex, Jaeger noted the solution of the ozone hole resulted because policy prescriptions were framed to improve the welfare of the major interests involved.

  Discussion followed the panelist's presentations. Some of the issues raised include the difference between the operation of capitalism and the science of economics. Many people confuse the science of economics with the practice of capitalism.

  Biodiversity has been presented as species abundance and richness. Biodiversity is much more complex than this and this complexity has not been adequately explained to the public.

  One of the common misunderstandings is that invasive species lower biodiversity when measured in terms of abundance and richness. The biologists present noted that invasive species tend to increase biodiversity when measured this way. At the species and population level, Oregon currently has more fish biodiversity than at the time of European settlement, although the long term trend is not known

  The participants also debated the value of quantitative scientific results versus well crafted story in terms of communicating principles and findings about biodiversity.

  Science and policy tend to follow fashions. There was considerable discussion about how biodiversity might be positioned in this fawning over fashions.

  Biological systems change over many time scales. For many of topics related to biodiversity, the temporal record is too short to make firm conclusions. The Pacific Northwest has experienced many significant ecological changes even since the Pleistocene. These have been driven by larger and longer global processes and have had impacts greater than the settlement of the region by those from a European background.

  In general summary, history matters, time matters, scientific evidence matters, how issues are framed matters, public understanding and values matter, and biodiversity matters. Because biodiversity and biocomplexity almost certainly promote resilience and sustainability, these topics will continue to be important.