Ecological literacy and psychographics: lifestyle contributors to ecological knowledge and understanding

Knowledge and understanding about how the ecological systems of the Earth support life form the foundation for ecological literacy, which, in turn, is of critical importance for sustainability. There is widespread concern that levels of ecological literacy within many contemporary human societies are too low to enable effective decision-making about how to live sustainably. This paper presents and discusses the findings of an ecological literacy assessment of South Australian adults. The assessment tested for knowledge and understanding of ecological systems and interconnections with human society. Analyses revealed significant relationships between assessment scores and a range of value-based and behavioural characteristics. Such characteristics included the value placed on nature, time spent outdoors and in nature, involvement in nature-based activities, and perceived sources of ecological knowledge and understanding. Higher average scores were correlated with higher values accorded to involvement in outdoor activities, importance of the outdoors to enjoyment of life, importance of nature in the household, volunteer environmental activity and growing food. Higher scores were also correlated with higher education, research activities, outdoor lifestyles, place-based experiences, volunteer activities, mentors and colleagues, and books and magazines. Lower scores were achieved by those who considered media, natural disasters and environmental marketing to be major contributors to their ecological knowledge. These findings contribute to a broader study of the relationships between ecological literacy and a range of both socio-demographic and psychographic characteristics. They invite serious consideration from any society that values the participation of an informed population with the capacity to make sustainable environmental decisions.     

Ecological literacy and socio-demographics: who are the most eco-literate in our community,and why?

Ecological literacy is founded upon knowledge and understanding about how the ecological systems of the Earth function and support life. A widespread concern that levels of ecological literacy within many contemporary human communities are inadequate to enable effective decision-making about sustainable ways of living led to a rigorous and carefully designed assessment of over 1000 South Australian adults from diverse sectors including industry, government, nongovernment, business and community organisations. This assessment tested for local and global knowledge, including an understanding of the interconnection of natural systems with human society. Quantitative analyses revealed significant relationships between scores and a range of socio-demographic characteristics. Scores varied significantly with gender, age, education, employment, place of growing up and time spent in South Australia (SA). Highest average scores were found in males, middle-age groups, the most highly educated, those with science-related educational backgrounds, those working in environment-related fields, those who grew up in small town environments rather than in large towns or cities and in those who had spent more than 10 years in SA. These findings contribute to a broader study of factors associated with ecologically literate individuals and groups within the western and industrialised adult community of SA. They form a valuable foundation on which to build efforts to further understand and develop ecological literacy within our citizenry and governing bodies.     

War and sustainability

SUMMARY

In order to use the planet's ecological life-support systems sustainably, damage to them must be both prevented and repaired. However, repair requires awareness of damage which, in this case, mandates a high level of ecological literacy. Prevention of ecological damage will only be successful on a planetary scale if human society endorses precautionary practices that reduce the probability of ecosystem damage. Society is beginning to endorse precautionary practices to protect human health, which is no longer regarded as merely absence of symptoms of disease and malfunction. Health is regarded as a robust function — an approach toward optimal conditions. Similar views are beginning to emerge regarding ecosystem health, and a close link between human and ecosystem health is gaining increased recognition. However, to achieve health, ecological ‘wounds’ must be repaired, which is impossible until society ‘sees’ the wounds. After this recognition, society must become more literate on the attributes of ecosystem health. The methods and procedures are in place, but they will not be used effectively until a major paradigm shift occurs.     

Socio-environmental co-evolution: some ideas for an analytical approach

A number of scholars, mainly in ecological economics, have been attracted to the concept of co-evolution for the analysis of socio-environmental change. Yet none has adopted and developed an applied analytical approach using an explicitly evolutionary framework. This paper discusses how other scholars in economics, technological studies, organization and political science have been using evolutionary explanations and draws some lessons for ecological economics. Evolutionary is a mode of explanation based on the selective retention of renewable variation. It accounts for phenomena of structural fit and change in a variety of domains. A co-evolutionary explanation, by extension, entails two or more evolving systems whose interaction affects their evolution. Socio-environmental co-evolution involves human systems (material practices and non-material ideas and values) and non-human systems (living and physical). The challenge then is how to develop case-specific, empirical applications that define and elaborate the variants that co-evolve and specify the processes of mutual selection. Applications could benefit from existing classifications and causal propositions in the natural and social sciences. Co-evolution is part of a larger analytical toolkit for looking at complex socio-environmental problems. Although distinct, there are strong synergies, complementarities and potential for combined uses between co-evolutionary, co-dynamic and complexity-based explanations.     

Theoretical foundations of learning processes for sustainable development

Social-ecological systems are co-evolving systems. Of particular relevance are here: (1) co-evolution of the environment and governance, (2) co-evolution of technology and governance, and (3) co-evolution of human behaviour and culture. The co-evolutionary perspective has helped to understand the processes which led to the present unsustainable situation. This paper highlights different types of learning processes which occur in co-evolving systems and explores learning processes on the macro-, meso- and micro-levels for moving onto more sustainable paths. While the literature in environmental management, ecological economics or sustainability science often refers to the need for learning processes, the conceptualisation of learning and the link to learning theories is weak. This paper draws on learning theories from psychology, social psychology, education, evolutionary economics and political science and offers a first step toward theoretical foundations of learning processes for sustainable development. An improved understanding of these learning processes will provide important clues for policy recommendations on multiple scales.     

Designing for nature and sustainability

Humankind is now using natural resources more rapidly than natural systems can replace them and has been doing so for approximately two and a half decades. Moreover, both natural capital and the ecosystem services it provides are being diminished at an unprecedented rate. Finally, the human population is expected to increase by three billion by 2050. This situation is clearly unsustainable, but it can be made less so by redesigning societal wastes so that they benefit the biospheric life-support system. Nature initiates and maintains a system of energy and nutrient cycling and, if the system integrity is maintained, provides alternative and redundant means that help stabilize functional capacity. The system is composed of opportunistic individuals that compete with other individuals to acquire the resources essential to their survival. The interrelationships within this aggregation of individuals (i.e. system components) are based on energy flow. This self-organizing and self-maintaining system is increasingly stressed by human activities. Humans are a part of, not apart from, this system and are governed by the same laws of nature. In short, an ecologically-based economic system is essential to sustainable use of the planet. The planet's life-support system has been a superb model of sustainability, which humans should emulate and become a part of more than they now are. When the biospheric life-support system is stressed to the point of disequilibrium, the results are disastrous for societies, individuals and ecosystems. Evolutionary processes have produced replacement systems following the five great biological extinctions. However, the probability is high that the next replacement system will not be as suitable for humankind as the present system. Sustainable practices are intended to prevent biospheric disequilibrium and maintain the present environmental conditions so favorable to humankind, including posterity.     

生态伦理:可持续发展的伦理基础

可持续发展是始源于人类所面面临的生态危机、以人与自然关系的协调发展为基本内容的一种生态化发展模式,它所面对和需要处理的是人类发展需求无限性与自然资源有限性这一矛盾,即人类对自然的价值取向、开发强度是否符合自然规律的问题.目前学界对它的研究已突破"经济-科技-政治"等实践层面,开始深入到"观念-价值-文化"等认识论、价值论领域.生态伦理是对人与自然关系的哲学反思中应运而生的一种革命性的伦理思想,本质上属于人类社会的"观念-价值-文化"领域,其理论构成、研究对象正契合人类的可持续发展.生态伦理作为可持续发展伦理基础是可持续发展的客观要求和必然选择:①生态伦理突破传统的道德定义,将伦理关怀的对象扩展到人与自然界关系的领域,为可持续发展奠定了坚实的思想基础,提供可靠的伦理前提;②生态伦理肯定自然价值和自然权利,直接回应了在可持续发展中人为何要尊重自然价值与权利这一理论课题,为人类对大自然的价值认同寻到理论根基,使可持续发展寻找到坚实的价值支点;③生态伦理在反思和批判传统道德评价标准的基础上,提出全新的道德评价标准,为现实的可持续发展战略的设计与安排提供伦理支持和辩护.     

近十年生态工程在中国的进展

我国生态工程近 1 0多年有进一步发展 ,研究和应用对象扩展为社会 -经济 -自然复合生态系统 ,目标明确为可持续发展 ,从追求一维的经济增长或环境与自然保护 ,走向富裕、健康、文明三维一体的复合生态繁荣。在充实“整体、协调、循环、自生”的生态工程原理和生态控制论的基础上 ,总结出生态工程设计的 8项原则。方法论发展为从物理过程的量化走向生态过程的序化 ,从工程结构的优化走向生态格局的进化 ,从机器的人工智能走向人的生态智能。技术路线发展了硬件、软件、心件耦合 ;多学科、多技术的系统组合 ;调控复合生态系统全生态过程 ;寓环境保护于生产和消费中 ,寓废弃物处理于利用中 ;结构和功能纵横耦合成食物链网式、生命周期式、生态系统式等网络结构     

A modified method of ecological footprint calculation and its application

As economic and ecological support systems become more interdependent, new disciplines are needed to “bridge the gap” between human and nature. “Emergy” created by H.T. Odum is a new method for evaluating natural capital and ecosystem services. The “ecological footprint” created by Wackernagel and Rees has been promoted as a policy and planning tool for sustainability. The aim of this paper is to show a modified form of ecological footprint calculation by combining emergy analysis with conventional ecological footprint form of calculations. Our new method starts from the energy flows of a system in calculating ecological footprint and carrying capacity. Through a study of the energy flows, and using the method of emergy analysis, the energy flows of a system are translated into corresponding biological productive units. To demonstrate the mechanics of this new method, we compared our calculations with that of an original calculation of ecological footprint of a regional case. We select Gansu province in western China, as an example for application of our study. In this case the same conclusions were drawn using both methods: that Gansu province runs an ecological deficit.     

Diversity in industrial ecosystems

Within the natural world, diversity refers to the variety and variability among living organisms and the ecological complexes in which they occur. Its complexity is measured in terms of variations at genetic, species and ecosystem levels. It plays a critical role in meeting human needs while maintaining the ecological processes upon which our survival depends. This paper agues that such a natural metaphor should be considered in industrial systems in order to realise sustainable development. This article begins by describing natural biodiversity, emphasising its definition and value, and its maintenance. Next, the paper discusses the rationale and mechanisms for encouraging industrial diversity. The authors suggest that this natural metaphor provides a useful guide on how businesses in an industrial system can evolve towards greater resilience and sustainability.     

What Every Conservation Biologist Should Know about Economic Theory

Abstract: The last century has seen the ascendance of a core economic model, which we will refer to as Walrasian economics. This model is driven by the psychological assumptions that humans act only in a self‐referential and narrowly rational way and that production can be described as a self‐contained circular flow between firms and households. These assumptions have critical implications for the way economics is used to inform conservation biology. Yet the Walrasian model is inconsistent with a large body of empirical evidence about actual human behavior, and it violates a number of basic physical laws. Research in behavioral science and neuroscience shows that humans are uniquely social animals and not self‐centered rational economic beings. Economic production is subject to physical laws including the laws of thermodynamics and mass balance. In addition, some contemporary economic theory, spurred by exciting new research in human behavior and a wealth of data about the negative global impact of the human economy on natural systems, is moving toward a world view that places consumption and production squarely in its behavioral and biophysical context. We argue that abandoning the straightjacket of the Walrasian core is essential to further progress in understanding the complex, coupled interactions between the human economy and the natural world. We call for a new framework for economic theory and policy that is consistent with observed human behavior, recognizes the complex and frequently irreversible interaction between human and natural systems, and directly confronts the cumulative negative effects of the human economy on the Earth's life support systems. Biophysical economics and ecological economics are two emerging economic frameworks in this movement.     

基于生态足迹法的区域水资源生态承载力计算与评价——以珠海市为例

研究了人类社会对水资源的消耗、对自然生态环境的影响以及该影响的量化方法和量化指标,将生态足迹法引入区域水资源承载力系统,构建珠海市水资源生态承载力计算模型,分析计算水资源供给对区域经济社会发展的生态承载力,并对该地区的水资源生态承载力进行生态盈亏和敏感性评价.结果表明,总体上珠海市水资源系统呈现生态亏损,亏损率为37%,水资源生态承载呈现超载现象,珠海市城市化进程中流动人口增长对区域水资源的生态承载压力较大.研究结果还表明,将生态足迹模型运用到地区水资源承载力中具有较高的可信度,对地方尺度具有适用性.     

全球化视阈下的生态伦理学研究述论

作为人类文化的重要创新,生态伦理学研究推动了将道德延伸到自然界,通过协调各方利益,规范人类的环境态度和行为,重建人与自然的和谐关系,从而保证人类整体事业的繁荣。生态学所描述的仅仅自然界的自然生态,虽然其基本原理为生态伦理学所吸纳,但后者并非生态加伦理如此简单而已,它的研究对象更为广阔,也更为复杂。人始终是伦理学关怀的主体,其出发点是人,最终的对象也必然是包含人在内的整个自然。在伦理学层面上,人首先是社会性的,其次才是生物性的,在这一方面中国自古以来便形成了良好的生态文化传统。生态伦理的思想若要深深扎根当前所有人的心中,必须首先在全社会形成浓厚的生态文化,使环境保护的理念真正落到实处。以生态伦理为核心的生态文化必将成为人类社会生态文明建设的指南。21世纪继往开来的中国的生态伦理学应该具有清晰的价值定位,不仅需要超越生态学的全自然视角,突出人的社会性,而且需要体现社会主义的制度特征,构建自己的生态伦理话语体系。     

生态补偿理论研究现状与进展

全球生态环境问题已经引起世界各国的极大关注。生态系统及其服务的可持续性是人类社会可持续发展的决定性约束因素,人类赖以生存与发展的自然环境面临威胁,修复自然生态创伤,实施生态补偿是可持续发展的必然要求。一些生态补偿关键问题成为科学研究热点,如生态系统服务功能的价值核算、生态补偿的对象、标准、途径与方法,以及资源开发和重大工程活动的生态影响评价等。总结了国内外生态补偿相关研究成果,并进行综述,为开展生态补偿研究提供借鉴。     

Mutual information in the Tangled Nature model

We consider the concept of mutual information in ecological networks, and use this idea to analyse the Tangled Nature model of co-evolution. We show that this measure of correlation has two distinct behaviours depending on how we define the network in question: if we consider only the network of viable species this measure increases, whereas for the whole system it decreases. It is suggested that these are complimentary behaviours that show how ecosystems can become both more stable and better adapted.     

Ecological Attributes of Extinction-Prone Species: Loss of Freshwater Fishes of Virginia

I examined patterns of extirpation among Virginia's 197 historically native freshwater fish species to address the following questions: (1) Are extinction-prone species ecologically distinct? and (2) Are distinctive features similar to those identified for extinction-prone species in terrestrial systems? All species were assigned to categories for a series of attributes reflecting geographical distribution, habitat use, trophic habits, life history, size, and reproductive behavior. Associations between species that had been extirpated and those that had not were examined for each attribute. Univariate associations were observed between extirpation and three ecological attributes: diadromy, limited physiographic range, and limited range of water sizes. Species specialized with respect to multiple ecological attributes also were especially likely to be extirpated. These associations reflected the effects of reduced habitat area and increased isolation (insularization), which are also important determinants of extinction in terrestrial systems. Multivariate analyses suggested that extirpated species were ecologically similar to each other, but were not completely distinct from the nonextirpated fauna. My results suggest that ecological knowledge of species can help identify extinction-prone species and provide a basis for proactive conservation. Current approaches to conservation, which are largely reactive and piecemeal, are inadequate to protect biodiversity. Because aquatic degradation is complex and pervasive, conservation of aquatic biodiversity requires proactive comprehensive approaches to water resource management, including emphasis on protecting the ecological integrity of entire systems.     

制度-技术-资源协同影响生态经济的效果分析

生态经济是在生态系统承载能力范围内,运用系统工程方法和生态经济学原理改变生产和消费方式,挖掘资源的潜力,建设体制合理与社会和谐环境的经济形态。生态经济的以资源为基础,以政策与制度为导向,以技术创新为支撑,是制度、技术、资源等重要影响变量协同作用的结果,制度变迁、技术创新、资源利用三者共同作用于生态经济运行过程都呈现出了典型的非线性特征;将制度、技术、资源分别视为生态经济系统的高层、中层和低层子系统,以逻辑斯蒂（Logistic）曲线为基础,建构了生态经济发展的非线性动力学模型;最后以系统论的观点分析了制度、技术、资源与生态经济发展、科学发展观贯彻、和谐社会构建之间的互动关系。     

西藏生态整体性水平测度

为了探讨资源-环境双重约束下地处我国生态环境脆弱区的西藏的生态整体性特征,利用生态环境质量指数和生态现代化指数（EMI）对地处我国西南边陲的西藏地区的生态现代化水平进行了分析。结果表明：全球生态现代化水平在区域之间存在比较明显的空间分异。2004年西藏生态现代化指数为50,在全国排名为3位,较2000年的排名16位有了明显的提高。生态进步指数、经济生态化指数好于其他4个少数民族地区,但社会生态化指数落后于其他4个少数民族地区,人均SO2排放与新疆、广西相同,但高于内蒙古和宁夏;1980—2007年西藏现代化程度虽然有所提升,但远低于世界平均水平和中等发达国家以及我国平均水平和其他4个少数民族地区;1996—2007年西藏区域环境水平呈＂W＂型变动态势。资源转化率和水污染指数呈＂N＂型不稳定变动,生态保护指数和环境治理指数呈剧烈变动,生态脆弱性和环境支持系统的不稳定性没有明显改观。因此,西藏应立足地缘和资源优势,充分考虑西藏生态地域、生态系统服务功能、生态资产、生态敏感性以及人类活动对生态环境胁迫等要素的综合影响,依据青藏高原高寒生态大区和高寒草甸生态区、青藏高原高山草原、高寒草甸生态地区生态区划,发展人工设计生态方案的生态重建途径。建立严格的生态补偿制度,逐步提升生态现代化水平。     

Ecology,ecological poverty and sustainable development in Central Himalayan region of India

The people inhabiting the mountains of the Central Himalayan region of India are heavily dependent on their immediate natural resources for their survival. However, this resource-poor mountain ecosystem is gradually becoming unable to provide a minimum standard of living to its continually growing population. In this ecosystem, human population is doubling every 27–30 years, against the declining resource base, particularly forests. Forest are disappearing both quantitatively and qualitatively. Against the requirement of 18 ha of forest land to maintain production in 1 ha of cultivated land, the ratio of forests to cultivated land is only 1.33: 1. The present production from grasslands supports 8 units of livestock, against the ideal 2 units, and the gap between the demand and deficit of fodder is more than 5-fold. Loss of vegetative cover is resulting in drying up of water resources, compelling the women to walk longer distances to collect water. This ecological deterioration, apart from human growth and interference, is compounded by mountain specificities such as inaccessibility, fragility, marginality, diversity, niche and adaptability. The specificities manifest in isolation, distance, poor communication, limited mobility, etc., resulting in limited external linkages and replication of external experiences, and slow pace of development. They, therefore, restrict options for economic growth, effecting poverty and affecting the quality of life of the people of the region. Poverty, in this mountain ecosystem cannot be understood and assessed independent of ecological wealth and would better be termed as ecological poverty. The development efforts to be effective in alleviating poverty here, should take into account mountain specificities and incorporate options which have larger human dimensions, such as mechanisms for population control, socio-economic and cultural conditioning, indigenous knowledge systems of the local people and simple technologies that are already in practice or have potential and are based on least external inputs.     

Resilienz vs. Effizienz – ein kritischer Blick auf die Umweltökonomie

Background, aim, and scope Economists assess politics (also concerning energy supply) due to the efficiency criterion. Thus, economic instruments for environmental protection shall contribute to achieve ecological goals in an (cost-)efficient way. We show that the overemphasis of efficiency is an alien in the way (ecological) systems are working. Mostly, ecological systems are not high-grade efficient. Hence, economic instruments of environmental protection introduce an inappropriate logic to ecological systems that may have severe impacts on their resilience. We illustrate this with the example of emission trading. Time efficiency is considered to be a powerful criterion due to the interest yield requirements of investors, also for ecological investments. We show how the concentration on time efficiency destroys diversity and has negative impacts on the resilience of (eco-)systems. Main features The economic system is embedded in society and natural environment (as self-organizing, living systems). The economy as an ‘instrumental system’ should serve these systems. The guiding value approach (a system theory approach) gives indication that overemphasizing certain guiding values (such as efficiency, as the economic science does) may weaken the functional capability of systems and finally may lead to a collapse of the systems. Results and discussion The article tries to change the focus of the discussion. An altered focus probably has to be implemented by scientists of other subject areas. Contemporary environmental economics (with its focus on efficiency) is unable to give satisfying answers on the pestering problems. Conclusions Criticising the primacy of efficiency is not the same as generally to disclaim considering efficiency needs. Instead, based on the guiding value theory, we want to be contrary to the one-sided and dominating stressing of the of the efficiency criterion. Perspectives Not following the efficiency guide any more means to think over some ‘sacred cows’ such as emission trading or shareholder value. Instead we have to think over alternative designs to reach the ecological targets.