Human ecology

Last updated
Part of the built environment - suburban tract housing in Colorado Springs, Colorado Suburbia by David Shankbone.jpg
Part of the built environment   suburban tract housing in Colorado Springs, Colorado

Human ecology is an interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary study of the relationship between humans and their natural, social, and built environments. The philosophy and study of human ecology has a diffuse history with advancements in ecology, geography, sociology, psychology, anthropology, zoology, epidemiology, public health, and home economics, among others.

Contents

Historical development

The roots of ecology as a broader discipline can be traced to the Greeks and a lengthy list of developments in natural history science. Ecology also has notably developed in other cultures. Traditional knowledge, as it is called, includes the human propensity for intuitive knowledge, intelligent relations, understanding, and for passing on information about the natural world and the human experience. [1] [2] [3] [4] The term ecology was coined by Ernst Haeckel in 1866 and defined by direct reference to the economy of nature. [5]

Like other contemporary researchers of his time, Haeckel adopted his terminology from Carl Linnaeus where human ecological connections were more evident. In his 1749 publication, Specimen academicum de oeconomia naturae, Linnaeus developed a science that included the economy and polis of nature. Polis stems from its Greek roots for a political community (originally based on the city-states), sharing its roots with the word police in reference to the promotion of growth and maintenance of good social order in a community. [1] [6] [7] [8] Linnaeus was also the first to write about the close affinity between humans and primates. [9] Linnaeus presented early ideas found in modern aspects to human ecology, including the balance of nature while highlighting the importance of ecological functions (ecosystem services or natural capital in modern terms): "In exchange for performing its function satisfactorily, nature provided a species with the necessaries of life" [10] :66 The work of Linnaeus influenced Charles Darwin and other scientists of his time who used Linnaeus' terminology (i.e., the economy and polis of nature) with direct implications on matters of human affairs, ecology, and economics. [11] [12] [13]

Ecology is not just biological, but a human science as well. [5] An early and influential social scientist in the history of human ecology was Herbert Spencer. Spencer was influenced by and reciprocated his influence onto the works of Charles Darwin. Herbert Spencer coined the phrase "survival of the fittest", he was an early founder of sociology where he developed the idea of society as an organism, and he created an early precedent for the socio-ecological approach that was the subsequent aim and link between sociology and human ecology. [1] [14] [15]

Human ecology is the discipline that inquires into the patterns and process of interaction of humans with their environments. Human values, wealth, life-styles, resource use, and waste, etc. must affect and be affected by the physical and biotic environments along urban-rural gradients. The nature of these interactions is a legitimate ecological research topic and one of increasing importance. [16] :1233

The history of human ecology has strong roots in geography and sociology departments of the late 19th century. [1] [17] In this context a major historical development or landmark that stimulated research into the ecological relations between humans and their urban environments was founded in George Perkins Marsh's book Man and Nature; or, physical geography as modified by human action , which was published in 1864. Marsh was interested in the active agency of human-nature interactions (an early precursor to urban ecology or human niche construction) in frequent reference to the economy of nature. [18] [19] [20]

In 1894, an influential sociologist at the University of Chicago named Albion W. Small collaborated with sociologist George E. Vincent and published a "'laboratory guide' to studying people in their 'every-day occupations.'" [17] :578 This was a guidebook that trained students of sociology how they could study society in a way that a natural historian would study birds. Their publication "explicitly included the relation of the social world to the material environment." [17] :578

The first English-language use of the term "ecology" is credited to American chemist and founder of the field of home economics, Ellen Swallow Richards. Richards first introduced the term as "oekology" in 1892, and subsequently developed the term "human ecology". [21]

The term "human ecology" first appeared in Ellen Swallow Richards' 1907 Sanitation in Daily Life, where it was defined as "the study of the surroundings of human beings in the effects they produce on the lives of men". [22] Richard's use of the term recognized humans as part of rather than separate from nature. [21] The term made its first formal appearance in the field of sociology in the 1921 book "Introduction to the Science of Sociology", [23] [24] published by Robert E. Park and Ernest W. Burgess (also from the sociology department at the University of Chicago). Their student, Roderick D. McKenzie helped solidify human ecology as a sub-discipline within the Chicago school. [25] These authors emphasized the difference between human ecology and ecology in general by highlighting cultural evolution in human societies. [1]

Human ecology has a fragmented academic history with developments spread throughout a range of disciplines, including: home economics, geography, anthropology, sociology, zoology, and psychology. Some authors have argued that geography is human ecology. Much historical debate has hinged on the placement of humanity as part or as separate from nature. [17] [26] [27] In light of the branching debate of what constitutes human ecology, recent interdisciplinary researchers have sought a unifying scientific field they have titled coupled human and natural systems that "builds on but moves beyond previous work (e.g., human ecology, ecological anthropology, environmental geography)." [28] :639 Other fields or branches related to the historical development of human ecology as a discipline include cultural ecology, urban ecology, environmental sociology, and anthropological ecology. [29] [30] [31] Even though the term ‘human ecology' was popularized in the 1920s and 1930s, studies in this field had been conducted since the early nineteenth century in England and France. [32]

In 1969, College of the Atlantic [33] in Bar Harbor, Maine, was founded as a school of human ecology. Since its first enrolled class of 32 students, the college has grown into a small liberal arts institution with about 350 students and 35 full-time faculty. Every graduate receives a degree in human ecology, an interdisciplinary major which each student designs to fit their own interests and needs.

Biological ecologists have traditionally been reluctant to study human ecology, gravitating instead to the allure of wild nature. Human ecology has a history of focusing attention on humans' impact on the biotic world. [1] [34] Paul Sears was an early proponent of applying human ecology, addressing topics aimed at the population explosion of humanity, global resource limits, pollution, and published a comprehensive account on human ecology as a discipline in 1954. He saw the vast "explosion" of problems humans were creating for the environment and reminded us that "what is important is the work to be done rather than the label." [35] "When we as a profession learn to diagnose the total landscape, not only as the basis of our culture, but as an expression of it, and to share our special knowledge as widely as we can, we need not fear that our work will be ignored or that our efforts will be unappreciated." [35] :963 Recently, the Ecological Society of America has added a Section on Human Ecology, indicating the increasing openness of biological ecologists to engage with human dominated systems and the acknowledgement that most contemporary ecosystems have been influenced by human action.

Overview

Human ecology has been defined as a type of analysis applied to the relations in human beings that was traditionally applied to plants and animals in ecology. [36] Toward this aim, human ecologists (which can include sociologists) integrate diverse perspectives from a broad spectrum of disciplines covering "wider points of view". [37] :107 In its 1972 premier edition, the editors of Human Ecology: An Interdisciplinary Journal gave an introductory statement on the scope of topics in human ecology. [38] Their statement provides a broad overview on the interdisciplinary nature of the topic:

Forty years later in the same journal, Daniel G. Bates (2012) [39] notes lines of continuity in the discipline and the way it has changed:

Today there is greater emphasis on the problems facing individuals and how actors deal with them with the consequence that there is much more attention to decision-making at the individual level as people strategize and optimize risk, costs and benefits within specific contexts. Rather than attempting to formulate a cultural ecology or even a specifically "human ecology" model, researchers more often draw on demographic, economic and evolutionary theory as well as upon models derived from field ecology. [39] :1

While theoretical discussions continue, research published in Human Ecology Review suggests that recent discourse has shifted toward applying principles of human ecology. Some of these applications focus instead on addressing problems that cross disciplinary boundaries or transcend those boundaries altogether. Scholarship has increasingly tended away from Gerald L. Young's idea of a "unified theory" of human ecological knowledge—that human ecology may emerge as its own discipline—and more toward the pluralism best espoused by Paul Shepard: that human ecology is healthiest when "running out in all directions". [40] But human ecology is neither anti-discipline nor anti-theory, rather it is the ongoing attempt to formulate, synthesize, and apply theory to bridge the widening schism between man and nature. This new human ecology emphasizes complexity over reductionism, focuses on changes over stable states, and expands ecological concepts beyond plants and animals to include people.

Application to epidemiology and public health

The application of ecological concepts to epidemiology has similar roots to those of other disciplinary applications, with Carl Linnaeus having played a seminal role. However, the term appears to have come into common use in the medical and public health literature in the mid-twentieth century. [41] [42] This was strengthened in 1971 by the publication of Epidemiology as Medical Ecology, [43] and again in 1987 by the publication of a textbook on Public Health and Human Ecology. [44] An "ecosystem health" perspective has emerged as a thematic movement, integrating research and practice from such fields as environmental management, public health, biodiversity, and economic development. [45] Drawing in turn from the application of concepts such as the social-ecological model of health, human ecology has converged with the mainstream of global public health literature. [46]

Connection to home economics

In addition to its links to other disciplines, human ecology has a strong historical linkage to the field of home economics through the work of Ellen Swallow Richards, among others. However, as early as the 1960s, a number of universities began to rename home economics departments, schools, and colleges as human ecology programs. In part, this name change was a response to perceived difficulties with the term home economics in a modernizing society, and reflects a recognition of human ecology as one of the initial choices for the discipline which was to become home economics. [47] Current human ecology programs include the University of Wisconsin School of Human Ecology, the Cornell University College of Human Ecology, and the University of Alberta's Department of Human Ecology, [48] among others.

Niche of the Anthropocene

Perhaps the most important implication involves our view of human society. Homo sapiens is not an external disturbance, it is a keystone species within the system. In the long term, it may not be the magnitude of extracted goods and services that will determine sustainability. It may well be our disruption of ecological recovery and stability mechanisms that determines system collapse. [49] :3282

Changes to the Earth by human activities have been so great that a new geological epoch named the Anthropocene has been proposed. [50] The human niche or ecological polis of human society, as it was known historically, has created entirely new arrangements of ecosystems as we convert matter into technology. Human ecology has created anthropogenic biomes (called anthromes). [51] The habitats within these anthromes reach out through our road networks to create what has been called technoecosystems containing technosols. Technodiversity exists within these technoecosystems. [5] [52] In direct parallel to the concept of the ecosphere, human civilization has also created a technosphere. [53] [54] [55] [56] The way that the human species engineers or constructs technodiversity into the environment threads back into the processes of cultural and biological evolution, including the human economy. [57] [58]

Ecosystem services

A bumblebee pollinating a flower, one example of an ecosystem service Bee pollinating Aquilegia vulgaris.JPG
A bumblebee pollinating a flower, one example of an ecosystem service

Policy and human institutions should rarely assume that human enterprise is benign. A safer assumption holds that human enterprise almost always exacts an ecological toll - a debit taken from the ecological commons. [59] :95

The ecosystems of planet Earth are coupled to human environments. Ecosystems regulate the global geophysical cycles of energy, climate, soil nutrients, and water that in turn support and grow natural capital (including the environmental, physiological, cognitive, cultural, and spiritual dimensions of life). Ultimately, every manufactured product in human environments comes from natural systems. [28] Ecosystems are considered common-pool resources because ecosystems do not exclude beneficiaries and they can be depleted or degraded. [60] For example, green space within communities provides sustainable health services that reduce mortality and regulate the spread of vector-borne disease. [61] Research shows that people who are more engaged with and who have regular access to natural areas benefit from lower rates of diabetes, heart disease and psychological disorders. [62] These ecological health services are regularly depleted through urban development projects that do not factor in the common-pool value of ecosystems. [63] [64]

The ecological commons delivers a diverse supply of community services that sustains the well-being of human society. [65] [66] The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, an international UN initiative involving more than 1,360 experts worldwide, identifies four main ecosystem service types having 30 sub-categories stemming from natural capital. The ecological commons includes provisioning (e.g., food, raw materials, medicine, water supplies), regulating (e.g., climate, water, soil retention, flood retention), cultural (e.g., science and education, artistic, spiritual), and supporting (e.g., soil formation, nutrient cycling, water cycling) services. [67] [68]

Sixth mass extinction

Global assessments of biodiversity indicate that the current epoch, the Holocene (or Anthropocene) [69] is a sixth mass extinction. Species loss is accelerating at 100–1000 times faster than average background rates in the fossil record. [70] [71] [72] The field of conservation biology involves ecologists that are researching, confronting, and searching for solutions to sustain the planet's ecosystems for future generations. [73]

"Human activities are associated directly or indirectly with nearly every aspect of the current extinction spasm." [70] :11472

Nature is a resilient system. Ecosystems regenerate, withstand, and are forever adapting to fluctuating environments. Ecological resilience is an important conceptual framework in conservation management and it is defined as the preservation of biological relations in ecosystems that persevere and regenerate in response to disturbance over time.[ citation needed ]

However, persistent, systematic, large and non-random disturbance caused by the niche-constructing behavior of human beings, including habitat conversion and land development, has pushed many of the Earth's ecosystems to the extent of their resilience thresholds. Three planetary thresholds have already been crossed, including biodiversity loss, climate change, and nitrogen cycles. These biophysical systems are ecologically interrelated and are naturally resilient, but human civilization has transitioned the planet to an Anthropocene epoch and the ecological state of the Earth is deteriorating rapidly, to the detriment of humanity. [74] The world's fisheries and oceans, for example, are facing dire challenges as the threat of global collapse appears imminent, with serious ramifications for the well-being of humanity. [75]

While the Anthropocene is yet to be classified as an official epoch, current evidence suggest that "an epoch-scale boundary has been crossed within the last two centuries." [50] :835 The ecology of the planet is further threatened by global warming, but investments in nature conservation can provide a regulatory feedback to store and regulate carbon and other greenhouse gases. [76] [77]

Ecological footprint

While we are used to thinking of cities as geographically discrete places, most of the land "occupied" by their residents lies far beyond their borders. The total area of land required to sustain an urban region (its "ecological footprint") is typically at least an order of magnitude greater than that contained within municipal boundaries or the associated built-up area. [78] :121

In 1992, William Rees developed the ecological footprint concept. The ecological footprint and its close analog the water footprint has become a popular way of accounting for the level of impact that human society is imparting on the Earth's ecosystems. [78] [79] All indications are that the human enterprise is unsustainable as the footprint of society is placing too much stress on the ecology of the planet. [80] The WWF 2008 living planet report and other researchers report that human civilization has exceeded the bio-regenerative capacity of the planet. [80] [81] This means that the footprint of human consumption is extracting more natural resources than can be replenished by ecosystems around the world.

Ecological economics

Ecological economics is an economic science that extends its methods of valuation onto nature in an effort to address the inequity between market growth and biodiversity loss. [68] Natural capital is the stock of materials or information stored in biodiversity that generates services that can enhance the welfare of communities. [82] Population losses are the more sensitive indicator of natural capital than are species extinction in the accounting of ecosystem services. The prospect for recovery in the economic crisis of nature is grim. Populations, such as local ponds and patches of forest are being cleared away and lost at rates that exceed species extinctions. [83] The mainstream growth-based economic system adopted by governments worldwide does not include a price or markets for natural capital. This type of economic system places further ecological debt onto future generations. [84] [85]

Many human-nature interactions occur indirectly due to the production and use of human-made (manufactured and synthesized) products, such as electronic appliances, furniture, plastics, airplanes, and automobiles. These products insulate humans from the natural environment, leading them to perceive less dependence on natural systems than is the case, but all manufactured products ultimately come from natural systems. [28] :640

Human societies are increasingly being placed under stress as the ecological commons is diminished through an accounting system that has incorrectly assumed "... that nature is a fixed, indestructible capital asset." [86] :44 The current wave of threats, including massive extinction rates and concurrent loss of natural capital to the detriment of human society, is happening rapidly. This is called a biodiversity crisis, because 50% of the worlds species are predicted to go extinct within the next 50 years. [87] [88] Conventional monetary analyses are unable to detect or deal with these sorts of ecological problems. [89] Multiple global ecological economic initiatives are being promoted to solve this problem. For example, governments of the G8 met in 2007 and set forth The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) initiative:

In a global study we will initiate the process of analyzing the global economic benefit of biological diversity, the costs of the loss of biodiversity and the failure to take protective measures versus the costs of effective conservation. [90]

The work of Kenneth E. Boulding is notable for building on the integration between ecology and its economic origins. Boulding drew parallels between ecology and economics, most generally in that they are both studies of individuals as members of a system, and indicated that the "household of man" and the "household of nature" could somehow be integrated to create a perspective of greater value. [91] [92]

Interdisciplinary approaches

Human ecology may be defined: (1) from a bio-ecological standpoint as the study of man as the ecological dominant in plant and animal communities and systems; (2) from a bio-ecological standpoint as simply another animal affecting and being affected by his physical environment; and (3) as a human being, somehow different from animal life in general, interacting with physical and modified environments in a distinctive and creative way. A truly interdisciplinary human ecology will most likely address itself to all three. [1] :8–9

Human ecology expands functionalism from ecology to the human mind. People's perception of a complex world is a function of their ability to be able to comprehend beyond the immediate, both in time and in space. This concept manifested in the popular slogan promoting sustainability: "think global, act local." Moreover, people's conception of community stems from not only their physical location but their mental and emotional connections and varies from "community as place, community as way of life, or community of collective action." [1]

In the last century, the world has faced several challenges, including environmental degradation, public health issues, and climate change. Addressing these issues requires interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary interventions, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of the intricate connections between human societies and the environment. [93] In the early years, human ecology was still deeply enmeshed in its respective disciplines: geography, sociology, anthropology, psychology, and economics. Scholars through the 1970s until present have called for a greater integration between all of the scattered disciplines that has each established formal ecological research. [1] [20]

In art

While some of the early writers considered how art fit into a human ecology, it was Sears who posed the idea that in the long run human ecology will in fact look more like art. Bill Carpenter (1986) calls human ecology the "possibility of an aesthetic science", renewing dialogue about how art fits into a human ecological perspective. According to Carpenter, human ecology as an aesthetic science counters the disciplinary fragmentation of knowledge by examining human consciousness. [94]

In education

While the reputation of human ecology in institutions of higher learning is growing, there is no human ecology at the primary or secondary education levels, with one notable exception, Syosset High School, in Long Island, New York. Educational theorist Sir Kenneth Robinson has called for diversification of education to promote creativity in academic and non-academic (i.e., educate their "whole being") activities to implement a "new conception of human ecology". [95]

Bioregionalism and urban ecology

In the late 1960s, ecological concepts started to become integrated into the applied fields, namely architecture, landscape architecture, and planning. Ian McHarg called for a future when all planning would be "human ecological planning" by default, always bound up in humans' relationships with their environments. He emphasized local, place-based planning that takes into consideration all the "layers" of information from geology to botany to zoology to cultural history. [96] Proponents of the new urbanism movement, like James Howard Kunstler and Andres Duany, have embraced the term human ecology as a way to describe the problem of—and prescribe the solutions for—the landscapes and lifestyles of an automobile oriented society. Duany has called the human ecology movement to be "the agenda for the years ahead." [97] While McHargian planning is still widely respected, the landscape urbanism movement seeks a new understanding between human and environment relations. Among these theorists is Frederich Steiner, who published Human Ecology: Following Nature's Lead in 2002 which focuses on the relationships among landscape, culture, and planning. The work highlights the beauty of scientific inquiry by revealing those purely human dimensions which underlie our concepts of ecology. While Steiner discusses specific ecological settings, such as cityscapes and waterscapes, and the relationships between socio-cultural and environmental regions, he also takes a diverse approach to ecology—considering even the unique synthesis between ecology and political geography. Deiter Steiner's 2003 Human Ecology: Fragments of Anti-fragmentary view of the world is an important expose of recent trends in human ecology. Part literature review, the book is divided into four sections: "human ecology", "the implicit and the explicit", "structuration", and "the regional dimension". [98] Much of the work stresses the need for transciplinarity, antidualism, and wholeness of perspective.

Key journals

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ecology</span> Study of organisms and their environment

Ecology is the natural science of the relationships among living organisms, including humans, and their physical environment. Ecology considers organisms at the individual, population, community, ecosystem, and biosphere level. Ecology overlaps with the closely related sciences of biogeography, evolutionary biology, genetics, ethology, and natural history.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Biodiversity</span> Variety and variability of life forms

Biodiversity or biological diversity is the variety and variability of life on Earth. Biodiversity is a measure of variation at the genetic, species, and ecosystem levels. Biodiversity is not distributed evenly on Earth; it is usually greater in the tropics as a result of the warm climate and high primary productivity in the region near the equator. Tropical forest ecosystems cover less than 10% of Earth's terrestrial surface and contain about 50% of the world's species. There are latitudinal gradients in species diversity for both marine and terrestrial taxa. Marine coastal biodiversity is highest globally speaking in the Western Pacific ocean steered mainly by the higher surface temperatures. In all oceans across the planet, marine species diversity peaks in the mid-latitudinal zones. Terrestrial species threatened with mass extinction can be observed in exceptionally dense regional biodiversity hotspots, with high levels of species endemism under threat. There are 36 such hotspot regions which require the world's attention in order to secure global biodiversity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Natural capital</span> Worlds stock of natural resources

Natural capital is the world's stock of natural resources, which includes geology, soils, air, water and all living organisms. Some natural capital assets provide people with free goods and services, often called ecosystem services. All of these underpin our economy and society, and thus make human life possible.

The carrying capacity of an environment is the maximum population size of a biological species that can be sustained by that specific environment, given the food, habitat, water, and other resources available. The carrying capacity is defined as the environment's maximal load, which in population ecology corresponds to the population equilibrium, when the number of deaths in a population equals the number of births. The effect of carrying capacity on population dynamics is modelled with a logistic function. Carrying capacity is applied to the maximum population an environment can support in ecology, agriculture and fisheries. The term carrying capacity has been applied to a few different processes in the past before finally being applied to population limits in the 1950s. The notion of carrying capacity for humans is covered by the notion of sustainable population.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ecological economics</span> Interdependence of human economies and natural ecosystems

Ecological economics, bioeconomics, ecolonomy, eco-economics, or ecol-econ is both a transdisciplinary and an interdisciplinary field of academic research addressing the interdependence and coevolution of human economies and natural ecosystems, both intertemporally and spatially. By treating the economy as a subsystem of Earth's larger ecosystem, and by emphasizing the preservation of natural capital, the field of ecological economics is differentiated from environmental economics, which is the mainstream economic analysis of the environment. One survey of German economists found that ecological and environmental economics are different schools of economic thought, with ecological economists emphasizing strong sustainability and rejecting the proposition that physical (human-made) capital can substitute for natural capital.

Agroecology is an academic discipline that studies ecological processes applied to agricultural production systems. Bringing ecological principles to bear can suggest new management approaches in agroecosystems. The term can refer to a science, a movement, or an agricultural practice. Agroecologists study a variety of agroecosystems. The field of agroecology is not associated with any one particular method of farming, whether it be organic, regenerative, integrated, or industrial, intensive or extensive, although some use the name specifically for alternative agriculture.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conservation biology</span> Study of threats to biological diversity

Conservation biology is the study of the conservation of nature and of Earth's biodiversity with the aim of protecting species, their habitats, and ecosystems from excessive rates of extinction and the erosion of biotic interactions. It is an interdisciplinary subject drawing on natural and social sciences, and the practice of natural resource management.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Landscape ecology</span> Science of relationships between ecological processes in the environment and particular ecosystems

Landscape ecology is the science of studying and improving relationships between ecological processes in the environment and particular ecosystems. This is done within a variety of landscape scales, development spatial patterns, and organizational levels of research and policy. Concisely, landscape ecology can be described as the science of "landscape diversity" as the synergetic result of biodiversity and geodiversity.

The ecological footprint measures human demand on natural capital, i.e. the quantity of nature it takes to support people and their economies. It tracks human demand on nature through an ecological accounting system. The accounts contrast the biologically productive area people use to satisfy their consumption to the biologically productive area available within a region, nation, or the world (biocapacity). Biocapacity is the productive area that can regenerate what people demand from nature. Therefore, the metric is a measure of human impact on the environment. As Ecological Footprint accounts measure to what extent human activities operate within the means of our planet, they are a central metric for sustainability.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Habitat conservation</span> Management practice for protecting types of environments

Habitat conservation is a management practice that seeks to conserve, protect and restore habitats and prevent species extinction, fragmentation or reduction in range. It is a priority of many groups that cannot be easily characterized in terms of any one ideology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Applied ecology</span>

Applied ecology is a sub-field within ecology that considers the application of the science of ecology to real-world questions. It is also described as a scientific field that focuses on the application of concepts, theories, models, or methods of fundamental ecology to environmental problems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Environmental resource management</span> Type of resource management

Environmental resource management or environmental management is the management of the interaction and impact of human societies on the environment. It is not, as the phrase might suggest, the management of the environment itself. Environmental resources management aims to ensure that ecosystem services are protected and maintained for future human generations, and also maintain ecosystem integrity through considering ethical, economic, and scientific (ecological) variables. Environmental resource management tries to identify factors affecteconflicts thatd bconflicts thaty conflictthattheorists thaariset arise between meeting needs and protecting resources. It is thus linked to environmental protection, resource management, sustainability, integrated landscape management, natural resource management, fisheries management, forest management, wildlife management, environmental management systems, and others.

Ecology is a new science and considered as an important branch of biological science, having only become prominent during the second half of the 20th century. Ecological thought is derivative of established currents in philosophy, particularly from ethics and politics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ecosystem service</span> Benefits provided by healthy nature, forests and environmental systems

Ecosystem services are the various benefits that humans derive from healthy ecosystems. These ecosystems, when functioning well, offer such things as provision of food, natural pollination of crops, clean air and water, decomposition of wastes, or flood control. Ecosystem services are grouped into four broad categories of services. There are provisioning services, such as the production of food and water. Regulating services, such as the control of climate and disease. Supporting services, such as nutrient cycles and oxygen production. And finally there are cultural services, such as spiritual and recreational benefits. Evaluations of ecosystem services may include assigning an economic value to them.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ecological debt</span> Environmental debt between Global North and South

Ecological debt refers to the accumulated debt seen by some campaigners as owed by the Global North to Global South countries, due to the net sum of historical environmental injustice, especially through resource exploitation, habitat degradation, and pollution by waste discharge. The concept was coined by Global Southerner non-governmental organizations in the 1990s and its definition has varied over the years, in several attempts of greater specification.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Environmental issues</span> Concerns and policies regarding the biophysical environment

Environmental issues are disruptions in the usual function of ecosystems. Further, these issues can be caused by humans or they can be natural. These issues are considered serious when the ecosystem cannot recover in the present situation, and catastrophic if the ecosystem is projected to certainly collapse.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of environmental pollution</span>

The history of environmental pollution traces human-dominated ecological systems from the earliest civilizations to the present day. This history is characterized by the increased regional success of a particular society, followed by crises that were either resolved, producing sustainability, or not, leading to decline. In early human history, the use of fire and desire for specific foods may have altered the natural composition of plant and animal communities. Between 8,000 and 12,000 years ago, agrarian communities emerged which depended largely on their environment and the creation of a "structure of permanence."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Planetary boundaries</span> Limits not to be exceeded if humanity wants to survive in a safe ecosystem

Planetary boundaries are a framework to describe limits to the impacts of human activities on the Earth system. Beyond these limits, the environment may not be able to self-regulate anymore. This would mean the Earth system would leave the period of stability of the Holocene, in which human society developed. The framework is based on scientific evidence that human actions, especially those of industrialized societies since the Industrial Revolution, have become the main driver of global environmental change. According to the framework, "transgressing one or more planetary boundaries may be deleterious or even catastrophic due to the risk of crossing thresholds that will trigger non-linear, abrupt environmental change within continental-scale to planetary-scale systems."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nutrient cycle</span> Set of processes exchanging nutrients between parts of a system

A nutrient cycle is the movement and exchange of inorganic and organic matter back into the production of matter. Energy flow is a unidirectional and noncyclic pathway, whereas the movement of mineral nutrients is cyclic. Mineral cycles include the carbon cycle, sulfur cycle, nitrogen cycle, water cycle, phosphorus cycle, oxygen cycle, among others that continually recycle along with other mineral nutrients into productive ecological nutrition.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gretchen Daily</span> American biologist (born 1964)

Gretchen C. Daily is an American environmental scientist and tropical ecologist. She has contributed to understanding humanity's dependence and impacts on nature, and to advancing a systematic approach for valuing nature in policy, finance, management, and practice around the world. Daily is co-founder and faculty director of the Natural Capital Project, a global partnership that aims to mainstream the values of nature into decision-making of people, governments, investors, corporations, NGOs, and other institutions. Together with more than 300 partners worldwide, the Project is pioneering science, technology, and scalable demonstrations of inclusive, sustainable development.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Young, G.L. (1974). "Human Ecology as an Interdisciplinary Concept: A Critical Inquiry". Advances in Ecological Research Volume 8. Vol. 8. pp. 1–105. doi:10.1016/S0065-2504(08)60277-9. ISBN   9780120139088.
  2. Huntington, H. P. (2000). "Using traditional ecological knowledge in science: Methods and applications" (PDF). Ecological Applications. 10 (5): 1270–1274. doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1270:UTEKIS]2.0.CO;2. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-01-21. Retrieved 2011-06-27.
  3. Turner, N. J.; Ignace, M. B.; Ignace, R. (2000). "Traditional ecological knowledge and wisdom of aboriginal peoples in British Columbia" (PDF). Ecological Applications. 10 (5): 1275–1287. doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1275:tekawo]2.0.co;2.
  4. Davis, A.; Wagner, J. R. (2003). "Who knows? On the importance of identifying "experts" when researching local ecological knowledge" (PDF). Human Ecology. 31 (3): 463–489. doi:10.1023/A:1025075923297. S2CID   154618965. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-03-15.
  5. 1 2 3 Odum, E. P.; Barrett, G. W. (2005). Fundamentals of ecology. Brooks Cole. p. 598. ISBN   978-0-534-42066-6.
  6. Pearce, T. (2010). "A great complication of circumstances" (PDF). Journal of the History of Biology. 43 (3): 493–528. doi:10.1007/s10739-009-9205-0. PMID   20665080. S2CID   34864334. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-03-31.
  7. Kricher, J. (2009-04-27). The balance of nature: Ecology's enduring myth. Princeton University Press. p. 252. ISBN   978-0-691-13898-5.
  8. Egerton, F. N. (2007). "Understanding food chains and food webs, 1700–1970". Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America. 88: 50–69. doi:10.1890/0012-9623(2007)88[50:UFCAFW]2.0.CO;2.
  9. Reid, G. M. (2009). "Carolus Linnaeus (1707-1778): his life, philosophy and science and its relationship to modern biology and medicine". Taxon. 58 (1): 18–31. doi:10.1002/tax.581005.
  10. Foster, J. (2003). "Between economics and ecology: Some historical and philosophical considerations for modelers of natural capital". Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 86 (1–2): 63–74. doi:10.1023/A:1024002617932. PMID   12858999. S2CID   30966297.
  11. Haeckel, E. (1866). Generelle Morphologie der Organismen. Berlin: G.Reimer. Generelle Morphologie der Organismen.
  12. Stauffer, R. C. (1957). "Haeckel, Darwin and ecology". The Quarterly Review of Biology. 32 (2): 138–144. doi:10.1086/401754. S2CID   84079279.
  13. Kormandy, E. J.; Wooster, Donald (1978). "Review: Ecology/Economy of Nature—Synonyms?". Ecology. 59 (6): 1292–4. doi:10.2307/1938247. JSTOR   1938247.
  14. Catton, W. R. (1994). "Foundations of human ecology". Sociological Perspectives. 31 (1): 75–95. doi:10.2307/1389410. JSTOR   1389410. S2CID   145219388.
  15. Claeys, G. (2000). "The "survival of the fittest" and the origins of social Darwinism". Journal of the History of Ideas. 61 (2): 223–240. doi:10.1353/jhi.2000.0014. JSTOR   3654026. S2CID   146267804.
  16. McDonnell, M. J.; Pickett, S. T. A. (1990). "Ecosystem structure and function along urban-rural gradients: An unexploited opportunity for ecology". Ecology. 71 (4): 1232–1237. Bibcode:1990Ecol...71.1232M. doi:10.2307/1938259. JSTOR   1938259.
  17. 1 2 3 4 Gross, M. (2004). "Human geography and ecological sociology: The unfolding of human ecology, 1890 to 1930 - and beyond". Social Science History. 28 (4): 575–605. doi:10.1215/01455532-28-4-575 (inactive 2024-04-19). S2CID   233365777. Archived from the original on 2011-07-26. Retrieved 2011-06-21.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of April 2024 (link)
  18. Jelinski, D. E. (2005). "There is not mother nature: There is no balance of nature: Culture, ecology and conservation". Human Ecology. 33 (2): 271–288. doi:10.1007/s10745-005-2435-7. JSTOR   4603569. S2CID   154454141.
  19. Stallin, J. A. (2007). "The biogeography of geographers: A content visualization of journal publications" (PDF). Physical Geography. 28 (3): 261–275. Bibcode:2007PhGeo..28..261S. doi:10.2747/0272-3646.28.3.261. S2CID   25040312. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-06-11.
  20. 1 2 Liu, J.; Dietz, T.; Carpenter, S. R.; Alberti, M.; Folke, C.; Moran, E.; Pell, A. N.; Deadman, P.; Kratz, T.; Lubchenco, J.; Ostrom, E.; Ouyang, Z.; Provencher, W.; Redman, C. L.; Schneider, S. H.; Taylor, W. W. (2007). "Complexity of coupled human and natural systems" (PDF). Science. 317 (5844): 1513–1516. Bibcode:2007Sci...317.1513L. doi: 10.1126/science.1144004 . PMID   17872436. S2CID   8109766.
  21. 1 2 Merchant, C. (2007). American Environmental History: An Introduction. New York: Columbia University Press. p. 181. ISBN   978-0231140355.
  22. Richards, Ellen H. (2012) [1907]. Sanitation in Daily Life. Forgotten Books. pp. v. ASIN   B008KX8KGA.
  23. Park, R. E.; Burgess, E. W. S., eds. (1921). Introduction to the science of society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 161–216.
  24. Schnore, L. F. (1958). "Social morphology and human ecology". American Journal of Sociology. 63 (6): 620–634. doi:10.1086/222357. JSTOR   2772992. S2CID   144355767.
  25. MacDonald, Dennis W. (2011). "Beyond the Group: The Implications of Roderick D. McKenzie's Human Ecology for Reconceptualizing Society and the Social". Nature and Culture. 6 (3): 263–284. doi:10.3167/nc.2011.060304.
  26. Barrows, H. H. (1923). "Geography as human ecology". Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 13 (1): 1–14. doi:10.1080/00045602309356882. JSTOR   2560816.
  27. Bruhn, J. G. (1972). "Human ecology: A unifying science?". Human Ecology. 2 (2): 105–125. doi:10.1007/bf01558116. JSTOR   4602290. S2CID   145504053.
  28. 1 2 3 Liu, J.; et al. (2007). "Coupled Human and Natural Systems". Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment. 36 (8): 639–649. doi:10.1579/0044-7447(2007)36[639:CHANS]2.0.CO;2. ISSN   0044-7447. JSTOR   25547831. PMID   18240679. S2CID   18167083.
  29. Orlove, B. S. (1980). "Ecological anthropology". Annual Review of Anthropology. 9: 235–273. doi:10.1146/annurev.an.09.100180.001315. JSTOR   2155736.
  30. Nettle, D. (2009). "Ecological influences on human behavioural diversity: a review of recent findings" (PDF). Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 24 (11): 618–624. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.05.013. PMID   19683831.
  31. Zimmer, K. S. (1994). "Human geography and the 'new ecology': The prospect and promise of integration". Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 84 (1): 108–125. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8306.1994.tb01731.x. JSTOR   2563826.
  32. Caves, R. W. (2004). Encyclopedia of the City . Routledge. pp.  364. ISBN   9780415252256.
  33. coa.edu
  34. McDonnell, M. J. (1997). "A paradigm shift". Urban Ecology. 1 (2): 85–86. doi:10.1023/A:1018598708346. S2CID   31157829.
  35. 1 2 Sears, P. B. (1954). "Human ecology: A problem in synthesis". Science. 120 (3128): 959–963. Bibcode:1954Sci...120..959S. doi:10.1126/science.120.3128.959. JSTOR   1681410. PMID   13216198.
  36. Park, R. E. (1936). "Human ecology". American Journal of Sociology. 42 (1): 1–15. doi:10.1086/217327. JSTOR   2768859. S2CID   222450324.
  37. Borden, R.J (2008). "A brief history of SHE: Reflections on the founding and first twenty five years of the Society for Human Ecology" (PDF). Human Ecology Review. 15 (1): 95–108.
  38. 1 2 "Introductory statement". Human Ecology. 1 (1): 1. 1972. doi:10.1007/BF01791277. JSTOR   4602239. S2CID   102336814.
  39. 1 2 Bates, D. G. (2012). "On forty years: Remarks from the editor". Hum. Ecol. 40 (1): 1–4. doi: 10.1007/s10745-012-9461-z .
  40. Shepard, P. (1967). "What ever happened to human ecology?". BioScience . 17 (12): 891–894. doi:10.2307/1293928. JSTOR   1293928.
  41. Corwin EHL. Ecology of health. New York: Commonwealth Fund, 1949. Cited in le Riche WH, Milner J. Epidemiology as Medical Ecology. Churchill Livingstone. Edinburgh and London. 1971.
  42. Audy, JR. (1958). "Medical ecology in relation to geography". British Journal of Clinical Practice. 12 (2): 102–110. PMID   13510527.
  43. le Riche, W. Harding; Milner, Jean (1971). Epidemiology as medical ecology. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. ISBN   9780700014811.
  44. Last, John M. (1998). Public health & human ecology (2nd ed.). Stanford, Connecticut: Appleton & Lange. ISBN   9780838580806.
  45. Charron SF. Ecohealth research in practice: Innovative Applications of an Ecosystem Approach to Health. Springer, IDRC 2012.
  46. White, F; Stallones, L; Last, JM. (2013). Global Public Health: Ecological Foundations. Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0-19-975190-7.
  47. "Why the Change to Human Ecology?". Cornell University. Retrieved 20 November 2012.
  48. "University of Alberta Department of Human Ecology".
  49. O'Neil, R. V. (2001). "Is it time to bury the ecosystem concept? (With full military honors, of course!)" (PDF). Ecology. 82 (12): 3275–3284. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[3275:IITTBT]2.0.CO;2.
  50. 1 2 Zalasiewicz, J.; Williams, M.; Haywood, A.; Ellis, M. (2011). "The Anthropocene: a new epoch of geological time?" (PDF). Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A. 369 (1938): 835–841. Bibcode:2011RSPTA.369..835Z. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2010.0339 . PMID   21282149. S2CID   2624037.
  51. Ellis, E. C. (2011). "Anthropogenic transformation of the terrestrial biosphere" (PDF). Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A. 369 (1938): 1010–1035. Bibcode:2011RSPTA.369.1010E. doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0331. PMID   21282158. S2CID   14668849.
  52. Rossiter, D. G. (2007). "Classification of Urban and Industrial Soils in the World Reference Base for Soil Resources (5 pp)" (PDF). Journal of Soils and Sediments. 7 (2): 96–100. Bibcode:2007JSoSe...7...96R. doi:10.1065/jss2007.02.208. S2CID   10338446.
  53. Stairs, D. (1997). "Biophilia and technophilia: Examining the nature/culture split in design theory". Design Issues. 13 (3): 37–44. doi:10.2307/1511939. JSTOR   1511939.
  54. Adams, C. (2009). "Applied catalysis: A predictive socioeconomic history". Topics in Catalysis. 52 (8): 924–934. doi:10.1007/s11244-009-9251-z. S2CID   96322189.
  55. Lugoa, A. E.; Gucinski, H. (2000). "Function, effects, and management of forest roads" (PDF). Forest Ecology and Management. 133 (3): 249–262. doi:10.1016/s0378-1127(99)00237-6.
  56. Zabel, B.; Hawes, P.; Stuart, H.; Marino, D. V. (1999). "Construction and engineering of a created environment: Overview of the Biosphere 2 closed system". Ecological Engineering. 13 (1–4): 43–63. Bibcode:1999EcEng..13...43Z. doi:10.1016/S0925-8574(98)00091-3.
  57. Rowley-Conwy, P.; Layton, R. (2011). "Foraging and farming as niche construction: stable and unstable adaptations". Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B. 366 (1556): 849–862. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0307. PMC   3048996 . PMID   21320899.
  58. Jablonka, E. (2011). "The entangled (and constructed) human bank". Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B. 366 (1556): 784. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0364. PMC   3049000 . PMID   21320893.
  59. Sienkiewicz, A. (2006). "Toward a Legal Land Ethic: Punitive Damages, Natural Value, and the Ecological Commons". Penn State Environmental Law Review. 91: 95–6.
  60. Becker, C. D.; Ostrom, E. (1995). "Human Ecology and Resource Sustainability: The Importance of Institutional Diversity" (PDF). Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 26: 113–133. doi:10.1146/annurev.es.26.110195.000553.
  61. McMichael, A. J.; Bolin, B.; Costanza, R.; Daily, G. C.; Folke, C.; Lindahl-Kiessling, K.; et al. (1999). "Globalization and the Sustainability of Human Health". BioScience. 49 (3): 205–210. doi: 10.2307/1313510 . JSTOR   10.1525/bisi.1999.49.3.205.
  62. Hartig, T. (2008). "Green space, psychological restoration, and health inequality". The Lancet. 372 (9650): 1614–5. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61669-4. PMID   18994650. S2CID   19609171.
  63. Pickett, S. t. a.; Cadenasso, M. L. (2007). "Linking ecological and built components of urban mosaics: an open cycle of ecological design". Journal of Ecology. 96: 8–12. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2007.01310.x .
  64. Termorshuizen, J. W.; Opdam, P.; van den Brink, A. (2007). "Incorporating ecological sustainability into landscape planning" (PDF). Landscape and Urban Planning. 79 (3–4): 374–384. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.04.005. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-24.
  65. Díaz, S.; Fargione, J.; Chapin, F. S.; Tilman, D. (2006). "Biodiversity Loss Threatens Human Well-Being". PLOS Biol. 4 (8): e277. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040277 . PMC   1543691 . PMID   16895442. Open Access logo PLoS transparent.svg
  66. Ostrom, E.; et al. (1999). "Revisiting the Commons: Local Lessons, Global Challenges" (PDF). Science. 284 (5412): 278–282. Bibcode:1999Sci...284..278.. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.510.4369 . doi:10.1126/science.284.5412.278. PMID   10195886. S2CID   19472705.
  67. "Millennium Ecosystem Assessment - Synthesis Report". United Nations. 2005. Retrieved 4 February 2010.
  68. 1 2 de Groot, R. S.; Wilson, M. A.; Boumans, R. M. J. (2002). "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services" (PDF). Ecological Economics. 41 (3): 393–408. Bibcode:2002EcoEc..41..393D. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00089-7.
  69. Zalasiewicz, J.; et al. (2008). "Are we now living in the Anthropocene". GSA Today. 18 (2): 4–8. Bibcode:2008GSAT...18b...4Z. doi: 10.1130/GSAT01802A.1 .
  70. 1 2 Wake, D. B.; Vredenburg, V. T. (2008). "Are we in the midst of the sixth mass extinction? A view from the world of amphibians". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105 (Suppl 1): 11466–73. Bibcode:2008PNAS..10511466W. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0801921105 . PMC   2556420 . PMID   18695221.
  71. May, R. M. (2010). "Ecological science and tomorrow's world". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. 365 (1537): 41–7. doi:10.1098/rstb.2009.0164. PMC   2842703 . PMID   20008384.
  72. McCallum, M. L. (2007). "Amphibian Decline or Extinction? Current Declines Dwarf Background Extinction Rate" (PDF). Journal of Herpetology. 41 (3): 483–491. doi:10.1670/0022-1511(2007)41[483:ADOECD]2.0.CO;2. S2CID   30162903. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2021-10-01. Retrieved 2011-06-20.
  73. Ehrlich, P. R.; Pringle, R. M. (2008). "Where does biodiversity go from here? A grim business-as-usual forecast and a hopeful portfolio of partial solutions". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105 (S1): 11579–86. Bibcode:2008PNAS..10511579E. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0801911105 . PMC   2556413 . PMID   18695214.
  74. Rockström, W.; Noone, K.; Persson, A.; Chapin, S.; Lambin, E. F.; Lenton, T. M.; Scheffer, M; Folke, C; et al. (2009). "A safe operating space for humanity". Nature. 461 (7263): 472–475. Bibcode:2009Natur.461..472R. doi: 10.1038/461472a . PMID   19779433. S2CID   205049746.
  75. Jackson JB (2008). "Colloquium paper: ecological extinction and evolution in the brave new ocean". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105 (Suppl 1): 11458–65. Bibcode:2008PNAS..10511458J. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0802812105 . PMC   2556419 . PMID   18695220.
  76. Mooney, H.; et al. (2009). "Biodiversity, climate change, and ecosystem services Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability". Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 1 (1): 46–54. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2009.07.006.
  77. Chapin, F. S.; Eviner, Valerie T.; et al. (2000). "Consequences of changing biodiversity". Nature. 405 (6783): 234–242. doi:10.1038/35012241. hdl: 11336/37401 . PMID   10821284. S2CID   205006508.
  78. 1 2 Rees, W. E. (1992). "Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out". Environment and Urbanization. 4 (2): 121–130. Bibcode:1992EnUrb...4..121R. doi: 10.1177/095624789200400212 .
  79. Hoekstra, A. (2009). "Human appropriation of natural capital: A comparison of ecological footprint and water footprint analysis" (PDF). Ecological Economics. 68 (7): 1963–1974. Bibcode:2009EcoEc..68.1963H. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.06.021.
  80. 1 2 Moran, D. D.; Kitzes, Justin A.; et al. (2008). "Measuring sustainable development — Nation by nation" (PDF). Ecological Economics. 64 (3): 470–474. Bibcode:2008EcoEc..64..470M. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.08.017. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-15.
  81. "Living Planet Report 2008" (PDF). Worldwide Wildlife Fun. Retrieved 4 February 2010.
  82. Costanza, R.; et al. (1997). "The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital" (PDF). Nature. 387 (6630): 253–260. Bibcode:1997Natur.387..253C. doi:10.1038/387253a0. S2CID   672256. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-12-26.
  83. Ceballos, G.; Ehrlich, P. R. (2002). "Mammal Population Losses and the Extinction Crisis" (PDF). Science. 296 (5569): 904–7. Bibcode:2002Sci...296..904C. doi:10.1126/science.1069349. PMID   11988573. S2CID   32115412. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-20.
  84. Wackernagel, M.; Rees, W. E. (1997). "Perceptual and structural barriers to investing in natural capital: Economics from an ecological footprint perspective". Ecological Economics. 20 (1): 3–24. Bibcode:1997EcoEc..20....3W. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(96)00077-8.
  85. Pastor, J.; Light, S.; Sovel, L. (1998). "Sustainability and resilience in boreal regions: sources and consequences of variability". Conservation Ecology. 2 (2): 16. doi:10.5751/ES-00062-020216. hdl: 10535/2686 . S2CID   88880482.
  86. Dasgupta, P. (2008). "Creative Accounting". Nature. 456: 44. doi: 10.1038/twas08.44a .
  87. Koh, LP; Sodhi, NS; et al. (2004). "Species Coextinctions and the Biodiversity Crisis". Science. 305 (5690): 1632–4. Bibcode:2004Sci...305.1632K. doi:10.1126/science.1101101. PMID   15361627. S2CID   30713492.
  88. Western, D. (1992). "The Biodiversity Crisis: A Challenge for Biology". Oikos. 63 (1): 29–38. Bibcode:1992Oikos..63...29W. doi:10.2307/3545513. JSTOR   3545513.
  89. Rees, W. (2002). "An Ecological Economics Perspective on Sustainability and Prospects for Ending Poverty". Population & Environment. 24 (1): 15–46. doi:10.1023/A:1020125725915. S2CID   150950663.
  90. "The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity". European Union. Retrieved 4 February 2010.
  91. Boulding, K.E. 1950. An Ecological Introduction. In A Reconstruction of Economics, Wiley, New York. pp. 3-17.
  92. Boulding, K.E. 1966. Economics and Ecology. In Nature Environments of North America, F.F. Darling and J.P. Milton, eds, Doubleday New York. pp.225-231.
  93. Agaton, Casper Boongaling; del Rosario, Eunice A.; Nguyen-Orca, Marie Faye; Salvacion, Arnold R.; Sandalo, Ricardo M. (2024-01-30). "Introduction to the Journal of Human Ecology and Sustainability (JHES)". Journal of Human Ecology and Sustainability. 1 (1): 9. doi: 10.56237/jhes24ED .
  94. Carpenter, B. 1986. Human Ecology: The Possibility of an Aesthetic Science. Paper presented at the Society for Human Ecology conference.
  95. Robinson, K. 2006. TED Talk, http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html
  96. McHarg, I. (1981). "Ecological Planning at Pennsylvania". Landscape Planning. 8 (2): 109–120. doi:10.1016/0304-3924(81)90029-0.
  97. In Kunstler, J.H. 1994. The Geography of Nowhere. New York:Touchstone. pp.260
  98. Steiner, D. and M. Nauser (eds.). 1993. Human Ecology: Fragments of Anti-fragmentary Views of the World. London and New York: Routledge. Human Ecology Forum 108 Human Ecology Review, 2008; Vol. 15, No. 1,

Further reading