Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Integrating Social Sciences into Long-Term Ecological Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Long-Term Ecological Research

Abstract

In Europe and North America, long-term ecological research (LTER) networks are changing their treatment of human activity from exogenous ‘disturbances’ to endogenous behaviour. The engagement of social scientists in LTER networks currently takes forms ranging from nonexistent, to research in parallel with ecological research but with minimal interaction, to truly collaborative long-term socio-ecological research (LTSER). Successful collaboration of social and ecological scientists can be facilitated by a ‘jazz band’ approach that allows shifting multidisciplinary leadership along with disciplinary research solos. Socio-ecological simulation modelling can serve as a common tool for analysing complex dynamics of the interacting systems. The design criteria for an LTSER network should include socio-economic as well as ecological factors in order to ensure that findings can be extrapolated in both dimensions, an approach currently being followed in Europe. However, due to evolving societal needs, socio-ecological research should also be occurring outside the network of LTSER sites. New governmental initiatives on both sides of the Atlantic have the potential to enable more and better socio-ecological research than in the past.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Grove, J. Morgan. Personal communication by email to Scott M. Swinton, October 6, 2007.

  2. 2.

    A criterion for the spatial extent of the sites to be selected - although important in ecological studies - was intentionally not included in the list. The size of the social system is determined by other criteria, such as income, markets and demography. Therefore the number and characteristics of ecological units (ecosystems, watersheds) should be adjusted to the meta-level aim of improving research collaboration between natural and social scientists to enhance our understanding of the interacting systems, society and nature.

References

  • Antle, J. M., Capalbo, S. M., Elliott, E. T., Hunt, H. W., Mooney S., & Paustian, K. H. (2001). Research needs for understanding and predicting the behavior of managed ecosystems: Lessons from the study of agroecosystems. Ecosystems, 4, 723–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benedick, R. E. (1991). Ozone diplomacy. Harvard: University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bockstael, N. E., Freeman, A. M., Kopp, R. J., Portney, P. R., & Smith, V. K. (2000). On measuring economic values for nature. Environmental Science & Technology, 34, 1384.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, S. R., DeFries, R., Dietz, T., Mooney, H. A., Polasky, S., Reid, W. V., et al. (2006). Millennium ecosystem assessment: Research needs. Science, 314, 257–258.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, S. L., Swinton, S. M., Anderson, C. W., Benson, B. J., Brunt, J., Gragson, T., et al. (2007). Integrated science for society and the environment: A strategic research initiative. Publication #23 of the U.S. LTER Network, LTER Network Office. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico.

    Google Scholar 

  • COM. (2005). Draft declaration on guiding principles for sustainable development. Communication from the Commission of the European Communities to the Council and the European Parliament 218. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/com/2005/com2005_0218en01.pdf.

  • Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine. (2004). Facilitating interdisciplinary research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R., D’Arge, R., DeGroot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., et al. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387, 253–260.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, G. S., Cumming, D. H., & Redman, C. L. (2006). Scale mismatches in socio-ecological systems: Causes, consequences, and solutions. Ecology and Society, 11, 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dirnböck, Th., Bezák, P., Dullinger, S., Haberl, H., Lotze-Campen, H., Mirtl, M., et al. (Eds.). (2006). Scaling issues in long-term socio-ecological biodiversity research: A review of European cases. Social Ecology Working Paper 100. Vienna: KlagenfurtUniversity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drechsler, M., Grimm, V., Mysiak, J., & Wätzold, F. (2007). Differences and similarities between ecological and economic models for biodiversity conservation. Ecological Economics, 62, 232–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drechsler, M., Johst, K., Ohl, C., & Wätzold, W. (2007). Designing cost-effective payments for conservation measures to generate spatiotemporal habitat heterogeneity. Conservation Biology, 21, 1475–1486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EEA. (1999a). Environment in the European Union at the turn of the century. Environmental assessment report No 2. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • EEA. (1999b). Environmental indicators: Typology and overview. Technical report No 25. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gragson, T. L., & Grove, M. (2006). Social science in the context of the Long Term Ecological Research Program. Society and Natural Resources, 19(1), 93–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gragson, T. L., & Bolstad, P. V. (2006). Land use legacies and the future of Southern Appalachia. Society and Natural Resources, 19(1), 175–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimm, N., Grove, J. M., Pickett, S. T. A., & Redman, C. L., (2000). Integrated approaches to long-term studies of urban ecological systems. Bioscience, 50, 571–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grove, J. M., Cadenasso, M. L., Burch, W. R., Pickett, S. T. A., Schwarz, K., Neil-Dunne, J., et al. (2006). Data and methods comparing social structure and vegetation structure of urban neighborhoods in Baltimore, Maryland. Society and Natural Resources, 19(1), 117–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haberl, H., Winiwarter, V., Andersson, K., Ayres, R. U., Boone, C., Castillo, A., et al. (2006). From LTER to LTSER: Conceptualizing the socioeconomic dimension of long-term socioecological research. Ecology and Society, 11(2). Retrieved from URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art13/.

  • Jentsch, A., Wittmer, H., Jax, K., Ring, I., & Henle, K. (2003). Biodiversity. Emerging issues for linking natural and social sciences. GAIA, 12, 121–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johst, K., Drechsler, M., & Wätzold, F. (2002). An ecological-economic modelling procedure to design effective and efficient compensation payments for the protection of species. Ecological Economics, 41, 37–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kareiva, P., Watts, S., McDonald, R., & Boucher, T. (2007). Domesticated nature: Shaping landscapes and ecosystems for human welfare. Science, 316, 1866–1869.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • King, R. P., Lybecker, D. W., Regmi, A., & Swinton, S. M. (1993). Bioeconomic models of crop production systems: Design, development, and use. Review of Agricultural Economics, 15, 393–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MASR. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Biodiversity synthesis (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Scientific Report). Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirtl, M. (2004, July). LTER in Austria: Implementing multifunctional research platforms (MFRPs) for LTER. Paper presented at the ILTERN Coordinating Committee Meeting 7–9 July, Manaus, Brazil. Retrieved from http://www.ilternet.edu/meetings/.

  • Nelson, G. C., Bennett, E., Berhe, A. A., Cassman, K., DeFries, R., Dietz, T., et al.. (2006). Anthropogenic drivers of ecosystem change: An overview. Ecology and Society, 2, 29. Retrieved from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art29/.

  • Nowak, P., Bowen, S., & Cabot, P. E. (2006). Disproportionality as a framework for linking social and biophysical systems. Society and Natural Resources, 19, 153–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oberthür, S., & Ott, H. E. (1999). The Kyoto protocol. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohl, C., Krauze, K., & Grünbühel, C. (2007). Towards an understanding of long-term ecosystem dynamics by merging socio-economic and environmental research. Criteria for Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research Sites Selection. Ecological Economics, 63, 383–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parr, T. (2006). Research Integration for the CBD. ALTERNews, 02, Retrieved from http://www.alter-net.info.

  • Pearce, D. 1998. Auditing the Earth. Environment, 40, 23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrings, C. (2002). Modelling sustainable ecological-economic development. International Yearbook of Environmental and Resource Economics, 2001/2, 179–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickett, S. T. A., Cadenasso, M. L., Grove, J. M., Nilon, C. H., Pouyat, R. V., Zipperer, W. C., et al. (2001). Urban ecological systems: Linking terrestrial ecological, physical, and socioeconomic components of metropolitan areas. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 32, 127–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redman, C. L., Grove, J. M., & Kuby, L. H. (2004). Integrating social science into the long-term ecological research (LTER) network: Social dimensions of ecological change and ecological dimensions of social change. Ecosystems, 7, 161–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roughgarden, J. (2001). Guide to diplomatic relations with economists. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 82, 85–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shogren, J. F., Parkhurst, G. M., & Settle, C. (2003). Integrating economics and ecology to protect nature on private lands: Models, methods and mindsets. Environmental Science and Policy, 6, 233–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siepel, H. (2006). LTSER-sites in Europe. A preliminary selection. Retrieved from http://www.alter-net.info.

  • Siepel, H., & Furman, E. (2006). Biodiversity at Stake: Do we need a multi-disciplinary approach? ALTERNews, 02. Retrieved from http://www.alter-net.info.

  • Spalatro, F., & Provencher, B. (2001). An analysis of minimum frontage zoning to preserve lakefront amenities. Land Economics, 77, 469–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svarstad, H., Petersen, L. K., Rothman, D., Siepel, H., & Wätzoldt, F. (2008). Discursive biases of the environmental research framework DPSIR. Land Use Policy, 25, 116–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swinton, S. M., Lupi, F., Robertson, G. P., & Hamilton, S. K. (2007). Ecosystem services and agriculture: Cultivating agricultural ecosystems for diverse benefits. Ecological Economics, 64, 245–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swinton, S. M., Lupi, F., Robertson, G. P., & Landis, D. A. (2006). Ecosystem services from agriculture: Looking beyond the usual suspects. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 88, 1160–1166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman, D., Polasky, S., & Lehman, C. (2005). Diversity, productivity and temporal stability in the economies of humans and nature. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 49, 405–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tschirhart, J. (2004). A new adaptive system approach to predator-prey modeling. Ecological Modelling, 176, 255–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UFZ Biodiversity Research Strategy. (2007). Biodiversity and ecosystem functions under global change. Concept paper. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. National Research Council. (2005). Decision making for the environment.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNMP. (2005). Investing in development: A practical plan to achieve the millennium development goals, overview (United Nations Millennium Project). Washington, DC: Communications Development Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitousek, P. M., Mooney, H. A., Lubchenco, J., & Melillo, J. M. (1997). Human domination of earth's ecosystems. Science, 277, 494–499.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wätzold, F., Drechsler, M., Armstrong, C. W., Baumgärtner, S., Grimm, V., Huth, A., et al. (2006). Ecological-economic modelling for biodiversity management: Potential, pitfalls, and prospects. Conservation Biology, 20, 1043–1041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wätzold, F., Lienhoop, N., Drechsler, M., & Settele, J. (2008): Estimating optimal conservation in agricultural landscapes when costs and benefits of conservation measures are heterogeneous in space and over time, Ecological Economics, 68(1–2), 295–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wear, D. N., & Bolstad, P. (1998). Land-use changes in Southern Appalachian landscapes: Spatial analysis and forecast evaluation. Ecosystems, 1, 575–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, W., & Swinton, S. M. (2009). Incorporating natural enemies in an economic threshold for dynamically optimal pest management. Ecological Modelling, 220, 1315–1324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge support from ALTER Net (A Long-Term Biodiversity, Ecosystem and Awareness Research Network) funded by the EU’s sixth Framework Programme, as well as support from the National Science Foundation under Long-Term Ecological Rresearch (KBS-LTER) Grant No. 0423627. We thank Frank Wätzold, Irene Ring, Ted Gragson, Morgan Grove and Bill Provencher for helpful comments. We are also indebted to Prof. em. Wolfgang Haber and to an anonymous referee for stimulating comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UFZ-Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Permoserstraße 15, 04318, Leipzig, Germany

    Cornelia Ohl

  2. German Emissions Trading Authority at the Federal Environment Agency, Bismarckplatz 1, 14193, Berlin, Germany

    Cornelia Ohl

  3. Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824-1039, USA

    Scott M. Swinton

Authors
  1. Cornelia Ohl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Scott M. Swinton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cornelia Ohl .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Ökologie-Zentrum, Universität zu Kiel, Olshausenstr. 75, Kiel, 24118, Germany

    Felix Müller

  2. Dept. Biozönoseforschung, Helmholtz-Zentrum für Umweltforschung, Theodor-Lieser-Str. 4, Halle, 06120, Germany

    Cornelia Baessler

  3. Universität Rostock, Albert-Einstein-Str. 3, Rostock, 18055, Germany

    Hendrik Schubert

  4. Dept. Biozönoseforschung, Helmholtz-Zentrum für Umweltforschung, Theodor-Lieser-Str. 4, Halle, 06120, Germany

    Stefan Klotz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ohl, C., Swinton, S.M. (2010). Integrating Social Sciences into Long-Term Ecological Research. In: Müller, F., Baessler, C., Schubert, H., Klotz, S. (eds) Long-Term Ecological Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8782-9_27

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation