Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
proposed development. However, consideration of the current under-
standing of ecosystems, which I examine in Chapter 2 , reveals that the
goal of regulating human activities through precise knowledge of eco-
logical conditions and of their vulnerabilities is not realistic. An obvious
dif
culty is that our comprehension of how ecosystems work is limited.
We are only now beginning to explore what it is that enables them to
function and to retain their structure in the face of negative impacts. This
dearth of knowledge is at least recognised by the advocates of limits-
based regulation, which is why a heavy emphasis is placed on research. 54
The question however is whether it would become feasible to control
activities by reference to
if our knowledge of ecological
behaviour is vastly improved. I suggest, for the following reasons, that it
would not.
The
'
tipping-points
'
rst is that the envisaged regulatory approach is based on
an inaccurate oversimpli
cation of an extremely complex reality.
Resilience, the property which is central to the ability of ecosystems to
maintain structure and functionality, is the product of myriad interac-
tions between the living components of ecosystems, between biota and
their surroundings, and between ecosystems, the climate and other Earth
System processes. 55 The relative contribution of these interactions to
resilience is barely known. The suggestion that this overarching systemic
property and the innumerable processes that feed into it could be
reduced to a few well-chosen indicators, or that
ne judgments could
be made about how activities undermine resilience as a basis for regu-
lation, does not sit comfortably with the reality.
Second, resilience is not amenable to quanti
cation. 56 Ecosystems are
inherently dynamic. They evolve naturally. They also react to stimuli,
including from natural in
uences, the effect of human activities on them
and changes in climate. An obvious consequence of this dynamism is
that the resilience of the system and factors that contribute to it are
subject to constant change. It would not be meaningful to attempt to
reduce what is a dynamic process to a set of static
gures. In addition,
judging activities to be appropriate against knowledge of ecological
conditions at a particular point in time would not provide a satisfactory
54 Ross,
'
Modern Interpretations
'
,45;Jay,
'
BuiltatSea
'
,181.
55
See my discussion of ecosystem complexity and resilience in Chapter 2 Sections 2.2
and 2.3 .
56
See my discussion of resilience in Chapter 2, Section 2.3 .
Search WWH ::




Custom Search