HUMAN ECOLOGY A$ AN INTERDISCIPLINARY CONCEPT
27
principle of the environmental complex they call “ecological”. By whatever name, there is ambivalence over its content. For example, Barker
(1968) claims that “the ecological environment comprises a different
class of phenomenon [from “life-space’’ or psychological variables] and
can only be identified and understood independently of the behavior
with which it is linked”. Proshansky and his colleagues (1970), on the
other hand, appear to believe that behavior and environment are a
continuum, that “all components are defined by their participation in
the environmental process”. No component is seen as a separate entity.
There is little question that the adaptation of an ecological orientation in psychology is occurring and is legitimate (see also Clausen and
Kohn, 1954). It is unfortunate that those who practice the art, few as
they are, cannot get together and arrive at some satisfactory framework
for research and a common terminology that is acceptable to all. This
lack is not uncommon for a new science and does, in fact, have its
corollaries elsewhere in human ecology. However, when the ecological
psychologists do sit down and try to straighten out the tangle, it is
imperative that the commonalities on which they agree also fit in with
generally accepted usage across the breadth of human and biological
ecology.
4. Economics and ecology
Economists with an interest in and knowledge of ecology are few,
with only three or four of repeated note: Kenneth Boulding, S. V.
Ciriacy-Wantrup, Ruth Mack. Work by these few has been concentrated
on drawing simple parallels between ecology and economics and on
suggesting areas where the two concepts might, with benefit, be
integrated.
The most obvious parallel is the semantic origin of the names, a
common origin noted by Bates (1964), Boulding (1966) and CiriacyWantrup (1965), among others. The derivation of both terms stems
from the Greek word for habitatoikos: the resultant eco means “house”
or “household” in both cases. Logos is “word” or “discourse” or
account”; Nemein means ‘
summarizes that “both disciplines are interested in the relations between
complex sets of variables, and both try to understand these relations as
a meaningful whole. In other words, ecology and economics are both
concerned with the analysis of ‘systems’.” Boulding presents a similar
scheme by describing one of the “central concerns of ecology as the way
in which natural species earn their living”, how plants and animals
obtain the input necessary for survival. Economics, he claims, is also
C <
27
principle of the environmental complex they call “ecological”. By whatever name, there is ambivalence over its content. For example, Barker
(1968) claims that “the ecological environment comprises a different
class of phenomenon [from “life-space’’ or psychological variables] and
can only be identified and understood independently of the behavior
with which it is linked”. Proshansky and his colleagues (1970), on the
other hand, appear to believe that behavior and environment are a
continuum, that “all components are defined by their participation in
the environmental process”. No component is seen as a separate entity.
There is little question that the adaptation of an ecological orientation in psychology is occurring and is legitimate (see also Clausen and
Kohn, 1954). It is unfortunate that those who practice the art, few as
they are, cannot get together and arrive at some satisfactory framework
for research and a common terminology that is acceptable to all. This
lack is not uncommon for a new science and does, in fact, have its
corollaries elsewhere in human ecology. However, when the ecological
psychologists do sit down and try to straighten out the tangle, it is
imperative that the commonalities on which they agree also fit in with
generally accepted usage across the breadth of human and biological
ecology.
4. Economics and ecology
Economists with an interest in and knowledge of ecology are few,
with only three or four of repeated note: Kenneth Boulding, S. V.
Ciriacy-Wantrup, Ruth Mack. Work by these few has been concentrated
on drawing simple parallels between ecology and economics and on
suggesting areas where the two concepts might, with benefit, be
integrated.
The most obvious parallel is the semantic origin of the names, a
common origin noted by Bates (1964), Boulding (1966) and CiriacyWantrup (1965), among others. The derivation of both terms stems
from the Greek word for habitatoikos: the resultant eco means “house”
or “household” in both cases. Logos is “word” or “discourse” or
account”; Nemein means ‘
summarizes that “both disciplines are interested in the relations between
complex sets of variables, and both try to understand these relations as
a meaningful whole. In other words, ecology and economics are both
concerned with the analysis of ‘systems’.” Boulding presents a similar
scheme by describing one of the “central concerns of ecology as the way
in which natural species earn their living”, how plants and animals
obtain the input necessary for survival. Economics, he claims, is also
C <