HUMAN ECOLOGY AS AN INTERDISCIPLINARY CONCEPT
29
“for a continuing system, the network has ultimately to be circular . . .
a self-sustaining system”. And, so, back again to the concept of general
equilibrium: “economic and social activity tend to occupy patterns in
space as well as in time which look very much like a general equilibrium”.
In an essay ‘intermediate between the above two, Boulding (1966)
formalizes five basic similarities between ecology and economics. He
states that both are concerned not only with individuals but with
individuals as members of species. The concept of population of like
individuals constituting a species is indeed fundamental to ecology. He
likens the commodity as the corresponding concept in economics and
says that “. . . it is easy to see the population of commodities as a simple
extension of natural species. The automobile, the pair of shoes, and the
loaf of bread are just as much members of species as the whooping crane
and the horse, or indeed man himself.”
Second, both have an important concept of general equilibrium. The
relation of population to environment is a general equilibrium concept
in ecology, though applied only in the abstract to human populations.
This, Boulding says, has no direct postulate for populations of different
commodities in economics; but the general equilibrium of the price
system is similar in many respects to a system of ecological equilibrium.
Caution in the application of general equilibrium theory to economic
use of the physical environment has been suggested by Kneese et at.
(1970).
Third, Boulding relates as an essential element (in both ecological
and economic systems) a system of exchange among various individuals
and species. Fourth, both involve the implication of some sort of
development, succession in ecology and in economics the cumulative
growth of population and the accumulation of capital in the form of
larger numbers of the same kind of good. Lastly, Boulding notes policy
as a fifth parallel between economics and ecological systems, notably
the distortion of the equilibrium of the system by man in his own
favor.
These rather artificial parallels can be clarified perhaps by stating
them for both disciplines in the context of a single focal problem. A basic
problem in both ecology and economics can be defined as the study of
how limited material-environmental resources become allocated among
different users, what Bates (1964) has called “looking at ecology in
terms of the economy of nature”. Such an allocation process can be
viewed as a game in both ecology and economics in which economic man
and/or the ecological organism (whether man or other) behave in a
predictable manner. More precisely, the consumer is assumed to follow a
strategy that maximizes his utility function, while the producer
29
“for a continuing system, the network has ultimately to be circular . . .
a self-sustaining system”. And, so, back again to the concept of general
equilibrium: “economic and social activity tend to occupy patterns in
space as well as in time which look very much like a general equilibrium”.
In an essay ‘intermediate between the above two, Boulding (1966)
formalizes five basic similarities between ecology and economics. He
states that both are concerned not only with individuals but with
individuals as members of species. The concept of population of like
individuals constituting a species is indeed fundamental to ecology. He
likens the commodity as the corresponding concept in economics and
says that “. . . it is easy to see the population of commodities as a simple
extension of natural species. The automobile, the pair of shoes, and the
loaf of bread are just as much members of species as the whooping crane
and the horse, or indeed man himself.”
Second, both have an important concept of general equilibrium. The
relation of population to environment is a general equilibrium concept
in ecology, though applied only in the abstract to human populations.
This, Boulding says, has no direct postulate for populations of different
commodities in economics; but the general equilibrium of the price
system is similar in many respects to a system of ecological equilibrium.
Caution in the application of general equilibrium theory to economic
use of the physical environment has been suggested by Kneese et at.
(1970).
Third, Boulding relates as an essential element (in both ecological
and economic systems) a system of exchange among various individuals
and species. Fourth, both involve the implication of some sort of
development, succession in ecology and in economics the cumulative
growth of population and the accumulation of capital in the form of
larger numbers of the same kind of good. Lastly, Boulding notes policy
as a fifth parallel between economics and ecological systems, notably
the distortion of the equilibrium of the system by man in his own
favor.
These rather artificial parallels can be clarified perhaps by stating
them for both disciplines in the context of a single focal problem. A basic
problem in both ecology and economics can be defined as the study of
how limited material-environmental resources become allocated among
different users, what Bates (1964) has called “looking at ecology in
terms of the economy of nature”. Such an allocation process can be
viewed as a game in both ecology and economics in which economic man
and/or the ecological organism (whether man or other) behave in a
predictable manner. More precisely, the consumer is assumed to follow a
strategy that maximizes his utility function, while the producer