4
Adaptive Ecosystem Assessment and
Management: The Path of Last Resort?
S. S. Light
Man's attitude to the world must be radically
changed [emphasis added]. We have to abandon
the arrogant belief that the world is merely a puzzle to be solved, a machine with instructions
waiting to be discovered, a body of information
to be fed into a computer in the hope that, sooner
or later, it will spit out a universal solution.
- Vaclav Havel (1992)
The coming together of science, culture and spiritual activity is necessary for the fulfillment of
human needs [emphasis added]. The world is
presently in a difficult period of adjustment, and
we urge people to be patient in judging what the
longer-term future will be like. The complexity
of this adjustment renders the future's possibilities very uncertain. But the role of science in this
situation is essential for human survival.
-Ilya Prigogine (1984)
4.1 Introduction
Scientists understand that the Upper Mississippi
River floodplain ecosystem evolved over eons of
time through patterns of dynamic variability shaped
by drought and flood, scour and deposition, channel formation, migration, and abandonment. Our
scientists know that floodplain dynamics involving
connectivity, hydroperiod, and energy distribution
drive the river's ecosystems (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1999). Yet basin-scale
rehabilitation efforts on the Upper Mississippi
River continue to focus on (1) single targets, optimizing habitat for relatively few highly valued
species and (2) piecemeal environmental mitigation
that shows little deference to the prime abiotic factors affecting biotic integrity: hydrodynamics and
sedimentation.
Far from being an isolated incident, this dichotomy between our combined scientific and experiential understanding and the current state of
management practice on the Upper Mississippi
River is not unique. Experience suggests that this
dichotomy is widespread within the natural resource and environmental management professional community. Professional scientists are frustrated by having their limited resources and
energies squandered on mind-numbing meetings on
where to locate the next dredge spoil pile while the
ecological vitality of one of the world's great rivers
slips slowly and possibly irreversibly beyond grasp.
The inability for individuals and small groups of
scientists to address root causes and positively influence institutional decision making such as on
river degradation is driving some of our best people out of the profession or into early retirement.
The foundations of resource science and management are being rethought. The near century old
vision of scientific management is being dismantled and it is not entirely clear what will replace it.
Indisputably, understanding and managing nature
as complex adaptive systems is the fundamental
challenge resource that scientist and managers face
as the 21st century approaches. The question is
whether the current ways of organizing and using
scientific knowledge can deliver the needed comprehension and action.
The belief that a scientifically rigorous technocratic elite could be empowered to solve our nation's environmental ills is over and done with. The
unflagging faith in technocracy's ability to produce
the next generation of add-on innovations that
would "fix the problem" has backfired. We have
been living under the fantasy that, if we could just
put an additional program in place, or diffuse the
next generation of technological innovation
55
Adaptive Ecosystem Assessment and
Management: The Path of Last Resort?
S. S. Light
Man's attitude to the world must be radically
changed [emphasis added]. We have to abandon
the arrogant belief that the world is merely a puzzle to be solved, a machine with instructions
waiting to be discovered, a body of information
to be fed into a computer in the hope that, sooner
or later, it will spit out a universal solution.
- Vaclav Havel (1992)
The coming together of science, culture and spiritual activity is necessary for the fulfillment of
human needs [emphasis added]. The world is
presently in a difficult period of adjustment, and
we urge people to be patient in judging what the
longer-term future will be like. The complexity
of this adjustment renders the future's possibilities very uncertain. But the role of science in this
situation is essential for human survival.
-Ilya Prigogine (1984)
4.1 Introduction
Scientists understand that the Upper Mississippi
River floodplain ecosystem evolved over eons of
time through patterns of dynamic variability shaped
by drought and flood, scour and deposition, channel formation, migration, and abandonment. Our
scientists know that floodplain dynamics involving
connectivity, hydroperiod, and energy distribution
drive the river's ecosystems (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1999). Yet basin-scale
rehabilitation efforts on the Upper Mississippi
River continue to focus on (1) single targets, optimizing habitat for relatively few highly valued
species and (2) piecemeal environmental mitigation
that shows little deference to the prime abiotic factors affecting biotic integrity: hydrodynamics and
sedimentation.
Far from being an isolated incident, this dichotomy between our combined scientific and experiential understanding and the current state of
management practice on the Upper Mississippi
River is not unique. Experience suggests that this
dichotomy is widespread within the natural resource and environmental management professional community. Professional scientists are frustrated by having their limited resources and
energies squandered on mind-numbing meetings on
where to locate the next dredge spoil pile while the
ecological vitality of one of the world's great rivers
slips slowly and possibly irreversibly beyond grasp.
The inability for individuals and small groups of
scientists to address root causes and positively influence institutional decision making such as on
river degradation is driving some of our best people out of the profession or into early retirement.
The foundations of resource science and management are being rethought. The near century old
vision of scientific management is being dismantled and it is not entirely clear what will replace it.
Indisputably, understanding and managing nature
as complex adaptive systems is the fundamental
challenge resource that scientist and managers face
as the 21st century approaches. The question is
whether the current ways of organizing and using
scientific knowledge can deliver the needed comprehension and action.
The belief that a scientifically rigorous technocratic elite could be empowered to solve our nation's environmental ills is over and done with. The
unflagging faith in technocracy's ability to produce
the next generation of add-on innovations that
would "fix the problem" has backfired. We have
been living under the fantasy that, if we could just
put an additional program in place, or diffuse the
next generation of technological innovation
55