James J. Kay

Life as a manifestation of the second law of thermodynamics

We examine the thermodynamic evolution of various evolving systems, from primitive physical systems to complex living systems, and conclude that they involve similar processes which are phenomenological manifestations of the second law of thermodynamics. We take the reformulated second law of thermodynamics of Hatsopoulos and Keenan and Kestin and extend it to nonequilibrium regions, where nonequilibrium is described in terms of gradients maintaining systems at some distance away from equilibrium. The reformulated second law suggests that as systems are moved away from equilibrium they will take advantage of all available means to resist externally applied gradients. When highly ordered complex systems emerge, they develop and grow at the expense of increasing the disorder at higher levels in the systems hierarchy. We note that this behaviour appears universally in physical and chemical systems. We present a paradigm which provides for a thermodynamically consistent explanation of why there is life, including the origin of life, biological growth, the development of ecosystems, and patterns of biological evolution observed in the fossil record. We illustrate the use of this paradigm through a discussion of ecosystem development. We argue that as ecosystems grow and develop, they should increase their total dissipation, develop more complex structures with more energy flow, increase their cycling activity, develop greater diversity and generate more hierarchical levels, all to abet energy degradation. Species which survive in ecosystems are those that funnel energy into their own production and reproduction and contribute to autocatalytic processes which increase the total dissipation of the ecosystem. In short, ecosystems develop in ways which systematically increase their ability to degrade the incoming solar energy. We believe that our thermodynamic paradigm makes it possible for the study of ecosystems to be developed from a descriptive science to predictive science founded on the most basic principle of physics.

An ecosystem approach for sustainability: addressing the challenge of complexity

Abstract The dynamics of ecosystems and human systems need to be addressed in the context of post-normal science grounded in complex systems thinking. We portray these systems as Self-Organizing Holarchic Open (SOHO) systems and interpret their behaviours and structures with reference to non-equilibrium thermodynamics: holons, propensities and canons; and information and attractors. Given the phenomena exhibited by SOHO systems, conventional science approaches to modelling and forecasting are inappropriate, as are prevailing explanations in terms of linear causality and stochastic properties. Instead, narratives in the form of scenarios to depict morphogenetic causal loops, autocatalysis, and multiple possible pathways for development need to be considered. Short examples are given. We also link SOHO system descriptions to issues of human preferences and choices concerning the preferred attributes of particular SOHO systems, and to the implications for achieving them through adaptive management, monitoring and appropriate structures for governance. A heuristic framework to guide reasoning for this is presented, and reiterative steps for applying it are identified. In this way we provide a coherent conceptual basis, in the workings of both natural systems and decision systems, for the practice of post-normal science.

Ecological integrity and the management of ecosystems

SETTING THE STAGE The Notion of Natural and Cultural Integrity, Henry A. Reiger Considerations of Scale and Hierarchy, Anthony W. King Applying Notions of Ecological Integrity, Robert Steedman and Wolfgang Haider Choosing Indicators of Ecosystem Integrity: Wetlands as a Model System, Paul A. Keddy, Harold T. Lee and Irene C. Wisheu APPLYING THE CONCEPTS Measuring Biological Integrity: Lessons from Streams, James R. Karr Monitoring for Ecosystem Integrity, R.E. Munn National and Regional Scale Measures of Canadas Ecosystem Health, I.B. Marshall, H. Hirvonen and E. Wiken National Environmental Monitoring: A Case Study of the Atlantic Maritime Region, N.L. Shackell and B. Freedman Monitoring and Measuring Ecosystem Integrity in Canadian National Parks, Stephen Woodley An Approach to the Development of Biological Sediment Guidelines, Trevor B. Reynoldson and Michael A. Zarull On the Nature of Ecological Integrity: Some Closing Comments, James J. Kay Index

A nonequilibrium thermodynamic framework for discussing ecosystem integrity

During the last 20 years our understanding of the development of complex systems has changed significantly. Two major advancements are catastrophe theory and nonequilibrium thermodynamics with its associated theory of self-organization. These theories indicate that complex system development is nonlinear, discontinuous (catastrophes), not predictable (bifurcations), and multivalued (multiple developmental pathways). Ecosystem development should be expected to exhibit these characteristics.Traditional ecological theory has attempted to describe ecosystem stress response using some simple notions such as stability and resiliency. In fact, stress-response must be characterized by a richer set of concepts. The ability of the system to maintain its current operating point in the face of the stress, must be ascertained. If the system changes operating points, there are several questions to be considered: Is the change along the original developmental pathway or a new one? Is the change organizing or disorganizing? Will the system return to its original state? Will the system flip to some new state in a catastrophic way? Is the change acceptable to humans?The integrity of an ecosystem does not reflect a single characteristic of an ecosystem. The concept of integrity must be seen as multidimensional and encompassing a rich set of ecosystem behaviors. A framework of concepts for discussing integrity is presented in this article.

Complexity and thermodynamics: Towards a new ecology

Abstract This article proposes a thermodynamic paradigm for the development of ecosystems. Ecosystems are viewed as non-equilibrium structures and processes, open to material and energy flows. It is suggested that as ecosystems grow and develop, they should increase their total dissipation by developing structures and processes to assist energy degradation. Species which survive in ecosystems are those that funnel energy into their own production and reproduction and contribute to autocatalytic processes which increase the total dissipation of the ecosystem. These studies may allow for the development of measures useful to environmental management and may help the science of ecology with a much needed theoretical framework.

Embracing Complexity the Challenge of the Ecosystem Approach

As environmental degradation and change continues, decision makers and managers feel significant pressure to rectify the situation. Scientists, in turn, find themselves under pressure to set out simple and clear rules for proper ecosystem management. The response has been one of frustration. Michael Soule and Laurence Slobdokin both loudly complain that ecology is an intractable science, immature and not very helpful. Kristin Shrader-Frechette and Robert Peters reproach ecologists for not producing simple testable hypotheses.1 Meanwhile policy makers and managers clamour for a measure of ecosystem integrity whose value in different situations can be predicted by simulation models. The question on everyone’s mind is “what does ecosystem science identify as the main, simple, basic, universal laws which will allow quantitative prediction of ecosystem behaviour and what are the resulting rules for ecosystem management?”

A Detailed Guide to Network Analysis

This chapter will introduce a number of the more frequently used network analysis techniques, many of which trace their origins from Leontief’s (1936) economic input-output analysis and Shannon’s information theory (1948). We begin by presenting a standard format for recording all of the flow data related to the ecosystem in a network representation. Having constructed the representation, the direct and indirect relationships that exist among the different components can then be examined in depth using a suite of network analyses that have been developed through the years by a number of researchers. These analyses consist of calculating a number of measures which synthesise some part of the information about flows of energy or materials through an ecosystem. These measures and analytical techniques cover from the microscopic level, the level of a component, right up to the macroscopic level, the level of the whole ecosystem. The measures are presented in a gradation from micro to macroscopic. The set of measures described herein provides a very rich description of an ecosystem; a description which looks at the system from many different perspectives. Clearly anyone applying these measures will have need for only those which reflect the perspectives of interest to the researcher.

A package for the analysis of ecosystem flow networks

In a single software package NETWRK affords an ecosystem researcher or manager with several new avenues for extracting heretofore unavailable information about the flows of material or energy in the ecosystem. Clues about how an ecosystem may be reacting to a perturbation are often manifested first as changes in the relationships among the constituent taxa. Systematic analyses that quantify these configurational changes are only now beginning to appear as ecological software. NETWRK consolidates four analytical techniques: (1) The study of indirect trophic effects allows the user to infer how a given taxonomic group affects or is affected by other compartments with which it may not be directly connected. (2) The myriad of trophic interactions is simplified into a linear chain of trophic transfers (sensu Lindeman), revealing how efficiently the system is processing the medium in question. (3) The full structure of pathways of recycle is elaborated, possibly depicting domains of control within the system. (4) The overall trophic status of the system is assessed by several indices deriving from thermodynamics and information theory. A before-after comparison of these system indices allows the user to render quantitative judgements about the extent to which the community in question has been impacted. This nine year old program has been tested extensively and is available for use in both MS-DOS and Macintosh environments in either FORTRAN or Pascal. Copies are available from the authors.

What is Life? The Next Fifty Years: Order from disorder: the thermodynamics of complexity in biology

In the middle of the nineteenth century, two major scientific theories emerged about the evolution of natural systems over time. Thermodynamics, as refined by Boltzmann, viewed nature as decaying toward a certain death of random disorder in accordance with the second law of thermodynamics. This equilibrium seeking, pessimistic view of the evolution of natural systems is contrasted with the paradigm associated with Darwin, of increasing complexity, specialization, and organization of biological systems through time. The phenomenology of many natural systems shows that much of the world is inhabited by nonequilibrium coherent structures, such as convection cells, autocatalytic chemical reactions and life itself. Living systems exhibit a march away from disorder and equilibrium, into highly organized structures that exist some distance from equilibrium.

Perspective changes everything: managing ecosystems from the inside out

In the past, environmental managers could behave as if they were managing a “natural” system to which they were external; criteria for successful management could be derived from historical data or from current pristine systems elsewhere in the world. With a few localized exceptions, this approach is no longer viable. Most of the ecosystems for which critical and urgent decisions need to be made are best seen as complex ecosocial systems, with people firmly embedded as an integral element. We can no longer manage ecosystems per se, but rather we must learn to manage our interactions within our ecological context. This view, which incorporates notions of multiple, interacting, nested hierarchies, feedback loops across space and time, and radical uncertainty with regard to prediction of system behavior, requires rethinking. How should we now think about science and science-based management? Post-normal science, complex systems theories, and the creation of collective narratives offer the best hope for making progress in this field. We use several ecosystem management and community health programs in Peru, Kenya, and Nepal to demonstrate the characteristics necessary for this kind of “inside-out” approach.