(PAPER TO A SCIENCE FORUM HELD BY CSIRO RESOURCE FUTURES PROGRAM OCTOBER 1-2, 2002)
WHILE WE DO OTHER
THINGS SUCH AS STUDY PESTS AND DISEASES AND FLOWS IN THE NATIONAL PHYSICAL ECONOMY,
THE MAIN THEME OF THIS DIVISION’S RESEARCH IS STILL THE MANAGEMENT OF
LAND-BASED NATURAL RESOURCE SYSTEMS (BIOMES, LANDSCAPES, ECOSYSTEMS, LAND
SYSTEMS ETC) WITH A PARTICULAR INTEREST IN THE ENHANCEMENT OF THEIR PRODUCTION
AND CONSERVATION FUNCTIONS AND THE TRADEOFFS BETWEEN THESE FUNCTIONS. FOR THE PURPOSES OF TODAY’S TALK, THAT’S WHAT I MEAN BY ‘OUR SORT OF SCIENCE’
AND, FOR SHORT, I WILL REFER TO IT AS ‘RESOURCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE’ OR
R&E SCIENCE. AND OF COURSE OUR SORT
OF SCIENCE IS NOT RESTRICTED TO CSE.
I AM BUILDING MY
TALK AROUND THE QUESTION ‘HAVE THERE BEEN OR CAN WE FORESEE PARADIGM SHIFTS IN
AUSTRALIAN R&E SCIENCE’? AND TO
CONSTRAIN MY REMARKS I WILL ADD ‘WITHIN THE PAST OR NEXT TEN YEARS’. WHILE I HAVE BEEN ASKED TO SCENARIO THE
FUTURE (THERE’S A NEW VERB FOR YOU), I DO BELIEVE THAT OFTEN THE BEST WAY OF
THINKING ABOUT THE SHAPE OF THINGS TO COME IS TO TAKE A RUNNING JUMP AT THEM
OUT OF THE PAST. ARTHUR KOESTLER WAS
FOND OF MAKING THE SAME POINT USING THE FRENCH PHRASE ---‘RECULER POUR MIEUX
SAUTER’---‘RUN BACK IN ORDER TO LEAP
FURTHER FORWARD’.
FOR MOST SCIENTISTS,
THE TERM PARADIGM SHIFT COMMONLY REFERS TO A KUHNIAN PARADIGM SHIFT
MEANING THAT SCIENTISTS IN A PARTICULAR DISCIPLINE COME TO OVERVIEW THE SYSTEMS
THEY STUDY, THEIR ‘TARGET’ SYSTEMS, IN A NEW WAY WHICH SEEMS TO BE MORE
CONSISTENT WITH THE FACTS. FOR EXAMPLE,
THE EARTH GOES ROUND THE SUN RATHER THAN VICE VERSA. BUT, I THINK THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL (NOTE: NOT DIFFERENT) WAY IN
WHICH THE TERM CAN BE USED, AND THAT IS TO REFER TO THE SITUATION WHERE A
COMMUNITY OF SCIENTISTS COMES TO AGREE, TACITLY PERHAPS, THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF
WHAT THEY ARE STUDYING NEED TO BE REDEFINED.
FOR EXAMPLE, ‘PERHAPS WE SHOULD BE STUDYING CROP ROTATIONS RATHER THAN CROP
X’. I WILL CALL THESE TWO VERSIONS OF
‘PARADIGM SHIFT’ THE ‘NEW OVERVIEW’OR TYPE 1 AND THE ‘NEW SYSTEM’ OR TYPE 2
VERSIONS. AND I WILL FURTHER RECOGNISE
THAT ‘NEW SYSTEM’ SHIFTS CAN NORMALLY BE THOUGHT OF AS EITHER A SHIFT IN FOCUS
TO A NEW SUB-SYSTEM OR TO A NEW SUPER-SYSTEM.
AN EXAMPLE OF THE FORMER IS A SHIFT IN FOCUS FROM A CROP’S AGRONOMY TO A
CROP’S GENETICS. SOMETIMES, THE TERMS
‘MORE HOLISTIC’ AND ‘MORE REDUCTIONIST’ ARE APPLIED TO NEW-SYSTEM SHIFTS BUT
THESE TERMS CARRY EMOTIONAL BAGGAGE WHICH WE CAN LEAVE IN THE LOCKER-ROOM
TODAY.
SO, FROM A LIMITED
PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE, BECAUSE IT IS NOT SOMETHING I HAVE HAD TIME TO RESEARCH
MORE WIDELY, I AM LOOKING FOR PARADIGM SHIFTS IN AUSTRALIAN R&E SCIENCE.
LET ME START WITH A
FIRST DISAGGREGATION OF WHAT R&E SCIENTISTS DO AND HAVE BEEN DOING; AND I
WILL DO IT BY REFERENCING MYSELF. TEN YEARS AGO I HAD JUST PUBLISHED A BOOK
CALLED USE WITH CARE: A GUIDE TO MANAGING AUSTRALIA'S NATURAL RESOURCES IN
THE 21ST CENTURY. TRYING
HARD TO GENERALISE, I IDENTIFIED THEREIN ‘FIVE CHALLENGES FOR AUSTRALIAN
RESOURCE SCIENTISTS’, TASKS WHICH I THOUGHT PEOPLE LIKE US BOTH WOULD BE AND
SHOULD BE TACKLING; AND OF COURSE THEY WERE NOT TOO FAR AWAY FROM WHAT PEOPLE
WERE ACTUALLY DOING (NO PARADIGM SHIFTS FOR ME). I WILL QUOTE THEM VERBATIM:
I THINK THAT THE
FIRST FOUR OF THESE THEMES HAVE BEEN A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THE RESEARCH EFFORT
IN R&E SCIENCE IN THE LAST DECADE AND THAT THERE HAVE BEEN MAJOR SUCCESSES
IN ALL FOUR AREAS. HOWEVER, I CANNOT
SEE CLEAR PARADIGM SHIFTS, CERTAINLY NOT OF THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK TYPE IN
THESE FOUR THEMES. I AM MORE THAN
HAPPY TO HAVE MY BLIND SPOTS POINTED OUT BUT I WILL ASK FOR A ‘VOTE’ FROM THE
AUDIENCE AFTER ANY SUGGESTIONS. BEFORE
YOU SPEAK, REMEMBER THAT THE CLOSER YOU ARE TO A PROBLEM, THE MORE LIKELY ANY
ADVANCE IS TO BE SEEN AS A BREAKTHROUGH OR A RECONCEPTUALISATION. TO ME, THE CORE OF ANY RECONCEPTUALISATION
WILL NORMALLY BE A PERCEPTION OF A RELATIONSHIP PREVIOUSLY UNSUSPECTED OR
UNSUBSTANTIATED, LIKE THE HOLE IN OZONE LAYER OR AIR BUBBLES IN ICE CORES
LET ME DEFEND MY
ASSERTION WITH A BRIEF COMMENT ON RECENT PROGRESS WITHIN EACH OF THESE THEMES.
I WILL ALSO MENTION SEVERAL EXAMPLES OF WHAT I SEE AS FAILURES. NOTE THAT I AM
TALKING ABOUT THEMES 1-4 AT THIS STAGE, NOT THEME 5.
THANKS TO NORMAL
SCIENCE, WE KNOW A LOT MORE ABOUT MANY LANDSCAPE PROCESSES THAN WE DID A
DECADE AGO. PART OF THIS HAS COME FROM
A REFOCUSSING OF ATTENTION ON PROCESSES INCREASINGLY SEEN AS IMPORTANT TO
UNDERSTAND FOR ECONOMIC REASONS.
EXAMPLES INCLUDE SALT MOVEMENTS, WATER QUALITY, GROUNDWATER BEHAVIOUR.
SOME OF THE PROGRESS
IS ASSOCIATED WITH INSTRUMENTATION GAINS, INCLUDING A REVIVAL OF THE 1970S
ENTHUSIASM FOR SIMULATION METHODS (EG IBP) ON THE BACK OF NEW GENERATIONS OF
POWERFUL COMPUTERS.
THERE HAS BEEN A
STEADY DAWNING OF UNDERSTANDING AS TO JUST HOW ENORMOUS MANY OF THE PROBLEMS IN
OUR AGRO-ECOLOGICAL LANDSCAPES ARE, EG SPECIES LOSSES, LAND DEGRADATION, FERAL
PLANTS AND ANIMALS. AND THAT WE DO NOT
HAVE PRACTICABLE SOLUTIONS.
AS FAR AS ECOLOGICAL
UNDERSTANDING IS CONCERNED, AND HERE I AM TRULY ENTERING THE LION’S DEN, THE
PROCESS-FUNCTIONAL APPROACH TO UNDERSTANDING ECOSYSTEMS HAS CONTRIBUTED MORE
INSIGHTS TO R&E SCIENCE IN THE LAST DECADE THAN THE POPULATION-COMMUNITY
APPROACH WITH ITS EMPHASIS ON ECOSYSTEMS AS EQUILIBRIUM-SEEKING NETWORKS OF INTERACTING
POPULATIONS.
THE IDEA OF
ECOSYSTEMS AS ENERGY PROCESSING SYSTEMS GOES BACK AT LEAST TO LINDEMAN (1942)
AND VIA ODUM’S ENERGETICS WE HAVE ARRIVED AT HOLLING’S ADAPTIVE CYCLE THEORY
WHICH SAYS THAT, IF THEY ARE NOT RUDELY INTERRUPTED, ECOSYSTEMS GO THROUGH LIFE
CYCLES WHICH CAN BE INTERPRETED IN ENERGY PROCESSING TERMS. THAT IS THE TEMPORAL SIDE OF
PROCESS-FUNCTIONAL THINKING.
THE INCREASING
SPATIAL UNDERSTANDING OF ECOSYSTEMS, AT LEAST IN AUSTRALIA, HAS ITS ROOTS IN
THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINISM OF LAND SYSTEMS AND CATENARY SEQUENCES IN SOIL
LANDSCAPES. A FURTHER LEVEL OF
UNDERSTANDING CAME WITH SUCCESSFUL ATTEMPTS TO RELATE COMMUNITIES AND SPECIES
TO ENVIRONMENTAL ENVELOPES AND GRADIENTS.
CURRENT THINKING
WHICH SEES ECOSYSTEMS IN TERMS OF PATCH DYNAMICS BRINGS THE SPATIAL AND THE
TEMPORAL TOGETHER AND (SOMEONE MAY BE ABLE TO TELL ME) OPENS THE WAY PERHAPS
FOR AN INTEGRATION WITH THE POPULATION–COMMUNITY STRAND OF ECOLOGICAL THOUGHT.
ANYHOW, THE POINT I
AM MOVING TOWARDS MAKING IS THAT THE EVOLUTION OF THE ECOLOGICAL PARADIGM HAS
PROVIDED THE INTELLECTUAL FOUNDATION FOR WHAT I WILL IDENTIFY AS AN EMERGING
PARADIGM IN R&E SCIENCE AND THAT IS THAT AGRO-ECOLOGICAL LANDSCAPES HAVE TO
BE MANAGED AT LANDSCAPE SCALE AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ECOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES. FOR WANT OF A BETTER NAME, I WILL CALL IT
THE AGRO-ECOLOGICAL PARADIGM. AND IT IS
GENERATING SOME VERY POWERFUL IDEAS FOR LANDSCAPE MANAGERS, FOR EXAMPLE, THE
IDEA OF ROTATING PERENNIALITY, SHIFTING PATCHES OF PERENNIAL VEGETATION IN THE
LANDSCAPE. BUT I DO NOT THINK WE CAN
YET CLAIM A PARADIGM SHIFT. WHEN IT
DOES COME, IN THE SENSE OF BECOMING THE CONVENTIONAL WISDOM, IT WILL BE BOTH A
TYPE 1 AND A TYPE 2 PARADIGM SHIFT---A REFOCUSING TOWARDS THE LARGER LANDSCAPE
AND A PERCEPTION OF THAT LANDSCAPE AS AN EVOLVING SYSTEM REQUIRING EVOLVING
MANAGEMENT.
I WILL RETURN TO THE
AGRO-ECOLOGICAL PARADIGM PRESENTLY BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT IS PART OF A LARGER
PARADIGM SHIFT WHICH DID ARRIVE IN THE LAST DECADE OR SO. BUT LET ME CONTINUE WITH THE NEXT OF THE
R&E RESEARCH THEMES I IDENTIFIED IN 1992.
UNDER THIS HEADING,
THE MOST NOTABLE IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN IN
GROUND TRUTHING AND
FIELD DATA COLLECTION ARE EXPENSIVE AND SO INVENTORY WORK WHICH DEPENDS ON
MEASURING THINGS THAT CANNOT BE REMOTELY SENSED HAS BEEN INCREASINGLY NEGLECTED
IN THE LAST DECADE.
I WILL MENTION ONE
SPECTACULAR FAILURE WHICH I THINK COMES UNDER THIS HEADING AND THAT IS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT. A
PRIMARY REASON HAS BEEN OUR INABILITY TO QUANTIFY THE SIGNIFICANCE OF
IMPACTS AS DISTINCT FROM THEIR SIZE.
THE PAST DECADE HAS
CONFIRMED TWO BIG DISAPPOINTMENTS UNDER THIS HEADING:
THESE
DISAPPOINTMENTS HAVE BEEN OFFSET BY THE READY ACCEPTANCE OF SYSTEMS WHICH
PROVIDE LANDSCAPE MANAGERS WITH BACKGROUND INFORMATION, PROCESSED TO A GREATER
OR LESSER DEGREE, EG WEATHER INFORMATION, MARKET INFORMATION.
BEFORE COMMENTING ON
PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES IN THE NINETIES LET ME MAKE ONE COMMENT ON WHAT MIGHT
BE CALLED CONSERVATION TECHNOLOGIES AND THAT IS TO NOTE THE LACK OF RECENT
SUCCESS HERE. TO GIVE FOUR EXAMPLES, WE
R&E SCIENTISTS HAVE FAILED TO FIND ECONOMICAL AND EFFECTIVE LARGE-AREA
TECHNOLOGIES FOR ADDRESSING SPECIES LOSS, FERAL PESTS, THE LOSS OF ECOSYSTEM
SERVICES AND THE CHALLENGE OF RESTORATION ECOLOGY.
MODERN AGRICULTURE
DEPENDS HEAVILY ON FOUR FAMILIES OF TECHNOLOGIES: MECHANISATION, IRRIGATION,
FERTILISATION AND CHEMICALS. THE WHOLE
SYSTEM IS INESCAPABLY DEPENDENT ON CHEAP ENERGY. ONE MAJOR TREND IN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES HAS BEEN
THE MOVEMENT TOWARDS PRECISION OPERATIONS IN ALL FOUR GROUPS OF
TECHNOLOGIES. PRECISION CROPPING IS A
GOOD EXAMPLE BECAUSE IT INVOLVES ALL FOUR FAMILIES. PRECISION IN ANIMAL MANAGEMENT INVOLVES MANAGING EACH ANIMAL AS
AN INDIVIDUAL. WE HAVE GONE FAR BEYOND TAILORED
FEEDING OF MILKING COWS TO SUCH THINGS AS FLEECE TESTING AND FEED CONVERSION
TESTING. AND THE POINT IN TERMS OF
BEING ‘BENIGN AND PROFITABLE’ IS THAT PRECISION BRINGS BENIGNITY (THERE’S A NEW
WORD FOR YOU), MAINLY BY REDUCING RESIDUES AND DISTURBANCES ASSOCIATED WITH
FARMING OPERATIONS.
HOWEVER, WE NEED TO
NOTE THAT THESE NEW BENIGN AND PROFITABLE MATERIAL TECHNOLOGIES HAVE NOT BEEN
PRODUCED BY OUR SORT OF SCIENTISTS BUT BY VETS AND CHEMISTS AND ENGINEERS.
BEFORE MOVING ON TO
THEME 5, WHERE I PROMISE TO FIND YOU A PARADIGM SHIFT, I WANT TO DRAW TOGETHER
A COUPLE OF GENERAL OBSERVATION ABOUT R&E SCIENCE IN THE LAST DECADE.
THE MANAGEMENT OF
LAND-BASED NATURAL RESOURCE SYSTEMS HAS CHANGED MARKEDLY IN THE LAST
DECADE. THERE HAS BEEN A REFOCUSING
UPWARDS TOWARDS THE MANAGEMENT OF WHOLE LANDSCAPES AND A REFOCUSING DOWNWARDS
TOWARDS MANAGEMENT OF SMALL SUB-SYSTEMS LIKE ANIMALS AND LAND UNITS WITHIN
THOSE LANDSCAPES. I DO NOT WANT TO CALL
THOSE CHANGES A PARADIGM SHIFT BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE ONLY CONFUSING IN A PAPER
WHERE I AM CONCERNED WITH PARADIGM SHIFTS IN R&E SCIENCE, NOT IN LANDSCAPE
MANAGEMENT. PERHAPS I CAN CALL IT A REVOLUTION.
WHILE I DO NOT THINK
THAT R&E SCIENCE HAS CONTRIBUTED FUNDAMENTALLY TO THE SHIFT TOWARDS
MICRO-MANAGEMENT, I DO THINK THAT ECOLOGICAL THINKING HAS PLAYED AN IMPORTANT
ROLE IN THE SHIFT TOWARDS MANAGING LANDSCAPES RATHER THAN PADDOCKS OR BLOCKS OR
OTHER CADASTRAL UNITS. I AM IN TWO
MINDS AS TO WHETHER TO CALL THE GROWTH IN ECOLOGICAL UNDERSTANDING OVER THE
LAST DECADE A PARADIGM SHIFT.
MY SECOND GENERAL
OBSERVATION IS THAT, TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE HAS BEEN PROGRESS, IF NOT
PARADIGM SHIFT, IN R&E SCIENCE IN THE NINETIES, THAT PROGRESS IS SIMILAR TO
THE PAST IN THE DEGREE TO WHICH IT HAS BEEN DEPENDENT ON NEW TECHNOLOGIES AND
NEW METHODS---NEW RESEARCH TOOLS IF YOU LIKE.
SCIENCE PIGGYBACKS ON (RESEARCH) TECHNOLOGY AS THIS
PERCEPTIVE QUOTE FROM HANBURY BROWN
(THE WISDOM OF SCIENCE 1986) SHOWS:
AT THE TIME BACON WROTE---THE EARLY 17TH CENTURY---...
SCIENTISTS WERE MAKING RAPID PROGRESS LARGELY DUE TO THE NEW SCIENTIFIC
INSTRUMENTS---THE TELESCOPE, MICROSCOPE, THERMOMETER, BAROMETER, PENDULUM CLOCK
AND THE AIR PUMP.
HISTORIES OF SCIENCE ARE OFTEN WRITTEN IN TERMS OF OUTSTANDING PEOPLE LIKE
NEWTON AND EINSTEIN, SO THAT THEY GIVE THE IMPRESSION THAT THE PROGRESS OF
SCIENCE DEPENDS LARGELY ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW THEORIES. IT WOULD BE NEARER THE TRUTH TO SAY THAT IT
DEPENDS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW INSTRUMENTS AND HENCE ON NEW MATERIALS AND
NEW WAYS OF MAKING THINGS ... OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE REAL WORLD IS LIMITED BY THE
TOOLS WHICH ARE AVAILABLE AT THE TIME.
SCIENCE DEPENDS ON
TECHNOLOGY AS MUCH AS TECHNOLOGY DEPENDS ON SCIENCE AND THE COMPUTER OF COURSE
IS THE GENERIC TECHNOLOGY.
MY THIRD OBSERVATION
IS THAT TO THE EXTENT THAT THEMES 1-4 CONTINUE TO BE IMPORTANT IN R&E
SCIENCE, I CAN FORESEE STEADY PROGRESS DURING THIS DECADE IN THE AREAS WHERE
THERE HAS BEEN PROGRESS AND LITTLE PROGRESS IN THE AREAS WHERE THERE HAS BEEN
LITTLE PROGRESS IN THE PAST DECADE.
BECAUSE I AM NOT IN A POSITION TO FORESEE PARADIGM SHIFTS IN THESE
THEMATIC AREAS, THERE IS NOTHING ELSE THAT I CAN SAY.
A TECHNOLOGY IS A
RECIPE FOR PRODUCING SOMETHING, USUALLY SOMETHING MATERIAL, BUT SOCIAL TECHNOLOGIES,
AS DISTINCT FROM MATERIAL TECHNOLOGIES, ARE RECIPES FOR PRODUCING IMPROVED
INTERACTIONS OF PARTICULAR SORTS BETWEEN PEOPLE, EG LANDCARE GROUPS,
TRANSFERABLE WATER RIGHTS, MULTI-PARTY LAND USE PLANNING PROCEDURES SUCH AS
SIRO-PLAN
THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN THEMES 1-4 AND THEME 5 IS THAT THEMES 1-4 ARE ABOUT DOING SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCH INTENDED TO IMPROVE THE MANAGEMENT OF A CHUNK OF NATURAL RESOURCES BY
A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL, PARTY OR INTEREST GROUP HAVING MORE-OR-LESS COMPLETE
CONTROL OVER THE USE AND MANAGEMENT OF THOSE RESOURCES. THEME 5 WAS A RECOGNITION THAT MANY RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS HAVE TO BE UNDERSTOOD IN TERMS OF THE NEEDS OF MULTIPLE
STAKEHOLDERS, EACH WITH THEIR OWN ISSUES, VALUES AND GOALS. AND IT IS IN THIS AREA THAT A PARADIGM SHIFT
HAS OCCURRED IN RECENT YEARS. THERE IS
NOW A WIDE AGREEMENT THAT OUR SORT OF SCIENCE SHOULD BE STUDYING A MUCH MORE
INCLUSIVE TYPE OF SYSTEM THAN PREVIOUSLY.
I AM HAPPY TO DESCRIBE SUCH SYSTEMS AS SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL (BRIAN
WALKER’S TERM I THINK) BUT WE COULD ALSO DESCRIBE THEM AS ECO-SOCIAL SYSTEMS
WHERE THE ECO- BIT REFERS TO BOTH ECONOMIC AND ECOLOGICAL. [I CONFESS THAT WHEN I IDENTIFIED THE
DESIGNING OF SOCIAL TECHNOLOGIES AS A CHALLENGE FOR R&E SCIENTISTS I DID
NOT ENVISAGE DEALING WITH SYSTEMS OF THIS SIZE AND COMPLEXITY.]
I NEED TO EMPHASISE
AT ONCE THAT I AM TALKING ABOUT A TYPE 2 PARADIGM SHIFT, IE A NEW SYSTEM IS BEING STUDIED, NOT A PARADIGM
SHIFT INVOLVING A NEW CONCEPTUALISATION.
I WILL RETURN PRESENTLY TO THE CHALLENGE OF FINDING A NEW CONCEPTUALISATION
TO MATCH OUR NEW TARGET SYSTEMS.
SO, WITH MUCH
ARM-WAVING, THE PARADIGM SHIFT HAS BEEN FROM STUDYING THE MANAGEMENT OF
PRODUCTION AND CONSERVATION IN LAND-BASED NATURAL RESOURCE SYSTEMS TO STUDYING
THE WELL-BEING OF COMMUNITIES THAT ARE DEPENDENT ON NATURAL RESOURCE SYSTEMS
SEEN AS HAVING MULTIPLE USE AND FUNCTIONAL POSSIBILITIES.
I CAN SEE SEVERAL
REASONS WHY R&E SCIENCE HAS ADOPTED THE STUDY OF ECO-SOCIAL SYSTEMS SO
STRONGLY OVER THE PAST DECADE.
THE PRIMARY REASON
HAS BEEN THE ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL SQUEEZE ON AGRICULTURE. CONVENTIONAL AGRICULTURE CAN NO LONGER BE
SEEN AS A SUFFICIENT INFRASTRUCTURE OR FOUNDATION FOR SUCCESSFUL RURAL AND
REGIONAL COMMUNITIES. COMMUNITIES ARE
GROPING FOR NEW WAYS TO SURVIVE AND THRIVE AND BECAUSE OUR SORT OF SCIENCE IS
APPLIED SCIENCE WE ARE RESPONDING BY SAYING WE WILL TRY TO HELP. FINDING NEW AND DIFFERENT WAYS OF USING A
COMMUNITY’S LANDSCAPES TO MEET ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL TARGETS IS PART OF
THIS SEARCH, EG DEVELOPING A TOURISM INDUSTRY.
A SECOND REASON IS
THAT VALUES AND ATTITUDES IN AUSTRALIAN SOCIETY ARE SHIFTING. ECONOMIC RATIONALISM IS UNDER SIEGE. SCIENTISM IS UNDER SIEGE AND
TECHNO-SCEPTICISM IS ON THE RISE.
PEOPLE ARE BEGINNING TO REALISE THAT NEW TECHNOLOGIES OFTEN ‘BITE
BACK’. I AM NOT SURE WHETHER
ENVIRONMENTALISM IS ON THE RISE OR NOT.
PARTICIPATION HAS BECOME A MANTRA, POSSIBLY AS A RESPONSE TO PEOPLE
FEELING THAT THEY ARE LOSING CONTROL OVER THEIR LIVES.
THESE VALUE SHIFTS
AFFECT R&E SCIENTISTS DIRECTLY. AFTER
ALL THEY ARE PART OF THE COMMUNITY. BUT
THEY HAVE AFFECTED FUNDING AGENCIES TOO.
LET ME EXAGGERATE AND SAY THAT THE ATTITUDE IS ‘DON’T WORRY ABOUT THE
SCIENCE, JUST MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS ARE INVOLVED’.
THAT HEADING
ORIGINALLY READ ‘NEED FOR AN OVERVIEW PARADIGM’ BUT I THOUGHT I’D REVIVE YOUR
FLAGGING ATTENTION.
HERE IS THE
SITUATION WE HAVE GOT OURSELVES INTO.
IN RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY NEEDS AND PRESSURES FROM FUNDING AGENCIES, WE
HAVE MADE A TYPE 2 PARADIGM SHIFT FROM STUDYING THE MANAGEMENT OF LAND-BASED
NATURAL RESOURCE SYSTEMS TO STUDYING COMMUNITY WELFARE IN ECO-SOCIAL
SYSTEMS. THE PROBLEM IS THAT WE DO NOT
AS YET HAVE AN OVERVIEW PARADIGM FOR THINKING ABOUT AND STUDYING ECO-SOCIAL
SYSTEMS. I’LL CALL IT THE ‘NO PARADIGM’
PROBLEM.
WE HAVE NOW REACHED
THE IDEAL MOMENT FOR ME TO STOP TALKING. WHY IS THAT? IT IS BECAUSE EVERYBODY HERE WILL HAVE A RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION
‘IS THERE A ‘NO PARADIGM’ PROBLEM?’ AND I WOULD NOT WANT TO STEAL YOUR
THUNDER. LET ME FINISH BY FLAGGING SOME
OF THE ANSWERS I WILL NOT BE SURPRISED TO HEAR: