The Eroding Artificial/Natural Distinction: Some Consequences for Ecology and Economics

Since Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), historians and philosophers of science have paid increasing attention to the implications of disciplinarity. In this chapter we consider restrictions posed to interdisciplinary exchange between ecology and economics that result from a particular kind of commitment to the ideal of disciplinary purity, that is, that each discipline is defined by an appropriate, unique set of objects, methods, theories, and aims. We argue that, when it comes to the objects of study in ecology and economics, ideas of disciplinary purity have been underwritten by the artificial-natural distinction. We then problematize this distinction, and thus disciplinary purity, both conceptually and empirically. Conceptually, the distinction is no longer tenable. Empirically, recent interdisciplinary research has shown the epistemological and policy-oriented benefits of dealing with models which explicitly link anthropogenic (i.e., “artificial”) and non-anthropogenic factors (i.e., “natural”). We conclude that, in the current age of the Anthropocene, it is to be expected that without interdisciplinary exchange, ecology and economics may relinquish global relevance because the distinct and separate systems to which each “pure” science was originally made to apply will only diminish over time

Trust and institutions

"Dieses Papier beschäftigt sich mit den Funktionen von Institutionen im Prozess der Vertrauensgenese in Beziehungen zwischen individuellen Akteuren (Managern) und kollektiven Akteuren (Firmen). Es werden mehrere Ansätze zur Konzeptualisierung von Vertrauen in organisationalen Kontexten und deren Annahmen darüber diskutiert, wie institutionelle Arrangements Prozesse der Vertrauensbildung beeinflussen. Vor dem Hintergrund dieser Diskussion wird eine tragfähige Perspektive zur Analyse des Verhältnisses zwischen Vertrauen und institutionellen Strukturen entwickelt. Vier Szenarien, in welchen der Einfluss von Institutionen für die Genese von Vertrauen besonders wichtig sein kann, werden genauer betrachtet: das frühe Entwicklungsstadium von Geschäftsbeziehungen; Fälle, in denen Institutionen relativ stark und verlässlich sind; Fälle, in denen Vertrauen schnell aufgebaut werden muss; und Fälle, in denen idiosynkratische Transaktionen stattfinden." (Autorenreferat)"This paper deals with the role of institutions in the development of trust among individual actors (managers), among collective actors (firms), and between individual and collective actors. We review various strands of literature on organizational trust and examine the assumptions made about how trust building processes are influenced by institutional arrangements. Building on this discussion, we develop a perspective on the interrelationship between trust and institutions. We examine four situations where the influence of institutions can be conducive to building trust in business relationships: in the early stages of the development of a trust-based relationship; when institutions are relatively strong; when trust needs to be established swiftly; and when the transaction is idiosyncratic rather than based on routine behavior." (author's abstract

When Ecology Needs Economics and Economics Needs Ecology: Interdisciplinary Exchange in the Age of Humans

Evidence that humans play a dominant role in most ecosystems forces scientists to confront systems that contain factors transgressing traditional disciplinary boundaries. However, it is an open question whether this state of affairs should encourage interdisciplinary exchange or integration. With two case studies, we show that exchange between ecologists and economists is preferable, for epistemological and policy-oriented reasons, to their acting independently. We call this “exchange gain.” Our case studies show that theoretical exchanges can be less disruptive to current theory than commonly thought—valuable exchange does not necessarily require disciplinary integration

A comparative study of knowledge construction within online user support discussion forums in Chinese and English-language cultural contexts

Many IT companies like HP, Dell and Lenovo have established both English language and Chinese user support forums for their consumers to share and construct knowledge. The innovative knowledge generated in these virtual product user communities is valuable for companies enabling them to incorporate users’ innovative insights and problems solving skills. This research compares the knowledge construction processes within such forums in English and Chinese cultural contexts. The research adopts a method combining content analysis of discussion threads where technical problems are solved, complemented by observation and thematic analysis of interviews with forum members. The results show that the cultural and language differences do not cause a big change of users’ knowledge construction patterns. However, the character of Chinese language and culture can indirectly affect the process by including more social information to influence social interactions. The research suggests that more tailored facilitation strategies should be adopted in managing producer sponsored user support forums designed for different cultural regions

Considering Intra-individual Genetic Heterogeneity to Understand Biodiversity

In this chapter, I am concerned with the concept of Intra-individual Genetic Hetereogeneity (IGH) and its potential influence on biodiversity estimates. Definitions of biological individuality are often indirectly dependent on genetic sampling -and vice versa. Genetic sampling typically focuses on a particular locus or set of loci, found in the the mitochondrial, chloroplast or nuclear genome. If ecological function or evolutionary individuality can be defined on the level of multiple divergent genomes, as I shall argue is the case in IGH, our current genetic sampling strategies and analytic approaches may miss out on relevant biodiversity. Now that more and more examples of IGH are available, it is becoming possible to investigate the positive and negative effects of IGH on the functioning and evolution of multicellular individuals more systematically. I consider some examples and argue that studying diversity through the lens of IGH facilitates thinking not in terms of units, but in terms of interactions between biological entities. This, in turn, enables a fresh take on the ecological and evolutionary significance of biological diversity

Trust and Institutions

Abstract: This paper deals with the role of institutions in the development of trust among individual actors (managers), among collective actors (firms), and between individual and collective actors. We review various strands of literature on organizational trust and examine the assumptions made about how trust building processes are influenced by institutional arrangements. Building on this discussion, we develop a perspective on the interrelationship between trust and institutions. We examinefour situations where the influence of institutions can be conducive to building trust in business relationships: in the early stages of the development of a trust-based relationship; when institutions are relatively strong; when trust needs to be established swiftly; and when the transaction is idiosyncratic rather than based on routine behavior.

When Ecology Needs Economics and Economics Needs Ecology: Interdisciplinary Exchange in the Age of Humans

Evidence that humans play a dominant role in most ecosystems forces scientists to confront systems that contain factors transgressing traditional disciplinary boundaries. However, it is an open question whether this state of affairs should encourage interdisciplinary exchange or integration. With two case studies, we show that exchange between ecologists and economists is preferable, for epistemological and policy-oriented reasons, to their acting independently. We call this “exchange gain.” Our case studies show that theoretical exchanges can be less disruptive to current theory than commonly thought—valuable exchange does not necessarily require disciplinary integration