Mongolian Journal of Biological Sciences 2006 Vol. 4(1): 67-68

[Book review] Ecological Paradigms Lost: Routes of Theory Change edited by Kim Cuddington and Beatrix E. Beisner, 2005, 434 pages, ISBN 0-12-088459-3, Academic Press, hardback, US$79.95.

Ecology is a relatively young science. Within James Koopman. In the community ecology sec- its short history, however, ecology has radiated tion, Anthony Ives and Kevin McCann provide into many well-defi ned subdisciplines. This di- different perspectives on the long-standing stabil- versifi cation and theoretical development must be ity-diversity controversy. Philosophical consider- associated with underlying conceptual changes. ation for these chapters is given by philosopher Have the changes in theory happened gradually David Castle. The evolutionary ecology section is since the foundation of the fi eld, or have they fol- covered by Robert Holt and Troy Day and by a lowed what is known as the Kuhnian paradigm commentary from Kim Sterelny. A nice section of shift (Kuhn 1962)? How much, if any, of the past the book consisted of refl ections by Eric Pianka works and history of ecology should modern stu- and Henry Horn on the short but distinguished dents and scholars in the fi eld learn? These are career and infl uence of the great Robert MacAr- interesting questions, especially when we see that thur. In the part on ecosystem ecology, Timothy there is an increasing level of disconnection from Allen and colleagues and Garry Peterson give foundational research in our fi eld. If paradigm overviews of major questions and approaches in shifts occurred in ecology, i.e., if the changes have that fi eld of ecology. Kevin de Laplante provides been so profound and fundamental, then perhaps a philosophical perspective on these issues. it is not as important to learn the history of ecol- The editors had to diversify views and widen ogy and foundational works as it is in the case of a the scope since ecologists and philosophers of sci- gradual evolution of theoretical backgrounds. This ence may already have opinionated perspectives book developed out of a symposium at the annual about the questions addressed by the volume. meeting of the Ecological Society of America in For example, it is interesting that in the foreword an attempt to address these questions. of the book Robert Paine clearly suggested that, The book had two major goals: (1) provide an while agreeing that there has been continuing con- overview of the history of some traditional sub- ceptual evolution, ecology does not map well onto disciplines, and (2) determine whether the devel- the Kuhnian perspective that is based on physical opment of these ideas is one of paradigm shifts sciences because ecology is nonlinear and multi- or one of a more gradual accumulation of smaller causational (i.e., pluralistic). He also suggests changes from simple to more complex concepts. that there is a wealth of information available if This volume covers the major traditional subdisci- one were to engage in what he called ‘ecological plines of ecology: population ecology, epidemio- paleontology.’ So it appears that there is a strong logical ecology, community ecology, evolutionary opinion right on the opening pages about the is- ecology, and ecosystem ecology. In each section, sues to be covered by the book: perhaps there are leading ecologists examine and provide historical no paradigm shifts in ecology and one can choose overviews of major theoretical developments in to study history of the fi eld. each of these sub-disciplines, and a philosopher At the end, there are at least three points most of science provided philosophical analyses for authors agreed upon. First, although use of the each section. Andre de Roos and Lennart Persson term paradigm has been increasing in ecology and discuss some of the important theoretical devel- evolution literature since its introduction by Kuhn opments that arose from simple structured popu- (Cuddington and Beisner, 2005), it is clear that the lation models. Jay Odenbaugh analyzes these term itself is loosely defi ned, especially as applied contributions from the philosophical perspective. to ecology. Therefore it is challenging to defi ne Hans Heesterbreek examines unstructured epide- what should be considered paradigms for ecolo- miological models and Matt Keeling reviews the gists. Second, the view of most authors of the vol- extension of these models with explicit spatial ume was that theoretical developments in ecology considerations. A philosophical analysis of the were outgrowths of older material. So perhaps no epidemiological ecology section is provided by paradigm if any was lost, although there are a few 67 68 Boldgiv. Book review theory changes that some ecologists consider a especially ecology instructors. Combined with paradigm shift. In fact, there are those who would Foundations of Ecology (Real and Brown, 1991) argue that ecology has not conceptually advanced and Modeling Nature (Kingsland 1995), Ecologi- since the MacArthur era. New ideas not only cal Paradigms Lost will be a valuable contribu- gradually evolved from older materials (such as tion to understanding the historical backgrounds structured population models from unstructured of ecological concepts which in turn will provide models), but also from a merger between different us with better understanding of current theories. areas occurring to give rise to a new subdiscipline (e.g., evolutionary ecology). Also interesting is References that conceptual changes did not always drive the- oretical changes. Methodological advances were Cuddington, K. and B. Beisner (eds). 2005. Eco- also responsible for theory developments. The logical Paradigms Lost: Routes of Theory third and most important point is that the authors Change. Academic Press, London, UK. demonstrate that a historical viewpoint improves Kingsland, S. E. 1995. Modeling Nature: Episodes our ability to evaluate the importance of older in the History of Population Ecology. 2nd ed. developments and to anticipate useful new direc- University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL. tions. Therefore, as opposed to Paine’s introduc- Kuhn, T. 1962. The Structure of Scientifi c Revo- tion, learning the history of ecology should not be lutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, ‘ecological paleontology,’ but part of an educa- IL. tional process for all ecologists. Real, L. A. and J. H. Brown (eds). 1991. Foun- To my mind, it is clear that this book will pro- dations of Ecology: Classic Papers with Com- vide very interesting reading not only for begin- mentaries. University of Chicago Press, Chi- ners in the fi eld, but also for practicing ecologists, cago, IL.

Bazartseren Boldgiv Department of Ecology, National University of Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar 210646, Mongolia, E-mail: boldgiv@biology.num.edu.mn