ABSTRACT

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 interdisciplinary exchange does not necessarily require disciplinary breakdown.

摘要

人类在大多数生态系统中起着主导作用的证据迫使科学家面对包含超越传统学科界限的因素的系统。但是，这种状况是否应该鼓励跨学科的交流或融合是一个悬而未决的问题。通过两个案例研究，我们表明，由于认识论和政策导向的原因，生态学家和经济学家之间的交流比他们独立行动更可取。我们称此为“交换收益”。我们的案例研究表明，理论交流对当前理论的破坏性要比通常认为的要小。有价值的跨学科交流并不一定要求学科破裂。