Concepts, Contrasts, and Conclusions from the Baltimore Ecosystem Study
This document outlines ideas for a synthesis volume for the Baltimore Ecosystem Study Long-Term Ecological Research project. It invites explicit proposals for chapters by members of the project and details what is required in those proposals. The document lays out a general structure and philosophy of the volume. Because such syntheses are crucially important contributions and products of LTER projects, the editors ask that members of BES study this document and respond with proposals that advance the strategy outlined here. Mechanisms, deadlines, and planning opportunities are laid out below.
We have a distinctive story to tell
The Baltimore Ecosystem Study, Long-Term Ecological Research project is widely recognized as a paragon of modern urban socio-ecological science. After nearly 15 years of research, education, and community engagement in a complex, spatially extensive city-suburban-exurban system (CSE), there are insights to share, generalizations to examine, and gaps to highlight. Therefore, we wish to produce an edited volume to synthesize the findings, to link the perspectives of different research traditions, and to illustrate the benefits of interacting with diverse communities and institutions in improving the understanding of Baltimore’s ecology in the broadest sense.
|Both paper and e-book formats will be published.|
The story is distinctive for several reasons. One is the excitement about theory. Does the study of urban systems, including city, suburb, and exurb, require new or altered theory? How has standard, disciplinary theory been revised and advanced by studying the built and inhabited environment? Built environment as a concept encourages us to unpack the term “urban.” Therefore, the synthesis is not to be a simple, empirical compilation.
Not only do we presume that ecological theory is necessary for understanding cities, but that the study CSE themselves is necessary for both improving theory and human wellbeing. In the contemporary world of seven billion persons, more than half of whom live in urban systems, understanding cities as socio-ecological systems is a necessity. Such studies contribute new methods as well as to theory and practical applications. BES represents an urban research program that aims to meet all these needs. BES is unique, adaptive, and has evolved. We wish to present our recipe as both a model and a foil for others interested in urban socio-ecological research and application.
The book will be organized around an attitude that theoretical and methodological novelty are both important. In addition, such novelty should make a difference in how people view and manage the city. A seminal conceptual contribution of BES is the shift from urban ecology as studying ecology in the city, to studying ecology of the city. But while we take this insight as an important inflection point in urban ecology, how the field might evolve in the future is also important. What are the implications of the shift from ecology in to the ecology of urban systems? We must answer this broader question by examining a trajectory of knowledge: “We thought this, we learned these new things, and this is where research and application need to go.”
We wish to produce a book that people, especially aspiring urban socio-ecological researchers, educators, and practitioners will actually read and use. We do not wish to produce a sterile reference volume crammed with endless lists of data. Rather, we aim for a lively, provocative, risky volume that helps set the tone for the next generation of urban socio-ecological research. Simply summarizing past contributions would count as failure. The synthesis should point to and give context and meaning to the mass of rigorous and important data that BES has contributed.
A challenge to authors
|A book allows more freedom for novel content.|
The authors must commit to the agenda outlined above. We intend this book to be a substantially novel contribution, not a rehashing of empirical papers that might appear in scholarly journals. Specific new tasks will be accomplished by each chapter. The editors provide a structure for each chapter to conform to, and questions each must answer.
First, the book will recognize that there are several levels of synthesis. This will be laid out in the preface. BES has contributed to synthesis 1) within disciplines, 2) across disciplines in social and biophysical sciences. The book will further highlight synthesis 3) across chapters via shared questions, and 4) across the different scales or geographies various chapters examine.
Three goals of the volume
Each goal will be represented by a series of chapters. 1) The first goal is to present the development and justification of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study. This section will contrast BES with earlier schools of urban ecology, explain the local and external roots of the project, and place the understanding to be summarized in the context of urban transformations now underway globally. 2) The second section of the volume will summarize the theories examined, the approaches employed, the knowledge generated, and the empirical gaps remaining in the Baltimore Ecosystem Study. Each chapter must highlight both the theoretical and empirical contributions and needs within its topical scope. Finally, the third section will summarize the major themes and needs that the research, education, and community engagement have identified. These insights will be presented in the form of urban socio-ecological principles, and the remaining priority needs for urban socio-ecological science, education, and application.
In Section II each chapter must address several questions (Table 1).
Table 1. Questions to be Answered by Chapters in Section II of BES Synthesis Volume.
1. What theory did you use? To help with this task, a definition of theory is provided elsewhere in this document (Box 2).
2. How was that theory changed by application in an urban system? Urban is used here in the broadest sense, as a city-suburb-exurban complex, spatially extensive system (Box 1).
3. Was that theory changed by interdisciplinary integration? If so how? In particular, integration across both social and natural science disciplines is of interest.
4. What did you learn? How does this compare with information from other or contrasting cities?
5. How was the knowledge applied to one or more of the following realms: education, public understanding, and policy?
6. What is needed next? Such needs can address theory, methods, and translations, among others.
The book will conclude with chapters that synthesize 1) the principles of urban ecology that emerge or are addressed by BES research, 2) the similarities and differences between findings and expectations from Baltimore as compared to other urban areas, and 3) the pressing questions and issues for urban socio-ecological research.
Invitation to contribute a chapter
The editors will commission several chapters to set the context for BES and explain its historical development and research and engagement strategies.
|An LTER synthesis volume.|
We also invite members of BES to present proposals for the chapters in Section II, via an e-mail to the BES Co-Principal Investigator listserve. A PDF form will be delivered along with this document to solicit brief nominations for chapters. If you don't get an invitation but want one, contact Project Facilitator, Holly Beyar at beyarh at caryinstitute dot org.
The form will provide space for a two or three sentences answering each question stated earlier (Table 1), plus some additional information about potential and committed coauthors.
Fill in the digital form and return it via e-mail to Holly Beyar at the address spelled out above by 9 January 2012. This will give the editors chance to prepare for the January meeting described below.
The proposals, the general structure of the book, and a schedule for completion of the writing, will be discussed at the Quarterly Research Meeting on January 18, 2012.
The agenda for the January 18 meeting will include:
· Review of purpose and audience of the book project.
· Meaning and scope of theory.
· Scope of the introductory and context chapters (Section I) and the summarizing chapters (Section III).
· Discussion of chapter proposals for Section II.
· Breakout discussions to refine and consolidate chapters, if necessary
· Schedule and milestones for project completion
If you have questions, please contact Steward Pickett, Morgan Grove, Elena Irwin, or Chris Swan, who will serve as editors of the book.
Here are some sources on the structure of theory in ecology, plus two references that examine the use of ecological theory in urban ecology.
Niemelä, J. 1999. Is there a need for a theory of urban ecology? Urban Ecosystems 3:57-65.
Pickett, S. T. A., J. Kolasa, and C. G. Jones. 2007. Ecological understanding: the nature of theory and the theory of nature, 2nd edition. Springer, New York.
Scheiner, S. M. and M. R. Willig, editors. 2011. The theory of ecology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Swan, C. M., S. T. A. Pickett, K. Szlavecz, P. Warren, and K. T. Willey. 2011. Biodiversity and community composition in urban ecosystems: coupled human, spatial, and metacommunity processes. Pages 179-186 in J. Niemelä, editor. Handbook of Urban Ecology. Oxford University Press, New York.