Without wanting to start a long diatribe, I am curious how the group
sees this:
Is it really viable to say that
economic systems are more
complex and more differentiated than ecologic
systems.
? Even to an amateur (moi, nodding to SAS) this seems unsubstantiated.
Economic systems are within ecological systems, ultimately. And we
have no way of knowing if we understand the complexity and
intersecting differentiation of ecological systems. We just cross our
fingers, then in a hundred years new information shows up and they all
say "What were they thinking do to X?"
The planet is a closed loop, right? So any system in it is subject to
the same restrictions.
And
but they also generate a product
which is independent from themselves.
makes me wonder what one would consider (sorry everyone, really I am)
an emergent phenomenon: if an element in an ecosystem generates CO2
and changes the range of potential elements/ life forms that may
arise, how is this any different than generating an iPod that changes
the possible desires and future products of the marketplace, or
generating drugs that then change the range of potential elements/life
forms?
Am I missing something?
Tory
ps I really am just curious. No desire to start a long wrangle.... Too
much to do for that. But curious.
Thanks in advance.
On Oct 17, 2010, at 3:34 PM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
Both systems can be viewed as complex
adaptive systems consisting of many interacting
agents that adapt and learn from their interactions
with one another:
system: economic system - ecosystem
agent: organism - company
interaction: food webs - supply chains
One major difference is perhaps what the
agents do with their supply, the agents
of ecosystems are more "selfish":
* Organisms consume s.th. to produce more of
themselves, they maintain themselves with food,
and they produce stuff necessary to make more
copies of themselves. Agent and product are
identical.
* Companies consume s.th. to produce a product
which is different from themselves. Agent and
product are different.
On the one hand, economic systems are more
complex and more differentiated than ecologic
systems. Companies can consume other companies
to produce larger companies and to maintain
themselves, but they also generate a product
which is independent from themselves.
On the other hand, ecologic systems are much
more sophisticated, since they are unbeatable in
green technology, regenerative energy and natural
recycling ;-)
-J.
----- Original Message ----- From: Russ Abbott
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Cc: Alexandre Lomovtsev ; Shuger,Debora ; Porter,Edith
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2010 6:35 AM
Subject: [FRIAM] Economy vs. ecology
I've been thinking about the differences between our economic system
and a natural ecology. Since I'm not an expert in either I'm writing
this in the hope that someone who is will clarify any issues I get
wrong.
It seems to me that a fundamental difference is that natural
ecologies are supply-driven. By that I mean that the supply of
resources (food, sunshine, etc.) is the primary determinant of how
the ecology functions. (I'm not talking here about transitions when
a species invades an ecology and upsets the pre-existing balance. I
want to focus at least at the beginning on ecologies that have
achieved a fairly stable state.) In such ecologies fairly well-
defined food webs are established. These determine the sizes of the
various populations, etc. Of course there are or can be cycles such
as the standard predator-prey cycle. But even in these cases, the
whole thing is supply driven. It's what's available (primarily to be
eaten) that determines everything else.
Our economic system is for the most part supply-driven. The economy
is not completely detached from the need for basic energy and other
natural resource supplies. If there are supply shocks in these
areas, the economy will feel them. But for the most part what most
people do (as economic agents) depends on whether someone is willing
to pay them. That means that most people are dependent on the demand
(for their services) rather than the supply (of available food). Our
current economic situation illustrates that very well. We are
currently demand-deficient. Not enough people want to buy enough
things (or services) to keep us all employed. This seems very
strange and artificial. That so much of the economy depends on
demand rather than supply makes it very vulnerable to the kind of
problems we face today.
But as I said, our economy is not completely demand driven. We are
still supply dependent. Working with others I'm hoping to build a
model that illustrates where the tipping point is. When does a
supply-driven ecology become a demand-dependent economy? Is it a
sharp phase transition? Can it be characterized in terms of other
properties? Comments are welcome.
-- Russ Abbott
______________________________________
Professor, Computer Science
California State University, Los Angeles
Google voice: 424-242-USA0 (last character is zero)
blog: http://russabbott.blogspot.com/
vita: http://sites.google.com/site/russabbott/
______________________________________
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
-----------------------------------
Tory Hughes
victo...@toryhughes.com
Tory Hughes website
Tory Hughes facebook
------------------------------------
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org