Basics of Life – Stores, Stocks & Funds
Basics of Life – Stores, Stocks & Funds
Basics of Life – Stores, Stocks & Funds
Abstract
Life and forms of living beings began around 4 billion years ago. However, the terms stocks and stores have only developed as scientific concepts over the course of the last two centuries, while the term fund came into use even more recently (Georgescu-Roegen 1971). A fund can be understood as a source of services for one or more species of living beings.
While Mainstream Economics does not focus on the origins of life, this is a basic concern of Ecological Economics. To understand life, we need concepts which focus on its temporal structure and are suitable to examine the interaction between the dynamics of coupled systems, made up of natural and economic components.
A central concept is that of a stock, hence this concept develops a general theory of stocks, applicable in ecology and economics. Some stocks are used as stores in ecosystems and economic systems. Crucial questions for sustainability are: When do stores become scarce? How can they be replenished or substituted by other stores? To answer these questions, we need a third concept, a fund. Essential for a fund is that it maintains itself, and that it gives services to other living beings. Take an apple tree, for example. Its services are material and immaterial, be they shelter or aesthetic services. Drawing on three other concepts a Teleological Concept of Nature, Thermodynamics and Irreversibility, enables us to operationalize the concept of life. This concept helps us grasp the intertemporal relationships between stocks, stores and living beings.
As a practical example we use the three concepts to examine the development of oxygen in the atmosphere and its consequences for life on earth.
Key Contributers: Dale Adams – Karin Frank – Bernd Klauer – Mi-Yong Lee – Reiner Manstetten – Matthias Ruth – Gerhard Wagenhals – Christian Wissel
Related concepts: TELEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF NATURE – THERMODYNAMICS – IRREVERSIBILITY – EVOLUTION – BASICS OF TIME – ABSOLUTE & RELATIVE SCARCITY – INDIVIDUAL, COMMUNITY & ENTIRETY
1. History
The history of the concepts of stocks, stores and funds is very long, reaching back to the start of our cosmos i.e. about 14 billion years ago. Life and forms of funds began around 4 billion years ago. However, the terminology of stocks and stores have only developed as scientific concepts over the course of the last two centuries, while the term fund, the way we use it, came into use even more recently (Georgescu-Roegen 1971; Faber et al. 1995, 2002).
During the 1980s and 1990s, both the concept of capital and – less conspicuously – the conceptual pairing of stock and flow, used as a means to study intertemporal decisions in economic systems, were introduced into the debate around sustainability (cf. e.g. Faber 1986: Chapter 3, Faber et al 1996; 1998). At certain points in this process, these concepts were interpreted in new ways. Materials flows were a significant element in this, particularly in the debate about the closed substance cycle economy and life cycle assessments (cf.eg. Bund and Misereor 1996). At the same time efforts were underway in ecology to understand ecosystems as networks of materials and energy flows, a subject taken up by Ecological Economists to generate information about their sustainability” (Klauer et al. 2018: 34; cf. e.g. Odum 1983: Chapter 4; Hannon 1973, 1995; SUSTAINABILITY & JUSTICE).
“Those readers familiar with Georgescu-Roegen’s (1971) pioneering work – JOINT PRODUCTION – THERMODYNAMICS – IRREVERSIBILITY– will recall that the concepts of funds and flows have been developed and analysed in detail in his chapter 9 (cf. Wodopia 1986). While Georgescu-Roegen uses these concepts within the context of economic production, we shall develop these concepts within the context of the natural world – TELEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF NATURE” (Faber et al. 1998: 178-179).
2. Theory
The Concepts of Stocks, Stores and Funds
We start by introducing a fundamental concept of ecology, the notion of biocoenosis, as it will give us orientation for our main goal, namely to develop an encompassing and adequate concept of life (Section 2.1). Then we turn to the definitions of stores, stocks and funds (Section 2.2). This will allow us to deal with the basics of life by taking recourse to thermodynamics, self-organization, triple teleology, stocks, stores and funds (Section 2.3). This lays the groundwork for an encompassing conceptual model to integrate different areas of discourse, physical, biological, ecological and social (Section 2.4). – We note that this concept is mainly taken from the book Faber and Manstetten Philosophical Basics of Ecology and Economy (2010).
2.1 The economy of biocoenoses: an introduction to our line of questioning.
The three tele of living things as introduced in the concept TELEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF NATURE were conceptualised from the viewpoint of the individual living thing. In contrast, with this concept we wish to start from the viewpoint of the biocoenosis; this word is a combination of two Greek words, bios, meaning life, and coinos, meaning Mingling, sharing. Common examples of a biocoenosis are a forest or a pond, each consisting of many species.
We shall now “examine the foundations which make the life of a biocoenosis possible. Within the sphere of humanity, questions pertaining to the foundations of life belong to the economy: How do we find or produce what we need to live, how is it resources distributed, in which ways is it consumed and what happens with the waste? How is life in the future safeguarded the future? For human beings, questions of the foundations of their life thus entails the problems of their way of life, in particular their view of justice [SUSTAINABILITY & JUSTICE], i.e. the partitioning and allotment within the framework of their living space. The shaping this way of life represents an ever – new challenge to human reason, to our ability to think and to plan ahead. Our foundations of life are not simply ‘there’ by themselves, but require shrewd and farsighted management: what we need and what we enjoy must be produced in the right amounts for our use and consumption, and it must be distributed in such a manner that all can partake of it and, if possible, be satisfied. In addition, all of this must occur in such a manner that the production and consumption of today do not exhaust the foundations of life for tomorrow and the day after” (Faber/Manstetten 2010: 97)
The concept of a biocoenosis applies to all kinds of living beings. Although they all have to be taken into consideration when studying environmental economic interaction, the focus is often on the biocoenosis of human beings. The prototype of community, which gives the economy its Greek name, is the house (Greek: oikos). “Oikos not only mean the building itself, it also refers to everything that can be better summarised under the term household. The household of a farm – at least as it was understood in Ancient Greece – included, apart from the inhabited buildings, all the stalls, pastures and fields, as well as the people, slaves and animals living therein. The economy extends to the area dedicated to the acquisition and application of the means of life. Its corresponding context is the household. The household of a farm – at least – as it was understood in ancient Greece – incorporated apart from the inhabited buildings all the stalls, pastures and fields, including the people and animals living therein” (Faber/Manstetten 2010: 16).
2.2. Stocks and stores: definitions
Stocks and flows
Stores and extraction
Where do the stocks come from and how do they change?
– Where do the stores come from?
– How do extractions alter the stores?
– What happens to the extracted quantity after the point in time of extraction?
Using these three questions, our examination is enhanced by the aspect of time [BASICS OF TIME – THERMODYNAMICS – IRREVERSIBILITY; cf. also: Faber, Proops, Speck 1999; Klauer et al. 2016]. If, in contrast, we speak only of stores and extractions, we are performing a purely static examination. Initially we can say: the extracted quantity directly or indirectly serves the consumption of a living thing that consumes for its self-preservation or self-development [which is the 1. Telos as defined in TELEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF NATURE]. In nonhuman biocoenoses the quantity is generally directly consumed, or at the most stored for a limited amounts of time, as we experience bees and hamsters.
Two things must be noted here in the case of direct or indirect consumption:
2. The quantity extracted from stores cannot be destroyed by the user. The consumption or the production leading to consumption may physically or chemically change the extracted quantity, but it is subject to the laws of energy conservation and entropy – THERMODYNAMICS. Consequently, the quantity does not disappear; it is only altered. Thus, every extraction is supplemented by the dimension of waste in the broadest sense. Direct consumption produces unconsumed leftovers – e.g. the remains of plants or animal carrion – as well as faeces, gases (such as the methane produced in keeping cattle), sewage, etc. Even the carcasses of living creatures ultimately belong to such waste. Every extraction within a biocoenosis leads to a decrease in the store in question and an increase in waste. Why then have the stores of the biocoenosis Earth not been continuously decreasing over the billions of years since the emergence of life, and the waste not continually increasing?
Viewing life solely from the viewpoint of stores, extraction and consumption
2.3. The terms fund and service – definition and explanation
The characteristics of living funds
First, we make some introductory remarks. Consideration of our three tele – (1) self- preservation, (2) self-reproduction and (3) necessarily rendering services to other organisms – TELEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF NATURE – indicates that all organisms are funds, necessarily rendering services to other organisms, i.e. provide services. On the other hand, from the first and second tele we know that there is self-maintenance and reproduction, implying the organism/species maintains itself so that each organism/species also needs services. If a species is able to maintain itself, it implies that the basis for its necessary services is not depleted. Thus organisms/species can also be viewed as users of funds, in addition to acting as funds themselves.
The fundamental characteristics of a living fund may be summarised as follows:
(i) A fund has relationships with species, because it gives services to one or several other organisms.
(ii) A fund reproduces itself.
(iii) A fund is indefinite nature with regard to its time scale.
On the occasion when the relationship between organisms is symmetric, we speak of symbiosis. The fact that the fund reproduces itself reflects the second telos (i.e. self-reproduction) – TELEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF NATURE.
Renewable and non-renewable resources
A question concerning the foundations of life
Sun, air, water and soil as funds
Duration of funds
Duration of living funds
The difference between living and non-living funds
Living funds differ in several essential aspects from non-living funds. Unlike non-living funds such as the sun, living funds have no permanent substratum. Their non-transience derives from a continual renewal of their elements. Thus, a precondition of living funds is set by the first and second telos of living things, those tele through which a species preserves and renews itself – TELEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF NATURE. The first telos is linked to a constant cycle of material and energy, whereas the second telos is linked to a cycle of death and birth: the disappearance of individuals that are replaced by new ones.
Species as funds and as recipients of services
The services of living funds
Recycling
The importance of the role ‘recycling’ plays in nature is made evident by the fact that the amount of biomass produced in a period of time (that is, the mass that enters the body of a living creature) must correspond to an approximately equal amount of ‘mass to be disposed of’ (see: Zwilling, Fritsche 1993). The leaves of a tree fall, the living things belonging to a species of plant or animal die, and they remain as carcasses or organic material in nature insofar as they are not consumed by other living things. Thus, the impression can be evoked that nature chiefly produces overabundance. But such an impression is based on too narrow a perspective: Everything that nature produces ultimately enters a cycle in which it is taken up as a service. All processes of decay or decomposition are the life-processes of living things. These are in turn the precondition for life of higher living things. When focusing on an entire community – INDIVIDUAL, COMMUNITY & ENTIRETY –, rather than on individual living things, one can hardly separate production, consumption and disposal.
Cyclic systems
As a true cyclic system, every process of production, consumption and disposal in nature can be regarded as necessary elements of one another: Production implies consumption and disposal, consumption implies disposal and production, disposal implies consumption and production. In a biocoenosis, any differentiation of these terms is purely analytical. The distinction of production, consumption and disposal only gains any authenticity in a human economy. One further – from a human viewpoint very important – distinction cannot even be made analytically from the perspective of a bioncoenosis: the distinction between positive and negative services – between services and disservices, so to speak. Such a distinction exists for an individual living thing from the perspective of its first telos TELEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF NATURE, but not for an entirety that, in the long-term – BASICS OF TIME –, can make everything occurring within it to a moment of its own evolution – EVOLUTION.
Joint production
A further characteristic of funds in nature, both living and non-living, is so-called ‘joint production’ [JOINT PRODUCTION and Faber, Proops, Baumgärtner 1998a, Baumgärtner et al 2006]. As a rule, funds produce more than one service. We have already offered the example of a tree which, while realising its first two tele, necessarily produces leaves and fruit, bark and shade as services for other living things. An extremely important service provided as a joint product by the respiration of all green plants is the oxygen other higher living things require to breath. Some biocoenoses (for example the rain forests) even ‘produce’ their own climate in an interaction of their funds. Consequently, the climate of a tropical region is greatly changed if the predominant rain forests are destroyed” (Faber and Manstetten 2010: 97-103).
Funds in the economy
Besides labour and resources, capital goods are employed for production. While labour and resources are consumed by a production process, capital goods do not flow into it “as a substance, but render services. Therefore, they are called funds of services. A typical example is a machine. Of course, economic funds are also subject to qualitative change by wear and tear. The value of the latter is measured by its yearly depreciation. The function of a fund is not to be consumed, but to transform inputs. The counterpart to the flows of stock variables is their service flow” (Wodopia 1986: 189).
2.4. Basics of life: thermodynamics, self-organization, triple teleology
The Laws of Thermodynamics, the relationships developed in THERMODYNAMICS and IRREVERSIBILITY as well as the triple teleology – TELEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF NATURE – and our concepts to grasp the phenomena of evolution – EVOLUTION – can be combined with the concepts of stocks, stores and funds, elaborated in the present concept. Combining all these results has prepared the ground for an encompassing conceptual model to integrate different areas of discourse.
As stated in the summary “part of the endeavour of Ecological Economics is to construct a language and set of concepts with which this endeavour can be fruitfully pursued. One set of concepts that has been advocated revolves around Prigogine’s work on self-organising systems (Prigogine 1962, Prigogine and Stengers 1984; Jantsch 1980 – IRREVERSIBILITY). Another very influential author has been Georgescu-Roegen, who has not only illuminated the role of the Entropy Law in economics, but has also stressed the distinction between stocks and funds (Gerorgescu-Roegen 1971).
The theory of self-organising systems allows us to encompass biological and non-biological structures in the same conceptual model. On the other hand, the notion of funds, as discussed thus far in the literature, is explicitly concerned with human action. It seems to us that these two seemingly disparate areas of discourse offer great promise to Ecological Economics, if they can be subsumed within a broader conceptualisation of nature. How can we bridge the gap between Prigogine and Georgescu-Roegen? The approach we take looks back to Aristotle and his teleological characterisation of processes – TELEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF NATURE. We shall argue that a teleological approach can be justified even for non-reasoning systems. This range of applicability of teleological arguments allows a breadth of argumentation appropriate to the endeavour of Ecological Economics. Our methodological approach will be an evolutionary one. In particular we shall use the notions of genotype (potentialities) and phenotype (realisation), as discussed in EVOLUTION.
Thus, our aim is to find a language and a set of concepts to allow us to formulate the problem of economy-environment interactions [cf. JOINT PRODUCTION and Norton 1992]. In general, one is used to analysing nature and the economy with different kinds of concepts. In contrast to this approach, we wish to develop new concepts of nature and the economy, such that they enable us to use elements of each concept to discussing the other area. Our conceptual and methodological approach will be at the borderline between science and philosophy.
All these concepts will allow us to go directly from the ecological sphere to the economic one, and vice versa. If we succeed in this endeavour, this will enable us to use one language to speak on problems of both economy and ecology” (Faber et al. 1998: 168-169).
Since space does not allow us to present the program outlined above in detail, we refer to the publication on this topic (Faber et al. 1995) and give here summary of it: first “a brief characterisation of biological evolution – EVOLUTION – in terms of Prigogine’s ‘Far from Equilibrium Self-Organising Dissipative Structures’ (FFESODS) – IRREVERSIBILITY. The teleology introduced in TELEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF NATURE can be employed to unify natural and social phenomena, for the triple teleology can be used to characterise organisms, including human beings. The final building block is the distinction between stocks and funds, which we discuss to indicate how the most general notion of funds is applicable to organisms. We also note that economic capital has some aspects of a fund. We then indicate how the history of human economic development can be characterised in terms of the three tele and the development of funds. The major conclusion of that publication is that using this newly developed language, it becomes evident that there is a great dichotomy between the way nature develops and the way modern economies evolve. In particular, it follows from the analysis that the way the modern economy works is inherently unsustainable [SUSTAINABILITY & JUSTICE – Becker et al. 2015] We apply our language to the problem of sustainability” (Faber et al. 1998: 169).
3. The MINE Project: Focus on Fundamental Concepts
3. Practice
In this chapter we deal with the theoretical and practical dimension of stocks and stores and show the relationship between biocoenosis and moderation, a notion which is crucial for sustainability – SUSTAINABILITY & JUSTICE – (Section 3.1). Finally, we turn to case studies, two will be mentioned briefly and one at length (Section 3.2).
3.1 Theoretical and practical dimension of the concept of stocks
“The concept of stock, the stocks perspective and the stocks framework play a dual role in sustainability policy – SUSTAINABILITY & JUSTICE –, namely,
1. as a kind of instrument and
2. as an internal principle, a bridging principle for purposes of judgement – POWER OF JUDGEMENT – ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS – in relation to time.
Thus, the stocks perspective is capable of developing and schooling a sense of time [for more details see ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS]. In doing so it clearly leads to better decision making” (Klauer et al. 2017: 133-134).
Biocoenoses and moderation
“An important ‘rule’ in biocoenoses is that species use their funds in moderation. In a manner of speaking, such use is an expression of the nomos (Greek: law, regulation of allotment) of a biocoenosis. The boundaries of such moderation are, however, not set by any inhibitions of certain species in the realisation of their first two tele – TELEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF NATURE –, but rather by technical limitations of the exploitation of the funds.
However, such moderation is not always easy to recognise: In the short-term, living things frequently use their funds in a way one could interpret as overuse. In light of the activities of the temporarily arising swarms of locusts in West Africa, for example, it would be difficult not to get such an impression. In reality, however, even this is an expression of the dynamic development of moderation in biocoenoses. Two examples:
Illustration of spatial structure
Remmert describes the breeding behaviour of the sandwich tern:
‘Terns breed only in small primary dunes which sometimes form after high tides, sometimes after island formation. Such primary dunes develop on sand slabs, and are destroyed by the next tide or, over the course of several years, become secondary dunes, those which island visitors generally know as dunes – the large dunes. Only in the narrow and brief period of transition between primary and secondary dunes can sandwich terns proceed to breed. The effect is an extremely erratic behaviour of the colonies. Very large colonies can suddenly emerge somewhere, and equally suddenly completely disappear. Small colonies can also appear here and there according to the size of the primary dune area. The number of all breeding birds in the coastal region of the North Sea is relatively constant. […] For science, an abundance of questions arises from this discovery. How do the terns learn of newly arisen primary dunes, and how is their communication accomplished? Why are they bound in such a characteristic way to a specific habitat? What is their effect on this habitat? It is likely that their close-quarter breeding, together with a great deal of excrement transport, results in a rapid growth of the primary dunes, and thus the self-destruction of their habitat’ (Remmert 1988: 95f).
For the sandwich terns this is not a great problem as long as they find new breeding areas. The habitat ‘North Sea’ is for them a fund which continually provides sufficient primary dunes. Temporarily, the habitat seems overused. Understanding the species in such a habitat, however, means viewing it in its immensity, not only momentarily.
Illustration of temporal structure
What this example demonstrates for spatial structures holds analogously for temporal ones: Understanding cannot be limited to a specific point in time, but must take long-term timelines into consideration –BASICS OF TIME. In fact, Biocoenoses create internal time measures as, our second example shows:
‘Larches and Arven in Engadin (Switzerland) are above a certain altitude completely stripped of their needles by the caterpillars of a butterfly; the damage is considerable. Before introducing a large-scale insecticide program, however, studies were permitted, the result of which was that, after such a stripping of needles, the needles formed in the following year possessed a harder surface which could not be penetrated by the young caterpillars. Thus, the butterfly population collapsed. In the course of the following years the original needle form gradually developed until the butterflies could once more attack. This occurred about once every ten years. If one were to combat the pest with insecticide – which could be easily accomplished – one would make the needles more vulnerable to the butterfly caterpillars from year to year. Thus, one would be forced to carry out insect control year for year until the end of time’ (Remmert 1988: 100f).
Shock-like changes in living systems (biocoenosis)
However, the moderate interplay of different species does not imply that a biocoenosis remains constant over time,6 or periodically passes through certain states again and again. On the one hand, certain developments on the side of non-living funds, which caused considerable, sometimes shock-like climate changes, have over geological time periods led to radical changes in many biocoenoses, if not destroying them altogether. If, however, we viewed the entire Earth as a biocoenosis, we see that it has thus far been so stabile as to survive even enormous shocks in the form of meteorite strikes. Each time, such strikes appear to have caused a massive extinction of species, but they were simultaneously the cause of new and more complex forms of life developing. In the long-term, life has thus far proven itself capable of integrating such shocks into its evolution” (Faber and Manstetten 2010: 103f).
3.2. Case studies
Inland shipping
An illustration for the use of the stock concept to examine economic environmental interactions is given in chapter 12 of Klauer et al. (2017). The authors “examine how political decision makers in Germany in a sustainable way – or at least in a way that is more sustainable than at present.
The main focus at this point, however, is on method. Using this example, they demonstrate that their heuristic developed on the basis of the theory of stocks – ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS – can be put to practical use to generate a rough overall picture of a given problem using relatively simple means, to outline the need for action and, where necessary, to gain pointers toward options for action and windows of opportunity – BASICS OF TIME – for implementing them. The example is also provided by way of illustration in order to make the abstract and rather general description given easier to understand. There are two things the authors wish to highlight in particular in this regard:
It is in the nature of a heuristic that the information it helps to generate is neither inevitable nor incontrovertible. Additionally, of course, it is always possible to arrive at the same information by another route, that is, without the heuristic. The heuristic, then, is merely a device designed to help the enquirer move systematically along a path toward sustainable solutions. It cannot, however, be applied in a purely schematic or automatic way but rather requires expert understanding and the faculty of judgement.” (Klauer et al 2017: 201; see for detailed information on this example Chapter 12) – POWER OF JUDGEMENT – ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS.
The development of oxygen in the atmosphere as a paradigm of the development of a new service and its consequences
The terminology of funds and services allows the processes leading to the development of the oxygen atmosphere and the related evolutionary changes – EVOLUTION – to be described as follows. The oxygen atmosphere (the following adheres closely to Schopf 1988) which provides most of today’s living things with the necessary air to breath, has not always been available. It is much rather a service that can be traced back to the interaction of several funds. The fund that set the development of an oxygen atmosphere in motion, originally (that is two billion years ago) consisted of cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) that performed aerobic photosynthesis. The oxygen accumulating through these processes was initially not a service, being neither useful nor harmful. The more abundant it grew; however, the more it became harmful for anaerobic forms of life.
4. Literature
Key Literature
-
Faber, M., Manstetten, R. (2010) Philosophical Basics of Ecology and Economy. Routledge: Chapter 9. Translated from the German by Dale Adams, Mensch – Natur – Wissen. Grundlagen der Umweltbildung, Vanderhoek & Ruprecht, Göttingen, 2003. [One of the main sources for this concept.]
Faber, M., Manstetten, R., Proops, J. (1998): Ecological Economics. Concepts and Methods. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
Klauer, B., Manstetten, R. Petersen, T., Schiller, J. with Contributions by B. Fischer, F. Jöst, M. Lee, K. Ott (2013) Die Kunst langfristig zu denken. Wege zur Nachhaltigkeit. Nomos, Baden-Baden. [The English translation is noted below.]
Klauer, B., Manstetten, R. Petersen, T., Schiller, J. with Contributions by B. Fischer, F. Jöst, M. Lee, K. Ott (2016) Sustainability and the Art of Long-Term Thinking. Translated by Kathleen Cross, Routledge, London.
Further Reading
References
-
Stocks and Stores
Baumgärtner, S. (2000) Ambivalent Joint Production and the Natural Environment, Physica, Heidelberg.
Baumgärtner, S., Faber, M., Schiller, J. (2006) Joint Production and Responsibility in Ecological Economics. On the Foundations of Environmental Policy. Cheltenham, UK, Brookfield, USA.
BUND/Misereor (ed.) (1996) Zukunftsfähiges Deutschland, Birkhäuser, Basel.
Begon, M.E., Harper, J.L., Townsend, C.R, (1990) Ecology: Individuals, Populations, and Communities. 2nd Ed., Blackwell Scientific Publications, Boston, Oxford.
Faber, M. (ed.) (1986): Studies in Austrian Capital Theory, Investment and Time. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York. Chapter 3.
Faber, M., Manstetten, R., Proops, J. (1998): Ecological Economics. Concepts and Methods. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
Faber, M., Manstetten, R. (2010) Philosophical Basics of Ecology and Economy. Routledge: Chapter 9. Translated from the German by Dale Adams, Mensch – Natur – Wissen. Grundlagen der Umweltbildung, Vanderhoek & Ruprecht, Göttingen, 2003.
Faber, M., Frank, K., Klauer, B.,Manstetten, R., Schiller, J., Wissel, C. (2005) On the foundation of a general theory of stocks. Ecological Economics 55: 155-172. [The paper develops a joint terminology to examine ecological economic interactions from the perspective of economics and ecology. It has been foundational.]
Faber, M., Proops, J.L.R., Baumgärtner, S. (1998a) “All Production is Joint Production – a Thermodynamic Analysis”, in: S. Facheux, J., Gowdy, und I. Nicolai (eds.), Sustainability and Firms. Technological Change and the Changing Regulatory Environment, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1971) The Entropy Law and the Economic Process, Harvard University Press, Cambridge/Mass: Chapter 9.
Hannon, B. (1973): The Structure of Ecosystems. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 41: 535-546.
Klauer, B., Manstetten, R. Petersen, T., Schiller, J. with Contributions by B. Fischer, F. Jöst, M. Lee, K. Ott (2013) Die Kunst langfristig zu denken. Wege zur Nachhaltigkeit. Nomos, Baden-Baden. [One of the main sources for this concept. The English translation is noted below.]
Klauer, B., Manstetten, R. Petersen, T., Schiller, J. with Contributions by B. Fischer, F. Jöst, M. Lee, K. Ott (2016) Sustainaiblity and the Art of Long-Term Thinking. Translated by Kathleen Cross, Routledge, London. [One of the main sources for this concept. It is also essential for the concept Basics of Life. The German edition is noted above.]
Odum, E. (1986): Grundlagen der Ökologie. Thieme, Stuttgart, New York.
Zwilling, R., Fritsche, W. (ed.) (1993) Ökologie und Umwelt. Ein interdisziplinärer Ansatz, Heidelberger Verlagsanstalt, Heidelberg.
Funds
Faber, M., Manstetten, R. (1998) „Produktion, Konsum und Dienste in der Natur – Eine Theorie der Fonds“, in: L. Pohlmann, H.-J. Krug and U. Niedersen (eds.), Selbstorganisation, Jahrbuch für Komplexität in den Natur-, Sozial- und Geisteswissenschaften: Evolution und Selbstorganisation in der Ökonomie, Vol. 9, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin: 209-236. [Foundational paper for the triple teleology.]
Faber, M., Manstetten, R., Proops, J.L.R. (1995) “On the Conceptual Foundations of Ecological Economics: A Teleological Approach”, Ecological Economics 12: 41-54. [Foundational paper for the triple teleology.]
Faber, M., Manstetten, R. Proops, J.L.R. (1996) Ecological Economics. Concepts and Methods, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
Wodopia, F.-J., (1986) “Flow and fund approaches in irreversible investment”, in M. Faber (ed.) (1986), Studies in Austrian Capital Theory, Investment and Time. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: 195-207.
Thermodynamics and self-organisation
Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1971) The Entropy Law and the Economic Process, Cambridge, Harvard University Press. The classic monograph on the foundations of Ecological Economics, written by an author who also contributed to Mainstream Economics.
Jantsch, E. (1980) The Self-Organising Universe. Pergamon, Oxford.
Mirowski, P. (1984), “Physics and the marginalist revolution”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 4: Norton, B.G. (1992) á new paradigm for environmental management. In: R. Costanza, B. G. Norton and B. Haskel (eds.).
Prigogine, I. (1980) From Being to Becoming – Time complexity in Physical Sciences. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco. [Prigogine received the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 1977 for his study of irreversible thermodynamics.]
Prigogine I. and I. Stengers (1984) Order Out of Chaos. Herinemann. London. This book is written for laypeople.
Practice
Becker, C., Ewringmann, D., Faber, M., Petersen, P., Zahrnt, A. (2015) “Endangering the nature is unjust. On the status and future of sustainability discourse”, in Ethics, Policy & Environment, 18: 60-67.
Klauer, B., Manstetten, R. Petersen, T., Schiller, J. with Contributions by B. Fischer, F. Jöst, M. Lee, K. Ott (2013) Die Kunst langfristig zu denken. Wege zur Nachhaltigkeit. Nomos, Baden-Baden. [One of the main sources for this concpept. The English translation is noted below.]
Klauer, B., Manstetten, R. Petersen, T., Schiller, J. with Contributions by B. Fischer, F. Jöst, M. Lee, K. Ott (forthcoming) Sustainaiblity and the Art of Long-Term Thinking. Translated by Kathleen Cross, Routledge, Abidong , Oxon, UK. [One of the main sources for this concept. It is also essential for the BASICS OF LIFE. The German edition is noted above.]
Remmert, H. (1988) Naturschutz, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Schopf, W. J. (1988) Evolution der ersten Zellen. I E. Mayr (ed.), Evolution, Spektrum der Wissenschaft, Heidelberg: 82-99.
Copy Rights
-
The content of MINE originates from scientific work published in books and peer-reviewed journals. Quotes are indicated by a special typographic style.
The project team would like to thank the publishers Edward Elgar, Elsevier, Routledge, Springer and Taylor & Francis for granting a reproduction permission.
Furthermore, we want to express our gratitude to Bernd Klauer, Reiner Manstetten, Thomas Petersen and Johannes Schiller for supporting the MINE Project and granting the permission to use parts of the content of their book “Sustainability and the Art of Long-Term Thinking.”
We are indebted to Prof. Joachim Funke, Ombudsman for Good Scientific Practice at Heidelberg University and the legal department at Heidelberg University, for their advice and support.
The main sources of this concept are the following publications:
Faber, M. and R. Manstetten (2010) Philosophical Basics of Ecology and Economy. Routledge, London and New York. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the publisher. The material is reproduced in MINE with permission of the Licensor through PLSclear (Ref. No: 8528, licenced 03.01.2019).
Faber, M., Manstetten, R., Proops, J.L.R. (1998), Ecological Economics. Concepts and Methods. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
Copyright notice: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the publisher.
The material is reproduced in MINE with permission of the Licensor through PLSclear (Ref. No: 8525, licenced 21.11.2018).
Klauer, Bernd, Reiner Manstetten, Thomas Petersen and Johannes Schiller (2017) Sustainability and the Art of Long-Term Thinking, Routledge, Abington, Oxon and New York, NY. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the publisher. The material is reproduced in MINE with permission of the Licensor through PLSclear (Ref. No: 8527, licenced 14.12.2018). We want to express our gratitude to Bernd Klauer, Reiner Manstetten, Thomas Petersen and Johannes Schiller for supporting the MINE Project and granting the permission to use parts of the content of their book.