What do you think?
Rate this book
The Balance of Nature: Ecology's Enduring Myth
The idea of a balance of nature has been a dominant part of Western philosophy since before Aristotle, and it persists in the public imagination and even among some ecologists today. In this lively and thought-provoking book, John Kricher demonstrates that nature in fact is not in balance, nor has it ever been at any stage in Earth's history. He explains how and why this notion of a natural world in balance has endured for so long, and he shows why, in these times of extraordinary human influence on the planet's ecosystems, it is critical that we accept and understand that evolution is a fact of life, and that ecology is far more dynamic than we ever imagined.
The Balance of Nature traces the fascinating history of the science of ecology and evolutionary biology, from the discipline's early innovators to the advent of Darwin and evolution, to the brilliant and inquisitive scientific minds of today. Blending insights and entertaining stories from his own remarkable life in science, Kricher reveals how evolution is a powerful engine that drives ecological change, how nature is constantly in flux and, in effect, quite naturally out of balance--and how notions to the contrary are misguided and ultimately hazardous to us all.
The Balance of Nature forcefully argues that an understanding of the dynamic nature of ecology and evolution is essential to formulating policies of environmental ethics to guide humanity toward a more responsible stewardship of our planet's ecosystems.
The Balance of Nature traces the fascinating history of the science of ecology and evolutionary biology, from the discipline's early innovators to the advent of Darwin and evolution, to the brilliant and inquisitive scientific minds of today. Blending insights and entertaining stories from his own remarkable life in science, Kricher reveals how evolution is a powerful engine that drives ecological change, how nature is constantly in flux and, in effect, quite naturally out of balance--and how notions to the contrary are misguided and ultimately hazardous to us all.
The Balance of Nature forcefully argues that an understanding of the dynamic nature of ecology and evolution is essential to formulating policies of environmental ethics to guide humanity toward a more responsible stewardship of our planet's ecosystems.
256 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2009
6 people are currently reading
151 people want to read
About the author
John C. Kricher
35 books5 followersJohn C. Kricher, Professor of Biology, Wheaton College, Norton, Massachusetts.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
November 1, 2016
The Balance of Nature is the idea that the various species are fixed, have been essentially constant over time, and exist in a balance where the lifestyles of each fit together to form a whole. However, scientific developments, starting with Darwin's theories, have shown this to be wrong. In fact, species exist in an unstable relationship, some thriving and some going extinct. Strangely, although most educated people understand at least the basic idea of evolution, many still believe in the earlier idea of the balance of nature.
Kircher's book explores the idea of balance of nature. The book is more a collection of essays on topics that have significance to the concept of balance of nature. Each chapter is well written and contains excellent material. Each includes comments on the significance of the topic to the idea of the balance of nature.
The ideas of the Greeks around the balance of nature are described in chapter 3. In chapter 4, the writings of Linnaeus are shown to include the idea of a balanced nature, with each organism having a role, and recognizing the interaction of the various species. The most influential work describing nature as a balanced, purposeful system is "Natural Theology" by William Paley.
Chapter 5 described Darwin's contribution. While the basic tenets of natural selection suggest a dynamic ecosystem, Darwin believed that all available space in the nature had been taken up, and new species had to force their way into the ecosystem (the wedge metaphor).
Chapter 6 describes the development of ecology with the ideas of food chains, energy movement and population dynamics.
Chapter 7 points out that while on long term balance of nature exists, many ecologists believe that certain ecosystems will achieve an equilibrium where most niches are filled. However, these are based on current geographic and climatic conditions. For example, many of the North American ecosystems are only a few thousand years old, originating only in the current interglacial period. If a habitat is left alone, it will eventually show change due to natural disturbances.
Chapter 8 talks of various ecosystem dynamics, including masting where organisms periodically reproduce in large volumes to defeat predators.
Chapter 9 describes the fortuitous astronomical conditions that allowed life to develop on earth.
Chapter 10 discusses extinction which is a matter of chance. Adaptation is no guarantee against extinction. Ecosystems continuously experience disruptions, sometimes colossal, from outside agents - there are winners and losers in such perturbations. A balance or equilibrium of nature is reinvented as ecosystems re-stabilize with new life forms following disruptive events.
Chapter 11 is on climate change and expected effects on the current balance of nature.
Chapter 12 discusses food web dynamics. Top-down forces occur where the highest predators control the population of their prey and therefore indirectly the prey's prey. Bottom-up effects include selection pressure on plants to evolve mechanisms to resist herbivory. Food webs are dynamic often resulting in a change in equilibria.
Chapter 13 is on biodiversity. The main factor in biodiversity decline is loss or severe fragmentation of habitat, especially forest. Although the author fails to say why this would be, presumably it is because of a reduction in specific niches or the elimination of entire ecosystems including their niches. Invasive species result in a reduction of native species. Any relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem efficiency remains unclear.
Chapter 14 reflects on man's impact on the earth's ecosystems.
While the book contains much interesting material, a more direct exploration of ecosystem balance would have been nice. For example, the book fails to explore the idea of vacant niches, to what extent they exist, whether they represent opportunities for species and therefore to what extent equilibria actually exist.
Kircher's book explores the idea of balance of nature. The book is more a collection of essays on topics that have significance to the concept of balance of nature. Each chapter is well written and contains excellent material. Each includes comments on the significance of the topic to the idea of the balance of nature.
The ideas of the Greeks around the balance of nature are described in chapter 3. In chapter 4, the writings of Linnaeus are shown to include the idea of a balanced nature, with each organism having a role, and recognizing the interaction of the various species. The most influential work describing nature as a balanced, purposeful system is "Natural Theology" by William Paley.
Chapter 5 described Darwin's contribution. While the basic tenets of natural selection suggest a dynamic ecosystem, Darwin believed that all available space in the nature had been taken up, and new species had to force their way into the ecosystem (the wedge metaphor).
Chapter 6 describes the development of ecology with the ideas of food chains, energy movement and population dynamics.
Chapter 7 points out that while on long term balance of nature exists, many ecologists believe that certain ecosystems will achieve an equilibrium where most niches are filled. However, these are based on current geographic and climatic conditions. For example, many of the North American ecosystems are only a few thousand years old, originating only in the current interglacial period. If a habitat is left alone, it will eventually show change due to natural disturbances.
Chapter 8 talks of various ecosystem dynamics, including masting where organisms periodically reproduce in large volumes to defeat predators.
Chapter 9 describes the fortuitous astronomical conditions that allowed life to develop on earth.
Chapter 10 discusses extinction which is a matter of chance. Adaptation is no guarantee against extinction. Ecosystems continuously experience disruptions, sometimes colossal, from outside agents - there are winners and losers in such perturbations. A balance or equilibrium of nature is reinvented as ecosystems re-stabilize with new life forms following disruptive events.
Chapter 11 is on climate change and expected effects on the current balance of nature.
Chapter 12 discusses food web dynamics. Top-down forces occur where the highest predators control the population of their prey and therefore indirectly the prey's prey. Bottom-up effects include selection pressure on plants to evolve mechanisms to resist herbivory. Food webs are dynamic often resulting in a change in equilibria.
Chapter 13 is on biodiversity. The main factor in biodiversity decline is loss or severe fragmentation of habitat, especially forest. Although the author fails to say why this would be, presumably it is because of a reduction in specific niches or the elimination of entire ecosystems including their niches. Invasive species result in a reduction of native species. Any relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem efficiency remains unclear.
Chapter 14 reflects on man's impact on the earth's ecosystems.
While the book contains much interesting material, a more direct exploration of ecosystem balance would have been nice. For example, the book fails to explore the idea of vacant niches, to what extent they exist, whether they represent opportunities for species and therefore to what extent equilibria actually exist.
December 19, 2020
The subtitle of this book could have been 'Random musings of an ecologist'. Kricher has taught the science for forty odd years and pens his thoughts down on almost all aspects of ecology, from its history as a branch of knowledge, through the epiphany of Darwin and Wallace that made evolution the lynch pin organizing all of biology and how ecology is understood today. He then ends the later parts with a predictably environmental/conservation message of humanity's cumulative impact on the natural world and how our very survival from here on depends on how we can encompass the environment into our ethical fold.
Overall this book is a good primer for those new to ecology both as a science and as a philosophy, the latter which is ultimately the more critically important for our society. We ought to strike a balance WITH nature, even if there never was such a thing as a balance OF nature, as far as the science can tell.
Overall this book is a good primer for those new to ecology both as a science and as a philosophy, the latter which is ultimately the more critically important for our society. We ought to strike a balance WITH nature, even if there never was such a thing as a balance OF nature, as far as the science can tell.
July 18, 2012
This book is great. Reasonable arguments refuting the myth that life is some poetic balance beam in which everything perfectly meets the needs of its environment.
August 24, 2013
Ho letto questo libro perché attirato da una recensione pubblicata all'inizio del 2012 sul sito del Corriere della Sera e perché se ne è discusso sul forum di naturamediterraneo.com
Anche se mi aspettavo una specie di edizione aggiornata del bellissimo “Nature Keepers” di Stephen Budiansky, in realtà questo è un libro molto diverso: quello di Budiansky era molto specifico, parlava e descriveva (e spesso criticava) ampiamente la genesi e il significato di concetti come l'equilibrio della natura, climax, la natura che sa “gestirsi” da sola e di conseguenza il miglior approccio alla conservazione è quello “hands off”, in cui non fai nulla perché senza l'uomo si arriva al favoleggiato “equilibrio” e li criticava citando un gran numero di lavori e mostrando grafici, e in generale con un forte approfondimento di relativamente pochi argomenti.
Kricher invece scrive un libro che parla, e critica, anche il concetto di “equilibrio ambientale” ma in un'opera molto più generale, e in cui tende a parlare veramente di tutto... o quasi.
Questo non lo rende un libro brutto o da sconsigliare, anzi è una lettura piacevole, molto scorrevole e sicuramente di interesse per quelli che lo stesso autore definirebbe “educated general readers”, ossia persone che senza essere non tanto degli esperti, ma neppure degli appassionati di ecologia o di scienze naturali, vogliono comunque essere informati e aggiornati anche su tematiche ambientali. E qui mi rendo conto che forse questo lo rende un libro non particolarmente adatto al mercato italiano: a differenza che negli Stati Uniti, o più in generale nel mondo anglofono, qui o certi argomenti non interessano, o si passa ad appassionati che potrebbero trovare questo libro un po' troppo generico, e manca tutta una componente “di mezzo”...
Per tornare nello specifico, Kricher parla (e lo ripeto, scrive molto bene) di molti concetti solo vagamente collegati al titolo, come ad es. il principio antropico, il reverendo Paley, la filosofia greca etc. col risultato che non approfondisce veramente nulla. I primi 3-4 capitoli poi sono praticamente un inquadramento storico con un'ottica evoluzionistico/scientista, molto ben esposto, ma sono anche da un lato molto brevi, e dall'altra imho una “distrazione” rispetto all'argomento, e infine nulla che non sia già stato scritto e riscritto in questi ultimi 20-30 anni dai vari Dawkins, Dennett etc.
I capitoli successivi entrano più “nel merito”, ma imho rimangono un po' poco, e a volte alcuni argomenti sono trattati nemmeno fosse un Bignami. Ad es. nell'ultimo capitolo Kricher parla della “formula IPAT” e la spiega così: “It is possible to gain some understanding by considering the formula I = P x A x T [...] I stands for impact, P for population, A for affluence, and T for technology. Note that the variables are multiplied, not added [...] The IPAT formula is obviously an oversimplification”. Il guaio è che ad essere troppo semplificata non è solo l'IPAT, ma anche la spiegazione che ne fa Kricher: va bene dire che il significato della formula è che a determinare l'impatto ambientale non è solo la dimensione della popolazione umana, ma anche altri fattori... ma è importante anche spiegare come effettivamente si calcolano questi indici (in particolare T...) e magari anche un accenno di critica: sempre riguardo la tecnologia, mi pare molto, troppo semplicistico dare per scontato che la tecnologia (o anche la ricchezza) e l'impatto ambientale siano direttamente proporzionali: per dire tra una centrale a carbone costruita negli anni '50 e una dell'inizio del 21° secolo, quest'ultima sarà tecnologicamente molto più avanzata, ma anche molto meno inquinante.
Non vorrei comunque aver dato un'impressione troppo negativa del libro, che alla fine mi è piaciuto (ok, nei primi capitoli mi sono anche un pochino annoiato) e ne consiglio tranquillamente la lettura, prima però leggetevi Budiansky ;-)
Io ho letto l'edizione originale in inglese, ma ne esiste anche la traduzione italiana, dal titolo “L'equilibrio della natura. Mito e realtà” pubblicata da Felici nel 2011
Anche se mi aspettavo una specie di edizione aggiornata del bellissimo “Nature Keepers” di Stephen Budiansky, in realtà questo è un libro molto diverso: quello di Budiansky era molto specifico, parlava e descriveva (e spesso criticava) ampiamente la genesi e il significato di concetti come l'equilibrio della natura, climax, la natura che sa “gestirsi” da sola e di conseguenza il miglior approccio alla conservazione è quello “hands off”, in cui non fai nulla perché senza l'uomo si arriva al favoleggiato “equilibrio” e li criticava citando un gran numero di lavori e mostrando grafici, e in generale con un forte approfondimento di relativamente pochi argomenti.
Kricher invece scrive un libro che parla, e critica, anche il concetto di “equilibrio ambientale” ma in un'opera molto più generale, e in cui tende a parlare veramente di tutto... o quasi.
Questo non lo rende un libro brutto o da sconsigliare, anzi è una lettura piacevole, molto scorrevole e sicuramente di interesse per quelli che lo stesso autore definirebbe “educated general readers”, ossia persone che senza essere non tanto degli esperti, ma neppure degli appassionati di ecologia o di scienze naturali, vogliono comunque essere informati e aggiornati anche su tematiche ambientali. E qui mi rendo conto che forse questo lo rende un libro non particolarmente adatto al mercato italiano: a differenza che negli Stati Uniti, o più in generale nel mondo anglofono, qui o certi argomenti non interessano, o si passa ad appassionati che potrebbero trovare questo libro un po' troppo generico, e manca tutta una componente “di mezzo”...
Per tornare nello specifico, Kricher parla (e lo ripeto, scrive molto bene) di molti concetti solo vagamente collegati al titolo, come ad es. il principio antropico, il reverendo Paley, la filosofia greca etc. col risultato che non approfondisce veramente nulla. I primi 3-4 capitoli poi sono praticamente un inquadramento storico con un'ottica evoluzionistico/scientista, molto ben esposto, ma sono anche da un lato molto brevi, e dall'altra imho una “distrazione” rispetto all'argomento, e infine nulla che non sia già stato scritto e riscritto in questi ultimi 20-30 anni dai vari Dawkins, Dennett etc.
I capitoli successivi entrano più “nel merito”, ma imho rimangono un po' poco, e a volte alcuni argomenti sono trattati nemmeno fosse un Bignami. Ad es. nell'ultimo capitolo Kricher parla della “formula IPAT” e la spiega così: “It is possible to gain some understanding by considering the formula I = P x A x T [...] I stands for impact, P for population, A for affluence, and T for technology. Note that the variables are multiplied, not added [...] The IPAT formula is obviously an oversimplification”. Il guaio è che ad essere troppo semplificata non è solo l'IPAT, ma anche la spiegazione che ne fa Kricher: va bene dire che il significato della formula è che a determinare l'impatto ambientale non è solo la dimensione della popolazione umana, ma anche altri fattori... ma è importante anche spiegare come effettivamente si calcolano questi indici (in particolare T...) e magari anche un accenno di critica: sempre riguardo la tecnologia, mi pare molto, troppo semplicistico dare per scontato che la tecnologia (o anche la ricchezza) e l'impatto ambientale siano direttamente proporzionali: per dire tra una centrale a carbone costruita negli anni '50 e una dell'inizio del 21° secolo, quest'ultima sarà tecnologicamente molto più avanzata, ma anche molto meno inquinante.
Non vorrei comunque aver dato un'impressione troppo negativa del libro, che alla fine mi è piaciuto (ok, nei primi capitoli mi sono anche un pochino annoiato) e ne consiglio tranquillamente la lettura, prima però leggetevi Budiansky ;-)
Io ho letto l'edizione originale in inglese, ma ne esiste anche la traduzione italiana, dal titolo “L'equilibrio della natura. Mito e realtà” pubblicata da Felici nel 2011
December 31, 2010
Interesting attempt by ecologist Kricher to dispel the notion of nature having an intrinsic 'balance' that humankind is disrupting. This does not mean Kricher isn't deeply concerned with humankind's negative effects on the environment, but he feels the notion of a 'balance of nature' does more harm than good, and would like the notion of 'disturbing the balance' to be replaced by considerations of biodiversity when determining our impact on nature.
Kricher traces the 'balance of nature' idea back to various philosophical and religious views of nature being a 'balanced, purposeful system.' However, in the course of painting the history of this idea in broad strokes, especially when writing on religion, he glosses over such aspects as the petty and chaotic character of the classical Greek/Roman deities. These capricious gods point to a religious view of nature and the forces behind as chaotic and irrational, instead of ordered and balanced.
He does a good job showing how the idea of a balance of nature doesn't make sense when looking at natural change that's occurred in various ecosystems across long time periods - ie, the illusion of balance comes from mistaking a local, shorter-term equilibrium as an eternal state. What he does less of a good job at is addressing how these local, shorter-term equilibriums (of which he gives many examples) *are* a strong aspect of ecosystem dynamics, even if such equilibriums are themselves are repeatedly (and naturally) disrupted and transformed in the long run. The idea of the 'balance of nature' owes as much to this real, empirical aspect of ecosystems as to the long religious/philosophical history he traced. It seems a paradigm that analyzed shorter-term, localized equilibriums (or even *gasp* balances!) amidst longer-scale change would be useful, but Kricher seems to dismiss that direction.
Also, he has hope for biodiversity as a paradigm to replace the balance of nature, but most of the last section of the book is detailing the various disagreements about what biodiversity means and how to measure it, so the way forward is not made clear (basically, he is saying, 'A lot more work needs to be done!').
Despite the above caveats, this book is still a good intro the issues raised and some basics of ecology.
Kricher traces the 'balance of nature' idea back to various philosophical and religious views of nature being a 'balanced, purposeful system.' However, in the course of painting the history of this idea in broad strokes, especially when writing on religion, he glosses over such aspects as the petty and chaotic character of the classical Greek/Roman deities. These capricious gods point to a religious view of nature and the forces behind as chaotic and irrational, instead of ordered and balanced.
He does a good job showing how the idea of a balance of nature doesn't make sense when looking at natural change that's occurred in various ecosystems across long time periods - ie, the illusion of balance comes from mistaking a local, shorter-term equilibrium as an eternal state. What he does less of a good job at is addressing how these local, shorter-term equilibriums (of which he gives many examples) *are* a strong aspect of ecosystem dynamics, even if such equilibriums are themselves are repeatedly (and naturally) disrupted and transformed in the long run. The idea of the 'balance of nature' owes as much to this real, empirical aspect of ecosystems as to the long religious/philosophical history he traced. It seems a paradigm that analyzed shorter-term, localized equilibriums (or even *gasp* balances!) amidst longer-scale change would be useful, but Kricher seems to dismiss that direction.
Also, he has hope for biodiversity as a paradigm to replace the balance of nature, but most of the last section of the book is detailing the various disagreements about what biodiversity means and how to measure it, so the way forward is not made clear (basically, he is saying, 'A lot more work needs to be done!').
Despite the above caveats, this book is still a good intro the issues raised and some basics of ecology.
October 22, 2019
Agent Smith didn't understand ecology. Many people seem to believe that all species have purpose and form a delicate balance. Books such as this one hope to cure this belief. I am writing this review after some time when I read it, so it deserves another read. I mainly remember ecological fitting. I recommend a few books to read alongside this book which are: Fred Pearce's the New Wild, Alan de Queiroz' The Monkey's Voyage, Ken Thompson's Where do Camels Belong and Tim Low's New Nature.
Fred Pearce talks about Ascension Island, in which the green mountain is made by ecological fitting. I want to mention that Fred Pearce's book is a bit controversial and can see why some do not like it.
March 23, 2010
The early chapters present a good summary of how we once thought about the natural world, from Classical Greece onward; the central two chapters (of 14) sketch the current consensus view of nature as a dynamical system, never quite achieving equilibrium. In this book for the general reader, Kricher writes with scientific precision and specificity, but he's not afraid to be blunt when his argument warrants it. For instance, two sentences make up the paragraph that serves to transition between discussions of Frederic Clements's and Henry Gleason's models of succession:
Clements's view did not go unchallenged. Good thing.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews