2004 年 6 巻 1 号 p. 25-42
How do we manage so as to consider or account for both ecosystems and the biosphere? How do we consider complexity in general while resolving conflicts such as those between the effects of predators on prey populations and vice versa? The tradeoffs among economic and ecological factors have proven impossible to address in conventional management. Finding balance among the conflicting forces of nature is one of the principal challenges for management. Systemic management resolves such dilemmas by finding guidance based on empirical information in emergent patterns. In this paper we describe systemic management and contrast it with conventional management to show how systemic management more successfully accounts for complexity. We add to the list of examples of how systemic management could be applied by illustrating its use in the spatial and temporal distribution of fisheries harvests, as well as the establishment of marine reserves and closed seasons. This can involve harvests from individual resource species, ecosystems, or the whole marine environment. A key difference between systemic management and conventional management is the guiding information used. Conventional management uses thought, models, meetings, lists, consensus, or stakeholder input whereas systemic management uses empirical information to mimic natural systems wherein the use of models is restricted to finding and describing emergent patterns.
