Diversity in Industrial Ecosystems

Aug 26, 03:47 AM

Current Headlines: By Geng, Yong Cote, Raymond

Key words: Diversity, ecosystems, industrial ecology, eco- efficiency, industrial diversity SUMMARY

Within the natural world, diversity refers to the variety and variability among living organisms and the ecological complexes in which they occur. Its complexity is measured in terms of variations at genetic, species and ecosystem levels. It plays a critical role in meeting human needs while maintaining the ecological processes upon which our survival depends. This paper agues that such a natural metaphor should be considered in industrial systems in order to realise sustainable development. This article begins by describing natural biodiversity, emphasising its definition and value, and its maintenance. Next, the paper discusses the rationale and mechanisms for encouraging industrial diversity. The authors suggest that this natural metaphor provides a useful guide on how businesses in an industrial system can evolve towards greater resilience and sustainability.

INTRODUCTION

One of the primary concerns of ecologists, environmentalists, economists and government officials is how to meet the needs, wants, and preferences of a growing world population in the face of the risks faced by the atmosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere and natural resource stocks of the Earth. These risks are exacerbated by the expanding scope and scale of industrialisation (Koenig and Cantlon, 2000). This concern has given impetus to a new integrated management approach in industry based in industrial ecology (IE). It advocates that industrial systems could and should operate according to the principles that drive natural systems. Further, it provides some guidance on the manner in which to retrofit our industrial systems in an ecological framework, thereby improving overall eco- efficiency of resource use.

Diversity is one of the key features of natural ecosystems. It supports the sustainability of natural ecosystems by recycling essential elements, balancing total emissions with sinks, and reducing the build-up of wastes. It also encourages competition among different species, thus fostering dynamic development of ecosystems. This paper argues that such a characteristic and metaphor should be considered in the design of industrial ecosystems, where different companies locate within the same geographical area, to make more effective and efficient use of resources and infrastructure. Having an industrial base that is diverse in type and size will encourage byproducts exchanges among different firms, reduce business risks, mitigate pollution, improve public images, and foster an ecosystemic approach.

This paper examines the applicability of diversity in industrial systems. It defines diversity in the natural world, and men describes the value of diversity. Following this section is an introduction on how to maintain diversity in the natural world. After this we discuss issues related to applying this natural metaphor within industrial systems. The main focus of this paper is on ways and means of encouraging industrial diversity in order to increase the sustainability.

DEFINITIONS AND VALUES OF DIVERSITY IN THE NATURAL WORLD

One basic principle of natural ecosystems is diversity, including biodiversity, which incorporates diversity in species, in organisms, niches, habitats and in information. Diversity can be defined as the number of different items and their relative frequency. From the natural ecosystem point of view, diversity refers to the variety and variability among living organisms and the ecological complexes in which they occur (Perlman and Adelson 1997).

Over billions of years, interaction between the abiotic and biotic factors on life through the process of evolution has produced many different life forms. It is estimated that there are as many as 500 million kinds of plants, animals, and microorganisms that have existed since the beginning of time. Today, scientists estimate that the world contains between 10 and 80 million species, although only about 1.4 million have been identified and named (Chiras 2001). While the basis of these estimates might be questioned, there is litde doubt that the diversity of life on the planet is extensive. These different species together create a life-support system by interacting with each other, helping keep the sustainability of our plantetary ecosystem. For biological diversity, species are organised at many levels, ranging from complete ecosystems to the chemical structures that are the molecular basis of heredity. Thus, the term encompasses different ecosystems, species, genes and their relative abundance. Biodiversity is the sum of all these interactions, and is usually recognised at three different levels:

* Genetic diversity is the variability in genetic make-up among individuals of the same species. For example, among Homo sapiens, there are a number of races. We also know that economically useful crops are developed from wild plants by selecting valuable inheritable characteristics. Thus, many wild ancestor plants contain genes not found in today's crop plants. An environment that includes both the domestic varieties of a crop and the crop's wild ancestors has more diversity dian an environment with wild ancestors eliminated to make way for domestic crops.

* Species diversity is the total number of species in an area. For example, a rangeland with 100 species of annual and perennial grasses and shrubs has more diversity than the same rangeland after heavy grazing has eliminated or gready reduced the frequency of the perennial grass species.

* Ecosystem diversity is the variety of ecosystems in an area. For example, a landscape interspersed with croplands, grasslands and woodlands has more diversity than a landscape with most of the woodlands converted to grasslands and croplands.

Biodiversity not only provides direct benefits like food, medicine and energy; it also affords us a life-support system. It facilitates the recycling of essential elements, such as carbon, oxygen and nitrogen. It also contributes to mitigating pollution, protecting watersheds and combating soil erosion. A diverse ecological system acts as a buffer against excessive variations in weather and climate, thereby potentially protecting us from catastrophic events (Perlman and Adelson 1997) . However, in recent years, the loss of entire species and natural areas, caused almost entirely by human activity, has been occurring at unprecedented rates. The extinction of each additional species brings the irreversible loss of unique genetic codes, some of which are linked to the development of medicines, foods and jobs. Currendy, driven by underlying social conditions, including increased per capita consumption, poverty, rapid population growth and unsound economic and social policies, many threats to biodiversity exist. Examples include habitat destruction (such as burning or felling of old- growth forests) , overexploitation (such as overhunting of elephants and whales), pollution (such as industrial emissions that cause acid rain), and global climate change (such as the greenhouse effect and destruction of the ozone layer).Therefore, maintaining diversity is crucial to both the survival of human beings and the sustainability of ecosystems on which we and other species depend.

MAINTAINING DIVERSITY

Maintaining maximum biological diversity assumes far greater urgency as rates of environmental change increase. This is because the diversity in genes, species and ecosystems provides the raw materials with which different human communities will adapt to change, and the loss of each additional species reduces the options for nature and people to respond to changing conditions. In the natural world, the loss of certain species from an ecosystem could substantially decrease primary productivity. For instance, if mycorrhizal fungi were to die out, the growth rate of the plants mat depend on these organisms to supplement water and nutrients will decrease dramatically. Similarly, if herbivores such as zebras and wildebeest are removed from the African savanna, the net primary productivity of these ecosystems will be affected (Chiras 2001). Reducing an ecosystem's diversity also has effects on water and nutrient cycling. A typical example is when a forest ecosystem is simplified, greater amounts of water are lost in flash floods leading to increased soil erosion.

If the relationship between species diversity and ecological processes defies general rules, ecologiste have at least identified many specific relationships that allow them to assess how environmental changes will affect species diversity, and how changes in species diversity will affect certain ecological processes. A number of recent advances in ecology that detail such relationships provide decision-makers with an invaluable picture of the mode and tempo of change in ecosystems, and, more important, provide managers with the information needed to wisely manage biodiversity.

1. Regardless of how static they may appear, the mix of species making up communities and ecosystems changes continually.

2. Species diversity increases with environmental heterogeneity, or the patchiness of a habitat, but though species richness can sometimes be increased by increasing the diversity of habitats within an ecosystem, mis intervention can be a double-edged sword. 3. Habitat patchiness influences not only the composition of species in an ecosystem, but also the interactions among species.

4. Periodic disturbances play an important role in creating the patchy environments that foster high-species richness.

5. Both the size and isolation of habitat patches can influence species richness, as can the extent of the transition zones between habitats.

6. Certain species have disproportionate influence on the characteristics of an ecosystem.

With knowledge of the particular roles of species within communities, and the important influences of disturbance and environmental heterogeneity on species richness growing, it is increasingly possible to use and manage land in ways mat maintain the species within a region and provide valuable ecosystem services to humanity.

But recognising the trade-offs inherent in various stages in an ecosystem's characteristic diversity - the pattern of distribution and abundance of populations, species, and habitats - is arguably essential to achieving sustainable development worldwide. Biodiversity can be increased by, for instance, creating new habitats or allowing moderate disturbances. It can be decreased through such changes as species loss or the prevention of natural patterns of disturbance and invasion. An ecosystem's characteristic diversity can be altered to modify the services that the ecosystem provides to humanity, as has occurred in agriculture. Scientists have modified plants mereby enhancing their ability to grow in different climates. But in the quest to enhance one service, other essential ecosystem services are often compromised. For example, establishing timber plantations may increase timber productivity in the short term, but reducing species diversity in mis way may increase the frequency of pest infestations. It obviously harms the species that are removed (mereby diminishing the ecosystem's 'genetic library').

Since altering the ecosystem to enhance short-term productivity causes multiple changes in other ecological processes, and since these changes may ultimately reduce long-term productivity, the focus of management policies cannot be limited to only a small number of mese effects. Global concern over the unprecedented loss of living resources has brought governments togemer to draft the International Convention on Biodiversity. This comprehensive agreement recognises, for the first time, mat the conservation of biodiversity is a common concern of all the world's peoples. Already, more dian 100 countries have ratified it. From a public point of view, we can help conserve biodiversity at two levels, namely, at the inhvidual level and the societal level.

As inhviduals, measures include investing in and supporting environmentally sound businesses; supporting local, national and international conservation efforts; minimising our consumption of gasoline, electricity and material goods; and becoming informed about legislation that affects the world's biohversity and sharing our concerns with our elected representatives. As a society, we can all move to curb our use of energy, eliminate our consumption and use of threatened species and support the transformation of national and international policies to those that are more sustainable and less harmful to biohversity.

APPLYING THE NATURAL SYSTEM METAPHOR

Diversity of the system in terms of the actors, or 'process units' involved is higher in sustainable systems than in unsustainable systems. Sustainable ecosystems and sustainable industrial systems are systems with more complexity and networking than in unsustainable systems (Wallner 1999). Some authors have suggested that growth does not necessarily have to end to achieve sustainability, if hver- sity of the economic system increases (Mao and Kang 2005) . Diversity in the actors involved in cultural or economic systems leads into hversity of interests, preferences and values, which can be conflicting. The use of diversity as a normative principle of industrial ecology to achieve interdependency or cooperation or adaptation between the actors involved, e.g. in recycling networks or cooperative waste utilisation, is therefore, anything but straightforward.

The analogy that is drawn between industrial systems and natural systems has become a key feature in the field of industrial ecology. The complex flows of materials, energy and information that exist width industrial systems, and their reliance on the resources and services provided by the biosphere, make the application of the natural ecosystems analogy relevant. Industrial systems have important similarities to natural ecosystems, as both systems take in energy and materials and transform them into products (Allenby and Cooper 1994). However, the current industry performs a linear transformation while nature's is cyclical. This linear industrial system is characteristic of immature ecological systems. Such systems exist in a development stage, typically concentrating on growth and throughput with limited developments of the material cycling efficiencies. The mature ecosystem is made up of a relatively stable, long-lasting, complex and interrelated community of plants, animals, fungi and bacteria that have mastered the principles of efficiency. Most of the species in the mature ecosystem possess lower growth potentials but great capabilities for utilising and competing for scarce resources. These organisms interact through a network of highly complex and efficient symbiotic relationships and food webs. In these systems, the organisms are more diversified and the use of resources is more efficient. These types of interactions are highly facilitated by the cooperation that takes place amongst organisms, which is conducted in such a way as to fully use their habitat and to gather and use energy efficiendy.

An ecosystem is essentially the complex organisation of biological interactions and the nonliving surroundings. The boundaries of ecosystems are generally defined by the physical factors that predominate widthin the area. In describing a natural system, it is important to recognise hat the boundaries can vary substantially. Similarly, within the field of industrial ecology, it is believed that not only can industrial systems be viewed as part of and in relation to natural ecological systems, but also industrial systems can be described in the context of an ecological system. The boundary for an industrial ecosystem has been defined in terms of scale. It can be defined at a global scale (biosphere), regional scale (biomes in ecological systems) , and industrial scale (smaller community level), such as an industrial park. The inhvidual businesses widhn an industrial system interact within a specific location to form a type of industrial community, analogous to the organisms interacting within the ecosystem community. This interaction illustrates that the industrial system would not in itself be a closed system but an open system. As such, the industrial system interacts with other industrial and urban communities outside the boundaries of the industrial system, interacts with the ecological ecosystem upon which it depends for its own survival, and finally interacts with the biosphere as a whole.

Mature ecosystems are typically characterised by a hverse array of organisms interacting with each other and their surroundings to create self-sustaining communities. The environment of an organism is made up of everything that affects it during its lifetime and includes the biotic and abiotic factors. In addition, each organism occupies a specific living space, which is usually referred to as its habitat. The habitat of an organism is usually determined by its biological requirements, both biotic and abiotic, which are necessary for its survival.

Each organism in the ecosystem has a functional role within its surroundings. This role is commonly referred to as an organism's niche, which constitutes everything that the organism affects and is affected by during its lifetime. Over time, natural ecosystems have evolved into relatively mature stable cyclical systems, endlessly circulating and transforming materials constructively within the ecosystem. Materials and energy work their way from producers, dirough different levels of consumers, before finally being returned to the system by scavengers and decomposers (Geng and Cote 2002).

Comparisons to a mature natural ecosystem can be made when describing an industrial system. The industries and businesses within this system are analogous to the organisms within a natural ecosystem, and the physical location and connections in which a business operates are analogous to an organism's habitat. Each industry and business occupies its own niche or functional role within the system. On the basis of this, we can study the diversity of the industrial world.

INDUSTRIAL DDTERSITY

Human economic and industrial systems are also diverse. We can consider the diversity of product structures and supply, for instance. However, when understanding the system under one single denominator, i.e. monetary value, the diversity is reduced. In addition, the diversity is reduced dirough the ideal of mass production, focusing on maximising the rapid increase of homogenised industrial output products. This dominant Taylorist or Fordist ideal is beginning to be challenged by the increasing emphasis on quality, variety and diversity in the industrial output structure of products. Societal information regarding the ecosystem functions is, in many cases, based on parameters that are transformed to policy decision-making by monetary values. To find monetary substitutes for natural goods is always difficult. Therefore, human interventions into the natural ecosystem can only be based on incomplete information, and tend to be selected without taking into consideration the existing diversity in nature. The ecosystem principle of diversity, when considered in industrial environmental policy and management, could then mean diversity in cooperation. The existence of diverse and interdependent cooperation systems could, for example, facilitate the existence of systems where the actors involved use each other's waste materials and energy through cooperation. Actors that do not usually cooperate with each other would need to do so, e.g. large manufacturers, small- and medium- sized enterprises, public municipal organizations, waste management companies, consumers, etc.

Further, the diversity analogy would promote diversity in industrial inputs and outputs. In order to realise loop-closing operation of an industrial system, it is integral that a diverse range of businesses is established, interacting within the system in a diverse range of materials. Encouraging more recycling and reusing companies to join the industrial system allows redundancy for materials, which further enables the system to become resilient during times of stress. Redundancy involving multiple possible inputs and outputs within industrial systems enhances the sustainability of symbiotic relationships and maintains the stability of the system (Noronha 1999). The more companies in the industrial system that perform these roles, such as reuse, repair, remanufacturing and recovery of materials and recycling, the more likely the stability of these roles and maintenance of the system is accomplished. Diversity of niches and redundancy of materials within niches creates a dynamic stability, because if one organism (company) drops out of the network, there is usually a backup company dealing in the same material that can fill the respective niche and allow the web to remain intact (Benyus 1997). For example, the fuel basis of a power plant could, as well as the traditional coal and oil inputs, peat, wood wastes, forestry wastes and recycled fuels from households or from industries. A case study on the industrial ecology of a regional energy supply system of the Jyvaskyla region in Finland showed how the system is based on cascading of energy with the co-production principle of heat and electricity. In co-production of heat and power, the waste energy from electricity production can be used in the production of district heating for households and industrial steam for local industry requirements. The input basis of the Jyvaskyla energy supply system includes forestry, sawmill and plywood mill wastes. The technique of fluidised bed burning is very flexible in respect to fuels, as low-grade solid fuels like forestry and sawmill wastes can be easily used as fuel. The technique also makes possible the use of various recycled fuels. With the co-production of heat and power method, the output structure of the key power plant in the region is also relatively diverse, as electricity, heat and industrial steam can be produced from the same source ( Korhonen 2001).

The story of Kalundborg, an industrial byproduct exchange in Denmark, has become the most famous case illustrating industrial symbiosis. In this case, a coal-fired power plant, a pharmaceutical plant, a plasterboard factory, a sulfuric acid producer, a fish farm, a cement producer, local farmers, district heating facilities and others interact to take advantage of discarded or wasted materials. The reutilisation of what would otherwise be wasted has lessened the impact of industry on the environment while generating business opportunities and profits (Lowe 1997). The system has worked well because there are a limited number of mutualistic and commensalistic relationships and an aware cadre of managers (Jacobsen 2006). However, it could be argued that the lack of diversity creates the potential for instability in the system. In this system, once one core company, such as the power plant, stops operating, the whole symbiotic system could collapse (Ehrenfeld and Chertow 2002). But how can we encourage the diversity of an industrial ecosystem?

A team contributing to green an industrial system can enhance the success rate of new businesses by setting up an incubator through public/private collaboration. This resource can play a vital role in developing suppliers to anchor tenants, filling out a theme cluster such as resource recovery or renewable energy, or helping to fill niches in the byproduct exchange network. Such business incubators typically help entrepreneurs in several areas:

1. Support in venture-financing, marketing, accounting, organising design and other business capacities.

2. Access to common legal, secretarial and bookkeeping services, and office and telecommunications equipment.

3. Collaboration among businesses in a shared facility.

4. Access to timely information on markets and emerging technical opportunities.

5. Access to training in business basics through local schools.

6. Mentoring from entrepreneurs in the region.

Such a system can nurture start-up and new firms by providing the above-mentioned services and office space on a shared, affordable basis. By establishing such a business incubator, we can encourage the diversity of industries in an industrial system and reduce the operational risks of an eco-industrial system.

Other measures include:

1. Recruiting companies to fill niches when key suppliers or customers move, change processes, or go out of business.

2. Modelling the whole network of exchanges to reveal new opportunities.

3. Researching technologies, vendors and markets for presently unmarketable materials.

4. Linking the industrial byproduct exchange system into regional, national and global resource exchange systems.

5. Negotiating with agencies to assure a regulatory framework open to exchange.

CONCLUSIONS

Ecosystem survival is based, at least in part, on diversity: diversity in species, in organisms, in interdependency, in cooperation and in information. The existence of diversity can be seen as a long-term survival strategy of ecosystems as a consequence of permanently changing environmental conditions, by fostering flexibility and adaptability. The natural biodiversity metaphor described in this paper provides a useful guide on how businesses in an industrial system can evolve toward greater resilience and sustainability. Essentially, the natural system metaphor is most useful for understanding the functional attributes that industrial systems should replicate. We have argued that diversity of companies in the industrial system ensures stability and redundancy, thus enhancing the sustainability of the relationships that exist amonst the businesses. Encouraging the diversity of businesses with a reasonable amount of redundancy can facilitate the development of industrial ecosystems. The larger, more complex and diverse system we have, the more opportunities there are to enhance greater cycling of materials within the industrial systems. Cycling of materials is on key to sustainability of natural, as well as industrial systems.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study is sponsored by the Canadian International Development Agency's Tier 1 project (S-61562), the Fok-Ying Tung education Foundation (104001), the Scientific Research Foundation for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars, State Education Ministry (2007- 24), and the Dalian Science Foundation for Returned Overseas Scholars (2005J22JH015).

REFERENCES

Allenby BR and Cooper WE. Understanding Industrial Ecology from a Biological Systems Perspective. Total Quality Environmental Management 1994;4:343-6

Benyus JM. Biomimicry: innovation inspired by nature. New York: William Morrow, 1998

Chiras D. Environmental Science: Creating a Sustainable Future. USA Jones and Bartiett Publishers; 2001

Ehrenfeld J and Chertow M. Industrial Symbiosis: The Legacy of Kalundborg. In Ayres R (ed.), A Handbook of Industrial Ecology. Northampton, UK: Edward Elgar; 2002

Geng Y and Cote R. Scavengers and Decomposers in an Eco- Industrial Park. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 2002;9:333-40

Jacobsen NB. Industrial Symbiosis in Kalundborg, Denmark: A Quantitative Assessment of Economic and Environmental Aspects. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2006;10(1-2):239-55

Koenig H and Cantlon J. Quantitative Industrial Ecology & Ecological Economics. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2000;3(2&3):63- 83

Korhonen J. Four ecosystem principles for an industrial ecosystem. Journal of Cleaner Production 2001;9:253-9

Lowe EA Creating by-product resource exchanges: strategies for eco-industrial pailas. Journal of Cleaner Production 1997;5(3):57- 65

Mao P and Kang SY. Building up a Circular Economy Model with Chinese Characteristics. Green Economy 2005;4(2):56-60

Noronha J. Scavengers and Decomposers in an Industrial Park System: A Case Study of Burnside Industrial Park. Master Thesis, Dalhousie University; 1999

Perlman D and Adelson G. Biodiversity: Exploring Values and Priorities in Conservation. USA: Blackwell Science; 1997

Wallner HP. Towards sustainable development of industry: Networking complexity and eco-cluster. Journal of Cleaner Production 1999;7:49-58

Yong Geng1 and Raymond Cote2

1 Institute for Eco-Planning and Development, Dalian University of Technology, China

2 School for Resource and Environmental Studies at Dalhousie University, Canada

Correspondence: Yong Geng, School of Management, Dalian University of Technology, No 2, Linggong Road, Dalian, Liaoning Province, China. Email: ecoplan@dlut.edu.cn

Copyright Sapiens Publishing Aug 2007

(c) 2007 International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights Reserved.