2020 ESA Annual Meeting (August 3 - 6)

PS 34 Abstract - Solving intractable scientific debates requires a combination of analytical thinking, logical skepticism, and collaboration

James B. Grace, U.S. Geological Survey Wetland and Aquatic Research Center, Lafayette, LA
Background/Question/Methods

Science and ecology have a long history of extended controversies and debates. In my career I have been naturally drawn to these situations, as they reflect sticking points in the progress of science. What I believe will be my three major contributions to science and ecology deal with controversies related to (1) the role of competition in structuring ecological communities, (2) the processes connecting biodiversity with ecosystem productivity, and (3) the possibilities for scientists to pose and evaluate causal hypotheses using data. All three of these require careful attention to linguistics and fundamental assumptions, as well as the development of integrative perspectives that can clarify the partial truths contained in competing explanations.

Results/Conclusions

Topic #1 - Debate over the role of competition in ecological communities persisted throughout the 1970s and 1980s. In 1990, my colleagues and I organized a working group resulting in a book entitled, “Perspectives on Plant Competition” that identified a wide range of variant meanings for the word “competition” were able to resolve major disagreements between competing theories.

Topic #2 – Theories about species diversity and ecosystem productivity developed in the early 1970’s and by the mid 1990s, 5 major models were actively debated. In 2016, after more than 40 years of study, we proposed an integrative solution to the problem that has reframed the entire discussion and resolved many of the most recalcitrant aspects of the discussion.

Topic #3 –So-called “causal inference” methods have emerged recently that claim to sanction causal inferences from data under a very narrow set of conditions. My logical and linguistic analyses show that these new approaches actually propagate the fatal assumption from statistics that causal inference is impossible, create false claims of primacy, and the spread of disinformation. Building upon past experiences, I have formulated a solution to the fundamental problem and integrate all quantitative traditions under a common framework that supports scientific inquiry.