History of Ecological Sciences, Part 63: Biosphere Ecology
https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bes2.1568

TUHO: In ecological economics, human economy is not a closed loop—it is a transitory assemblage of matter and energy; a metabolic flux, an unstable moment of larger geophysical and biochemical drama.[8] This metabolic perspective is championed also by early founders of ecological economics, especially Nicolas Georgescu-Roegen. His account suggests that economy is an evolving apparatus functioning as a thermodynamic differential—it sucks low entropy and spits out high entropy, while ideally keeping its internal entropy on a stable level, much like organisms do.[9] What is crucial here is the overall “carrying capacity”[10] of the environment that hosts the economic assemblage—if the assemblage produces too much high entropy, it undermines environmental conditions allowing for future existence of this very assemblage. Here, the figure of the limit gets reinscribed in its dynamic version. If we are to follow this metabolic metaphor further, we might even say that just as organisms, economic assemblages obey what Sanford Kwinter—while discussing Jakob von Uëxkull’s idea of Umwelt—labelled as principle of immanentism, which states that “the distinction between organism and environment, inside and out, is but one of degree: a greater or lesser compression or dilation of information”.[11]

A nejaky uvody do ekologicke ekonomike

The Development of Environmental Thinking in Economics
https://www.jstor.org/stable/30302282

The early history of modern ecological economics
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800904002058

A neco k diverzite

Measuring commonness and rarity is pivotal to ecology and conservation. Zeta diversity, the average number of species shared by multiple sets of assemblages, and Dark diversity, the number of species that could occur in an assemblage but are missing, have been recently proposed to capture two aspects of the commonness-rarity spectrum. Despite a shared focus on commonness and rarity, thus far, Zeta and Dark diversities have been assessed separately. Here, we review these two frameworks and suggest their integration into a unified paradigm of the “rarity facets of biodiversity.” This can be achieved by partitioning Alpha and Beta diversities into five components (the Zeta, Eta, Theta, Iota, and Kappa rarity facets) defined based on the commonness and rarity of species. Each facet is assessed in traditional and multiassemblage fashions to bridge conceptual differences between Dark diversity and Zeta diversity. We discuss applications of the rarity facets including comparing the taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity of rare and common species, or measuring species' prevalence in different facets as a metric of species rarity. The rarity facets integrate two emergent paradigms in biodiversity science to better understand the ecology of commonness and rarity, an important endeavor in a time of widespread changes in biodiversity across the Earth.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ece3.8096

Jeste k metabolicke perspektive

ŠUM
http://sumrevija.si/en/lukas-likavcan-autonomy-and-necessity-sum12/