An integrative paradigm for building causal knowledge

Abstract A core aspiration of the ecological sciences is to determine how systems work, which implies the challenge of developing a causal understanding. Causal inference has long been approached from a statistical perspective, which can be limited and restrictive for a variety of reasons. Ecologists and other natural scientists have historically pursued mechanistic knowledge as an alternative approach to causal understanding, though without explicit reference to the requirements of causal statistics. In this paper, I describe the premises of an expanded paradigm for causal studies, the Integrative Causal Investigation Paradigm, that subsumes causal statistics and mechanistic investigation into a multi‐evidence approach. This paradigm is distinct from the one articulated by causal statistics in that it (1) focuses its attention on the long‐term goal of building causal knowledge across multiple studies and (2) recognizes the essential role of mechanistic investigations in establishing a causal understanding. The Integrative Paradigm, consequentially, proposes that there are multiple methodological routes to building causal knowledge and thus represents a pluralistic perspective. This paper begins by describing the crux of the problem faced by causal statistics. To understand this problem, it should be recognized that the word causal has multiple meanings and a variety of evidential standards. An expanded vocabulary is developed so as to reduce ambiguities and clarify critical issues. I further show by example that there is an important ingredient typically omitted from consideration in causal statistics, which is the known information related to the mechanisms underlying relationships being evaluated. To address this issue, I describe a procedure, Causal Knowledge Analysis, that involves an evaluation and compilation of existing evidence indicative of causal content and the features of mechanisms. Causal Knowledge Analysis is applied to three example situations to illustrate the process and its potential for contributing to the development of causal knowledge. The implications of adopting the proposed paradigm and associated procedures are discussed and include the potential for advancing ecology, the potential for clarifying causal methodology, and the potential for contributing to predictive forecasting.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Ecological Monographs
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/ecm.1628
Citations
21
Primary Topic
Evaluation and Performance Assessment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
10.30

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

An integrative paradigm for building causal knowledge

James B. Grace
21 citations
Ecological Monographs
Evaluation and Performance Assessment
10.30
article

An integrative paradigm for building causal knowledge

James B. Grace
article en
21 citations

Abstract

Abstract A core aspiration of the ecological sciences is to determine how systems work, which implies the challenge of developing a causal understanding. Causal inference has long been approached from a statistical perspective, which can be limited and restrictive for a variety of reasons. Ecologists and other natural scientists have historically pursued mechanistic knowledge as an alternative approach to causal understanding, though without explicit reference to the requirements of causal statistics. In this paper, I describe the premises of an expanded paradigm for causal studies, the Integrative Causal Investigation Paradigm, that subsumes causal statistics and mechanistic investigation into a multi‐evidence approach. This paradigm is distinct from the one articulated by causal statistics in that it (1) focuses its attention on the long‐term goal of building causal knowledge across multiple studies and (2) recognizes the essential role of mechanistic investigations in establishing a causal understanding. The Integrative Paradigm, consequentially, proposes that there are multiple methodological routes to building causal knowledge and thus represents a pluralistic perspective. This paper begins by describing the crux of the problem faced by causal statistics. To understand this problem, it should be recognized that the word causal has multiple meanings and a variety of evidential standards. An expanded vocabulary is developed so as to reduce ambiguities and clarify critical issues. I further show by example that there is an important ingredient typically omitted from consideration in causal statistics, which is the known information related to the mechanisms underlying relationships being evaluated. To address this issue, I describe a procedure, Causal Knowledge Analysis, that involves an evaluation and compilation of existing evidence indicative of causal content and the features of mechanisms. Causal Knowledge Analysis is applied to three example situations to illustrate the process and its potential for contributing to the development of causal knowledge. The implications of adopting the proposed paradigm and associated procedures are discussed and include the potential for advancing ecology, the potential for clarifying causal methodology, and the potential for contributing to predictive forecasting.

Ecological MonographsVol. 94(4)
United States Geological Survey (US), U.S. Geological Survey, Wetland and Aquatic Research Center
U.S. Geological Survey
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Evaluation and Performance Assessment
10.30
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.