Moving beyond the diversity paradox: the limitations of competition-based frameworks in understanding species diversity

Over the last century, ecologists have attempted to understand patterns of
species diversity by showing stable coexistence arising from a baseline
expectation of competitive exclusion. This expectation stems from an
explicit assumption of resource scarcity and implicit assumptions of
Malthusian struggle and winner-take-all dynamics. Fidelity to the
competitive exclusion principle (CEP) presents species diversity as a
paradox: if species compete for limited resources, how can they coexist?
In this essay, we investigate the contradiction between the theoretical
expectation of competitive exclusion and the empirical prevalence of
multispecies communities. We trace the persistence of the CEP in
ecological research despite numerous challenges and explore publishing
trends suggesting that this framework has resulted in a disproportionate
focus on competition and exclusion in contemporary research. From a
critical science studies perspective, we analyze the sociopolitical
factors that have contributed to these patterns. We argue that we must
excavate the ideological foundation upon which competition-based
coexistence research has been built to move beyond the current perceived
“diversity paradox.” To that end, we propose shifting the functional null
hypothesis of coexistence research, introducing the notion of a
“coexistence principle,” which positions the persistence of multispecies
communities as the rule rather than the exception in nature.