Ecosystem research in software engineering
The application of the concept of the ecosystem in the software engineering shows the existence of the same problems regarding the definition of the concept of the ecosystem and its use for research that still exists in ecology. Justification for applying the concept of the ecosystem in an area that...
Gespeichert in:
| Datum: | 2025 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
PROBLEMS IN PROGRAMMING
2025
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online Zugang: | https://pp.isofts.kiev.ua/index.php/ojs1/article/view/679 |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| Назва журналу: | Problems in programming |
| Завантажити файл: |  |
Institution
Problems in programming| id |
pp_isofts_kiev_ua-article-679 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
ojs |
| resource_txt_mv |
ppisoftskievua/50/040096a72d3cc966f10667ac0b257e50.pdf |
| spelling |
pp_isofts_kiev_ua-article-6792025-04-16T13:57:48Z Ecosystem research in software engineering Екосистемні дослідження в інженерії програмного забезпечення Sydorov, N.A. software engineering; software ecosystem, software engineering ecosystem; software engineering ecosystem cycles УДК 681.5.004.4 інженерія програмного забезпечення; екосистема програмного забезпечення; екосистемаінженерії програмного забезпечення; екосистемні цикли інженерії програмного забезпечення УДК 681.5.004.4 The application of the concept of the ecosystem in the software engineering shows the existence of the same problems regarding the definition of the concept of the ecosystem and its use for research that still exists in ecology. Justification for applying the concept of the ecosystem in an area that differs significantly from the ecology area, as in our case, requires researchers to look for analogies. This primarily applies to landscape, energy and matter transfer chains (trophic chains) and nutritional cycles. Until such analogies will be found in software engineering, the ecosystem research is nothing more than system analysis, and the concept of the ecosystem is an attractive concept. The purpose of this position article is to draw the attention of the software engineering community to ecosystem research. Three concepts of ecosystems in ecology, software and software engineering are considered. The composition and essence of ecosystem research in the software engineering are given. The literature review of on the state of ecosystem research in the software was carried out.Problems in programming 2024; 4: 114-124 Застосування концепції екосистеми в інженерії програмного забезпечення показує існування тих самих проблем щодо визначення концепції екосистеми та її використання для досліджень, які все ще існують в екології. Обґрунтування застосування поняття екосистеми на території, яка суттєво відрізняється від території екології, як у нашому випадку, вимагає від дослідників пошуку аналогій. В першу чергу це стосується ландшафту, ланцюгів переносу енергії та речовини (трофічних ланцюгів) і циклів харчування. Поки такі аналогії не будуть знайдені в інженерії програмного забезпечення, дослідження екосистеми є не чим іншим, як системним аналізом, а концепція екосистеми є привабливою концепцією. Мета цієї позиційної статті — привернути увагу спільноти інженерії програмного забезпечення до дослідження екосистем. Розглянуто три концепції екосистем, а саме в екології, програмному забезпеченні та інженерії програмного забезпечення. Наведено склад та сутність екосистемних досліджень у інженерії програмного забезпечення. Проведено огляд літератури щодо стану екосистемних досліджень у інженерії програмного забезпечення.Problems in programming 2024; 4: 114-124 PROBLEMS IN PROGRAMMING ПРОБЛЕМЫ ПРОГРАММИРОВАНИЯ ПРОБЛЕМИ ПРОГРАМУВАННЯ 2025-04-16 Article Article application/pdf https://pp.isofts.kiev.ua/index.php/ojs1/article/view/679 10.15407/pp2024.04.114 PROBLEMS IN PROGRAMMING; No 4 (2024); 114-124 ПРОБЛЕМЫ ПРОГРАММИРОВАНИЯ; No 4 (2024); 114-124 ПРОБЛЕМИ ПРОГРАМУВАННЯ; No 4 (2024); 114-124 1727-4907 10.15407/pp2024.04 en https://pp.isofts.kiev.ua/index.php/ojs1/article/view/679/731 Copyright (c) 2025 PROBLEMS IN PROGRAMMING |
| institution |
Problems in programming |
| baseUrl_str |
https://pp.isofts.kiev.ua/index.php/ojs1/oai |
| datestamp_date |
2025-04-16T13:57:48Z |
| collection |
OJS |
| language |
English |
| topic |
software engineering; software ecosystem software engineering ecosystem; software engineering ecosystem cycles УДК 681.5.004.4 |
| spellingShingle |
software engineering; software ecosystem software engineering ecosystem; software engineering ecosystem cycles УДК 681.5.004.4 Sydorov, N.A. Ecosystem research in software engineering |
| topic_facet |
software engineering; software ecosystem software engineering ecosystem; software engineering ecosystem cycles УДК 681.5.004.4 інженерія програмного забезпечення екосистема програмного забезпечення екосистемаінженерії програмного забезпечення екосистемні цикли інженерії програмного забезпечення УДК 681.5.004.4 |
| format |
Article |
| author |
Sydorov, N.A. |
| author_facet |
Sydorov, N.A. |
| author_sort |
Sydorov, N.A. |
| title |
Ecosystem research in software engineering |
| title_short |
Ecosystem research in software engineering |
| title_full |
Ecosystem research in software engineering |
| title_fullStr |
Ecosystem research in software engineering |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Ecosystem research in software engineering |
| title_sort |
ecosystem research in software engineering |
| title_alt |
Екосистемні дослідження в інженерії програмного забезпечення |
| description |
The application of the concept of the ecosystem in the software engineering shows the existence of the same problems regarding the definition of the concept of the ecosystem and its use for research that still exists in ecology. Justification for applying the concept of the ecosystem in an area that differs significantly from the ecology area, as in our case, requires researchers to look for analogies. This primarily applies to landscape, energy and matter transfer chains (trophic chains) and nutritional cycles. Until such analogies will be found in software engineering, the ecosystem research is nothing more than system analysis, and the concept of the ecosystem is an attractive concept. The purpose of this position article is to draw the attention of the software engineering community to ecosystem research. Three concepts of ecosystems in ecology, software and software engineering are considered. The composition and essence of ecosystem research in the software engineering are given. The literature review of on the state of ecosystem research in the software was carried out.Problems in programming 2024; 4: 114-124 |
| publisher |
PROBLEMS IN PROGRAMMING |
| publishDate |
2025 |
| url |
https://pp.isofts.kiev.ua/index.php/ojs1/article/view/679 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT sydorovna ecosystemresearchinsoftwareengineering AT sydorovna ekosistemnídoslídžennâvínženerííprogramnogozabezpečennâ |
| first_indexed |
2025-07-17T10:08:16Z |
| last_indexed |
2025-07-17T10:08:16Z |
| _version_ |
1850411912171356160 |
| fulltext |
114
Програмна інженерія виробництва програмних продуктів
© М. О. Сидоров, 2024
ISSN 1727-4907. Проблеми програмування. 2024. №4
УДК 681.5.004.4 http://doi.org/10.15407/pp2024.04.114
N. A. Sydorov
ECOSYSTEM RESEARCH IN SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
The application of the concept of the ecosystem in the software engineering shows the existence of the same
problems regarding the definition of the concept of the ecosystem and its use for research that still exists in
ecology. Justification for applying the concept of the ecosystem in an area that differs significantly from the
ecology area, as in our case, requires researchers to look for analogies. This primarily applies to landscape,
energy and matter transfer chains (trophic chains) and nutritional cycles. Until such analogies will be found in
software engineering, the ecosystem research is nothing more than system analysis, and the concept of the eco-
system is an attractive concept. The purpose of this position article is to draw the attention of the software engi-
neering community to ecosystem research. Three concepts of ecosystems in ecology, software and software
engineering are considered. The composition and essence of ecosystem research in the software engineering are
given. The literature review of on the state of ecosystem research in the software was carried out.
Keywords: Software engineering, software ecosystem, software engineering ecosystem, software engineering
ecosystem cycles.
М.О. Сидоров
ЕКОСИСТЕМНІ ДОСЛІДЖЕННЯ В ІНЖЕНЕРІЇ
ПРОГРАМНОГО ЗАБЕЗПЕЧЕННЯ
Застосування концепції екосистеми в інженерії програмного забезпечення показує існування тих самих
проблем щодо визначення концепції екосистеми та її використання для досліджень, які все ще існують в
екології. Обґрунтування застосування поняття екосистеми на території, яка суттєво відрізняється від те-
риторії екології, як у нашому випадку, вимагає від дослідників пошуку аналогій. В першу чергу це сто-
сується ландшафту, ланцюгів переносу енергії та речовини (трофічних ланцюгів) і циклів харчування.
Поки такі аналогії не будуть знайдені в інженерії програмного забезпечення, дослідження екосистеми є
не чим іншим, як системним аналізом, а концепція екосистеми є привабливою концепцією. Мета цієї
позиційної статті — привернути увагу спільноти інженерії програмного забезпечення до дослідження
екосистем. Розглянуто три концепції екосистем, а саме в екології, програмному забезпеченні та інженерії
програмного забезпечення. Наведено склад та сутність екосистемних досліджень у інженерії програм-
ного забезпечення. Проведено огляд літератури щодо стану екосистемних досліджень у інженерії про-
грамного забезпечення.
Ключові слова: інженерія програмного забезпечення, екосистема програмного забезпечення, екосистема
інженерії програмного забезпечення, екосистемні цикли інженерії програмного забезпечення
Introduction
The application of the concept of the
ecosystem in the software engineering shows
the existence of the same problems regarding
the definition of the concept and its use for re-
search that still exists in ecology [1-3]. Justifi-
cation for applying the concept of an ecosys-
tem in an area that differs significantly from
ecology, as in our case, requires researchers to
look for analogies. This primarily applies to
landscape, the energy and matter transfer
chains (trophic chains) and nutritional cycles.
Until similar constructions are found in the
software engineering, ecosystem research will
be nothing more than system analysis, and the
ecosystem will be an attractive concept but
without sense.
The article [4] showed the expediency
of applying the concept of the ecosystem in the
software while preserving essence of the biol-
ogy ecosystem. In the article [5], the concept
of the software engineering ecosystem intro-
duced. The purpose of this article is to draw the
attention of software engineering community
to ecosystem research. To justify position, the
types of ecosystems - the biology ecosystem,
software ecosystem, software engineering eco-
115
Програмна інженерія виробництва програмних продуктів
system and features of the ecosystem research
in software engineering are considered. The
state of the ecosystem research in the software
by the review of the relevant literature is pre-
sented.
To the using of the ecosystem
concept
Consider three using of concept of eco-
system - the ecology ecosystem, the software
ecosystem and the ecosystem of software engi-
neering. Epistemology of the ecosystem con-
cept can be found in article [1].
Ecology ecosystem. The term "ecosys-
tem" should denote a group of organisms liv-
ing in a certain area, interacting with their
physical environment in such a way that the
flow of energy leads to a well-defined trophic
structure, biotic diversity and material cycles
[6]. The concept of the ecosystem can be ap-
plied to various ecological objects. This appli-
cation is justified by the fact that they demon-
strate similar forms of relationships (energy
and material cycles). The concept of the eco-
system is based on the concept of the system,
but the ecosystem research differs from system
research. This difference is expressed is that
living components are necessarily present in
the ecosystem and demands are made require-
ments that include study of internal cycles of
matter, energy flows, and nutrient cycle, and
due to the presence of non-living components,
the ecosystem is characterized interdiscipli-
narity [6]. It is clear that the application of the
concept in software engineering should be
guided by the same requirements and a neces-
sary condition for their satisfaction should be
the presence of analogues of interactions spec-
ified for ecological ecosystems.
Software ecosystem. This a wide-
spread term today that has many interpreta-
tions. In the review article [7], four definitions
of software ecosystems are given. Analyzing
these definitions, the authors identify three
main elements that combine these definitions.
This is platform, business and relationships. In
addition, a generalized definition of the soft-
ware ecosystem as the interaction of a set of
subjects on top of a general technological plat-
form, leading to a number of solutions in soft-
ware or services is formulated. The article [8]
has no new terms, but definitions are given that
are related to the software ecosystem: mobile
learning ecosystems/mobile ecosystem, open
source free software ecosystem, open ecosys-
tem, digital (business) ecosystem. Here, these
definitions stand next to the definition of the
software ecosystem. As for cycles and chains,
the work [7] indicates that the software ecosys-
tem is an association that manages the ecosys-
tem, executing the platform, creating and ap-
plying rules, processes, business procedures,
setting and controlling quality standards and/or
organizing relationships with the actor.
Software engineering ecosystems. In
the work [5], based on the assumption that in
software engineering, as well as in ecology,
there should be a wider range of ecosystems
than software ecosystems known in the litera-
ture, the concept of the software engineering
ecosystems was introduced. The classification
of ecosystems and the concepts of flows and
chains similar to biological ecosystems was
proposed. As in [5], in this article we will keep
to the following point of view.
The ecosystem is a concept, not a real
entity and is based on the concept of the sys-
tem. The concept can be applied to biogeoce-
nosis on the landscape that has system bound-
ary, within the software engineering territory
[5]. Each system, in the defined landscape of
the software engineering territory that is open
to material and energy flows and their analo-
gies, and contains at least two living beings
(organisms) and meet the requirements of the
ecosystems, can studied as a software engi-
neering ecosystem. However, since the re-
searcher determines the boundary of the land-
scape based on the goals of the study that the
previously determined boundary is not always
the system boundary and biogeocenosis on the
landscape is not will be a system. Further will
be studied only system biogeocenosis. As an
analogue of energy transferred in biological
ecosystems in trophic cycles, it is proposed to
use the concept of value based on the energy
theory of value [9]. To determine ecosystems
of the software engineering territory, we will
use a structural ecosystem approach [10].
Therefore, in the ecosystem, in addition to the
abiotic component and value, we consider four
more types of elements of the ecosystem struc-
ture [10]. Namely, firstly, the types of activi-
ties that determine discrete actions that must be
116
Програмна інженерія виробництва програмних продуктів
carried out in order for the value proposal to
materialize. Secondly, actors who are subjects
and who carry out activities. Thirdly, positions
that determine where subjects are in the flow
of activity and characterize who transfers value
to whom; fourthly, connections that determine
transfers value and artifacts between subjects.
There are activities at the center of the defini-
tion of the ecosystem. To make the ecosystem
sustainable, actors need to interact in such a
way that the value materializes. Therefore, as
an analogue of the trophic chain, we will use
the chain of interdependent value creation by
actors performing activities in the landscape
using and producing the abiotic components
(artifacts). The activities of the actors play an
important role in the ecosystem, defining its
functions and services. Sometimes one actor
can own the platform (a product, service or
technology) and plays the leader role in the
software engineering ecosystem then the eco-
system is called the platform ecosystem [11].
In the same way, we will consider soft-
ware landscapes on which artificial biota can
operate - computer programs, as well as land-
scapes on which both types of biota (human
and computer programs) act [12]. For a system
formed by artificial biota, a chain of formation
of the emergence function of the system can be
specified as an interdependent value creation
chain.
The place the software engineering
ecosystems in the living systems
The software engineering will be con-
sidered as part of human activity aimed at
transforming the biosphere into an anthropo-
sphere (noosphere). Transforming is carried
out by human influence on the biosphere by his
activity and thought. Although thought is not a
form of energy, nevertheless under its influ-
ence, processes occur and artifacts are created
that change the biosphere. Occupying a certain
area of the biosphere, software engineering
carries out a variety of activities aimed at solv-
ing practical tasks often occurring in other ter-
ritories, thereby playing a special role in the
context of the anthroposphere. In general, the
following types of the software engineering ac-
tivity on human activity habitats can be distin-
guished (Fig. 1):
- software engineering education and
research. The habitat consists of universities
and fundamental research organizations;
- software engineering. The habitat is
organizations that transform the results of the
fundamental research to recommendations for
practical application;
- software development and mainte-
nance. The habitat consists of organizations
that create and maintain software products for
different domains;
- software market. The habitat includes
organizations supplying software products;
- software operation. The habitat is de-
fined on other territories on that the software
product is used;
- executing software. The habitat is the
software products themselves.
It is obvious that these types of activi-
ties, although specific, are carried out in the
context of the biosphere and, therefore, the bi-
ogeochemical cycles and the waste activities
are inherent the territory of software engineer-
ing and they must are studied in the software
engineering ecosystems (Fig. 1).
Biosphere
Antroposphere
Software engineering territory
Education and Research Development and Maintenance Marketing Executing
Sun
Provides energy
Heat
Releases
Abiotic Biotic
Biogeochemical Cycle
Waste
Creates
OperationEngineering
The Software Engineering Human Activity Habitats
Fig. 1. The types of the software engineering
activity on human activity habitats
Considering the territory of software
engineering as part of the living system in
which take place biogeocenosis, can apply to
them the concept of the ecosystem to it and
after that will study by performing the ecosys-
tem research. Since the concept of a software
engineering ecosystem is applied in the con-
text of biological ecosystems that the relevant
parts of both biotic and abiotic components,
as well as biogeochemical cycles taking place
117
Програмна інженерія виробництва програмних продуктів
in the territory of software engineering, may
be of interest also. However, new aspects of
software engineering ecosystem research
should be related with locating of the territory
in the anthroposphere. Here the anthropos are
new biotic components and the anthropogenic
artifacts are new abiotic components, and
arise the new networks and cycles inherent
only in the software engineering ecosystems
(Fig. 2). Therefore, along with the known
ones (from ecology), there should be new di-
rections of the software engineering ecosys-
tem research.
Living system
Antroposphere
Ecosystem
Software Engineering
Ecosystem
Abiotic BioticAtmo/Geo/Hydro/
Cryo/Pedo Spheres Organism
Person
Antropos
Biogeochemical Cycle
Anthropogenic
Abiotic
Software Engineering
Ecosystem Cycle
Fig. 2. Software engineering ecosystems
in the anthroposphere
Thus, in living systems of anthroposphere,
the object of the ecosystem research in the ter-
ritory of the software engineering will be the
human activity habitats and its social systems
(Fig. 1, 3) [5]. Applying the concept of the
ecosystem, these systems can be study as the
software engineering ecosystems, taking into
account the additional components of biotic is
anthropos and abiotic are antropogenic arti-
facts that are inherent in the anthroposphere.
In the software engineering ecosystem, except
for artifacts that consist of assets and tools
[13], data, information and knowledge should
be considered, as well as the software product
as territory for the software ecosystem
(Fig. 3).
Antroposphere
Living system
Human Activity System
Software
Engineering
Ecosystem
Abiotic Biotic
Anthropogenic Artifact
Antropos
< operates in
Data/
Information/
Knowledge Asset Tool
Software
Product
< situated in
Software Engineering
Human Activity System
Territory for Software
Ecosystem
Fig. 3. Software engineering ecosystem
The ontology of the software engineer-
ing ecosystem with its attributes is shown on
Fig. 4.
Living system
Software Engineering
Ecosystem
Abiotic Biotic
Landscape Boundary Service
Person
Software Engineering
Anthropogenic Abiotic
Software Engineering
Ecosystem Cycle
Software Engineering
Activity Habitat Antropos
Software Engineering Human
Activity System
has>
part of operates in
< situated in
has> provides>
Fig. 4. The ontology of the software
engineering ecosystem
In the context of the software engineer-
ing habitats the activity of anthropos to lead to
implementing processes that can be a linear
(chains), nonlinear (networks) and repetitive
(cycles). These processes must be objects for
the ecosystems study regardless of the soft-
ware engineering ecosystem type [5]. They are
the following chains, cycles and networks
(Fig. 5):
- software engineering life cycle, this is
the main cycle in software engineering,
118
Програмна інженерія виробництва програмних продуктів
therefor inherent in application devel-
opment human activity.
- cycles of data, information and
knowledge, especially inherent in such human
activity as software engineering education and
research, and software research.
- software reuse cycle, analogous to nu-
tritional cycles, here, these are cycles of reuse
of software life cycle artifacts (requirements,
design, code, and documentation) and
knowledge artifacts.
- value chain/web, this is a value chain
and network - an analogue of energy chain in
the software engineering ecosystem [9].
- waste cycle is a waste creation and
disposal cycle using 3R (Reuse, Rework, and
Recovery).
All of the above relates to the applica-
tion of the ecosystem concept in the context of
living systems [14]. In the paper [5], it is
shown that the software ecosystem is the appli-
cation of the concept of the ecosystem to the
software product is the habitat of in the sense
of artificial life using analogues of the biotic
component of biological ecosystems [4, 15,
16] (Table 1). Here, there are more questions
than answers. Therefore, next only software
engineering ecosystem research in the context
of human activity habitat (living system) will
be considered further.
Software Engineering
Ecosystem Cycle
Data/Information/
Knowledge Cycle Waste CycleSoftware Reuse Cycle Value Chain/WebSoftware Engineering Life
Cycle
Fig. 5. Software engineering ecosystem chains,
cycles and networks
Table 1. Analogues of biotic components of Software ecosystem
for biotic components of Biology ecosyste
№ Software ecosystem Biology ecosystem
1. Characters, lexemes, simple types Molecules (?)
2. Operators, complex types, Structured operators Tissues
3. Subroutines (algorithms) Cells (?)
4. Modules (Classes), mega modules (Subsystems) Organs (organisms)
5. Programs Genus
6. Computer programs Species
7. Software Subspecies
8. Software of domain Varieties
9. Software product Individual of the Varieties
10. Software products of same type on the domain territory Population
11. Software product line (family) Evolving Population
12. Populations of the Software products on the some do-
main territory Community (Biocenos)
13. Populations of the Software products on the some do-
main territory and abiotic Biogeocenos
119
Програмна інженерія виробництва програмних продуктів
Ecosystem research
In accordance with the goals of study-
ing objects in software engineering using the
concept of the ecosystem, we will use tradi-
tional approaches to studying systems [3].
However, need take into account the following
features:
- Structural analysis is performed on bi-
otic and abiotic components. In addition, struc-
tural analysis will have study the biotic com-
ponent as a community, including its various
forms, such as the working community, the
program community, and abiotic component
as, for example, the artifacts populations.
- Functional analysis is aimed at study-
ing the added value chains instead of food
chains, and circulation chains of artifacts of the
legacy software instead of nutritional cycles.
For software engineering ecosystems with a
human community in the biotic component,
and possibly software ecosystems, flows that
lead to the emergence and elimination of waste
should be investigate.
- System analysis, as in the biological
ecosystem, aims to study the emergence, sta-
bility, self-organization, evolution and sustain-
ability of the ecosystems.
Ecosystem research in the software
engineering
Next, based on research on biological
ecosystems, we will consider the main areas of
research applying the concept of the ecosystem
in the software engineering. The research will
be divided into two groups - basic and target
(Fig. 6). Basic studies are those aimed at col-
lecting data and information about the ecosys-
tems and are divided on long-term study and
the ecosystems history study. Targeted re-
search includes structural, functional and sys-
tem analysis.
Ecosystem research
Basic studies
Structural analysis
Ecosystems history study
Targeted research
Long-term study
Functional analysis
System analysis
Fig. 6. Software engineering ecosystem research
Basic studies are those aimed at col-
lecting data and information about the ecosys-
tems. This will provide more complete and re-
liable results of targeted studies. Long-term
studies and historical research are the basic re-
search.
Long-term study is research con-
ducted in the ecosystem, continuously for
long periods of time [17, 18]. The duration of
research should be at least such as long as the
dominant event of the ecosystem occurs or
until the event under study changes [18]. In
article [19], a classification of types of long-
term ecological studies is provided. There are
retrospective research (passive - deep and re-
cent; active - opportunistic, intentional and re-
modeled) and prospective research. Research
data can be directed to the following: to de-
velop and test the theory; to provide general
knowledge about the operation of selected
ecosystems; to provide student and postgrad-
uate training [17]. The long-term ecological
studies have features that consider before
starting research. It is, firstly, permanent
providing of money, time, staff, means; sec-
ondly, keeping research from complacency, if
funding job is provided in the long run; third,
limit by practical considerations, for example,
by time [17]. Apparently, these features need
14. Software products as systems Ecosystems
15. Information flows Energy flows (?)
16. Control (algorithms) DNA, RNK (?)
120
Програмна інженерія виробництва програмних продуктів
take into account for the software engineering
ecosystem research. The long-term studies
expedient when there are the slow processes,
rare events, complex phenomena [17]. The
field study and the field experiment can be
used for the long-term ecological studies.
The ecosystems history study. As the
structure, functions, services, landscape, and
terrain of the ecosystems change over time, the
ecosystems have a history. For quantitative
and especially comparative studies, it is critical
to determine the current state of the ecosystem
and state changes over time. For example, how
the transformation of the ecotope into a biotope
of the software engineering ecosystem was
carried out. For historical research, the empiri-
cal or natural-historical method, the field
study, the anthropological and ethnographic
studies can be use.
Targeted research includes structural,
functional and system analysis.
Structural analysis aims to study the
following components of the ecosystem as
structure [10]. Firstly, activities, which specify
the actions for the value proposition to materi-
alize. Secondly, creating by the actors. Thirdly,
positions that determine places where actors
are in the flow of activity. Fourthly, links that
determine the transfer of value between the ac-
tors. The essence of the value may vary - ma-
terial, information, influence, funds. Need to
be considered that there is the transfer of en-
ergy in the ecosystem, biotic and abiotic are
characterized by diversity and therefore need
multidiscipline study, and that the structure of
the ecosystem can be multi-level. The field
study, the monitoring and classification meth-
ods can be used for the structural analysis. The
software engineering ecologist must follow an
example the ecologist in studying species of
both biotic and abiotic component of the soft-
ware engineering ecosystem [20].
Functional analysis contributes to the
identification of functions, services and inter-
actions (streams and chains) aimed at creating
value.
Ecosystem functions on the definition
of ecosystem processes are based, which can
be interactions inside biota and between the bi-
otic and abiotic components of the ecosystem,
covering material cycles and energy flows. The
functions of the ecosystem can be defined as
the ability of processes and components of the
structure to provide goods and services that
meet human needs, directly or indirectly. Arti-
cle [21] examines the historical development
of the concept of ecosystem services in eco-
nomic theory and practice, which can be useful
in the software engineering.
Ecosystem services are defined as a set
of ecosystem functions that are useful for hu-
mans [22]. Thus, ecosystem services in soft-
ware engineering should include the results of
performing ecosystem functions that are bene-
ficial to humans. In the software engineering,
as with other types of the ecosystems, these
functions can be divided into three groups -
economic, sociocultural and environmental
[22]. The first group, depending on the type of
ecosystem, includes knowledge, skills, prod-
ucts and artifacts. The second group is deter-
mined by the presence of people in the biota of
the ecosystem that bring socio-cultural values
to the concept of the ecosystem. Both are re-
lated to not only the culture of software engi-
neering, but also to society and culture in a
broad sense. The third group, these are func-
tions regarding the ability of ecosystems to
regulate flows that lead to waste disposal [4].
An important aspect in the study of ecosystem
services is their evaluation. The papers [23, 24]
offer models for evaluating ecosystem services
that can be applied to software engineering
ecosystems.
Researching flows, chains and cycles
that correspond to ecosystem functions is an
important part of the functional ecosystem
study. For the software engineering ecosys-
tems, these are the study of the added value
chains (food chain analogues), reuse cycles of
the legacy software artifacts, knowledge, prac-
tices (analogues of nutritional cycles). In bio-
logical ecosystems, the nutrient cycle is one of
the most important processes, as it ensures the
transformation of "old" (legacy) matter into
nutrients used by living organisms. It also
maintains the balance of those nutrients that
are necessary to maintain a healthy ecosystem.
Biological ecosystems consider four cycles of
nutrients (water, oxygen, nitrogen, carbon). In
software engineering ecosystems, as an ana-
logue of such cycles, we suggest using the soft-
ware engineering artifacts (knowledge, po-
lices, software artifacts, best practices) reuse
121
Програмна інженерія виробництва програмних продуктів
cycles (Fig. 4). Without reuse cycles, software
engineering ecosystems can become unbal-
anced and unhealthy, similar to biological eco-
systems, leading to inefficiency and disintegra-
tion. In addition to them, flows that lead to gen-
erated and disposal of waste should be studied.
Waste cycles are important and arise for vari-
ous reasons, for example, waste is a result of
inappropriate organization of the activity pro-
cess. For functional analysis, the technique of
system functional analysis can be used. For
value chains and cycles, it may will be useful
to apply value chain analysis [25, 26]. System
analysis is aimed at studying a part of the world
as a system localized within the ecosystem. Of
particular interest are the emergent functions
of the system and modeling and simulation.
Since ecosystems are usually open systems,
connections between the ecosystem and other
parts of the world presented as ecosystems are
also studied. For system analysis, experimental
simulation, simulation experiment, conceptual
modeling, simulation should be used. Finally,
it should be noted that the ecosystem research
differs from systems research in that it is inter-
disciplinary.
Literature Review
The literature review was performed.
The goal of review is find out the state of the
ecosystem research in context of the software.
For this goal are formulated the following two
research questions:
(RQ1) Do software ecosystem re-
searchers use biological analogies, and if so,
which ones?
(RQ2) What type of the ecosystem re-
search have software ecosystems researchers
shown interest in?
Below are the results of the analysis.
RQ1. Do software ecosystem research-
ers use biological analogies, and if so, which
ones?
In the works [16, 27] are attempts to
use analogies. For example, [27] offers two
types of biota and an analogue of the food
chain for the software ecosystem. The first
type is the participants of the software project,
which are represented by four categories - core
developers, active developers, peripheral de-
velopers and users. Between them, a connec-
tion is indicated, according to the authors, sim-
ilar to a trophic chain directed from core devel-
opers to users. The second type are the soft-
ware components and the project contributors
that are compared whit the biological species
in the biological ecosystem. Indicated that as
in the trophic network, some of these compo-
nents (such as joint development platforms and
software libraries) act as producents. A wider
range of analogues of components for this type
can be found in the work [16]. However, it has
no analogies with chains and cycles.
RQ2. What type of the ecosystem re-
search have software ecosystems researchers
shown interest in?
Basic studies (Long-term studies). The
paper [28, 29] is work from this type of re-
search. Author studied three aspects of the
software ecosystems - how this ecosystem has
emerged; how the present organization works
in terms of its structure, its processes, and its
product line, and how the organization relates
to actors in its external environment.
Basic studies (History of ecosys-
tems). The paper [29] presents the results of
studying how the object-oriented classes are
used in software packages over time to in-
crease understanding of the evolution of the
software ecosystem, as well as the mainte-
nance and survivability of projects.
Targeted research (Structural
analysis). The article [30] considers a subset
of communities found on GitHub and a variety
of roles is identified. The article [31], bots as
parts of biotic are used to coordinate open
source software projects. Four different classes
of the bots that coordinate work in such
projects (broker, checker, gatekeeper, and
manager) have been identified. In the articles
[32, 33], the workforce ecosystem as a
structure focused on creating value for the
organization was defined.
Targeted research (Functional
analysis).
- Ecosystem functions and services. In
the article [34], proposed an open source
online platform (RECOSystem) to support the
development and management of recom-
mender systems. In the article [35], the defini-
tion of the software testing ecosystem was pro-
posed. The article [36], described the compo-
nent-based software development ecosystem
and its main service is the supply of compo-
122
Програмна інженерія виробництва програмних продуктів
nents to the market. The article [37], described
the ecosystem of scientific software, as well as
the production of scientific software compo-
nents. In the article [38], the program analysis
platform that aims to build a data-driven eco-
system is presented. The article [39], presents
an ecosystem that Ericsson has developed for
the systematic practice of large-scale reuse of
microservices in a cloud context. The article
[40] draws attention to decision-making on the
design of software and systems for products,
processes, projects that maximize the value
created for invested resources. In the article
[41], the concept of a unified software value
chain and the first empirical proof of the con-
cept are proposed. This article examines the
value chain in the context of the software life
cycle. This view supports our view of software
engineering ecosystems. In the article [42], the
concept of the software ecosystem service is
discussed.
- The reuse cycles of the legacy soft-
ware. In the article [43], the concept of the eco-
system applies to the software industry to en-
courage developers to reuse and multiple use
the software components. This view cannot be
directly related to the cycles of reuse of the leg-
acy software, but it can be accepted to study
these cycles. In the article [44], value networks
for DevSecOps are presented.
- Flows of waste generation and dis-
posal. The work [45] is the most famous in the
software engineering about this theme. This
aspect of the ecosystem research can certainly
be related to issues of the sustainable and envi-
ronmental software engineering [46].
Targeted research (System analysis).
The article [47] the structures of known eco-
systems, as well as formulated and analyzes
problems related to openness, management,
analysis and quality in such ecosystems are
presented. The article [48] draws attention to
orchestration in software ecosystems and of-
fers a new understanding of it. The article [49]
provides a systematic display of the descrip-
tion and documentation of the software ecosys-
tem through modeling.
Conclusion
This work is a continuation of the au-
thor's works [4, 5, 50 - 52]. Represents the au-
thor's view on the problem of applying the con-
cept of the biology ecosystem in software en-
gineering. Attention is drawn to the inade-
quacy of the existing application of the concept
to the software ecosystem compared to the bi-
ological approach. That can be explain by the
fact that the software ecosystem uses an ap-
proach that considers ecosystems as networks,
organized around a keystone species and char-
acterized by a large number of loosely inter-
connected participants who depend on each
other for their mutual effectiveness and sur-
vival. In paper [10], such approach was called
"ecosystem-as-affiliation", and in paper [11], it
was called "platform ecosystems". At the same
time, the boundaries of the landscape and itself
landscape are not specified and there are no an-
alogues of chains and cycles, the presence of
which determines the essence of biological
ecosystems. Therefore, now the software eco-
system, in our opinion, is nothing more than a
fashionable term [53]. In this article, attention
is drawn to a different approach "ecosystem-
as-structure", when ecosystem is configuration
of activities that are defined by a value propo-
sition. In this context, attention is drawn to the
ecosystem research and the need to find analo-
gies that are known in ecology.
References
1. R. V. O’neill, Is it time to bury the ecosystem
concept (with full military honors, of course!),
Ecology, 82(12), (2001) 3275–3284.
2. E. Becker, B. Breckling, Border zone between
ecology and systems theory, Ecology Revis-
ited, Springer, 2011, 385–403.
3. A. Mittwollen, Unity in Ecology? An Investi-
gation of Patterns, Problems and Unifying
Concepts of Population Ecology, Systems
Ecology and Evolutionary Ecology (Biology),
Ph.D. thesis, Bremen, 2002.
4. N.A. Sydorov, Software ecology, Software en-
gineering, 1 (2010), 53-61 (in Ukrainіan).
5. N. Sydorov, Software Engineering Ecosys-
tems, in: Proceedings of the 13th International
Scientific and Practical Programming Confer-
ence UkrProg 2022Kyiv, Ukraine, October 11-
12, 2022.CEUR-WS: 10-Oct-2023, Vol-3501,
pp. 91-100.
6. E P. Odum, Fundamentals of Ecology, Saun-
ders Company, Philadelphia-London, 1971.
7. K. Manikas, Software ecosystems – A system-
atic literature review, The Journal of Systems
and Software 86 (2013), 1294–1306.
123
Програмна інженерія виробництва програмних продуктів
8. O. Barbosa, C. Alves, A Systematic Mapping
Study on Software Ecosystems, in: Proceed-
ings of the Workshop on Software Ecosystems,
2011, pp. 15-26.
9. R. Costanza, C. J. Cleveland, Value theory and
energy, in: Encyclopedia of energy, 6, 2004,
pp. 337 - 346.
10. R. Adner, Ecosystem as Structure: An Action-
able Construct for Strategy, Journal of Man-
agement Vol. 43 No. 1, January (2017), 39–58.
11. K. Kapoor, A. Ziaee Bigdeli, Y.K. Dwivedi, A
socio-technical view of platform ecosystems:
Systematic review and research agenda, Jour-
nal of Business Research 128 (2021) 94–108.
12. D. H. Ackley, Real artificial life: Where we
may be, in: The Proceedings of Artificial Life
VII, Portland, Oregon, August, 2000.
13. E. Zabardast, J. Frattini, Assets in Software
Engineering: What are they after all?, Journal
of Systems and Software 193(2022), 111485.
14. F. Capra, P. L. Luisi, The systems view of life:
a unifying vision / University Printing House,
Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2014.
15. D. H. Ackley, Real artificial life: Where we
may be, in: The Proceedings of Artificial Life
VII, Portland, Oregon, August, 2000.
16. T. N. Nguyen, The Ecology of Software: A
Framework for the Investigation of Business-
IT Integration Issues and Trends of Infor-
mation Technology Management in Contem-
porary Organizations, in: Proceedings of the
Information Resources Management Associa-
tion International Conference, 2002.
17. D. Strayer, J. S. Glitzenstein, Long-Term Eco-
logical Studies: an Illustrated Account of Their
Design, Operation, and Importance to Ecol-
ogy, in: Occasional Publication of The Institute
of Ecosystem Studies Number 2, August,
1986.
18. G. E. Likens, The ecosystem approach: its use
and abuse, Germany, 1992.
19. S. T. Jackson, Repurposing long-term ecologi-
cal studies for climate change
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2314444120.
20. D. Kirsh, Explaining Artifact Evolution. in:
Cognitive Life of Things: Recasting the
Boundaries of the Mind. Malafouris, L. (Ed.),
McDonald Institute for Archaeological Re-
search, Cambridge, April 7-9, 2009. Cam-
bridge University press.
21. E. Gómez-Baggethun, The history of ecosys-
tem services in economic theory and practice:
From early notions to markets and payment
schemes, Ecological Economics, vol. 69
(2010), 1209-1218.
22. R. S. de Groot, A Typology for the Classifica-
tion Description and Valuation of Ecosystem
Functions, Goods and Services, Ecological
Economics, Ecological Economics Volume
41, Issue 3, (2002) 393-408.
23. L. Hein, K. van Koppen, Spatial Scales, Stake-
holders and the Valuation of Ecosystem Ser-
vices, Ecological Economics, 57, (2006), 209–
228.
24. J. J. Kaufman, Stimulating innovation in prod-
ucts and services: with function analysis and
mapping, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken,
New Jersey, 2006.
25. J. R. Wixson, Function Analysis and Decom-
position Using Function Analysis Systems
Technique, in: International Council on Sys-
tems Engineering Annual Conference (IN-
COSE ’99), 1999.
26. B. Boehm, A Value-Chain Analysis or Soft-
ware Productivity Components, TRW Inc.,
1976.
27. T. Mens, P. Grosjean, The Ecology of Soft-
ware Ecosystems, Computer, October (2015),
112-114.
28. G. K. Hanssen, A longitudinal case study of an
emerging software ecosystem: Implications for
practice and theory, The Journal of Systems
and Software 85 (2012) 1455–1466.
29. T. Mens, M. Claes, P. Grosjean, ECOS: Eco-
logical Studies of Open Source Software Eco-
systems (2014), Antwerp, Belgium 978-1-
4799-3752-3/14, 2014.
30. D, Mendez, B, Baudry, M, Monperrus, Empir-
ical Evidence of Large-Scale Diversity in API
Usage of Object-Oriented Software, in: Pro-
ceedings of IEEE 13th International Working
Conference on Source Code Analysis and Ma-
nipulation (SCAM), July 2013.
31. F. Hukal, N. Berente, Bots Coordinating Work
in Open Source Software Projects, Computer,
52(9) (2019), 52-60.
32. E.J. Altman, J. Schwartz, D. Kiron, R. Jones,
and D. Kearns-Manolatos, Workforce Ecosys-
tems: A New Strategic Approach to the Future
of Work, MIT Sloan Management Review and
Deloitte, April 2021.
33. A. T. Gorski, I. Gligorea, Workforce and
workplace ecosystem – challenges and oppor-
tunities in the age of digital transformation in:
Proceedings of the International Conference
knowledge-based organization, Vol. XXVIII
,No 1, 2022.
34. A. Abdalla, A Software Ecosystem platform
for the development of Recommender Sys-
tems, June, 2020, DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-
34335/v1.
124
Програмна інженерія виробництва програмних продуктів
35. I. Santos, Software testing ecosystems insights
and research opportunities, in: Proceedings of
the XXXIV Brazilian Symposium on Software
Engineering, 2020, pp. 421–426.
36. J. Arndt, J. Dibbern, The Tension between In-
tegration and Fragmentation in a Component
Based Software Development Ecosystem, in:
Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences, 2006.
37. J, Howison, Understanding the scientific soft-
ware ecosystem and its impact: Current and fu-
ture measures, Research Evaluation 24 (2015),
454–470.
38. C. Sadowski, Tricorder: Building a Program
Analysis Ecosystem, in: Proceedings of the
37th IEEE International Conference on Soft-
ware Engineering, Florence, Italy, May 2015,
pp. 598-608, DOI: 10.1109/ICSE.2015.76.
39. M. Usman, D, Badampudi, An Ecosystem for
the Large-Scale Reuse of Microservices in a
Cloud-Native Context, IEEE Software, (39)5,
Sept.-Oct., 2022.
40. B. Boehm, Software Economics: A Roadmap,
March 2000, doi: 10.1145/336512.336584.
41. A. Pussep, The Software Value Chain as an
Analytical Framework for the Software Indus-
try and Its Exemplary Application for Vertical
Integration Measurement, in: Proceedings of
the Seventeenth Americas Conference on In-
formation Systems, Detroit, Michigan August
4 -7, 2011.
42. K. Manikas, K. M. Hansen, Software ecosys-
tems – A systematic literature review, the Jour-
nal of Systems and Software, 86, (2013),
1294–1306.
43. J. Arndt, J. Dibbern, The Tension between In-
tegration and Fragmentation in a Component
Based Software Development Ecosystem, in:
Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences, 2006.
44. J. Morales, R. Turner, Guide to Implementing
DevSecOps for a System of Systems in Highly
Regulated Environments, Technical Report
CMU/SEI-2020-TR-002, 2020.
45. M. Poppendieck, T. Poppendieck, Implement-
ing Lean Software Development: An Agile
Toolkit, Addison-Wesley, 2003, 240p.
46. E. Kern, Green software and green software
engineering - definitions, measurements, and
quality aspects, in: Proceedings of the First In-
ternational Conference on Information and
Communication Technologies for Sustainabil-
ity, ETH Zurich, Feb, 14-16, 2013.
47. J.V. Joshua, Software Ecosystem: Features,
Benefits and Challenges, International Journal
of Advanced Computer Science and Applica-
tions (IJACSA), 8(4), (2013), 242-247.
48. L. M. Maruping, S. Matook, The evolution of
software development orchestration: current
state and an agenda for future research, Euro-
pean Journal of Information Systems, 29:5
(2020), 443-445, DOI:
10.1080/0960085X.2020.1831834.
49. O. Pettersson, J. Andersson, A Survey of Mod-
eling Approaches for Software Ecosystems,
Springer International Publishing Switzerland,
2016, pp. 79-93.
50. N. Sydorov, Programming Style as an Artefact
of a Software Artefacts Ecosystem, in: Pro-
ceedings of the Advances in Computer Science
for Engineering and Education Applications,
Springer, Cham, 2021, 244-255.
51. N.A. Sydorov, N. N. Sydorova, E.N. Sydorov,
Description model of programming style eco-
system, Problems in programming, 2-3(2022),
74-81.
52. N.A. Sydorov, Toward a software artifacts
ecosystem, Problems in programming, 4
(2020), 11.
53. S. Hyrynsalmi, S. M. Hyrynsalmi, Ecosystem:
A Zombie Category? 2019 IEEE International
Conference on Engineering, Technology and
Innovation (ICE/ITMC).
Одержано: 25.10.2024
Внутрішня рецензія отримана: 01.11.2024
Зовнішня рецензія отриман: 02.11.2024
Про автора:
Сидоров Микола Олександрович,
д.т.н., професор
ORCID 0000-0003-0800-1668
Місце роботи автора:
НТУ України «Київський політехнічний
інститут імені Ігоря Сікорського»,
кафедра інформатики
та програмної інженерії,
Моб. тел.: 067 7980361.
E-mail: nyksydorov@gmail/com
|