Shwarts recognized that any attempt to restore biocenoses to their original form is prematurely condemned to failure. Therefore, he saw it to be necessary to rethink the idea of a "good biosphere". He suggested the term "noobiogeocenosis" to characterize newly constructed biocenoses which are equal to their naturally developed predecessors. Further, Shwarts' conception vastly differs from Petrashov's. Shwarts characterizes the work of as an ecologist as following: to create a general scheme for the development of flourishing biogeocenoses in an urbanized environment. This scheme can be implemented as an industrial complex in conjunction with measures for the industrial development of the region and of the country. Schwarts sees a noobiogeocenosis as an aspect of "human ecology". The main task of this branch of science is to develop a general scheme for the development of a biogeocenotic cover of a single economic and geographical region. Shwarts's definition of a noobiogeocenosis and the role of ecologists in its creation, is conceptually very close to the modern field of industrial ecology, which has been defined elsewhere as a "systems-based, multidisciplinary discourse that seeks to understand emergent behavior of complex integrated human/natural systems". The field of industrial ecology also focuses on the economic and social impacts of the material exchange between industrial objects and their environment. In the field of industrial ecology, the term noocenosis has been used with reference to Shwarts' original charachterization of a noobiogeocenosis. According to recent literature in this discipline, a noocenosis is simply а human, technical and/or informational unit. The term is used to characterize the relationship between human production systems and the non-human environment. Furthermore, an important differentiation is that a noocenosis is seen as a separate instance from the biocenosis. In contrast, a noocenosis is, for Petrashov, an ecological concept that focuses on the resilience of a biocenosis, the complexity of its ecological connections and its stage in the line of evolutionary development. All these factors are evaluated within the context of human-industrial degradation of biocenoses, the state which characterizes the modern world. Petrashov views human flourishing not as a goal per se, but rather as the bi-product of flourishing biocenoses. Social development is only possible through the rational construction and maintenance of biocenoses.