I doubt we will see a great lump again, nor do I expect a new "species concept" to appear.
I agree that we will not see lumping of the sort embodied in the "Great Lumping Event" several decades ago, in which anything that could possibly hybridize is lumped. It is useful to remember that, for nearly two hundred years prior to the 60s and 70s, splitting was the norm.
However, if the "Great Lump" was an abuse of the Biological Species Concept, I do fear that in out times, the Phylogenetic Species Concept (or subspecies concept!) is abused as well. Thus, I would not be surprised if, in another decade or two, we see the "reeling back" or at least reorganization of some of our current species limits.
To go out on a limb, I see a ripe example in our scrub jays. I think Woodhouse's and California make good splits, but perhaps more palatable were the Island population relegated to a subspecies of the California. This sort of thing is at least a future possibility that does not require us to ignore genetic advances, etc, only to reinterpret how we use them. However, I do agree that lumping of this sort would not be considered "Great," and that scale of lumping is unlikely... or at least difficult to foresee!
Regarding new species concepts, I'm still not convinced we've seen the end. I'd like to see a more holistic species concept, with a better balance of behavior, genetics, and ecology. I'd like to see the Biological Species Concept recognize that hybrid zones will occur in certain environmental situations; I'd like to see the Phylogenetic Species Concept recognize that sometimes members of the same species just don't see each other for thousands of years, and I'd like the Evolutionary Species Concept to recognize that any new species is necessarily nested in an old one - and there are still plenty around! I'd also like to see the geneticists and ecologists be forced to agree, whenever a lump or a split is made!
(Although maybe the only species around by then will be House Sparrow, and maybe a Mynah or two ...)
