The Anthropocene Review

The emergence of cascaded risks we face at the Anthropocene raises new problems and demands for action. Climate change can be seen as the most critical world risk: it reflects the effect of human actions that promote several risks, it potentiates disasters and catastrophes caused by natural phenomena, and it can, ultimately, threaten human survival on the planet. Risks in the Anthropocene are a matter of governance and local actions. A reflexive analysis, in the context of the so-called risk societies, and of resilient local communities to cope with the impact of risks of climate change is carried out. A Resilience Integrated Model of Climate and Economy (RIMCE) is proposed. The model is based on the idea of a social economic view, which involves nation-states that focus on local communities, citizen responsibility, rights, and behavior, materialized through networks of social capital and solidarity. This local cooperation to cope with climate crises, is the motivation for a new tax, the resilience social tax. With this reflection, we hope to contribute to the understanding of the economic ties attached to anthropogenic risks, proposing criteria to change behaviors, and advocating public participation in defining local actions to restore the optimal operating conditions of the Earth System.

This article is a theoretical engagement with the book The Falling Sky, written by anthropologist Bruce Albert and Yanomami shaman Davi Kopenawa. It presents how the concepts of nature and ecology in Yanomami cosmology, as developed by Kopenawa, break with stereotypes of indigenous people living in harmonic and stable relationships with nature. Instead, this ecology is a way of dealing with an unstable nature that can derail into chaos, disarranging the cosmic arrangement of humans, non-humans and spirits that shamans should work to keep in place. Kopenawa named this cosmic entropy the fall of the sky, which now is an imminent risk caused by the destruction of the forests. His conception of ecology shows that maintaining forests in indigenous land is not merely a spontaneous fact. Rather, it is also a consequence of the intellectual engagement of indigenous people and their collaboration with other living beings.

Analysis of multi-temporal satellite images from 1980 to 2019, complemented by geomorphic mapping and field study, indicate that “loose sand” extraction of Sakarya River deposits from the Adapazarı Plain of NW Turkey significantly intensified during the last decade, and mining operations have caused complete and irreversible alteration of floodplain habitat in a total area amounting to ~970 hectares. Our reconstructions estimate the total amount of mined material over a 40-year period since 1980 as ~50 million m³, amounting to ~80 million tonnes of fluvial sand. These sand mine operations, like most around the world, are highly disruptive and destructive but remain unregulated, and neither extractions or environmental impacts are reported or monitored. Our independent study is first to directly assess sand extraction in altering the natural geomorphic setting of the Sakarya River and describe economic, environmental, and social impacts of mining operations. The high demand for loose sand used in cement and concrete infrastructure correlates with changes in Turkey’s political economy, which increasingly focused on construction during the last quarter of the 20th century. Extractive sand mining in this region has caused substantial land loss, soil erosion and water table alterations, which have made agricultural land unsuitable for cultivation, and even destroyed most of the farmland supporting the villages, eliminating the traditional farming practiced for millennia. Continuous mining operations cause constant noise, heavy vehicle traffic and pollution. Furthermore, sand removal from the Sakarya river environment has significantly diminished sediment transport offshore to its delta in the Black Sea; the lower sediment yield diminishes coastal beach nourishment and is accelerating coastal land erosion regionally. The Sakarya case study we describe illustrates the need for (1) improved oversight of human agency that destroys riverine settings; and (2) regulations regarding long term environmental and social impacts of sand mining.

Geologists are currently finalizing the specification of a new geological time unit, the Anthropocene Epoch, characterized by the Earth’s response to humans driving geological change. Once it is ratified we can use it also as a civil time unit. The standard for time reckoning used worldwide today is the Gregorian calendar, introduced in 1582. As a calendar of the Catholic church, it is structured around supernatural events and indeterminate religious dates. Astronomical year numbering has long fixed the arcane arithmetic and religious notations of the Gregorian calendar, but the origin of its time scale perpetuates the links to religious and supernatural dates. If we shift the origin of the astronomical time scale to the onset of the Anthropocene, we can update the calendar with a science based time scale that is anchored by real world data and events. Such a time scale would be better suited as a culturally inclusive standard in a multi-cultural world.

Relationships between nature and society are made manifest in the production of landscapes. Consequently, landscape changes indicate changes in the relationships between nature and society. Forged at regional scales over long periods of time, nature/society relationships, like natural and social systems, exhibit periods of equilibrium, stability, and incremental change that eventually give way to new periods of equilibrium, stability, and incremental change in which causal relationships have changed. The paper presents a landscape changebased, grounded theory periodization of the New England (USA) region’s Anthropocene history. Its intent is to provide temporal boundaries within which processes, events, records, and artifacts can be examined within shared socio-ecological frames of reference, a first step in the development of new socio-ecologically-based historical narratives. Locating the “inaugural moment” of New England’s Anthropocene epoch at the establishment of Plymouth Colony in 1620, the beginning of England’s colonialization of this forested North American region, the paper presents and interprets regularity analyses of population density, land-use/land cover, and other data related to landscape shaping processes, identifying socio-ecological regime shifts from the aboriginal Late Woodlands regime to the English Colonial regime and subsequent shifts to the American Industrial regime in 1830 and the American Post-Industrial regime in 1970 along with their nested, subsidiary regimes. Previous periodizations of the region’s history are discussed, and a narrative of the region’s Anthropocene history is outlined based on the paper’s periodization. It is observed that displacements of a socio-ecological regime serve as resources for the next regime, that ghosts of past regimes are present in today’s environmental challenges, but that socio-ecological regime shifts are difficult to forecast.

What role do contemporary narratives and counter-narratives play in policy regarding the Anthropocene crisis? Given the centrality of the anthropos in the Anthropocene, what conditions might make possible a “post-anthropocentric” or “non-anthropocentric” narrative? Tracing the production of both dominant and counter-narratives, the struggle for narrative power centers the role of the anthropos in the Anthropocene. The standard narrative—“strong anthropocentrism”—maintains humanist assumptions relating to the “control” and “cultivation” of the non-human. In contrast, counter-narratives, from both alter-humanist eco-centric and post-humanist positions, attempt to de-center human-centrism toward more egalitarian responses to the Anthropocene. Despite these attempts at de-centering human spheres of influence, this article argues that these counter-narratives maintain a “weak anthropocentrism,” given their maintenance of human volition and intentionality. The production of “post-anthropocentric” or “non-anthropocentric” narratives of the Anthropocene crisis would require speculative moves beyond the human: toward human abolition and disconnection.

How natural and cultural forces shaping tropical forested landscapes are conceptualised is of vital importance to Anthropocene debates. We examine two concepts: disturbance and landscape domestication. From the perspective of disturbance, humans – whether ancient or modern – are a priori negative for tropical forests, outside of and alien to nature. From this view, the Anthropocene is a planetary scale aggregation of disturbance. A more just vision of tropical forests, accepting anthropogenic influence on biodiversity, would combine ‘disturbance’ with other concepts that capture human agency and intentionality. Landscape domestication proposes that humans can shape ecology and plant and animal population demographics, making the landscape more productive and congenial for humans, upgrading or degrading the biodiversity of tropical forests. Herein, forest peoples shape the Anthropocene itself through their ‘domestication’ of the forest. Yet this approach can overdetermine culture, ignoring non-human agency, whilst human impacts can be seen as the outcome of intentional modifications to increase landscape productivity, at worst a disavowed projection of ‘economic man’. Using the convivial scholarship framework of Nyamnjoh, we argue that these ideas give incomplete views of tropical forests in the Anthropocene and can be enriched by concepts derived from African worldviews with ‘relationality’ and ‘wholeness’ at their core. These are expressed in ohanife, deriving from Igbo language, ubuntu, from the Nguni language and ukama, a notion from Shona culture. Together these concepts evince an ‘eco-bio-communitarianism’ embracing humans, God, spirits, ancestors, animals and inanimate beings in a ‘community of beings’ irreducible to the culture-nature divide (moving beyond disturbance) and allowing for the agency and personhood of non-humans (moving beyond historical ecology). This is consonant with Indigenous Amazonian worldviews, such as that of Kopenawa. Approaching human-nature relations from Nyamnjoh’s idea of conviviality, we elaborate a less incomplete and more just perspective on the cultural and natural shaping of Anthropocene tropical forests.

The transition to a zero-emissions world entails vast political economic restructuring. How resources are mobilized, what sorts of technological infrastructures are constructed, who funds, controls and has claim to profits from investments contributing to the green transition will shape political economies for generations to come. This article suggests that early 20th-century American institutionalism and subsequent legal institutionalist literatures provide a valuable resource for energy transitions scholars and other social scientists, activists, and policy-makers of the energy transition. The article summarizes some of the major lines of thought in classical and legal institutionalism and briefly outlines three areas in which they can inform thinking about political economies of the Anthropocene. First, these literatures are generative of creative thinking on how business activity is organized and help overcome reductionist public-private dichotomies. Second, the history of institutionalist and progressive thought in the New Deal-era runs parallel, in revealing ways, to thinking based on environmental, social and governmental (ESG) principles in the present. Lastly, the article discusses radical proposals for transformation of private property and investment in the thought of institutionalist Adolf Berle relevant to simultaneously addressing both climate and inequality crises.

In delineating the Anthropocene, the Holocene is being redefined as the formative epoch of human development leading to the Anthropocene. This has led to a diversity of views of the Holocene and Holocene humanity in the Anthropocene, the extremes of which may be described as “Holocene utopianism” and “Holocene dystopianism.” The former views the Holocene as a solution to the predicament of the Anthropocene, as an idealized past of human activities and stable climate that must be aspired to. The latter perceives the Holocene and Holocene humanity as the root cause of the ills of the Anthropocene that must be avoided in the future. These views reflect a gross simplification of human activities and the environment of the Holocene. Human activity in the Holocene is characterized by diverse human behaviors that can be perceived as both destructive and sustaining to the earth’s ecological systems, and in many cases, emerged as a response to fluctuations in the Holocene climate. The Holocene does not provide an escape from the Anthropocene, as a solution or as a cautionary tale. Nonetheless, future human endeavors must necessarily draw from the diversity of human activities and systems of organization observed in the Holocene, but do so carefully.

This paper discusses the difference between growth and development in plants, and how these concepts can be applied to human civilization. While growth refers to the quantitative gain of biomass, development is characterized by qualitative changes in the specialization and functioning of cells, tissues, and organs. In human society, growth is often prioritized over development, as evidenced by the focus on gross domestic product without considering its social and environmental impacts. Waste, which is produced during consumption, is a significant problem for human civilization as it contributes to pollution and environmental degradation. Waste management and finding new uses for waste are important efforts to utilize waste production; however, their effectiveness is often unclear. Sustainable development of human society should focus on creating systems inspired by nature, which can be achieved by reducing waste production and increasing the share of waste utilizable in biological processes. The functional interconnection between decomposer (waste) and producers (raw materials) in human society is essential for achieving sustainable development. Ultimately, this path leads to the reduction of waste and improves the effectiveness of human activities, thereby reducing threats to ecosystems.

Since 2015, the Ecomodernist Manifesto has inspired efforts to shape a better future for people and the rest of life in the Anthropocene. At the same time, misconceptions and misunderstandings have arisen about what ecomodernism stands for. As three authors of the Manifesto, we offer this clarifying perspective.