Photo by chuttersnap on Unsplash
One idea from me
First coined by the geoscientists Crutzen and Stoermer in 2000, the Anthropocene tells the story that for most of human history, the geology and climate of the planet were influenced by nonhuman natural forces.
Over the past few hundred years, however, human exploitation of natural resources has unraveled ancient threads of ecological interdependence at lightning speed, placing into question the future livability of the planet for both humans and other forms of life. In the wake of this devastation, humans have altered the planet’s geology and ecosystems to such a degree that collectively, people have become a global ‘force of nature.’
For some conservationists, like the famous conservation biologist E.O. Wilson, the Anthropocene signals the beginning of the end of nature, calling on us to shore up the boundaries between humans and untouched wilderness now more than ever. The only way to ensure a healthy future for people and the planet will be to protect 50% of nature from human impact, and new global conservation initiative to protect ‘half the earth.’
On the other hand, these perspectives are best illustrated by recent “postnature” environmentalists arguing for more experimental, ‘ecomodern’ approaches to environmental conservation that can accommodate and thrive in the human-altered landscapes of the Anthropocene.
Which conservation project will become dominant, between the half-earthers and the ecomodernists?
It’s too soon to tell. It’s probably best to think of the Anthropocene as the ‘Anthropo-scene,’ a time of radical transformation in our thinking about human-environment relationships that is producing a whole mess of new projects and approaches to save the planet.
But I think the environmental journalist Emma Marris offers an interesting take on the middle ground of ‘half-wild’ wilderness we may need to adopt to save the human-altered wilderness of the Anthropocene:
“We must temper our romantic notion of untrammeled wilderness and find room next to it for the more nuanced notion of a global, half-wild rambunctious garden, tended by us”
(Book recommendation for further reading on the Anthropocene: Arts of Living on a Damaged Planet: Ghosts & Monsters of the Anthropocene. Here’s a great review!)
One quote from others
“There are many reasons to be suspicious of the idea of the Anthropocene.
It generalizes the blame for what is a situation of vastly uneven making and suffering. The rhetorical ‘we’ of Anthropocene discourse smooths over severe inequalities, and universalizes the site-specific consequences of environmental damage. The designation of this epoch as the ‘age of man’ also seems like our crowning act of self-mythologization – and as such only to embed the technocratic narcissism that has produced the current crisis.
“But the Anthropocene, for all its faults, also issues a powerful shock and challenge to our self-perception as a species. It exposes both the limits of our control over the long-term processes of the planet, and the magnitude of the consequences of our activities.”
– Robert Macfarlane in Underland
One question for you
– Immunologist Jona Salk