The Anthropocene

In 2000, when atmospheric chemist Paul J. Crutzen and limnologist Eugene F. Stoermer proposed to introduce a new geological era, the Anthropocene, they could not have foreseen the remarkable career of the new term. Within a few years, the geological community began to investigate the scientific evidence for the concept and established the Anthropocene Working Group. While the Working Group has started to examine possible markers and periodizations of the new epoch, scholars from numerous other disciplines have taken up the Anthropocene as a cultural concept. In addition, the media have developed a deep interest in the Anthropocene’s broader societal ramifications. The article sheds light on the controversial debate about the Anthropocene and discusses its inextricably linked dual careers, first as a geological term and second as a cultural term. Third, it argues that the debate about the “Age of Humans” is a timely opportunity both to rethink the nature-culture relation and to re-assess the narratives that historians of science, technology, and the environment have written until now. Specifically, it examines both the heuristic and analytical power of the concept. It discusses new histories, new ideas to understand historical change, and new temporalities shaped by scholars who have taken up the challenge of the Anthropocene as a cultural concept that has the ability to question established stories and narratives. Fourth, it ends by stressing the potential of the Anthropocene concept to blur established epistemological boundaries and to stimulate cross-disciplinary collaborations between the sciences and the humanities.ZusammenfassungAls Paul Crutzen und Eugene Stoermer im Jahr den Begriff des Anthropozäns erstmals in die Debatte brachten, konnten sie nicht wissen, welche rasante Karriere dieser machen würden. Nur wenige Jahre später begannen die Geowissenschaften, die wissenschaftliche Evidenz des Konzepts zu erforschen und richteten die Anthropocene Working Group ein. Während die Arbeitsgruppe mögliche Marker und Anfänge der neuen geowissenschaftlichen Epoche untersucht, verstehen Vertreter zahlreicher geisteswissenschaftlicher Disziplinen das Anthropozän vor allem als kulturelles Konzept, an dessen gesellschaftlichen Auswirkungen die Medien ein breites Interesse entwickelt haben. Der Beitrag beleuchtet die kontroverse Debatte über das Anthropozän und diskutiert dessen unauflöslich verflochtene Doppelkarriere erstens als geologischer und zweitens als kultureller Begriff. Drittens versteht er die Debatte um das „Zeitalter des Menschen“ als willkommene Gelegenheit, das Verhältnis von Natur und Kultur neu zu bestimmen und etablierte Erzählungen der Wissenschafts-, Technik- und Umweltgeschichte auf den Prüfstand zu stellen, wobei insbesondere das heuristische und analytische Potential des Konzepts geprüft werden soll. Er präsentiert neue Geschichten, neue Ideen zum Verständnis historischen Wandels und neue Temporalitäten, die aus der Beschäftigung mit dem Anthropozän als kulturelles Konzept, das etablierte Narrative kritisch hinterfragt, entstanden sind. Viertens schließlich diskutiert er das Anthropozän als Katalysator für eine, die Grenzen zwischen Natur- und Geisteswissenschaften sprengende, inter- und transdisziplinäre Forschung.

[1]  C. Pfister,et al.  Das 1950er Syndrom : der Weg in die Konsumgesellschaft , 1996 .

[2]  J. Jouzel,et al.  Climate and atmospheric history of the past 420,000 years from the Vostok ice core, Antarctica , 1999, Nature.

[3]  K. Pomeranz,et al.  The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Making of the Modern World Economy , 2001 .

[4]  P. Crutzen Geology of mankind , 2002, Nature.

[5]  Ted Nordhaus,et al.  The Death of Environmentalism Global warming politics in a post-environmental world , 2005 .

[6]  Bronislaw Szerszynski,et al.  Nature, Technology and the Sacred , 2005 .

[7]  W. Steffen,et al.  Global Change and the Earth System: A Planet Under Pressure , 2005 .

[8]  P. Crutzen Albedo Enhancement by Stratospheric Sulfur Injections: A Contribution to Resolve a Policy Dilemma? , 2006 .

[9]  John Dearing,et al.  Developing an Integrated History and future Of People on Earth (IHOPE): Draft Science Plan , 2012 .

[10]  Ted Nordhaus,et al.  Break Through: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility , 2007 .

[11]  Libby Robin,et al.  History for the Anthropocene , 2007 .

[12]  G. Parker Crisis and Catastrophe: The Global Crisis of the Seventeenth Century Reconsidered , 2008 .

[13]  F. Chapin,et al.  A safe operating space for humanity , 2009, Nature.

[14]  D. Chakrabarty The Climate of History: Four Theses , 2009, Critical Inquiry.

[15]  Marion Boyer,et al.  The Clock of the Long Now , 2009 .

[16]  P. Crutzen,et al.  The Anthropocene: conceptual and historical perspectives , 2011, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[17]  Minutes to Midnight: History and the Anthropocene Era from 1763 , 2011 .

[18]  J. Holbrook,et al.  Is the Anthropocene an issue of stratigraphy or pop culture , 2012 .

[19]  P. Gibbard,et al.  The term ‘Anthropocene’ in the context of formal geological classification , 2013 .

[20]  Gregory T. Cushman Guano and the Opening of the Pacific World: Frontmatter , 2013 .

[21]  Geoffrey Parker,et al.  Global Crisis: War, Climate Change and Catastrophe in the Seventeenth Century , 2013 .

[22]  Gregory T. Cushman Guano and the Opening of the Pacific World: Frontmatter , 2013 .

[23]  Clive Hamilton,et al.  Earthmasters: The Dawn of the Age of Climate Engineering , 2013 .

[24]  Gregory T. Cushman Guano and the Opening of the Pacific World: A Global Ecological History , 2013 .

[25]  Das Anthropozän: Wie ein neuer Blick auf Mensch und Natur das Museum verändert , 2013 .

[26]  J. McConnell,et al.  Antarctic-wide array of high-resolution ice core records reveals pervasive lead pollution began in 1889 and persists today , 2014, Scientific Reports.

[27]  F. Mauelshagen Redefining historical climatology in the Anthropocene , 2014 .

[28]  L. Head Contingencies of the Anthropocene: Lessons from the ‘Neolithic’ , 2014 .

[29]  Elizabeth Robin A Future Beyond Numbers , 2014 .

[30]  Ji-Hyung Cho The Little Ice Age and the Coming of the Anthropocene , 2014 .

[31]  B. Latour Agency at the Time of the Anthropocene , 2014 .

[32]  B. Guillaume Vernadsky’s philosophical legacy: A perspective from the Anthropocene , 2014 .

[33]  Jo Guldi,et al.  The History Manifesto , 2014 .

[34]  B. Latour Telling friends from foes at the time of the Anthropocene , 2014, Revista de Antropologia.

[35]  B. Scherer,et al.  Three galleries of the Anthropocene , 2014 .

[36]  Kritik des Anthropozäns: Plädoyer für eine neue Humanökologie , 2014 .

[37]  Andreas Malm,et al.  The geology of mankind? A critique of the Anthropocene narrative , 2014 .

[38]  T. Lecain Against the Anthropocene. A Neo-Materialist Perspective , 2015 .

[39]  The Anthropocene: A Critical Exploration , 2015 .

[40]  T. Bristow The Anthropocene Lyric , 2015 .

[41]  Zivilisatorischer Kollaps in der Geschichte und als Zukunftsszenario , 2015 .

[42]  M. Maslin,et al.  Defining the Anthropocene , 2015, Nature.

[43]  François Gemenne,et al.  Thinking the Anthropocene , 2015 .

[44]  J. Grinevald,et al.  Was the Anthropocene anticipated? , 2015 .

[45]  S. Carpenter,et al.  Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet , 2015, Science.

[46]  Teresa Lloro-Bidart A Political Ecology of Education in/for the Anthropocene , 2015 .

[47]  P. Gibbard,et al.  Formal subdivision of the Quaternary System/Period: Past, present, and future , 2015 .

[48]  Das Anthropozän : zum Stand der Dinge , 2015 .

[49]  D. Haraway Anthropocene, Capitalocene, Plantationocene, Chthulucene: Making Kin , 2015 .

[50]  The Geological Turn : Narratives of the Anthropocene , 2015 .

[51]  D. Chakrabarty The Anthropocene and the Convergence of Histories , 2015 .

[52]  Timothy Clark Ecocriticism on the Edge: The Anthropocene as a Threshold Concept , 2015 .

[53]  Will Steffen,et al.  Colonization of the Americas, ‘Little Ice Age’ climate, and bomb-produced carbon: Their role in defining the Anthropocene , 2015 .

[54]  Naomi Oreskes,et al.  When did the Anthropocene begin? A mid-twentieth century boundary level is stratigraphically optimal , 2015 .

[55]  D. Cohen,et al.  The History Manifesto: A Critique , 2015 .

[56]  C. Hamilton The Theodicy of the “Good Anthropocene” , 2015 .

[57]  D. Coen Big is a Thing of the Past: Climate Change and Methodology in the History of Ideas , 2016, Journal of the history of ideas.

[58]  L. Edwards,et al.  The “Anthropocene” epoch: Scientific decision or political statement? , 2016 .

[59]  G. L. Buffon,et al.  Histoire naturelle générale et particuliere avec la description du Cabinet du Roy : tome premier , 2016 .

[60]  Eine Million Jahre? Über die juristische Metaphysik der atomaren Endlagerung , 2016 .

[61]  J. McNeill The Great Acceleration: An Environmental History of the Anthropocene since 1945 , 2016 .

[62]  D. Fernbach,et al.  The Shock of the Anthropocene: The Earth, History and Us , 2016 .

[63]  Jason W. Moore Anthropocene or Capitalocene?: Nature, History, and the Crisis of Capitalism , 2016 .

[64]  Arthur Yip,et al.  Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors , 2016 .

[65]  Erle C. Ellis,et al.  The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene , 2016, Science.

[66]  Kärin Nickelsen,et al.  Introduction: Cooperation and Competition in the Sciences , 2016, NTM.

[67]  Displaying the Anthropocene in and beyond museums , 2017 .