How
to handle the
shock of the new?
How do arts, technology and making sense of the
future link?
Four line of thoughts #SGSCULTURE, @SalzburgGlobal.
[*]
[*]
 |
| The author at Senaatintori Helsinki (Finland) |
Nowadays, people are altering the Earth at an accelerating pace. A new, disrupted world is in the making; research & supply-chains ahead, politics lagging behind.
Since aeons, people have built on Earth their 'sociocultural-ecological niche' through purposefully engineering their environments to sustain their existence and reproduction. Starting from the fringes, in deep time, now human activity substantially shapes the dynamics of Earth. People's activities mark the globe at least since the industrial revolution. Taking this perspective I like to argue that, since the onset of agriculture in the Neolithic age, 'design and engineering' has been an all-purpose cultural activity of people to shape their 'sociocultural-ecological niches' to maintain their well-being, mutual care, and reproduction.
Since aeons, people have built on Earth their 'sociocultural-ecological niche' through purposefully engineering their environments to sustain their existence and reproduction. Starting from the fringes, in deep time, now human activity substantially shapes the dynamics of Earth. People's activities mark the globe at least since the industrial revolution. Taking this perspective I like to argue that, since the onset of agriculture in the Neolithic age, 'design and engineering' has been an all-purpose cultural activity of people to shape their 'sociocultural-ecological niches' to maintain their well-being, mutual care, and reproduction.
Tell the people, they are marvellous niche-builders!
What people like to happen, what they fear and what they cherish, that is at the core of their cultures. It gets pictured in their visual arts and other means to express feeling, perceiving and sense-making. Hence, culture and arts describes the sociocultural-ecological niches of our species, in history, today and as vision of the future.
The history of altering Earth exhibit complex social and cultural processes. For example, Denevan [1992, 2011] illustrates what happened in the Americas, Purdy [2015] describes the USA, Fressoz [2012] studies France, and Chew and Sarabia [2016] or Kowarsch [2016] describe an extended historical period or the philosophical context, respectively.
The history of altering Earth exhibit complex social and cultural processes. For example, Denevan [1992, 2011] illustrates what happened in the Americas, Purdy [2015] describes the USA, Fressoz [2012] studies France, and Chew and Sarabia [2016] or Kowarsch [2016] describe an extended historical period or the philosophical context, respectively.
 |
| Sculpture "Emiigrants on Fish" - Carl Milles, Milles Garden - Stockholm (Sweden) |
People are marvellously ingenious, also when altering the Earth. To that end they deploy three dominant traits of our species. First, all people - even the artists - seem to be engineers or designer who are determined to carve out a sociocultural-ecological niche from Earth. Second, people 'consist of abstract information, including the distinctive ideas, theories, intentions, feelings and other states of mind that characterize' them and shapes their thoughtful insights [Deutsch, 2011, p.130]. Third, whatever people engineer (or design) that they do conceive through mutual sharing of insights into sense-making. Hence, humankind's multiple cultures inevitably lead to various 'particularly engineered systems for producing, distributing and consuming goods and services'. In making these systems, people face choices and constraints; that may take physical or mental form.
The individual and collective responses to the global and self-inflicted altering of Earth are various. They may be visionary, confident, or concerned. However, they also include 'cognitive dissonance', or manifest as doomsday scenarios and denial of change. Addressing people's concerns appropriately through action, including politics, require shaping public and individual discourses. Discourse is a prerequisite for handling 'weird(ing) power relations enlivened by times of radical uncertainty' [Sweeney, 2014, p. 10], hence, doing politics. The discourse should be non-technical, non-expert. Rather, they must relate to people's preferences and world-views. Hence, they have to have a cultural meaning and have to relate to collective sense-making.
At very first view, people express their preferences and world-views through their lifestyles. However, the genuine societal expression of preferences and world-views is the particular engineering / design (and 'modus operandi') of the production systems and consumption patterns that support people in maintaining their lifestyles. The 'engineering/design and operation of production systems and consumption patterns' in turn shape the intersection of societies with the biotic and abiotic environments of Earth. Whatever shape these intersections may take given the scientific-technical means and economic resources, essential for the respective design-decision will be people's world-views, their preference regarding their lifestyles, and their values.
People's preferences and values are shaped by and expressed through art, for example, narratives, that is here, tales about the purpose of actions and views about 'what is right'. Nowadays, as global change is intentional and massive, the arts shall capture the underpinning social and cultural features, such as preferences of people, their world-views, and reflect general purpose. Furthermore, the arts should extend the discussions between specialists beyond the respective realms of professional competence and influence the sense-making of how to design production systems and consumption patterns.
We, the Terra-Former.
What's the New?
Examples to illustrate the perspective of the central role of engineering/design in our cultures are many.
Civil engineering builds visible intersections of the Earth and (economic) activities of people, for example, dredging a waterway, building a bridge or constructing a hydroelectric power plant and other more subtle changes of Earth's geomorphology.
A less visible although powerful intersection of the Earth and (economic) activities of people are the various production systems and consumption patterns, which couple through fluxes of matter and energy.
Urban dwellings may serve as a further example; they constitute a visible intersection with the biogeosphere, and massive fluxes of energy and matter couple them to the Earth. For example, cities are receiving drinking water and ejecting wastewater, receiving electric power or fuels and ejecting heat, receiving food and ejecting manufactured goods that at the end of their life-cycle are discarded or recycled elsewhere on the globe.
An effective terra-engineering, that is 'design at a planetary scale', is taking place on Earth to sustain a human population of 9 to 11 Billion people by the end of the century. That's the New!
Bingo, Geo-Bio-Noosphere!
Obviously, culture and arts are parts of the Earth.
But, how does culture, arts relate to Earth?
To keep it simple, the Earth is composed of three spheres, a 'geosphere' of abiotic features, a 'biosphere' of biotic features, and a 'noosphere' of cognitive features. The meaning of notions 'geosphere' and 'biosphere' seem evident. To match to these two notions, what is meant by 'noosphere' needs re-focussing compared to its habitual (metaphysical) meaning.
The notions 'biosphere' and 'geosphere' are built in a similar manner. On one side they refer to physical features of the Earth, respectively biotic and abiotic objects that alter in time and space. On the other side, they refer to processes that govern the interaction of these physical features (objects) in space and time. To relate culture and arts to 'biosphere' and 'geosphere', the notion 'noosphere' should be re-coined referring also to particular 'physical features' (objects) and 'processes'.
The construction and operation of any 'engineered / designed system / pattern' links people's activities to the Earth, either in a direct physical manner or through fluxes of energy and matter, or through both. The 'engineering / design
Summarizing, the engineering / design of the intersections of people's activities and the Earth is much more than science, technology and economy. The intersections are as much a reflection of our value systems, cultural choices, lifestyles, virtues and good courses of action. It is in addressing these matters of sense-making that cultures and arts play their role as essential cognitive features of our species.
The 'physical features' of the 'noosphere' are the artefacts that people make, not limited to but including 'engineered/designed systems for production and consumption'. The 'processes' in the 'noosphere' are the thoughtful insights of people about how to design, use and deploy these artefacts. Obviously, culture and arts are part of these thoughtful insights. Hence, the re-coined notion noosphere refers to physical features (artefacts, engineered systems) and processes (the intentional use of these artefacts).
The notions 'biosphere', 'geosphere' and 'noosphere' describe Earth as being composed of physical features and processes that govern interactions. Culture and arts are part of these processes. Consequently, a description of the Earth deems possible in which culture and arts are integral parts; 'a kind of hybrid Earth, of nature injected with human will, however responsible or irresponsible that will may have exercised' [Hamilton and Grinevald, 2015, p.68].
The Culture of “Ingenieurskunst" **
How does culture and arts relate to the engineering/design
of production systems and consumption patterns?
of production systems and consumption patterns?
The engineering/design of production systems and consumption patterns happens in a double framework. The first framework is set by the scientific-technological means, which are deployed within the available economic resources. The second framework is set by the "narratives" about what an engineered/designed system/pattern shall deliver.
The construction and operation of any 'engineered / designed system / pattern' links people's activities to the Earth, either in a direct physical manner or through fluxes of energy and matter, or through both. The 'engineering / design
narrative' describes people's sense-making of their sociocultural-ecological niche. Hence, the engineered / designed system, as well as the particular operation procedures for its use, depend on natural and technical constraints, on economic means, and on societal choices.
For example, the design of the high-water spillway of a hydroelectric power plant applies safety rules and the laws of hydrodynamics. The retention of water in the lake behind the dam is managed in function of the hydrological regimes, the intended use of water downstream of the dam, and the needs of the society for electrical power. The design and operation of an engineered / designed system in is about the appropriation of resources, that is value-driven societal choices to allocate opportunities.
Summarizing, the engineering / design of the intersections of people's activities and the Earth is much more than science, technology and economy. The intersections are as much a reflection of our value systems, cultural choices, lifestyles, virtues and good courses of action. It is in addressing these matters of sense-making that cultures and arts play their role as essential cognitive features of our species.
* The essay is a contribution to the Salzburg Global Seminar (593)
“The
Shock of the New: Arts, Technology and Making Sense of the Future”;
20-25 February 2018; #SGSCULTURE. The essay is derived from reflections in my paper “Ideal-Type
Narratives for Engineering a Human Niche”
Geosciences
2017,7(1),
18; doi:10.3390/geosciences7010018. Copyright / pictures: The author.
** The notion of 'engineering' is referred to in French and German as 'genie civil' and 'Ingenieurskunst', respectively. Rather than the English 'engineering', the corresponding French or German notions historically connote a more substantial concept, 'the ingenious civil' or 'the arts of engineering', respectively. Hence, both notions refer to the design and operation of purposely built and often larger-scale environments of artefacts.
Publications that were used to write this post:.
Allenby,
B. R.; Sarewitz, D. The techno-human condition; The MIT Press:
Cambridge, USA 2011.
Amundsen,
H.; Berglund, F.; Westskog, H. Overcoming barriers to climate change
adaptation—a question of multilevel governance? Environment and
Planning C: Government and Policy 2010, 28, 276–289,
doi:10.1068/c0941.
Anshelm,
J.; Hansson, A. Battling Promethean dreams and Trojan horses:
Revealing the critical discourses of geoengineering. Energy Research
& Social Science 2014, 2, 135–144,
doi:10.1016/j.erss.2014.04.001.
Banerjee,
B. The Limitations of Geoengineering Governance In A World of
Uncertainty. Stanford Journal of Law Science Policy 2011, 240, 15–36,
http://www.stanford.edu/group/sjlsp/cgi-bin/orange_web/users_images/pdfs/61_Banerjee%20FInal.pdf
(accessed 10 Januray 2017).
Barnosky,
A. D.; Hadly, E. A.; Bascompte, J.; Berlow, E. L.; Brown, J. H.;
Fortelius, M.; Getz, W. M.; Harte, J.; Hastings, A.; Marquet, P. A.;
Martinez, N. D.; Mooers, A.; Roopnarine, P.; Vermeij, G.; Williams,
J. W.; Gillespie, R.; Kitzes, J.; Marshall, C.; Matzke, N.; Mindell,
D. P.; Revilla, E.; Smith, A. B. Approaching a state shift in Earth's
biosphere. Nature 2012, 486, 52–58, doi:10.1038/nature11018.
Barnosky,
A. D.; Ehrlich, P. R.; Hadly, E. A. Avoiding collapse: Grand
challenges for science and society to solve by 2050. Elementa:
Science of the Anthropocene 2016, 4, 94,
doi:10.12952/journal.elementa.000094.
Barry,
A.; Maslin, M. The politics of the Anthropocene: a dialogue. Geo:
Geography and Environment 2016, 3, e00022, doi:10.1002/geo2.22.
Biermann,
F. “Earth system governance” as a crosscutting theme of global
change research. Global Environmental Change 2007, 17, 326–337,
doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.11.010.
Biermann,
F. The Anthropocene: A governance perspective. The Anthropocene
Review 2014, 1, 57–61, doi:10.1177/2053019613516289.
Bohle,
M. Handling of Human-Geosphere
Intersections. Geosciences 2016, 6, 3, doi:
10.3390/geosciences6010003
Bonneuil,
C.; Fressoz, J.-B. L’événement Anthropocène - La terre,
l’histoire et nous; Le Seuil: Paris, France, 2013.
Braje,
T. J.; Erlandson, J. M. Looking forward, looking back: Humans,
anthropogenic change, and the Anthropocene. Anthropocene 2013, 4,
116–121, doi:10.1016/j.ancene.2014.05.002.
Brown,
A. Just Enough: lessons in living green from traditional Japan;
Tuttle Publishing, Tokyo, Japon, 2012.
Brown,
A. G.; Tooth, S.; Bullard, J. E.; Thomas, D. S. G.; Chiverrell, R.
C.; Plater, A. J.; Murton, J.; Thorndycraft, V. R.; Tarolli, P.;
Rose, J.; Wainwright, J.; Downs, P.; Aalto, R. The Geomorphology of
the Anthropocene: Emergence, status and implications. Earth Surface
Processes and Landforms 2016, 42, 71-90, doi:10.1002/esp.3943.
Bugliarello,
G. Ideal of civil engineering. Journal of Professional Issues in
Engineering Education and Practice 1994, 120, 290–294,
http://www.scopus.com/scopus/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-0028467239&partnerID=40&rel=R7.0.0.
Cairney,
P. The Politics of Evidence-Based Policy Making; Palgrave Macmillan
UK: London, 2016.
Chakrabarty,
D. The Anthropocene and the convergence of histories. In The
Anthropcene and the Environmental Crisis; Hamilton, C.; Bonneuil, C.;
Gemenne, F., Eds.; Routledge: Abingdon, USA, 2015; pp. 32–43.
Chew,
S.; Sarabia, D. Nature–Culture Relations: Early Globalization,
Climate Changes, and System Crisis. Sustainability 2016, 8, 78,
doi:10.3390/su8010078
Chopra,
A.; Lineweaver, C. H. The Case for a Gaian Bottleneck: The Biology of
Habitability. Astrobiology 2016, 16, 7–22,
doi:10.1089/ast.2015.1387.
Crona,
B.; Wutich, A.; Brewis, A.; Gartin, M. Perceptions of climate change:
Linking local and global perceptions through a cultural knowledge
approach. Climatic Change 2013, 119, 519–531,
doi:10.1007/s10584-013-0708-5.
Dalby,
S. Framing the Anthropocene: The good, the bad and the ugly. The
Anthropocene Review 2015, 3, 1–19, doi:10.1177/2053019615618681.
Denevan,
W. M. The Pristine Myth: The Landscape of the Americas in 1492.
Annals of the Association of American Geographers 1992, 82, 369–385,
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8306.1992.tb01965.x..
Denevan,
W. M. The Pristine Myth: Revisited. Geographical Review 2011, 101,
576–591, doi:10.1111/j.1931-0846.2011.00118.x.
Deutsch,
D. The Beginning of Infinity; Alan Lane Pinguin: London, UK, 2011.
Dietz,
S.; Groon, B.; Pizer, W. A. Weighing the cost and benefits of climate
change to our children. Future of Children 2016, 26, 133–155,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/43755234.
Egré,
D.; Milewski, J. C. The diversity of hydropower projects. Energy
Policy 2002, 30, 1225–1230, doi:10.1016/S0301-4215(02)00083-6.
Ehrlich,
P. R.; Kareiva, P. M.; Daily, G. C. Securing natural capital and
expanding equity to re-scale civilization. Nature 2012, 486, 68–73,
doi:10.1038/nature11157.
Ellis,
E. C. The Planet of No Return Human Resilience on an Artificial
Earth. The Breakthrough Institute 2011, 2, 37–44.
Ellis,
E. C. Anthropogenic transformation of the terrestrial biosphere.
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical,
Physical and Engineering Sciences 2011, 369, 1010–1035,
doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0331.
Ellis,
E. C.; Kaplan, J. O.; Fuller, D. Q.; Vavrus, S.; Klein Goldewijk, K.;
Verburg, P. H. Used planet: A global history. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 2013, 110, 7978–7985,
doi:10.1073/pnas.1217241110.
Ellis,
M. A.; Trachtenberg, Z. Which Anthropocene is it to be? Beyond
geology to a moral and public discourse. Earth’s Future 2014, 2,
122-125, doi:10.1002/2013EF000191.
Ellis,
E. C. Ecology in an anthropogenic biosphere. Ecological Monographs
2015, 85, 287–331, doi:10.1890/14-2274.1
Ellis,
E. C.; Richerson, P. J.; Mesoudi, A.; Svenning, J.-C.; Odling-Smee,
J.; Burnside, W. R. Evolving the human niche. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 2016, 113, E4436–E4436,
doi:10.1073/pnas.1609425113.
Foley,
S. F.; Gronenborn, D.; Andreae, M. O.; Kadereit, J. W.; Esper, J.;
Scholz, D.; Pöschl, U.; Jacob, D. E.; Schöne, B. R.; Schreg, R.;
Vött, A.; Jordan, D.; Lelieveld, J.; Weller, C. G.; Alt, K. W.;
Gaudzinski-Windheuser, S.; Bruhn, K.-C. C.; Tost, H.; Sirocko, F.;
Crutzen, P. J. The Palaeoanthropocene – The beginnings of
anthropogenic environmental change. Anthropocene 2013, 3, 83–88,
doi:10.1016/j.ancene.2013.11.002.
Fressoz,
J.-B. L’Apocalypse joyeuse - Une histoire du risque technologique;
Le Seuil, Paris, France, 2012
Fu,
B.; Wang, Y. K.; Xu, P.; Yan, K.; Li, M. Value of ecosystem
hydropower service and its impact on the payment for ecosystem
services. Science of the Total Environment 2014, 472, 338–346,
doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.11.015.
Fuentes,
A. The Extended Evolutionary Synthesis, Ethnography, and the Human
Niche: Toward an Integrated Anthropology. Current Anthropology 2016,
57, S000–S000, doi:10.1086/685684.
Hamilton,
C.; Bonneuil, Ch.; Gemenne F. The Anthropocene and the Global
Environmental Crisis: Rethinking modernity in a new Epoch; Routledge:
London, UK, 2015.
Hamilton,
C.; Grinevald J. Was the Anthropocene anticipated? 2015,
Anthropocene Review 2, 59-72, doi: 10.1177/2053019614567155.
Hamilton,
C. Human destiny in the Anthropocene. In The Anthropocene and the
Environmental Crisis; Hamilton, C.; Bonneuil, C.; Gemenne, F., Eds.;
Routledge: Abingdon, USA, 2015; pp. 32–43.
Hamilton,
C. The Theodicy of the “Good Anthropocene.” Environmental
Humanities 2015, 7, 233–238,. doi:10.1215/22011919-3616434.
Head,
B. W.; Alford, J. Wicked Problems: Implications for Public Policy and
Management. Administration & Society 2015, 47, 711–739,
doi:10.1177/0095399713481601.
Helbing,
D. Globally networked risks and how to respond. Nature 2013, 497,
51–59, doi:10.1038/nature12047
Hutchings,
J. A.; Stenseth, N. C. Communication of Science Advice to Government.
Trends in Ecology and Evolution 2016, 31, 7-11,
doi:10.1016/j.tree.2015.10.008.
Koch,
F. H. Hydropower—the politics of water and energy: Introduction and
overview. Energy Policy 2002, 30, 1207–1213,
doi:10.1016/S0301-4215(02)00081-2.
Jones,
N. A.; Ross, H.; Lynam, T.; Perez, P.; Leitch, A. Mental Model: An
Interdisciplinary Synthesis of Theory and Methods. Ecology and
Society 2011, 16, 46–46,
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art46/.
Kleinhans,
M. G.; Buskes, C. J. J.; de Regt, H. W. Philosophy of Earth Science.
In Philosophies of the Sciences; Wiley-Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 2010;
pp. 213–236, doi:10.1002/9781444315578.ch9.
Kowarsch,
M. A Pragmatist Orientation for the Social Sciences in Climate
Policy; Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science;
Springer International Publishing: Switzerland 2016; Vol. 323.
Krauss,
W. Anthropology in the Anthropocene : sustainable development,
climate change and interdisciplinary research. In Grounding Global
Climate change. Contributions from the Social and Cultural Sciences.;
Springer, 2015; pp. 59–76, doi:10.1007/978-94-017-9322-3.
Kvellestad
Isaksen, K. Where does nature end and culture begin ?,
http://cas.oslo.no/full-width-article/where-does-nature-end-and-culture-begin-article1830-1082.html
(accessed
10 January 2017)
Landes,
D. S. The Unbound Prometheus; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge,
UK 2003.
Langmuir,
C.; Broecker, W. How to build a habitable planet; Princton University
Press, 2012.
Latour,
B. Face à Gaia Huit conférences sur le Nouveau Régime Climatique;
Editions La Découverte: Paris, France 2015.
Latour,
B. Telling Friends from Foes in the Time of the Anthropocene.
Thinking the Anthropocene, Paris, 14-15 November 2013 2013, 12,
http://www.bruno-latour.fr/sites/default/files/131-FRIENDS-FOES.pdf
(accessed
10 Januray 2017).
Lewis,
S. L.; Maslin, M. A. Defining the Anthropocene. Nature 2015, 519,
171–180, doi: 10.1038/nature14258
Loevbrand,
E.; Beck, S.; Chilvers, J.; Forsyth, T.; Hedrén, J.; Hulme, M.;
Lidskog, R.; Vasileiadou, E. Who speaks for the future of Earth? How
critical social science can extend the conversation on the
Anthropocene. Global Environmental Change 2015, 32, 211–218, doi
10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.03.012 .
Monastersky,
R. Anthropocene: The human age. Nature 2015, 519, 144–147,
doi:10.1038/519144a.
Moore,
A. Anthropocene anthropology: reconceptualizing contemporary global
change. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 2016, 22,
27–46, doi:10.1111/1467-9655.12332.
Morton,
O. The Planet Remade - How Geoengineering could Change the World;
Princton University Press: Princeton, USA, 2015.
Pagel,
M. Wired for Culture Origins of the Human Social Mind; W.W. Norton &
Company New York, USA, 2012.
Phillips,
J. Storytelling in Earth sciences: The eight basic plots.
Earth-Science Reviews 2012, 115, 153–162,
doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2012.09.005.
Pollitt,
C. Debate: Climate change—the ultimate wicked issue. Public Money &
Management 2016, 36, 78–80, doi:10.1080/09540962.2016.1118925.
Purdy,
J. After Nature A Politics for the Anthropocene; Havard University
Press, USA 2015.
Rayner,
S.; Heyward, C.; Kruger, T.; Pidgeon, N.; Redgwell, C.; Savulescu, J.
The Oxford Principles. Climatic Change 2013, 121, 499–512,
doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0675-2.
Rickards,
L. A. Metaphor and the Anthropocene: Presenting Humans as a
Geological Force. Geographical Research 2015, 53, 280–287,
doi:10.1111/1745-5871.12128.
Sayre,
N. F. The Politics of the Anthropogenic. Annual Review of
Anthropology 2012, 41, 57–70,
doi:10.1146/annurev-anthro-092611-145846.
Schmidt,
J.J. Historicising the Hydrological Cycle. Water Alternatives 2014,
7, 220-234.
Schmidt,
J. J.; Brown, P. G.; Orr, C. J. Ethics in the Anthropocene: A
research agenda. The Anthropocene Review 2016, 3, 188–200,
doi:10.1177/2053019616662052.
Schwägerl,
C. The Anthropocene - The human era and how it shapes our planet;
Synergetic Press: London, UK, 2014.
Sternberg,
R. Hydropower: Dimensions of social and environmental coexistence.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2008, 12, 1588–1621,
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2007.01.027.Steffen, W.; Grinevald, J.; Crutzen,
P.; McNeill, J. The Anthropocene: conceptual and historical
perspectives. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A:
Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 2011, 369, 842–867,
doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0327.
Sweeney,
J. A. Command-and-control: Alternative futures of geoengineering in
an age of global weirding. Futures 2014, 57, 1–13,
doi:10.1016/j.futures.2013.12.005.
Tattersal,
I. Masters of the Planet: the search for our human origins; Palgrave
Macmillian, New York, USA, 2012.
Veland,
S.; Lynch, A. H. Scaling the Anthropocene: How the stories we tell
matter. Geoforum 2016, 72, 1–5, doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2016.03.006.
Viollet,
P.-L. L’hydraulique dans les civilisations anciennes: 5000ans
d’histoire; Presses Ponts et Chausssées, 2000.
Waters,
C. N.; Zalasiewicz, J.; Summerhayes, C.; Barnosky, A. D.; Poirier,
C.; Galuszka, A.; Cearreta, A.; Edgeworth, M.; Ellis, E. C.; Ellis,
M. A.; Jeandel, C.; Leinfelder, R.; McNeill, J. R.; Richter, D. d.;
Steffen, W.; Syvitski, J. P. M.; Vidas, D.; Wagreich, M.; Williams,
M.; Zhisheng, A.; Grinevald, J.; Odada, E.; Oreskes, N.; Wolfe, A. P.
The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from
the Holocene. Science 2016, 351 (6269), doi:10.1126/science.aad2622.
Wilson,
E. O. Half-Earth -our planet’s fight for life; Liveright Publishing
Corporation, 2016.
Zalasiewicz,
J.; Waters, C. N.; Williams, M.; Barnosky, A. D.; Cearreta, A.;
Crutzen, P.; Ellis, E. C.; Ellis, M. A.; Fairchild, I. J.; Grinevald,
J.; Haff, P. K.; Hajdas, I.; Leinfelder, R.; McNeill, J.; Odada, E.
O.; Poirier, C.; Richter, D.; Steffen, W.; Summerhayes, C.; Syvitski,
J. P. M.; Vidas, D.; Wagreich, M.; Wing, S. L.; Wolfe, A. P.; An, Z.;
Oreskes, N. When did the Anthropocene begin? A mid-twentieth century
boundary level is stratigraphically optimal. Quaternary International
2015, doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2014.11.045.
Zalasiewicz,
J.; Williams, M.; Waters, C. N.; Barnosky, A. D.; Palmesino, J.; Ro
nnskog, A.-S.; Edgeworth, M.; Neal, C.; Cearreta, A.; Ellis, E. C.;
Grinevald, J.; Haff, P.; Ivar do Sul, J. A.; Jeandel, C.; Leinfelder,
R.; McNeill, J. R.; Odada, E.; Oreskes, N.; Price, S. J.; Revkin, A.;
Steffen, W.; Summerhayes, C.; Vidas, D.; Wing, S.; Wolfe, A. P. Scale
and diversity of the physical technosphere: A geological perspective.
The Anthropocene Review 2016, 10.1177/2053019616677743 (accessed 10
Januray 2017).
