On the Anthropocene formalization and the proposal by the Anthropocene Working Group
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1344/GeologicaActa2020.18.6Keywords:
Earth history, Human history, Geologic Time Scale, CapitalAbstract
In the coming years the Anthropocene will be likely submitted to formalization by the Anthropocene Working Group as a chronostratigraphic unit of the Geologic Time Scale. This has generated an increasing debate among detractors and defenders of its formalization in general, and of the proposal by the Anthropocene Working Group in particular. Here, the main issues regarding the Geologic Time Scale and the rules to formalize units, the empirical data supporting the Anthropocene formalization and the critiques to formalize it are critically reviewed. The procedure to formalize the Anthropocene is not dissimilar from those of the other units of the Geologic Time Scale and has been essentially based on stratigraphic and geologic criteria. Following the recommendation of the Anthropocene Working Group and based on the empirical evidence on the Anthropocene as it is expressed in strata and, more important, on the immanent and structural link between the Anthropocene and the reproduction of capital, it is proposed to define Capitalian as a Stage of the Anthropocene Epoch. In this way, a truly comprehensive understanding of the Earth history is obtained, which comprises the ultimate causes of the ongoing planetary transformation and its stratatigraphic expression.References
Altermann, W., Hoffman, P.F., Kasting, J.F., Nutman, A.P., Pirajno, F., Beard, B.L., Johnson, C.K., Melezhik, V.A., Papineau, D.,
The Precambrian: the Archean and Proterozoic Eons. In: Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Schmitz, M.D., Ogg, G.M. (eds.). The Geologic Time Scale 2012. Oxford, Elsevier, 300-365.
Angus, I., 2016. Facing the anthropocene: fossil capitalism and the crisis of the earth system. New York, Monthly Review,
pp.
Autin, W.J., Holbrook, J.M., 2012a. Is the Anthropocene an issue of stratigraphy or pop culture? GSA Today, 22, 60-61.
Autin, W.J., Holbrook, J.M., 2012b. Reply. Reply to Jan Zalasiewicz et al. on Response to Autin and Holbrock “Is the Anthropocene an issue of stratigraphy or pop culture?” GSA Today, 22, e23.
Barnosky, A.D., Matzke, N., Tomiya, S., Wogan, G.O.U., Swartz, B., Quental, T.B., Marshall, C., McGuire, J.L., Lindsey, E.L., Maguire, K.C., Mersey, B., Ferrer, E.A., 2011. Has the Earth’s sixth mass extinction already arrived? Nature, 471, 51-57.
Braje, T., 2016. Evaluating the Anthropocene: Is there something useful about a geological epoch of humans? Antiquity, 90, 504-512. DOI: 10.15184/aqy.2016.32
Ceballos, G, Ehrlich, P.R., Barnosky, A.D., García, A., Pringle, R.M., Palmer, T.M., 2015. Accelerated modern humaninduced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction. Science Advances, 1, e1400253.
Chen, X., 2017. The Ecological Crisis and the Logic of Capital. Leiden, Brill, 590pp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004356009
Crutzen, P.J., Stoermer, E.F., 2000. The Anthropocene. Global Change Newsletter, 41, 17-18.
Delasalla, D.A., Goldstein, M.I. (eds.), 2018. Encyclopedia of the Anthropocene. Oxford, Elsevier, 2280pp.
Finney, S., Edwards, L., 2016. The “Anthropocene” Epoch: Scientific decision or political statement? GSA Today, 26, 4-10.
Gradstein, F.M., 2012. Introduction. In: Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Schmitz, M.D., Ogg, G.M. (eds.). The Geologic Time Scale
Oxford, Elsevier, 1-29.
Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., 2012. The Chronostratigraphic Scale. In: Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Schmitz, M.D., Ogg, G.M. (eds.). The Geologic Time Scale 2012.Oxford, Elsevier, 31-42.
Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Hilgen, F.J., 2012. On the Geological Time Scale. Newsletter on Stratigraphy, 45, 171-188.
Harland, W.B., Armonstrong, R.L., Cox, A.V., Craig, L.E., Smith, A.G., Smith, D.G., 1990. A geologic time scale 1989. Cambridge, University Press, 263pp.
Hilgen, F.G., Brinkhuis, H., Zachariasse, W.J., 2006. Unit stratotypes for global stages: The Neogene perspective. Earth Science Reviews, 74, 113-125.
Ilyenkov, E., 1982. The Dialectics of the Abstract and the Concret in Marx’s Capital. Progress Publishers. Last accessed: February 2020. Available at: https://www.marxists.org/archive/ilyenkov/works/abstract/index.htm
Klein, G.D., 2015. The “Anthropocene”: What is its geological utility (Answer: it has none!). Episodes, 38, 218.
Malm, A., Hornborg, A., 2014. The geology of mankind? A critique of the Anthropocene narrative. The Anthropocene Review, 1, 62-69.
Malm, A., 2016. Fossil Capital: The Rise of Steam Power and the Roots of Global Warming. London, Verso, 496pp.
Mészáros, I., 2008. The Challenge and Burden of Historical Time: Socialism in the Twenty-First Century. New York, Monthly
Review Press, 480pp.
Ogg, J.G., Ogg, G.M., Gradstein, F.M., 2016. Quaternary. In: Ogg, J.G., Ogg, G.M., Gradstein, F.M. (eds.). A Concise Geologic Time Scale. Oxford, Elsevier, 211-226.
Oldfield, F., Steffen, W., 2014. Anthropogenic climate change and the nature of Earth System science. Anthropocene Review, 1, 70-75.
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin III, F.S., Lambin, E.F., Lenton, T.M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H.J., Nykvist, B., de Wit, C.A., Hughes, T., Van der Leeuw, S., Rodhe, H., Sörlin, S., Snyder, P.K., Costanza, R., Svedin, U., Falkenmark, M., Karlberg, L., Corell, R.W, Fabry, V.J., Hansen, J., Walker, B., Liverman, D., Richardson, K., Crutzen, P., Foley, J.A., 2009. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461, 472-475.
Roser, M., Ritchie, H., Ortiz-Ospina, E., 2019. World Population Growth. Published online at: OurWorldInData.org. Last accessed: February 2020. Available at: https://ourworldindata.org/world-population-growth
Rull, V., 2017. The “Anthropocene”: neglects, misconceptions, and possible futures. EMBO reports, 18, 1056-1060.
Rull, V., 2018. What If the ‘Anthropocene’ Is Not Formalized as a New Geological Series/Epoch? Quaternary, 1, 24.
Soriano, C., 2018a. The Anthropocene and the production and reproduction of capital. The Anthropocene Review, 5, 202-213.
Soriano, C., 2018b. On the theoretical approaches to the Anthropocene challenge. The Anthropocene Review, 5, 214-218.
Sprain, C.J., Renne, P.R., Vanderkluysen, L., Pande, K., Self, S., Mittal, T., 2019. The eruptive tempo of Deccan volcanism in relation to the Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary. Science, 363, 866-870.
Steffen, W., Broadgate, W., Deutsch, L., Gaffney, O., Ludwig, C., 2015. The trajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great Acceleration. The Anthropocene Review, 2, 81-98.
Steffen, W., Leinfelder, R., Zalasiewicz, J., Waters, C.N., Williams, M., Summerhayes, C., Barnosky, A.D., Cearreta, A., Crutzen,
P., Edgeworth, M., Ellis, E.C., Fairchild, I.J., Galuszka, A., Grinevald, J., Haywood, A., Ivar do Sul, J., Jeandel, C., McNeill, J.R., Odada, E., Oreskes, N., Revkin, A., Richter, D. de B., Syvitski, J., Vidas, D., Wagreich, M., Wing, S.L., Wolfe, A.P., Schellnhuber, H.J., 2016. Stratigraphic and Earth System approaches to defining the Anthropocene. Earth’s Future, 4, 324-345.
Steffen, W., Rockström, J., Richardson, K., Lenton, T.M., Folke, C., Liverman, D., Summerhayes, C.P., Barnosky, A.D., Cornell, S.E., Crucifix, M., Donges, J.F., Fetzer, I., Lade, S.J., Scheffer, M., Winkelmann, R., Schellnhuber, H.J., 2018. Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene. PNAS, 115, 8252-8259.
Visconti, G., 2104. Anthropocene: another academic invention? Rendiconti Lincei Science Fisiche e Naturali, 25, 381-392.
Walker, M., Gibbard, P., Lowe, J. 2015. Comment on “When did the Anthropocene begin? A mid-twentieth century boundary
is stratigraphically optimal” by Jan Zalasiewicz et al. (2015), Quaternary International, 383, 196-203. Quaternary International, 383, 204-207.
Waters, C.N., Zalasiewicz, J., Summerhayes, C., Barnosky, A.D, Poirier, C., Galuszka, A., Cearreta, A., Edgeworth, M., Ellis, E.C., Jeandel, C., Leinfelder, R., McNeill, J.R., Richter, D. de B., Steffen, W., Syvitski, J., Vidas, D., Wagreich, M., Williams, M., Zhisheng, A., Grinevald, J., Odada, E., Oreskes, N., Wolfe, A.P., 2016. The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically
distinct from the Holocene. Science, 351, aad2622, 1-10
Waters, C.N., Summerhayes, C.P., Rose, N.L., Shotyk, W., Head, M.J., Williams, M., Barnosky, A., Leinfelder, R., Galuszka, A., Gradstein, F., Mcneil, J., Poirier, C., Zalasiewicz, J., Fairchild, I., Loader, N.J., Cearreta, A., Syvitski, J.P., Wagreich, M., Zhisheng, C., Ivar do Sul, J.A., Steffen, W., Wing, S.L., Edgeworth, M., 2018. Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP) for the Anthropocene Series: Where and how to look for potential candidates. Earth Science Reviews, 178, 379-429.
Zalasiewicz, J., Cearreta, A., Crutzen, P., Ellis, E., Ellis, E., Grinevald, J., McNeill, J., Poirier, C., Price, S., Richter, D., Scholes, M., Steffen, W., Vidas, D., Waters, C., Williams, M., Wolfeet, A.P., 2012. Response to Autin and Holbrook on “Is the Anthopocene an issue of stratigraphy or pop culture?” GSA Today, 22, e21-e22.
Zalasiewicz, J., Waters, C.N., Wolfe, A.P., Barnosky, A.D., Cearreta, A., Edgeworth, M., Ellis, E.C., Fairchild, I.J., Gradstein, F.M.,
Grinevald, J., Haff, P., Head, M.J., Ivar do Sul, J.A. Jeandel, C., Leinfelder, R., McNeill, J.R., Oreskes, N., Poirier, C., Revkin, A., Richter, D. de B., Steffen, W., Summerhayes, C., Syvitski, J.P.M., Vidas, D., Wagreich, M., Wing, S., Williams, M., 2016. Comment. Finney & Edwards Article. GSA Today, 27, e36-e37.
Zalasiewicz, J., Waters, C.N., Wolfe, A.P., Barnosky, A.D., Cearreta, A., Edgeworth, M., Ellis, E.C., Fairchild, I.J., Gradstein, F.M.,
Grinevald, J., Haff, P., Head, M.J., Ivar do Sul, J.A., Jeandel, C., Leinfelder, R., McNeill, J.R., Oreskes, N., Poirier, C., Revkin, A., Richter, D. de B., Steffen, W., Summerhayes, C., Syvitski, J.P.M., Vidas, D., Wagreich, M., Wing, S., Williams, M., 2017. Making the case for a formal Anthropocene Epoch: an analysis of ongoing critiques. Newsletter on Stratigraphy, 50, 205-226.
Zalasiewicz, J., Waters, C., Head, M., Steffen, W., Syvitski, J., Vidas, D., Summerhayes, C., Williams, M., 2018. The geological and Earth System reality of the Anthropocene: reply to Bauer, A.M., Ellis, E.C., the Anthropocene divide: Obscuring understanding of social-environmental change. Current Anthropology, 59, 220-223.
Zalasiewicz, J., Waters, C.N., Head, M.J., Poirier, C., Summerhayes, C.P., Leinfelder, R., Grinevald, J., Steffen, W., Syvitski, J., Haff, P., McNeill, J.R., Wagreich, M., Fairchild, I.J., Richter, D.D., Vidas, D., Williams, M., Barnosky, A.D., Cearreta, A., 2019. A formal Anthropocene is compatible with but distinct from its diachronous anthropogenic counterparts: a response to W.F. Ruddiman’s three flaws in defining a formal Anthropocene. Progress in Physical Geography, 43, 319-333.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Geologica Acta
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright
Geologica Acta is the property of the UB, GEO3BCN, IDAEA and UAB. Geologica Acta must be cited for any partial or full reproduction. Papers are distributed under the Attribution-Share Alike Creative Commons License. This license allows anyone to reproduce and disseminate the content of the journal and even make derivative works crediting authorship and provenance and distributing possible derivative works under the same or an equivalent license.
Author Rights
Authors retain the copyright on their papers and are authorized to post them on their own web pages or institutional repositories. The copyright was retained by the journal from the year 2003 until 2009. In all cases, the complete citation and a link to the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) of the article must be included.
The authors can use excerpts or reproduce illustrations of their papers in other works without prior permission from Geologica Acta provided the source of the paper including the complete citation is fully acknowledged.
