What do you think?
Rate this book
Very Short Introductions #558
Anthropocene: A Very Short Introduction
The proposal that the impact of humanity on the planet has left a distinct footprint, even on the scale of geological time, has recently gained much ground. Global climate change, shifting global cycles of the weather, widespread pollution, radioactive fallout, plastic accumulation, species invasions, the mass extinction of species - these are just some of the many indicators that we will leave a lasting record in rock, the scientific basis for recognizing new time
intervals in Earth's history. The <"Anthropocene>", as the proposed new epoch has been named, is regularly in the news.
Even with such robust evidence, the proposal to formally recognize our current time as the Anthropocene remains controversial both inside and outside the scholarly world, kindling intense debates. The reason is clear. The Anthropocene represents far more than just another interval of geologic time. Instead, the Anthropocene has emerged as a powerful new narrative, a concept through which age-old questions about the meaning of nature and even the nature of humanity are being revisited and
radically revised.
This Very Short Introduction explains the science behind the Anthropocene and the many proposals about when to mark its beginning: the nuclear tests of the 1950s? The beginnings of agriculture? The origins of humans as a species? Erle Ellis considers the many ways that the Anthropocene's <"evolving paradigm>" is reshaping the sciences, stimulating the humanities, and foregrounding the politics of life on a planet transformed by humans. The Anthropocene remains a work in progress.
Is this the story of an unprecedented planetary disaster? Or of newfound wisdom and redemption? Ellis offers an insightful discussion of our role in shaping the planet, and how this will influence our future on many fronts.
ABOUT THE SERIES: The Very Short Introductions series from Oxford University Press contains hundreds of titles in almost every subject area. These pocket-sized books are the perfect way to get ahead in a new subject quickly. Our expert authors combine facts, analysis, perspective, new ideas, and enthusiasm to make interesting and challenging topics highly readable.
intervals in Earth's history. The <"Anthropocene>", as the proposed new epoch has been named, is regularly in the news.
Even with such robust evidence, the proposal to formally recognize our current time as the Anthropocene remains controversial both inside and outside the scholarly world, kindling intense debates. The reason is clear. The Anthropocene represents far more than just another interval of geologic time. Instead, the Anthropocene has emerged as a powerful new narrative, a concept through which age-old questions about the meaning of nature and even the nature of humanity are being revisited and
radically revised.
This Very Short Introduction explains the science behind the Anthropocene and the many proposals about when to mark its beginning: the nuclear tests of the 1950s? The beginnings of agriculture? The origins of humans as a species? Erle Ellis considers the many ways that the Anthropocene's <"evolving paradigm>" is reshaping the sciences, stimulating the humanities, and foregrounding the politics of life on a planet transformed by humans. The Anthropocene remains a work in progress.
Is this the story of an unprecedented planetary disaster? Or of newfound wisdom and redemption? Ellis offers an insightful discussion of our role in shaping the planet, and how this will influence our future on many fronts.
ABOUT THE SERIES: The Very Short Introductions series from Oxford University Press contains hundreds of titles in almost every subject area. These pocket-sized books are the perfect way to get ahead in a new subject quickly. Our expert authors combine facts, analysis, perspective, new ideas, and enthusiasm to make interesting and challenging topics highly readable.
208 pages, Kindle Edition
First published May 22, 2018
52 people are currently reading
501 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews
September 29, 2023
This is interesting and worthwhile. It's more academic than I would like, but it's mercifully brief. Apparently the term Anthropocene has to be defined in geological terms. That is, how does the purported new period manifest itself in rocks? Geologic time. These quotes give a sense of the tone.
"Paul Crutzen had tied the Anthropocene to the late 18th century and the Industrial Revolution, with combustion of fossil fuels causing an initial uptick in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations above those typical of the Holocene. Will Steffen, building on this earlier proposal, came to argue for the mid-20th century as the main point of onset for the Anthropocene marked by the 'Great Acceleration' in human activities around that time. And geologist Bill Ruddiman even suggested that the Anthropocene might be recognized thousands of years before the Industrial Revolution as the result of widespread land clearing fo agriculture, causing releases of carbon dioxide and methane, and potentially global climate change. All of these proposals offered the prospect for an Anthropocene GSSP [Global Boundary Stratotype Sections and Points], and yet from a pragmatic, stratigraphic, point of view, only one proposal presented a relatively straightforward, unambiguous, basis for a global, isochronous, stratigraphic marker: the spread of radioactive fallout from nuclear weapons testing, beginning with the Trinity Test of 1945." (p. 51)
This can seem a bit erudite at first, but eventually the reader is drawn into the urgency of the problem. And it's a monster.
"Atmospheric carbon dioxide has always varied substantially over time. Nevertheless, anthropogenic changes in carbon dioxide concentrations are well beyond their geologically recent natural range of variability . . . Today's levels of carbon dioxide (>400 ppm) are almost certainly higher than they have been at any time for the past 4 million years or even longer. Rates of atmospheric temperature change are also exceptionally rapid, and are accelerating together with rates of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions since 1950." (p. 66)
"Paul Crutzen had tied the Anthropocene to the late 18th century and the Industrial Revolution, with combustion of fossil fuels causing an initial uptick in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations above those typical of the Holocene. Will Steffen, building on this earlier proposal, came to argue for the mid-20th century as the main point of onset for the Anthropocene marked by the 'Great Acceleration' in human activities around that time. And geologist Bill Ruddiman even suggested that the Anthropocene might be recognized thousands of years before the Industrial Revolution as the result of widespread land clearing fo agriculture, causing releases of carbon dioxide and methane, and potentially global climate change. All of these proposals offered the prospect for an Anthropocene GSSP [Global Boundary Stratotype Sections and Points], and yet from a pragmatic, stratigraphic, point of view, only one proposal presented a relatively straightforward, unambiguous, basis for a global, isochronous, stratigraphic marker: the spread of radioactive fallout from nuclear weapons testing, beginning with the Trinity Test of 1945." (p. 51)
This can seem a bit erudite at first, but eventually the reader is drawn into the urgency of the problem. And it's a monster.
"Atmospheric carbon dioxide has always varied substantially over time. Nevertheless, anthropogenic changes in carbon dioxide concentrations are well beyond their geologically recent natural range of variability . . . Today's levels of carbon dioxide (>400 ppm) are almost certainly higher than they have been at any time for the past 4 million years or even longer. Rates of atmospheric temperature change are also exceptionally rapid, and are accelerating together with rates of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions since 1950." (p. 66)
March 25, 2023
Uticaj čoveka na planetu je neosporan. Čak i najzadrtiji poricatelji nauke to primećuju. Ipak, o načinima, obimu i ishodima uticaja postoje nelsaganja. Osvešćivanje razlika u gledištima, posebno u svetlu fascinantnih (i opominjućih) klimatoloških istraživanja, čini priču o antropocenu izuzetno važnom – jer, antropocen, suprotno onome kako bi ga mnogi mogli razumeti, nije nova geološka epoha planete (iako i to može biti, mada konsenzus među proučavaocima i dalje nije postignut), nego vrlo složena, ali i promenljiva ideja o okviru osvešćivanja temeljnog uticaja čovekovih aktivnosti na svet. Dipeš Čakrabrati će čak tvrditi da je, u odnosu na klimatske promene, antropocen izraz gubljenja razlike između prirodne i društvene istorije – pošto su ljudi postali ključni „geofizički činioci”, čije aktivnosti mogu menjati i samu klimu. Zato je antropocen rezultat protivrečnog izjednačavanja – dva modela trajanja (trajanje u prirodi i trajanje kao pamćenje u kulturi) izjednačila su se u nevolji i ugroženosti, a antropocen nije nikakva pobeda, već spomenik samosaplitanju i neodrživosti.
Ipak, bez obzira na to kako antropocen definisali, nameće se veza sa savremenošću – zagađenjem i, generalno, masovnom eksploatacijom resursa (ugalj, nafta, plastika, industrijska poljoprivreda). Međutim, Elis pokazuje da je istorija uticaja daleko starija i to više od desetine hiljada godina pre nove ere! Tako bi koren antropocena mogao biti ni manje ni više nego sama pojava čoveka, a netaknuta priroda – mit! Doslovce ne postoji tačka na planeti koja nije na neki način bila u vezi sa nekom vrstom ljudske aktivnosti, a tragovi toga ostaju i mogu se, u odnosu na različite analize, detektovati i pratiti. Lov, poljoprivreda, korišćenje alata, pa i sama vatra, imaju i te kako velik uticaj na planetu, a vreme u kojem živimo, naročito nakon Drugog svetskog rata, vreme je do sad neviđenog ubrzavanja i gomilanja, koje do krajnjih granica ispituje kapacitete samoodrživosti naše vrste. Treba s tim u vezi istaći da je masa plastičnih materijala višestruko pretekla celokupnu ljudsku biomasu – od 2 miliona godišnje 1950. godine do 300 miliona tona godišnje 2015. godine! Toliko veliki brojevi izazivaju vrtoglavicu. Elis ističe da je tokom 2000. godine, 75% posto kopnene biosfere transformisano u antrome – prostore ljudske upotrebe (od naselja, preko poljoprivrednog zemljišta, do prirodnih staništa kultivisanih u odnosu na čovekove mere)! Ovome treba dodati kako se nedovoljno ističe problem sa acidifikacijom okena koja u potpunosti može promeniti podvodne ekosisteme i desetkovati vrste. Kako god kome to izgledalo, pre i posle svega, mi smo ipak plava planeta (70% naspram 30%).
Ukoliko ne odgovorimo na izazov opstanka na način koji bi uvažio i ostale životne oblike, pa i samu planetu kao stanište, nismo ni, molim lepo, zaslužili da se održimo na ovom svetu. Elis navodi da je 99% svih vrsta života na Zemlji danas nestalo! Statistika nam, jasno je, ne ide naruku, naročito imajući u vidu našu samozaljubljenost i kratkovidost, kao i samouverenost u veri da je čovek mera svega, a jedino relevantno trajanje – trajanje ljudskog roda. Antropocen je stoga poziv da se neka temeljna uverenja koriguju i ne treba smetnuti s uma da dogovori nekad urode plodom – Montrealski protokol iz 1987. godine, jedan od retkih koji su potpisale sve članice UN, uspeo je da dovede do smanjenja ozonske rupe, a DDT, o kome je pisala Rejčel Karson u „Tihom proleću”, danas je potpuno zabranjen u Americi, mada se u nekim zemljama, nažalost, i dalje koristi kao snažan insekticid. Takođe, ne treba prenebregnuti, o čemu ima takođe reči u Elisovoj knjizi, da nisu sva društva niti svi pojedinci podjednako odgovorni za učinak antropocena. Komfor savremenog čoveka je daleko skuplji nego što bismo mislili, a ono što nazivamo životni minimum, štetan i nezasluženi luksuz.
Ovaj sjajan, utemeljen, a vrlo pristupačan uvod o izuzetno složenom i višedimenzionalnom problemu, koji nas se svih tiče, propraćen je i odličnim spiskom za dalja čitanja. Ja bih dodao i nešto čega na njemu nema: svako zainteresovan za ovu temu treba obavezno da baci pogled na odličnu monografiju Andrije Filipovića „Conditio ahumana”, kao i na radove Stefana Jankovića o antropocenu. Raduje me da i ova naša sredina, polako ali sigurno, prepoznaje važne teme.
Ipak, bez obzira na to kako antropocen definisali, nameće se veza sa savremenošću – zagađenjem i, generalno, masovnom eksploatacijom resursa (ugalj, nafta, plastika, industrijska poljoprivreda). Međutim, Elis pokazuje da je istorija uticaja daleko starija i to više od desetine hiljada godina pre nove ere! Tako bi koren antropocena mogao biti ni manje ni više nego sama pojava čoveka, a netaknuta priroda – mit! Doslovce ne postoji tačka na planeti koja nije na neki način bila u vezi sa nekom vrstom ljudske aktivnosti, a tragovi toga ostaju i mogu se, u odnosu na različite analize, detektovati i pratiti. Lov, poljoprivreda, korišćenje alata, pa i sama vatra, imaju i te kako velik uticaj na planetu, a vreme u kojem živimo, naročito nakon Drugog svetskog rata, vreme je do sad neviđenog ubrzavanja i gomilanja, koje do krajnjih granica ispituje kapacitete samoodrživosti naše vrste. Treba s tim u vezi istaći da je masa plastičnih materijala višestruko pretekla celokupnu ljudsku biomasu – od 2 miliona godišnje 1950. godine do 300 miliona tona godišnje 2015. godine! Toliko veliki brojevi izazivaju vrtoglavicu. Elis ističe da je tokom 2000. godine, 75% posto kopnene biosfere transformisano u antrome – prostore ljudske upotrebe (od naselja, preko poljoprivrednog zemljišta, do prirodnih staništa kultivisanih u odnosu na čovekove mere)! Ovome treba dodati kako se nedovoljno ističe problem sa acidifikacijom okena koja u potpunosti može promeniti podvodne ekosisteme i desetkovati vrste. Kako god kome to izgledalo, pre i posle svega, mi smo ipak plava planeta (70% naspram 30%).
Ukoliko ne odgovorimo na izazov opstanka na način koji bi uvažio i ostale životne oblike, pa i samu planetu kao stanište, nismo ni, molim lepo, zaslužili da se održimo na ovom svetu. Elis navodi da je 99% svih vrsta života na Zemlji danas nestalo! Statistika nam, jasno je, ne ide naruku, naročito imajući u vidu našu samozaljubljenost i kratkovidost, kao i samouverenost u veri da je čovek mera svega, a jedino relevantno trajanje – trajanje ljudskog roda. Antropocen je stoga poziv da se neka temeljna uverenja koriguju i ne treba smetnuti s uma da dogovori nekad urode plodom – Montrealski protokol iz 1987. godine, jedan od retkih koji su potpisale sve članice UN, uspeo je da dovede do smanjenja ozonske rupe, a DDT, o kome je pisala Rejčel Karson u „Tihom proleću”, danas je potpuno zabranjen u Americi, mada se u nekim zemljama, nažalost, i dalje koristi kao snažan insekticid. Takođe, ne treba prenebregnuti, o čemu ima takođe reči u Elisovoj knjizi, da nisu sva društva niti svi pojedinci podjednako odgovorni za učinak antropocena. Komfor savremenog čoveka je daleko skuplji nego što bismo mislili, a ono što nazivamo životni minimum, štetan i nezasluženi luksuz.
Ovaj sjajan, utemeljen, a vrlo pristupačan uvod o izuzetno složenom i višedimenzionalnom problemu, koji nas se svih tiče, propraćen je i odličnim spiskom za dalja čitanja. Ja bih dodao i nešto čega na njemu nema: svako zainteresovan za ovu temu treba obavezno da baci pogled na odličnu monografiju Andrije Filipovića „Conditio ahumana”, kao i na radove Stefana Jankovića o antropocenu. Raduje me da i ova naša sredina, polako ali sigurno, prepoznaje važne teme.
April 19, 2019
Broad and thorough explanation of the Anthropocene from a lot of different perspectives, as well as the geological one of course. I felt like I learned a lot and it essentially put climate change into historical/geological context. A light, easy-to-read tone
February 23, 2019
Exactly what the title says: a short (yet, my Personal impression, relatively complete) introduction into the Anthropocene. For scientists and nonscientists, written by an expert of the topic, with lots of scientific sources that one could further dig into if interested.
June 24, 2024
Anthropocene: A Very Short Introduction (2018) by Erle C. Ellis
Ellis does a decent job of cramming a vast subject into the limited space of a VSI. Since I have prior reading on almost every topic in the book, it's hard for me to judge how well it works as an introduction. It's certainly good for a refresher.
I give it 5 stars for readability and relevance. We're in the Anthropocene in large part because most people ignore books like this one - most people want to keep on flying, driving, heating, cooling, eating meat, owning meat-eating pets, and procreating, exactly as if science is one big hoax. Well, science is not a hoax. The science that is reliable enough to give us working smartphones is just as certain that Planet Earth has limits to how much abuse from humans it can take, and we're near or past several of those limits.
Ellis isn't afraid to cite a diversity of views. Perhaps the one I found most amusing - and similar to my own thinking - is that of geologist James Scourse in this quotation. Scourse questions whether slapping a new label ("Anthropocene") on the collection of human-caused environmental catastrophes "we" already knew we're causing adds anything useful. For example, does defining the Anthropocene cause one person to stop flying, or to cut their carbon footprint by any other means? If not, then what's the point? Absent any evidence that "rearrang(ing) the deck chairs" gets us any closer to solving our environmental problems, it's hard to see the point. Maybe these geologists are living out the saying "When your only tool is a hammer, every problem becomes a nail." If stratigraphy is your skill set, it's easier to keep doing what you know even if you would be of more use as a solar power engineer or something similar that actually cuts somebody's greenhouse gas emissions. For Scourse's own argument I recommend reading his brief article that Ellis cites.
But whether or not it makes sense to have a single overarching label for humanity's environmental mayhem, the content of "the Anthropocene" certainly matters - to anyone who depends on Planet Earth remaining able to support the 8 billion people we've already made, not to mention the 11 billion we're busily breeding.
Another reviewer suggests that if you're only going to read one book about the environmental crisis, make it this one. I would say this is not a bad book to start with, but if people are only going to read one short book on this topic, then we're almost certainly screwed. If you are like the average person who can read this book, and this review, then you've probably spent your whole life mastering the behaviors that are destroying the planet. You're not going to unwind all that commercial, political, social, and perhaps religious brainwashing with one single book, no matter how good it is. You're going to need shelves of them. But you have to start somewhere and there are worse places to start than this one.
Ellis does a decent job of cramming a vast subject into the limited space of a VSI. Since I have prior reading on almost every topic in the book, it's hard for me to judge how well it works as an introduction. It's certainly good for a refresher.
I give it 5 stars for readability and relevance. We're in the Anthropocene in large part because most people ignore books like this one - most people want to keep on flying, driving, heating, cooling, eating meat, owning meat-eating pets, and procreating, exactly as if science is one big hoax. Well, science is not a hoax. The science that is reliable enough to give us working smartphones is just as certain that Planet Earth has limits to how much abuse from humans it can take, and we're near or past several of those limits.
Ellis isn't afraid to cite a diversity of views. Perhaps the one I found most amusing - and similar to my own thinking - is that of geologist James Scourse in this quotation. Scourse questions whether slapping a new label ("Anthropocene") on the collection of human-caused environmental catastrophes "we" already knew we're causing adds anything useful. For example, does defining the Anthropocene cause one person to stop flying, or to cut their carbon footprint by any other means? If not, then what's the point? Absent any evidence that "rearrang(ing) the deck chairs" gets us any closer to solving our environmental problems, it's hard to see the point. Maybe these geologists are living out the saying "When your only tool is a hammer, every problem becomes a nail." If stratigraphy is your skill set, it's easier to keep doing what you know even if you would be of more use as a solar power engineer or something similar that actually cuts somebody's greenhouse gas emissions. For Scourse's own argument I recommend reading his brief article that Ellis cites.
But whether or not it makes sense to have a single overarching label for humanity's environmental mayhem, the content of "the Anthropocene" certainly matters - to anyone who depends on Planet Earth remaining able to support the 8 billion people we've already made, not to mention the 11 billion we're busily breeding.
Another reviewer suggests that if you're only going to read one book about the environmental crisis, make it this one. I would say this is not a bad book to start with, but if people are only going to read one short book on this topic, then we're almost certainly screwed. If you are like the average person who can read this book, and this review, then you've probably spent your whole life mastering the behaviors that are destroying the planet. You're not going to unwind all that commercial, political, social, and perhaps religious brainwashing with one single book, no matter how good it is. You're going to need shelves of them. But you have to start somewhere and there are worse places to start than this one.
April 21, 2022
I really enjoyed this short, easy to read book on the Anthropocene. It starts with exploring different possible markers of the Anthropocene in the stratigraphic record and then expands to include perspectives from ecology, anthropology and humanities. I think this interdisciplinary approach was well done and fitting for the topic. The book also includes a lot of interesting figures, which I think are a great addition to the text.
February 15, 2024
If you have to read 1 book about climate chance, let it be this one. It's a good historical overview, it's well written, it has graphs and schematics and it's not too long. It even made me smile a couple of times.
March 23, 2022
A fundamental text for understanding the impact of human civilization on earth.
August 26, 2020
“Anthropocene: A Very Short” introduction by Eric Ellis is excellent. Ever since I read about climate change, this word has been cropping up with regularity.
This is a deeper subject than I had previously thought about. Eric Ellis has done an excellent job of taking us through the journey from the beginning, to the current discussions about the ‘Anthropocene’.
Eric Ellis has written the book in a manner that is clear and succinct.
Anyone who wants to study this subject should start with this book.
This is a deeper subject than I had previously thought about. Eric Ellis has done an excellent job of taking us through the journey from the beginning, to the current discussions about the ‘Anthropocene’.
Eric Ellis has written the book in a manner that is clear and succinct.
Anyone who wants to study this subject should start with this book.
November 29, 2022
This was so well written and such an interesting book! It’s overview of many arguments without being to biased was fantastic and I loved the broad spectrum of opinions that were discussed. It was also so extraordinarily relevant to my essay that I could have written the whole thing from just this book which makes me probably quite biased towards it. But, yeah, I loved it!
August 5, 2022
This "very short introduction" is actually an extremely robust look at how geologic time works, and why we might be in a new period characterized by the impact humans have on the environment. It's a useful guide to not only the anthropocene, but also to the science of climate change in general.
July 8, 2023
The Anthropocene is a term used to describe a proposed new geological epoch, or a distinct period of time in Earth's history, that is primarily defined by the significant influence of human activities on the planet's ecosystems and geology. It suggests that human beings have become a dominant force shaping the Earth's environment, and our activities have had a profound impact on the planet.
The term "Anthropocene" combines two words: "anthropo," which means "human," and "cene," which refers to a geological epoch. It signifies that human activities are now a major geological force, comparable in scale to natural processes such as volcanic eruptions or ice ages.
In the past, geologists divided Earth's history into epochs like the Holocene, which ostensibly began around 11,700 years ago after the last ice age. However, proponents of the Anthropocene argue that human activities have caused significant and lasting changes to the planet, justifying the recognition of a new epoch.
The Anthropocene is characterized by various human-induced changes, including:
1. Climate Change: Human activities, such as burning fossil fuels and deforestation, have ostensibly led to increased greenhouse gas emissions, resulting in global warming and climate change. This has caused rising temperatures, sea-level rise, and extreme weather events.
2. Biodiversity Loss: Human activities have led to the extinction and decline of numerous plant and animal species, primarily due to habitat destruction, pollution, overfishing, and invasive species.
3. Land Use Change: Humans have altered large portions of Earth's land for agriculture, urbanization, and infrastructure development, resulting in habitat fragmentation and loss of natural ecosystems.
4. Pollution: The release of pollutants into the environment, including air, water, and soil pollution, has significantly affected ecosystems, human health, and wildlife.
5. Geological Alterations: Human activities, such as mining, construction, and the production of concrete, have reshaped landscapes and led to the deposition of new materials, such as plastics and human-made substances, in the Earth's crust.
The concept of the Anthropocene highlights the unprecedented influence that humans have on the planet and underscores the need for sustainable practices and responsible stewardship of Earth's resources. It encourages us to recognize the potential consequences of our actions and work towards finding solutions to mitigate the negative impacts of human activities on the environment.
While the Anthropocene view provides valuable insights into the significant impact of human activities on the planet, there are several challenges and difficulties associated with this perspective. Some of the important difficulties include:
1. Defining the Anthropocene: One major challenge is determining the precise start date of the Anthropocene and establishing clear boundaries for this proposed epoch. There is ongoing scientific debate regarding when exactly the Anthropocene began, with various proposed markers such as industrialization, nuclear tests, or the advent of agriculture. Agreeing on a universally accepted definition and timeline can be complex.
2. Geological Significance: Establishing the Anthropocene as a formal geological epoch requires it to leave a discernible and lasting geological trace in the Earth's rock layers. While there is evidence of human impact on a global scale, demonstrating a clear and recognizable geological signal that distinguishes the Anthropocene from previous epochs is challenging.
3. Scale and Attribution: Identifying and attributing specific human activities to the changes observed in the Earth's systems can be difficult. Many environmental changes, such as climate change and biodiversity loss, are the result of complex interactions between natural processes and human activities, making it challenging to separate and quantify the precise human contribution.
Ellis discusses this and more in this shorter work, though if this is a subject that does not intrigue you, you will find it absolutely sloggish.
The term "Anthropocene" combines two words: "anthropo," which means "human," and "cene," which refers to a geological epoch. It signifies that human activities are now a major geological force, comparable in scale to natural processes such as volcanic eruptions or ice ages.
In the past, geologists divided Earth's history into epochs like the Holocene, which ostensibly began around 11,700 years ago after the last ice age. However, proponents of the Anthropocene argue that human activities have caused significant and lasting changes to the planet, justifying the recognition of a new epoch.
The Anthropocene is characterized by various human-induced changes, including:
1. Climate Change: Human activities, such as burning fossil fuels and deforestation, have ostensibly led to increased greenhouse gas emissions, resulting in global warming and climate change. This has caused rising temperatures, sea-level rise, and extreme weather events.
2. Biodiversity Loss: Human activities have led to the extinction and decline of numerous plant and animal species, primarily due to habitat destruction, pollution, overfishing, and invasive species.
3. Land Use Change: Humans have altered large portions of Earth's land for agriculture, urbanization, and infrastructure development, resulting in habitat fragmentation and loss of natural ecosystems.
4. Pollution: The release of pollutants into the environment, including air, water, and soil pollution, has significantly affected ecosystems, human health, and wildlife.
5. Geological Alterations: Human activities, such as mining, construction, and the production of concrete, have reshaped landscapes and led to the deposition of new materials, such as plastics and human-made substances, in the Earth's crust.
The concept of the Anthropocene highlights the unprecedented influence that humans have on the planet and underscores the need for sustainable practices and responsible stewardship of Earth's resources. It encourages us to recognize the potential consequences of our actions and work towards finding solutions to mitigate the negative impacts of human activities on the environment.
While the Anthropocene view provides valuable insights into the significant impact of human activities on the planet, there are several challenges and difficulties associated with this perspective. Some of the important difficulties include:
1. Defining the Anthropocene: One major challenge is determining the precise start date of the Anthropocene and establishing clear boundaries for this proposed epoch. There is ongoing scientific debate regarding when exactly the Anthropocene began, with various proposed markers such as industrialization, nuclear tests, or the advent of agriculture. Agreeing on a universally accepted definition and timeline can be complex.
2. Geological Significance: Establishing the Anthropocene as a formal geological epoch requires it to leave a discernible and lasting geological trace in the Earth's rock layers. While there is evidence of human impact on a global scale, demonstrating a clear and recognizable geological signal that distinguishes the Anthropocene from previous epochs is challenging.
3. Scale and Attribution: Identifying and attributing specific human activities to the changes observed in the Earth's systems can be difficult. Many environmental changes, such as climate change and biodiversity loss, are the result of complex interactions between natural processes and human activities, making it challenging to separate and quantify the precise human contribution.
Ellis discusses this and more in this shorter work, though if this is a subject that does not intrigue you, you will find it absolutely sloggish.
November 2, 2018
Listen to the news reports. Open your eyes and look around you. The evidence of human-caused changes to Earth are overwhelming and unprecedented: Global climate change, widespread pollution, acidifying oceans, radioactive fallout and waste, plastic accumulation, invasive species and the mass extinction of species … . These outcomes are just a few of many that will leave a lasting record in rock, which is the scientific basis for recognising new geologic time intervals in Earth’s history. But unlike any of Earth’s other geologic ages, the Anthropocene is unique: it results from the actions of just one species — humans. How should we define the beginning of this new geologic era: the nuclear tests that began in 1945? The industrial revolution in the 19th century? The beginnings of agriculture some 10,000 years prior to that? The origin of humans as a species?
From the moment when Nobel prize-winning atmospheric chemist Paul Crutzen mentioned it during a conference in 2000, the concept of the Anthropocene has steadily grown in popularity, capturing the media’s attention and the public’s imagination. Despite this, the idea of the Anthropocene is controversial both inside and outside the Academe, igniting intense debates. Why is this such an emotionally-charged concept? It accepts that man’s impact upon Earth is so severe and so irreversible that it is being indelibly stamped into the planet’s geology, so it will be discernible in the distant future to successor sentient species (it’s unlikely that humans as a species will survive another million years) or even to visiting alien geologists, much like the iridium layer that was written in stone by an asteroid and its impact ejecta that wiped out the dinosaurs at the end of the Cretaceous some 66 million years ago. Thus, the Anthropocene is triggering soul-searching about age-old questions regarding the meaning of nature and the meaning of humanity. Yet even as it reshapes the sciences, the Anthropocene also inspires the humanities and influences politics (although, not enough).
Erle C. Ellis’s Anthropocene: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford University Press; 2018) is an interesting, succinct and stirring exposé that explains both the controversy and the science of the Anthropocene. This paperback includes lots of tables and graphs, and presents a factual analysis of what appears to be a purely academic question without overlooking the reality of the Anthropocene. Indeed, it quickly becomes painfully obvious that the human species has done no favours for the planet; that even the idea of a “pristine wilderness”, untouched by humans, is a myth. That said, the final chapter provides some reasoned hope by exploring a variety of ways (some better than others) that we can attempt to address the many damages we’ve made to the planet, so perhaps we might stop our headlong plunge off the precipice into extinction and disaster. Hopefully, we will finally heed the many ominous warnings around us and take decisive action on personal, community and global levels.
NOTE: originally published at Medium.
From the moment when Nobel prize-winning atmospheric chemist Paul Crutzen mentioned it during a conference in 2000, the concept of the Anthropocene has steadily grown in popularity, capturing the media’s attention and the public’s imagination. Despite this, the idea of the Anthropocene is controversial both inside and outside the Academe, igniting intense debates. Why is this such an emotionally-charged concept? It accepts that man’s impact upon Earth is so severe and so irreversible that it is being indelibly stamped into the planet’s geology, so it will be discernible in the distant future to successor sentient species (it’s unlikely that humans as a species will survive another million years) or even to visiting alien geologists, much like the iridium layer that was written in stone by an asteroid and its impact ejecta that wiped out the dinosaurs at the end of the Cretaceous some 66 million years ago. Thus, the Anthropocene is triggering soul-searching about age-old questions regarding the meaning of nature and the meaning of humanity. Yet even as it reshapes the sciences, the Anthropocene also inspires the humanities and influences politics (although, not enough).
Erle C. Ellis’s Anthropocene: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford University Press; 2018) is an interesting, succinct and stirring exposé that explains both the controversy and the science of the Anthropocene. This paperback includes lots of tables and graphs, and presents a factual analysis of what appears to be a purely academic question without overlooking the reality of the Anthropocene. Indeed, it quickly becomes painfully obvious that the human species has done no favours for the planet; that even the idea of a “pristine wilderness”, untouched by humans, is a myth. That said, the final chapter provides some reasoned hope by exploring a variety of ways (some better than others) that we can attempt to address the many damages we’ve made to the planet, so perhaps we might stop our headlong plunge off the precipice into extinction and disaster. Hopefully, we will finally heed the many ominous warnings around us and take decisive action on personal, community and global levels.
NOTE: originally published at Medium.
April 16, 2022
Decent! Appeals to scientific and non-scientific audiences alike, though as part of the former the initial introductory chapters on geology did drag (but only because this was very familiar territory to me). Still - a lot learned! Concepts that were new or remarkable to me (ecological and geographical, predominantly) include:
1) The Great Acceleration c. 1950; Earth's present 'No Analogue State'
2) Ecosystem Engineers and Anthromes
3) Biotic Homogenisation and the 'Homogocene'
4) The Pristine Myth
I was very interested on which isochronous marker ought to be considered as the Anthropocene's GSSP, especially with the additional weight of concepts like the Pristine Myth. I really liked the section on 'natural baselines' being more a matter of values than science, as there are several historical baselines where human civilisations have shaped the planet (e.g. hunter gatherers and their influence on the decline of megafauna, resulting in grassland to woodland transitions – that to me was quite novel).
I grew incredibly frustrated by the end of the book, which had much more of a social focus, as well it should have (politikos). Much of the rhetoric around climate change is about assigning blame, and that allows a lot of room for social and political debate (as well as space for climate change deniers, people of that ilk). I myself prefer a two part approach to such problems: 1) climate change is happening and these are the cold hard facts; 2) does it matter? (because the latter will always be subjective – I hold with a big, resounding yes but I do think there is also an argument for no, and I think nuanced and subjective ethics do not have a place in the repeatable and indifferent truths of science). Perhaps a chapter on the assignation of blame was appropriate in an introductory book on the Anthropocene but I personally was just a little soured.
Still – great book! Consider (ye who read this) my complaints more as 'notes to self', as I will be revisiting this book at some point and will want to know what I first thought.
1) The Great Acceleration c. 1950; Earth's present 'No Analogue State'
2) Ecosystem Engineers and Anthromes
3) Biotic Homogenisation and the 'Homogocene'
4) The Pristine Myth
I was very interested on which isochronous marker ought to be considered as the Anthropocene's GSSP, especially with the additional weight of concepts like the Pristine Myth. I really liked the section on 'natural baselines' being more a matter of values than science, as there are several historical baselines where human civilisations have shaped the planet (e.g. hunter gatherers and their influence on the decline of megafauna, resulting in grassland to woodland transitions – that to me was quite novel).
I grew incredibly frustrated by the end of the book, which had much more of a social focus, as well it should have (politikos). Much of the rhetoric around climate change is about assigning blame, and that allows a lot of room for social and political debate (as well as space for climate change deniers, people of that ilk). I myself prefer a two part approach to such problems: 1) climate change is happening and these are the cold hard facts; 2) does it matter? (because the latter will always be subjective – I hold with a big, resounding yes but I do think there is also an argument for no, and I think nuanced and subjective ethics do not have a place in the repeatable and indifferent truths of science). Perhaps a chapter on the assignation of blame was appropriate in an introductory book on the Anthropocene but I personally was just a little soured.
Still – great book! Consider (ye who read this) my complaints more as 'notes to self', as I will be revisiting this book at some point and will want to know what I first thought.
July 21, 2020
Between 3 and 4 stars for me, good book but too dogmatic in my view.
I think this is a very interesting book to broaden your perspective in many ways and I especially liked the outlook on debates and how our era might be perceived in the future. The focus is on geology, with a very good introduction to the geologic time scale and how the beginning points of eras determined. However, I think the author as well as the Anthropocene Working Group got a bit dogmatic here, trying to determine the starting point of the anthropocene in the same way as for all other previous eras.
In my mind, the question that should follow from the definition of the anthropocene is "when did human influence on the world/ climate become dominant?". The question the author addresses in this book is more like "when do we start seeing systematic signals in rocks that can be traced back to humans?". Now I see how this approach makes sense when rocks is all we have to look at when researching an era many millions of years ago. But for our current era we have much better data and I think using an approach that is adapted to poor data availability tends to neglect this rich data.
Also, I think Ruddiman's agriculture thesis was too easily dismissed. I'm basically with Ruddiman. If you're interested in climate history, check out his book, it's great:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...
I think this is a very interesting book to broaden your perspective in many ways and I especially liked the outlook on debates and how our era might be perceived in the future. The focus is on geology, with a very good introduction to the geologic time scale and how the beginning points of eras determined. However, I think the author as well as the Anthropocene Working Group got a bit dogmatic here, trying to determine the starting point of the anthropocene in the same way as for all other previous eras.
In my mind, the question that should follow from the definition of the anthropocene is "when did human influence on the world/ climate become dominant?". The question the author addresses in this book is more like "when do we start seeing systematic signals in rocks that can be traced back to humans?". Now I see how this approach makes sense when rocks is all we have to look at when researching an era many millions of years ago. But for our current era we have much better data and I think using an approach that is adapted to poor data availability tends to neglect this rich data.
Also, I think Ruddiman's agriculture thesis was too easily dismissed. I'm basically with Ruddiman. If you're interested in climate history, check out his book, it's great:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...
December 14, 2024
I had my critical thinking cap on while reading this book, so I have a little bit more to say than normal. This book was a fantastic introduction to the history of Earth and the impact that humans have had on the planet. And that’s all. I was consistently disappointed with the lack of discussion about the Anthropocene as a geologic epoch… Not that I’m a geology expert, but epochs are defined by marks being left on the rock… Like fossils or nuclear fallout. I felt so frustrated that this book hinted at that at the end of several chapters, but never actually got into it. Things like deforestation, changes in atmospheric composition, and plastic pollution absolutely have an effect on Earth, but at the end of the day, they don’t count towards events on the geologic time scale. I went into this book expecting more discussion on the impact that humans have on earth that are relevant to the argument that we are in the Anthropocene - discuss the different GSSPs that have been proposed! If I can look past that and see this book as a discussion of how humans have changed earth, then it is very well written, easy to understand, and thorough. Bonus points for the great figures interspersed. I recommend that everybody reads this!
April 13, 2019
This is the most ambitious Very Short Introduction I have read so far. It covered geology, ecology, archaeology, and then the political/philosophical implications of the Anthropocene. The philosophical bits were the most compelling to me. Possibly because it is hard to get an understanding of the science so briefly, or possibly because I don't find rocks that interesting. Anyway, "wtf have we done and what does it mean?" was easier to get across and more interesting to me, personally. I also found the debate about when the Anthropocene begins pretty interesting. Did we start fundamentally changing the earth as early as hunter/gatherers? With agriculture or with global trade? etc. I learned a lot of things I didn't know before, which is what I want out of a Very Short Introduction.
November 10, 2022
This "Very Short [160 pages] Introduction" to the Anthropocene mostly held my interest, though I did skim through a good part of the chapter on stratigraphy and the details of how geologists have identified all previous eras and epochs. If found it very well written for a lay person not afraid of some science and social science if explained well. I found some of the small black-and-white graphs and charts quite understandable, and others not so much, usually because I couldn't make out the differences among different trend-lines--one set of gray dots and dashes looked too much like another.
It was not a scare-mongering book, but informative about how our species has come dominate the earth systems, putting them at the mercy of our judgment, and some various ways they and we might proceed.
It was not a scare-mongering book, but informative about how our species has come dominate the earth systems, putting them at the mercy of our judgment, and some various ways they and we might proceed.
September 10, 2024
A very solid introduction, filled with bite-sized paragraphs and handy diagrams. I don't think it's designed to be read all in one go (it did get a little dry and read like bullet points in some parts) but it's a fantastic idea for the kind of thing to keep in your pocket and dip into when you have a spare moment. It's very comprehensive considering its broad subject and modest length, and the series as a whole is an excellent idea. I'll definitely be checking out some more of them.
Overall, the subject itself is also very fascinating. This book is a decent introduction not just to the concept but also its history and the arguments for and against such a thing. I feel like if somebody cornered me and for whatever reason I had to discuss this subject for 10 minutes, I'd be able to do it without feeling too stupid, so that's good. Did give me a few existential crises, though.
Overall, the subject itself is also very fascinating. This book is a decent introduction not just to the concept but also its history and the arguments for and against such a thing. I feel like if somebody cornered me and for whatever reason I had to discuss this subject for 10 minutes, I'd be able to do it without feeling too stupid, so that's good. Did give me a few existential crises, though.
July 15, 2024
This little book does a great job introducing the concept of the Anthropocene. One of my surprises is how the Anthropocene has been established since the 2010s but is still an unknown concept among non-experts.
What I particularly enjoyed about the book is how the author first introduced the term, justified the term, then provided counterarguments to the term, problematized the term, and then finally ended on an encouraging note of the possibilities of the Anthropocene. I felt like I was really getting a multifaceted understanding of the concept.
It was sufficiently detailed without getting too dense for non-experts.
What I particularly enjoyed about the book is how the author first introduced the term, justified the term, then provided counterarguments to the term, problematized the term, and then finally ended on an encouraging note of the possibilities of the Anthropocene. I felt like I was really getting a multifaceted understanding of the concept.
It was sufficiently detailed without getting too dense for non-experts.
February 22, 2020
This truly is an introduction. It doesn't really convey any new or surprising information, but it does a good job of explaining what the Anthropocene is, critical interpretations of it, what led to it, what may come of it, etc. Additionally, it is easy to understand and absolutely full of useful, informative figures and charts.
May 2, 2021
Anthropogenic what?
I was unfamiliar with the term when it was used in another book so I searched for a book. The very short introduction series is always good at introducing the reader to a new subject. Much more than just a Wikipedia entry, this book gets at the theory and differing views as to when and to what effect.
I was unfamiliar with the term when it was used in another book so I searched for a book. The very short introduction series is always good at introducing the reader to a new subject. Much more than just a Wikipedia entry, this book gets at the theory and differing views as to when and to what effect.
July 9, 2018
He aprendido mucho sobre cómo se delimita una época, era, etc. desde el punto geológico. No me interesaba mucho ese tema, la verdad.
Eso sí, hay muchas gráficas muy interesantes para cosas de cambio climático y fin del mundo y demás.
Eso sí, hay muchas gráficas muy interesantes para cosas de cambio climático y fin del mundo y demás.
June 16, 2020
This book definitely gets more interesting as it goes on, but I wish it hadn't spent so much time discussing geology on the front end and focused more on the debates and discussions that come up in the last third of the text.
December 29, 2023
Stellar. A great little book that describes the Anthropocene from many perspectives. Opened my eyes to lots I didn’t know, including philosophy of climate change. A second edition with updates wince originally written would be welcome.
February 10, 2025
As mentioned in the title, a brief but complete introduction on all topics concerning Anthropocene, always supported by science and facts. Recommended to people who want to expand their knowledge on the topic.
November 25, 2018
I love Oxford's very short introductions. Ellis does a fine job making literal eras of time digestable for the reader.
January 4, 2019
Good short intro
Interesting and informative. Good food for thought. Everyone should read this and understand our future. I really like these books.
Interesting and informative. Good food for thought. Everyone should read this and understand our future. I really like these books.
April 22, 2019
Gets the job done. Concise overview, but nothing terribly special. Does what it says on the box.
June 15, 2019
Read for class but truly a great introduction. Info I already knew paired with new perspectives that were interesting. Lots packed into a short book, but not too dense to get through.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews