Der vorliegende Beitrag nimmt sich zur Aufgabe, das Konzept des Anthropozäns, auch hinsichtlich seines Potenzials zu einer systemischen Nachhaltigkeitsanalyse sowie den daraus resultierenden Verantwortlichkeiten, Engagements und Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten etwas näher vorzustellen. Das vielleicht Spannendste am Anthropozän-Konzept ist tatsächlich die Herausforderung, solche Dualismen zugunsten eines vielfältigen Spektrums von Einteilungen, Denkansätzen und Problemlösungen aufzugeben. Dabei müssen allerdings die unterschiedlichen Ebenen des Anthropozän-Ansatzes auseinandergehalten werden, damit wir wissen, worüber wir jeweils reden und debattieren.
The Anthropocene concept is a comprehensive conceptual "toolbox" for systemic analysis, interdisciplinary monitoring and a new understanding of the gigantic current impact of human activities on the Earth system. At the same time, it neither implies a fatalistic acceptance of an apocalypse, nor does it promote a simplistic "everything will be fine" positivism, but rather allows differentiated observations from different perspectives. Precisely because of its systemic and interdisciplinary approach, the concept does not narrow possible pathways for the development, propagation and application of future options. On the contrary, the Earth system sciences, social sciences, cultural studies and the humanities together and very clearly express that in order to achieve global development goals such as justice, food security, health, peace and other goals for sustainable development (SDGs) (UNSDGs 2015), we keep on needing "assessable" and predictable conditions of an Anthropocene Earth system (Steffen et al. 2016). In order not to completely switch from the relative stability of the Holocene to incalculable risks, but rather to transform the Anthropocene Earth System into a different, but permanently habitable Anthropocene, it is necessary not to exceed planetary boundaries (sensu Rockström et al. 2009, Steffen et al. 2015b) and to see the SDGs as a compass. For this purpose, continuous monitoring of the state of the Anthropocene Earth system is indispensable. Only then both safe shelter spaces and a creative leeway for shaping the Anthropocene remain guaranteed. Within this framework, and depending on the region, the culture, the social requirements and the sociopolitical goals, it should be possible to negotiate very freely where the future journey should go. Necessary for that is a generally more holistic, systemic view of the integration of humankind into planetary processes, which means an integration of all societal groups, i.e. politics, science, business, administration, civil society groups and individuals. ...
Ein Comic über das WBGU-Gutachten «Gesellschaftsvertrag für eine Große Transformation» erklärt unterschiedliche Aspekte der Transformation zur klimaverträglichen, nachhaltigen Gesellschaft. Es wird deutlich, wie die Wissenschaft, Regierungen, aber auch alle Bürgerinnen und Bürger dazu beitragen können. In Anbetracht von Klimawandel, Artensterben und Ressourcenknappheit setzt sich immer mehr die Einsicht durch, dass wir unseren bisherigen Lebensstil nicht einfach beibehalten können. Wenn unsere Gesellschaften in fünfzig Jahren noch funktionieren sollen, müssen wir den Verbrauch von fossilen Brennstoffen drastisch reduzieren und ein nachhaltiges Wirtschaften lernen. Wie das gehen soll, zeigen die neun Mitglieder des Wissenschaftlichen Beirat Globale Umweltveränderungen (WBGU) in einem Comic zum Gutachten «Gesellschaftsvertrag für eine Große Transformation». In Form von Graphic Interviews wird aus unterschiedlichen wissenschaftlichen Blickwinkeln betrachtet, welche Probleme bestehen und wie sie gelöst werden können. Nur durch Trans- und Interdisziplinarität sowie Partizipation lassen sich Antworten auf diese komplexen Zukunftsfragen finden.
In March 2019, German-speaking scientists and scholars calling themselves Scientists for Future, published a statement in support of the youth protesters in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland (Fridays for Future, Klimastreik/Climate Strike), verifying the scientific evidence that the youth protestors refer to. In this article, they provide the full text of the statement, including the list of supporting facts (in both English and German) as well as an analysis of the results and impacts of the statement. Furthermore, they reflect on the challenges for scientists and scholars who feel a dual responsibility: on the one hand, to remain independent and politically neutral, and, on the other hand, to inform and warn societies of the dangers that lie ahead.
A range of published arguments against formalizing the Anthropocene as a geological time unit have variously suggested that it is a misleading term of non-stratigraphic origin and usage, is based on insignificant temporal and material stratigraphic content unlike that used to define older geological time units, is focused on observation of human history or speculation about the future rather than geologically significant events, and is driven more by politics than science. In response, we contend that the Anthropocene is a functional term that has firm geological grounding in a well-characterized stratigraphic record. This record, although often lithologically thin, is laterally extensive, rich in detail and already reflects substantial elapsed (and in part irreversible) change to the Earth System that is comparable to or greater in magnitude than that of previous epoch-scale transitions. The Anthropocene differs from previously defined epochs in reflecting contemporary geological change, which in turn also leads to the term's use over a wide range of social and political discourse. Nevertheless, that use remains entirely distinct from its demonstrable stratigraphic underpinning. Here we respond to the arguments opposing the geological validity and utility of the Anthropocene, and submit that a strong case may be made for the Anthropocene to be treated as a formal chronostratigraphic unit and added to the Geological Time Scale.
A range of published arguments against formalizing the Anthropocene as a geological time unit have variously suggested that it is a misleading term of non-stratigraphic origin and usage, is based on insignificant temporal and material stratigraphic content unlike that used to define older geological time units, is focused on observation of human history or speculation about the future rather than geologically significant events, and is driven more by politics than science. In response, we contend that the Anthropocene is a functional term that has firm geological grounding in a well-characterized stratigraphic record. This record, although often lithologically thin, is laterally extensive, rich in detail and already reflects substantial elapsed (and in part irreversible) change to the Earth System that is comparable to or greater in magnitude than that of previous epoch-scale transitions. The Anthropocene differs from previously defined epochs in reflecting contemporary geological change, which in turn also leads to the term's use over a wide range of social and political discourse. Nevertheless, that use remains entirely distinct from its demonstrable stratigraphic underpinning. Here we respond to the arguments opposing the geological validity and utility of the Anthropocene, and submit that a strong case may be made for the Anthropocene to be treated as a formal chronostratigraphic unit and added to the Geological Time Scale.
In March 2019, German-speaking scientists and scholars calling themselves Scientists for Future, published a statement in support of the youth protesters in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland (Fridays for Future, Klimastreik/Climate Strike), verifying the scientific evidence that the youth protestors refer to. In this article, they provide the full text of the statement, including the list of supporting facts (in both English and German) as well as an analysis of the results and impacts of the statement. Furthermore, they reflect on the challenges for scientists and scholars who feel a dual responsibility: on the one hand, to remain independent and politically neutral, and, on the other hand, to inform and warn societies of the dangers that lie ahead. ; ISSN:0940-5550
