1
|
Fletcher C, Ripple WJ, Newsome T, Barnard P, Beamer K, Behl A, Bowen J, Cooney M, Crist E, Field C, Hiser K, Karl DM, King DA, Mann ME, McGregor DP, Mora C, Oreskes N, Wilson M. Earth at risk: An urgent call to end the age of destruction and forge a just and sustainable future. PNAS NEXUS 2024; 3:pgae106. [PMID: 38566756 PMCID: PMC10986754 DOI: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae106] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/04/2024]
Abstract
Human development has ushered in an era of converging crises: climate change, ecological destruction, disease, pollution, and socioeconomic inequality. This review synthesizes the breadth of these interwoven emergencies and underscores the urgent need for comprehensive, integrated action. Propelled by imperialism, extractive capitalism, and a surging population, we are speeding past Earth's material limits, destroying critical ecosystems, and triggering irreversible changes in biophysical systems that underpin the Holocene climatic stability which fostered human civilization. The consequences of these actions are disproportionately borne by vulnerable populations, further entrenching global inequities. Marine and terrestrial biomes face critical tipping points, while escalating challenges to food and water access foreshadow a bleak outlook for global security. Against this backdrop of Earth at risk, we call for a global response centered on urgent decarbonization, fostering reciprocity with nature, and implementing regenerative practices in natural resource management. We call for the elimination of detrimental subsidies, promotion of equitable human development, and transformative financial support for lower income nations. A critical paradigm shift must occur that replaces exploitative, wealth-oriented capitalism with an economic model that prioritizes sustainability, resilience, and justice. We advocate a global cultural shift that elevates kinship with nature and communal well-being, underpinned by the recognition of Earth's finite resources and the interconnectedness of its inhabitants. The imperative is clear: to navigate away from this precipice, we must collectively harness political will, economic resources, and societal values to steer toward a future where human progress does not come at the cost of ecological integrity and social equity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles Fletcher
- School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA
| | - William J Ripple
- Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA
| | - Thomas Newsome
- School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
| | - Phoebe Barnard
- Center for Environmental Politics and School of Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
- African Climate and Development Initiative and FitzPatrick Institute, University of Cape Town, Cape Town 7700, South Africa
| | - Kamanamaikalani Beamer
- Hui ‘Āina Momona Program, Richardson School of Law, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA
- Hawai‘inuiākea School of Hawaiian Knowledge, Kamakakūokalani Center for Hawaiian Studies, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA
| | - Aishwarya Behl
- School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA
| | - Jay Bowen
- Institute of American Indian Arts, Santa Fe, NM 87508, USA
- Upper Skagit Tribe, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284, USA
| | - Michael Cooney
- School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, Hawai‘i Natural Energy Institute, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA
| | - Eileen Crist
- Department of Science Technology and Society, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24060, USA
| | - Christopher Field
- Doerr School for Sustainability, Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
| | - Krista Hiser
- Department of Languages, Linguistics, and Literature, Kapi‘olani Community College, Honolulu, HI 96816, USA
- Global Council for Science and the Environment, Washington, DC 20006, USA
| | - David M Karl
- Department of Oceanography, School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA
- Daniel K. Inouye Center for Microbial Oceanography, Research and Education, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA
| | - David A King
- Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1DQ, UK
| | - Michael E Mann
- Department of Earth and Environmental Science, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| | - Davianna P McGregor
- Department of Ethnic Studies, Center for Oral History, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA
| | - Camilo Mora
- Department of Geography and Environment, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA
| | - Naomi Oreskes
- Department of the History of Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
| | - Michael Wilson
- Associate Justice, Hawaii Supreme Court (retired), Honolulu, HI 96813, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Harmony in Conservation. CONSERVATION 2022. [DOI: 10.3390/conservation2040044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Many authors have noted the role that anthropocentrism has played in creating humanity’s dysfunctional relationship with the natural world. As human hubris (excessive pride or self-confidence) is an ailment that contributes to the anthropogenic sixth mass extinction of Earth’s biodiversity, we argue instead for ‘harmony with nature’. In recent decades, even the conservation discourse has become increasingly anthropocentric. Indeed, justification for nature conservation has in part shifted from nature’s intrinsic value to ‘ecosystem services’ for the benefit of people. Here we call for a transformation to a more harmonious human-nature relationship that is grounded in mutual respect and principled responsibility, instead of utilitarianism and enlightened self-interest. Far from what Tennyson called ‘red in tooth and claw’, we argue nature is a mixture of cooperation as well as competition. We argue that the UN’s ‘Harmony with Nature’ program is an innovative and refreshing path for change. If we are to achieve harmony with nature, modern industrial society will need to abandon its anthropocentric ‘human supremacy’ mindset and adopt an ecocentric worldview and ecological ethics. We conclude it is thus both appropriate (and essential) for conservationists to champion harmony with nature.
Collapse
|
3
|
Restoring the orangutan in a Whole- or Half-Earth context. ORYX 2022. [DOI: 10.1017/s003060532200093x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Various global-scale proposals exist to reduce the loss of biological diversity. These include the Half-Earth and Whole-Earth visions that respectively seek to set aside half the planet for wildlife conservation or to diversify conservation practices fundamentally and change the economic systems that determine environmental harm. Here we assess these visions in the specific context of Bornean orangutans Pongo pygmaeus and their conservation. Using an expert-led process we explored three scenarios over a 10-year time frame: continuation of Current Conditions, a Half-Earth approach and a Whole-Earth approach. In addition, we examined a 100-year population recovery scenario assuming 0% offtake of Bornean orangutans. Current Conditions were predicted to result in a population c. 73% of its current size by 2032. Half-Earth was judged comparatively easy to achieve and predicted to result in an orangutan population of c. 87% of its current size by 2032. Whole-Earth was anticipated to lead to greater forest loss and ape killing, resulting in a prediction of c. 44% of the current orangutan population for 2032. Finally, under the recovery scenario, populations could be c. 148% of their current size by 2122. Although we acknowledge uncertainties in all of these predictions, we conclude that the Half-Earth and Whole-Earth visions operate along different timelines, with the implementation of Whole-Earth requiring too much time to benefit orangutans. None of the theorized proposals provided a complete solution, so drawing elements from each will be required. We provide recommendations for equitable outcomes.
Collapse
|