English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The geological community and the Anthropocene Working Group (AWG) are moving ever closer to formalizing a new geologic epoch, the Anthropocene. First proposed to raise awareness for planetary stewardship, the Anthropocene will likely be defined, according to the AWG, based on patterns of near-synchronous anthropogenic change that place its boundary marker in the mid-twentieth century during the Great Acceleration. While a number of anthropologists, archaeologists, sociologists, and other social scientists have argued against such a designation, the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS) mandates the process and criteria for evaluating potential formal units of the geological timescale; and, the Anthropocene, with a recent boundary maker, likely will be ratified by the Executive Committee of the Internal Union of Geological Sciences. In light of this, I review biotic, atmospheric, and stratigraphic evidence offered by the AWG for a mid-twentieth century Anthropocene and demonstrate how failing to consider deeper historical processes may result in resource management policies and environmental science actions that exacerbate, rather than alleviate, future anthropogenic impacts.

The Anthropocene as Process: Why We Should View the State of the World through a Deep Historical Lens