![\"\"](\"https:\/\/osu-wams-blogs-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com\/blogs.dir\/3635\/files\/2020\/01\/figs1-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nFigure 1. Decline in freshwater, marine and terrestrial\npopulations of vertebrates. Adapted from\nRipple et al. 2015 [3].<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The growth of the\ntechnosphere has tremendous momentum and we must ask if it can be shaped and\nregulated into something that is sustainable, i.e. able to co-exist with the\nrest of the Earth system over the long term.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Figure 2. Earth system indicator trends 1750-2010. Adapted from Steffen et al. 2015 [4].<\/p>\n\n\n\n Why is the\ntechnosphere growing so vigorously?<\/strong> Let\u2019s consider three quite different\nfactors. <\/p>\n\n\n\n 1. The most general driver of technosphere\ngrowth is what systems ecologist Howard Odum called the \u201cmaximum power\nprinciple\u201d. It states: \u201cDuring\nself-organization, system designs develop and prevail that maximize power\nintake, energy transformation, and those uses that reinforce production and\nefficiency\u201d [5]. Self-organization<\/a> is a widely observed phenomenon, extending\nfrom the funnel of water formed in a draining bathtub, to inorganic chemical\nreactions that create arresting geometric designs, to giant termite mounds, and\nindeed, to cities [6]. Given\nEarth\u2019s vast reservoirs of fossil fuel energy, and a selection regime that\nrewards growth, the technosphere will indeed tend to increase energy\nconsumption, matter throughput, and complexity. \n<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2. Underlying much of the momentum of\ntechnosphere growth is the global market economy. Capitalism is essentially the operating\nsystem of the technosphere. \nCorporations, the state, and workers are compelled to expand the economy\nand hence the technosphere [7]. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The market economy\nrewards increasing efficiencies in production (to reduce costs) and often the\nroute to greater efficiently and greater economies of scale is by investment in\ntechnology. Technical progress is now\nthe expected norm and investments in research and development are a part of\ncorporate culture and national agendas. \nEconomists refer to the \u201ctreadmill of production<\/a>\u201d in which \u201ccompetition, profitability, and the\nquest for market share has contributed to an acceleration of human impact on\nthe environment\u201d [8]. \nEconomic globalization has geographically extended the market economy to\nthe whole world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3. Historically, war has been one of the biggest\ndrivers of technological expansion. In\nthe Parable of the Tribes<\/em>, historian\nAndrew Schmookler describes the sustained pressure on societies to conquer or\nbe conquered [9]. \nTechnology advances certainly help in winning wars and national\ngovernments invest heavily in research and application of technologies for\nwar. The Internet began with U.S. Defense\nDepartment funding to build a communications infrastructure that was hardened\nagainst nuclear attack.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Humanity has of course\nbenefited broadly as the technosphere expanded. \nBillions of people now have standards of living rivaling those of\nroyalty a few hundred years ago. The\nproportion of the global population living in poverty continues to decline.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But even before the use\nof the term technosphere, scientists and philosophers had begun to question\nwhether technology was always a benevolent force. The\nconcept of \u201cautonomous technology\u201d suggests that the growth and elaboration of\ntechnology can escape human control [10, 11]. The\npossibilities for a nuclear holocaust or a greenhouse gas driven climate change\ncatastrophe are indicative of technology-mediated global threats. <\/p>\n\n\n\n What can be\ndone? <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The maximum power principle does promote energy throughput, but there is\nplenty of scope for insuring that technosphere energy prioritizes renewable\nenergy. Carbon taxes may be the simplest\napproach to rapidly driving down fossil fuel combustion. Comprehensive recycling, based on a circular economy<\/a>, will help constrain\nthe mass throughput of the technosphere. \nFinishing the global demographic transition [12] will reduce future demand for natural\nresources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Capitalism will not go away but could undergo a Reformation. That means more corporate\nresponsibility<\/a>, better governmental oversight of corporate behavior, and increased\nattention by consumer to the environmental footprint of their consumption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The global incidence of physical war is decreasing, which will help slow\nthe growth of the technosphere. Wars are\noften based on the threat of an enemy, but humanity may become more unified\nbased on the common threat of global environmental change. The Paris Accord is suggestive of the\npossibilities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Implications<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The trajectory of the\ntechnosphere is towards limitless growth. \nHowever, we live on a planet \u2013 there are indeed limits to the natural\nresources upon which the technosphere depends. \nHumans are only a part of the technosphere, thus cannot truly control it\n(13). But they can certainly shape it<\/a>\n. Likewise, the technosphere is only\npart of the Earth system, thus cannot fully control the Earth system: quite\npossibly, the Earth system will respond to the environmental impacts of the\ntechnosphere with changes that suppress the technosphere and associated human\nwelfare. Improved understanding of\ntechnosphere growth in the context of the rest of the Earth system is clearly\nwarranted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1. Steffen, W., et\nal., Trajectories of the\nEarth System in the Anthropocene<\/a>. Proceedings of the National Academy of\nSciences of the United States of America, 2018. 115(33): p. 8252-8259.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2. Diaz, S., et al., Pervasive\nhuman-driven decline of life on Earth points to the need for transformative\nchange.<\/a> Science, 2019. 366(6471): p. 1327-+.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3. Ripple, W.J., et\nal., World\nScientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice<\/a>. Bioscience, 2017. 67(12):\np. 1026-1028.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 4. Steffen, W., et\nal., The\ntrajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great Acceleration<\/a>. The Anthropocene\nReview, 2015. 2: p. 81-98.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5. Odum, H.T.,\nSelf-Organization and Maximum Empower, in Maximum Power: The Ideas and\nApplications of H.T. Odum. 1995, Colorado University Press: Boulder CO. See Hall\nreview<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 6. Prigogine, I. and\nI. Stengers, Order out\nof Chaos<\/a>. 1984: Bantam.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 7. Curran, D., The\nTreadmill of Production and the Positional Economy of Consumption<\/a>. Canadian\nReview of Sociology-Revue Canadienne De Sociologie, 2017. 54(1): p. 28-47.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 8. Hooks, G. and C.L.\nSmith, Treadmills\nof production and destruction – Threats to the environment posed by militarism<\/a>.\nOrganization & Environment, 2005. 18(1): p. 19-37.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 9. Schmookler, A.B., The\nParable of the Tribes: The Problem of Power in Social Evolution<\/a>, Second\nEdition 1994: Suny Press. 426.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 10. Winner, L., Autonomous\nTechnology: Technics-out-of-Control as a Theme of Political Thought<\/a>. 1978:\nThe M.I.T. Press. 402.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 11. Kelly, K., Out of Control: The New\nBiology of Machines, Social Systems, & the Economic World<\/a>. 1995: Basic\nBooks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 12. Bongaarts, J., Human\npopulation growth and the demographic transition<\/a>. Philosophical\nTransactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 2009. 364(1532): p.\n2985-2990.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 13. Haff, P., Humans and\ntechnology in the Anthropocene: Six rules<\/a>. 2014. The Anthropocene\nReview:126-136. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" David P. Turner \/ January 28, 2020 The growth of the technosphere is changing the Earth system, pushing it towards a state that may be inimical to future human civilization [1]. As technosphere capital \u2212 e.g. in the form of … Continue reading ![\"\"](\"https:\/\/osu-wams-blogs-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com\/blogs.dir\/3635\/files\/2020\/01\/fig2x-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n