After the Anthropocene

TLDR

Crutzen and Stoermer’s 2000 naming of the Anthropocene has sparked debate across sciences, yet it remains a loosely defined placeholder for an era of environmental and social uncertainty. The term invites deeper considerations of its meaning, significance, and consequences for thought and politics. For this Forum, five scholars were invited to reflect on how the Anthropocene challenges the structures and habits of geography, politics, and their guiding concepts. The essays collectively outline an agenda for geographic thought and political engagement in the Anthropocene and suggest that geography is uniquely positioned to address its conceptual challenges.

Abstract

Crutzen and Stoermer’s (2000) naming of the ‘Anthropocene’ has provoked lively debate across the physical and social sciences, but, while the term is gradually gaining acceptance as the signifier of the current geological epoch, it remains little more than a roughly defined place-holder for an era characterized by environmental and social uncertainty. The term invites deeper considerations of its meaning, significance, and consequences for thought and politics. For this Forum, we invited five scholars to reflect on how the Anthropocene poses challenges to the structures and habits of geography, politics, and their guiding concepts. The resulting essays piece together an agenda for geographic thought – and political engagement – in this emerging epoch. Collectively, they suggest that geography, as a discipline, is particularly well suited to address the conceptual challenges presented by the Anthropocene.