Since the beginning of time, humans have interacted with their environments in order to survive. As mankind’s involvement with nature increased exponentially, the earth eventually became a human-dominated planet. Human activities began to impact the earth’s ecosystems so greatly that a new geological era came to be—the Anthropocene. Defined by Kareiva as “an era in which humans dominate every flux and cycle of the planet’s ecology and geochemistry,” the coining of the name “Anthropocene” served to underscore how substantially humans altered the earth. More recently, increased focus has been placed on urban ecology, the study of human interaction with the environment in urbanized settings. As the world continues to develop, understanding the effects of pollution, overdevelopment and other such pressures on nature is vital to striking a balance in our ecosystem.
Written in 1997, Vitousek’s article Human Domination of Earth’s Ecosystems paints a stark image of humanity’s impact on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. In stating that the consequences of land transformation “are not restricted to [a] target organism,” Vitousek highlights a domino-like effect that results from land transformation: marine ecosystems are altered, biochemical cycles are disrupted, and biotic changes are precipitated, ultimately leading to a loss of biological diversity.
In the more recent article Conservation in the Anthropocene, Kareiva portrays a more optimistic vantage point as he reveals that the traditional beliefs of conservationists cannot effectively preserve the current ecosystems of our planet. Long viewed as innocent and uncontroversial, conservation has often led to the expelling of indigenous people in an attempt to create parks and reserves. Kareiva proposes that “idealized notions of nature, parks, and wilderness” must become more realistic. In this regard, drastic conservation measures are neither feasible nor necessary. As an urban community, we must shift our focus towards maintaining and preserving our already urbanized cities in conjunction with parks and reserves.
Although Vitousek’s and Kareiva’s beliefs differ, they do agree that biodiversity is declining as a result of human’s ongoing alteration of the earth. They understand that conservation alone, in its strict sense, will not work because the pace of destruction is far greater than the pace on conservation. More importantly, both authors put forth a three-step solution. Vitousek suggests 1) reducing our ecological footprint, 2) better understanding our ecosystems, and 3) accepting our responsibility to manage our planet. Similarly, Kareiva proposes we 1) begin appreciating the strength and resilience of nature, 2) recognize how dependent we are upon it, and 3) continue developing with the importance of nature foremost in mind.
As I read through our assigned articles, I laid on my hammock, swinging peacefully between the two apple trees in my backyard. I reflected upon the arguments made by Vitousek and Kareiva as I stared at the bright blue sky through a canopy of foliage overhead. Humans and their ecosystems are undoubtedly intertwined. Everyday we witness the true resilience and dynamism of nature — its ability to survive and flourish even after being strained by humans for centuries. While we cannot halt human development in order to preserve nature, we can use our knowledge and technology to strike a balance and mutually coexist with our environment, allowing it to take its natural course.
