Editorial introduction

David Samways

doi:10.3197/jps.2020.5.1.5

Abstract

References Alcock, I., White, M.P., Taylor, T., Coldwell, D.F., Gribble, M.O., Evans, K.L., Corner, A., Vardoulakis, S. and Fleming, L.E., 2017. ‘Green’ on the ground but not in the air: Pro-environmental attitudes are related to household behaviours but not discretionary air travel. Global Environmental Change, 42, pp.136–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.11.005 Broomell, S.B., et al., 2015. Personal experience with climate change predicts intentions to act. Global Environmental Change, 32, pp.67–73. Carson, R., 1962. Silent spring. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. Demski, C., et al., 2017. Experience of extreme weather affects climate change mitigation and adaptation responses. Climatic Change, 140, pp.149–164. Feeney, J., 2019. Hunter-gatherer land management in the human break from ecological sustainability. The Anthropocene Review, 6(3), pp.223–242. Giddens, A., 1984. The constitution of society. Cambridge: Polity Press. Marx, K., 1959 [1894] Capital: Volume three. London: Lawrence and Wishart. Schneider-Mayerson, M. and Leong, K.L., 2020. Eco-reproductive concerns in the age of climate change. Climatic Change, 163, pp.1007–1023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-020-02923-y Smith, M. 2019. Concern for the environment at record highs. YouGov. [online] Available at: <https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/06/05/concern-environment-record-highs> [Accessed 14 December 2020]. Spence, A., et al., 2011. Perceptions of climate change and willingness to save energy related to flood experience. Nature Climate Change, [e-journal] https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1059. Tucker, C.K., 2019. A planet of 3 billion. Washington, DC: Atlas Observatory Press. Vollset, S.E., Goren, E., Yuan, C.-W., Cao, J., et al., 2020. Fertility, mortality, migration, and population scenarios for 195 countries and territories from 2017 to 2100: a forecasting analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. The Lancet, 396(10258), pp.1285–1306. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30677-2

Highlights

Freedom in this field [material existence] can only consist in socialised man, the associated producers, rationally regulating their interchange with Nature, bringing it under their common control, instead of being ruled by it as by the blind forces of Nature; (Marx, 1959 [1894] p.820)
The COVID-19 pandemic reminds us of the power of natural forces: while we can frequently find technical solutions – in this case a vaccine – our technical “mastery” of nature is far from complete
Rees takes us through a number of examples of how in nature the positive feedback of reproduction in favourable environmental conditions leads to population growth which is eventually checked by the negative feedback of the exhaustion of some fixed resource or environmental change due to population growth

Summary

Introduction

Freedom in this field [material existence] can only consist in socialised man, the associated producers, rationally regulating their interchange with Nature, bringing it under their common control, instead of being ruled by it as by the blind forces of Nature; (Marx, 1959 [1894] p.820). The co-developer of the ecological footprint concept, argues that the COVID-19 pandemic should be seen as one of the negative feedbacks consequent of our outsized footprint of which human population expansion is critical dimension.

Results

Conclusion