A new geoethics for the Anthropocene

There is a new, burgeoning literature on geoethics in the geosciences (Peppoloni and Di Capua 2021). It stems from the assumption that understanding the Earth, analyzing natural processes, and managing their impacts require significant responsibility from geoscientists. Thus, geological inquiry must be accompanied by thoughtful consideration of ethical and social dimensions.

The literature is based on the definition that geoethics consists of research and reflection on the values which underpin appropriate behaviours and practices (Peppoloni and Di Capua 2021). Geoethics encourages geoscientists and wider society to become fully aware of the humankind’s role as an active geological force on the planet and the ethical responsibility that this implies. Some (Koster et al. 2024) even use geoethics in disputes about defining the onset of humankind becoming an active geological force suggesting that a geoethical stance may do away with the Anthropocene as a useful concept: a new epoch in the GTS. Others move away from the human centered approach to suggest a more-than-human geoethics as a space of thought and an arena of concerns in which natural and cultural worlds are co-constitutive, requiring geoscientists to grasp the conjunction of the technologies of ecology, on the one hand, and of prehension and feeling, on the other (Sharp et al. 2022).

This paper focuses on a geoethical stance rooted in a critical positionality towards a traditional view of geology and focuses on what STS theorist Isabelle Stengers calls “slow science:” a thoughtful approach to considering unknown matters and their connections to existing knowledge (Stengers 2018). We advocate for critical/radical reflexivity as an ethical method, emphasizing insecurity regarding basic assumptions, discourse, and practices used in describing reality (Braun 2024). Instead of a human centered geoethics that engages with the Earth in a traditional Newtonian/Cartesian mode of scientific inquiry, we argue that a geoethical stance reflective of our critical juncture in Earth’s history should integrate the implications of quantum theory rather than avoid them, as suggested by some geoethicists. The main goal of quantum-inspired geoethics is to decenter the universal and hegemonic Newtonian/Cartesian worldview. We propose a geoethics attuned to becomings, matterings, and more-than-human events, recognizing various agential possibilities that give rise to new forms of temporality and spatiality.

References

Braun, R. 2024. Radical reflexivity, experimental ontology and RRI. Journal of Responsible Innovation. doi 10.1080/23299460.2024.2331651.

Koster, E., P. et al. 2024. The Anthropocene Event as a Cultural Zeitgeist in the Earth-Human Ecosystem. Journal of Geoethics and Social Geosciences 1 (1):1–41.

Peppoloni, S., and Di Capua, G. 2021. Current Definition and Vision of Geoethics. In Geo-societal Narratives - Contextualising geosciences, edited by M. Bohle and E. Marone, 17-28. Cham.: Palgrave Macmillan.

Sharp, E. L. et al. 2022. Geoethical Futures: A Call for More-Than-Human Physical Geography. Environment and Planning F. 1 (1):66-81.

Stengers, I. 2018. Another Science Is Possible : A Manifesto for Slow Science. Translated by Stephen Muecke. Cambridge UK: Polity Press.