The goal in the next two years of research by Initiative 2 of the G-COE to examine the relationship between humans and nature is not to identify how to utilize specific natural resources or functions to the fullest extent possible, but to focus on technologies and institutions for developing a sustainable humanosphere through an overall strengthening of the functions of the biosphere.
Since the formation of the earth, living organisms themselves have molded the very foundation that has allowed life to thrive. Living organisms, while being profoundly impacted by changes in the geosphere around them, have shaped the composition of the atmosphere as well as the states of water and energy that support the foundations of life and have formed a biosphere within the context of the dynamic cycles of water and energy. The repeated cycle of extinction and evolution has led to the present diversity of life (biodiversity) of the biosphere.
Humans evolved within this process of diversification of life. Humans learned to secure natural resources beneficial to their survival—food being first among these—by using certain useful plant and animal species and exploiting natural processes with certain useful functions. As local natural resources became insufficient to support growing populations, humans began to explore new environs in search of new resources, and, as a result, spread rapidly to all corners of the earth.
The biodiversity and dynamic atmosphere, water, and energy cycles were undoubtedly advantageous to the rapid growth and spread of early humans. If, for example, the biota had been less diverse and unchanging, such an environment would have been beneficial to an organism that had developed a simple survival strategy adapted to that particular environment. However, in an environment with diverse life forms and dynamic cycling of atmosphere, water, and energy, a multi-faceted survival strategy, both in terms of time and space, would be necessary. Thus, humans, with their highly developed intelligence, had a comparative advantage in such an environment. It can be said, then, that the very diversity of life formed by the biosphere and dynamic cycling of material and energy served as the basis for human survival.
During the process of population growth and spread across the globe, humans developed sophisticated technologies and institutions to interact with nature. Early humans secured their livelihood by using certain useful plant and animal species from among the diverse biota and exploiting certain functions of the dynamic material and energy cycles. An example of the former would be the domestication of a variety of plant and animals. Examples of the latter are slash and burn agriculture, whereby a section of a vast primary forest is perturbed and the vigorous productivity in the first year following deforestation is exploited, and lowland rice paddy production, which relies on the influx of nutrients carried with upland sediments that are deposited during annual rain and flooding events.
There is no difference in the essence of the technologies and institutions used today to deal with nature developed by humans during the process of population growth and spread across the globe and those developed in the pre-agricultural age. Plant breeding techniques designed to maximize the expression of certain useful traits have resulted in hybrid seeds. In the present day, selection of traits is even possible at the molecular level. We now artificially control the ecological succession as well as material and energy cycles to exploit natural processes to the fullest extent possible. The introduction of fossil fuel since the 1800s certainly accelerated movement in this direction; however, this by no means resulted in a fundamental change in the essential relationship between humans and nature. It can be said that, in terms of human’s selective use of plants and animals and the identification and exploitation of natural processes with certain useful functions, there appears to be no essential change from the pre-agricultural era to the present day.
From the standpoint of the relationship between humans and nature, the use of fossil fuels marks a much more significant turning point that has led to rapid changes on a global scale. In concrete terms, it is becoming evident to most people on the planet that, because the change has been so rapid, human activity has impacted the biosphere, leading to a rapid loss of the biodiversity that had developed over eons and significantly influenced the once-dynamic material and energy cycles. Research on the human impact on biodiversity and the material and energy cycles is considered high priority for the majority of academic fields concerned with the geo-environmental science.
As discussed above, the biodiversity formed by the biosphere and dynamic material and energy cycles have served as the basis for human survival. Humans have, in this context, developed technologies and institutions to make use of particular plants and animals that are beneficial to survival and that exploit natural processes with certain useful functions. However, it has become apparent in recent years that significant changes are occurring to the environment that has served as the basis for human survival and that, for the first time since the pre-agricultural era, we are facing an urgent need to drastically alter the technologies and institutions by which humans interact with nature.
In thinking about a new direction for human’s relationship with nature, we compare the following three scenarios, with the third scenario representing the most realistic alternative for a new paradigm.
1. Maintenance of the status quo
Refine our utilization of certain useful plant and animal species for our survival and exploitation of natural processes with certain functions so that it is possible to maintain the traditional mode of interaction with nature. This scenario requires the development of technologies to increase the utility of limited natural resources and to enable more efficient use of certain natural processes. In the case where certain material and energy resources are exhausted, there will be a need to find replacements by exploiting known resources at the gene level, developing new technologies to enable use of atomic energy, and expanding pursuit of resources to extraterrestrial sources like utilization of outer space.
2. A return to nature
Taking the standpoint that useful resources are nearly exhausted and that the material and energy cycles have reached a point of instability, return to the level of human exploitation of nature of the pre-agricultural era. Because there is less biodiversity and the material and energy cycles are less dynamic than they were in the past, overall productivity of the biosphere is lower. In such a case, it will be necessary to develop technologies to ensure survival in response to this decreased productivity.
3. Coexistence of humans and nature
Assume that biodiversity and the dynamic material and energy cycles were a precondition for exploitation of nature in the pre-agricultural age but that the use of selected plant and animal species and exploitation of certain natural processes has played a key role in the subsequent maximization and ability to maintain long-term productivity. The possibility of utilizing useful plant and animal resources will decrease with declining biodiversity and it will become impossible to maintain high levels of productivity in the face of declining vitality of the material and energy cycles.
If this is the case, it will be necessary to develop ways to continue utilizing certain species and natural processes that also incorporate a means to promote overall biodiversity and vitality of the material and energy cycles. There is a need to develop technologies and institutions to (1) promote biodiversity as a whole through the use of individual resources, (2) enhance total biosphere function through the exploitation of certain natural processes, (3) elucidate the role of individual species in the diverse biodiversity, (4) elucidate the role of individual processes within the entirety of biosphere functions, and (5) to evaluate the productivity of the biosphere as a whole rather than that of specific resources.
Last Updated 201010月22(金) 14:40 JST 