Abstract
Human biohistory is learning about human situations against the background of the story of life on Earth. One of its key features is recognition that the evolutionary emergence of the human capacity for culture was one of the great watersheds in the history of life. Human culture has become a new kind of force in the biosphere – with profound and far reaching impacts not only on humans themselves but also on the rest of the living world. The chapter briefly discusses some important biohistorical principles, including cultural maladaptation and cultural reform, technoaddiction and the evolutionary health principle. Cultural evolution has recently resulted in patterns of human activity across the globe of a magnitude and of a kind that are unsustainable. If present trends continue unabated the ecological collapse of civilisation is inevitable. The future wellbeing of humankind will depend on big changes in the scale, intensity and nature of human activities on Earth. The best hope for the future lies in a rapid transition to a society that is truly in tune with, sensitive to and respectful of the processes of life which underpin our existence. This is referred to as a biosensitive society. However, there will be no transition to biosensitivity unless there come about profound changes in the worldview, assumptions and priorities of our society’s dominant culture.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The word culture has many rather different meanings. Here it is used to mean the abstract products of the capacity for culture, such as learned language itself and the accumulated knowledge, assumptions, beliefs, values and technological competence of a human population. This use of the term is consistent with the first definition of ‘culture’ given in Collins Dictionary: ‘The total of the inherited ideas, beliefs, values and knowledge, which constitute the shared bases of social action’ (Collins Dictionary of the English Language (1979) Collins, Sydney, Auckland and Glasgow).
- 2.
I mention René Dubos first because his writings capture the essence of biohistory as I see it (e.g. Dubos 1968, 1980). However, he makes no attempt to develop a comprehensive theoretical basis for the subject. The same applies to the other authors mentioned (e.g. Zinsser 1935; Diamond 1997, 2005; McMichael 2001; Flannery 1994).
- 3.
In this paper a generation is taken to be 25 years.
- 4.
One of the most interesting of these very early townships from the socio-ecological standpoint is Çatalhöyük in Anatolia, which was inhabited for approaching 2,000 years from about 9,500 BP (Mellaart 1967; Hodder 2006). The population ranged from 5,000–8,000. There were no apparent social classes. The economy was based primarily on the cultivation of barley, wheat, peas, and lentils, and the breeding of sheep, goats and, later in the period, cattle. Hunting was also still important for meat.
- 5.
The fact that the capacity for culture was of biological advantage during the tens of thousands of generations of our species before the advent of agriculture does not mean, of course, that it will necessarily be an advantage under conditions quite different from those of the evolutionary habitat.
- 6.
This does not mean that evolutionary change in the human species has come to a halt. There has been a relaxation of some selection pressures that were powerful in the hunter-gatherer environment and in the long term this will result in genetic changes in human populations (Rendel 1970). There have also been some new selection pressures associated with the advent of farming that have produced changes in some populations. A well-known example of this is the emergence and spread in European populations of lactase production into adulthood in response to the availability of bovine milk as a food source. For discussion of this change and for other examples, see Cochran and Harpending (2009).
- 7.
An exception is Cleave and Campbell (1966), who drew attention to the fact that diets containing refined carbohydrates deviated from the natural diet of the human species and consequently gave rise to various forms of maladjustment.
- 8.
Working lists of the universal health needs of humans, both physical and psychosocial, based on this principle are available on www.biosensitivefutures.organd in Boyden (1987, 2004).
- 9.
- 10.
Figures for energy use provide a fair indication of the overall impact of humans on the biosphere. People in some of the developed countries today are using around 50 times as much energy per capita as was the case when farming began. Most of this increase has occurred very recently.
- 11.
See Rockström et al. (2009) for an interesting discussion of the full range of interlinked ecological changes resulting from human activities that are causes for serious concern. These authors recognise nine interlinked ‘planetary boundaries’, three of which have already been transgressed – namely climate change, rate of biodiversity loss and interference with the nitrogen and phosphorus cycles.
- 12.
In 1992 over 1,500 members of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), including 101 Nobel Prize winners, issued a statement entitled World’s scientists’ warning to humanity. The following extract from the press release that accompanied the publication of this statement summarises their position: “The scientists emphasise the urgency of the problem. As they note in their appeal, ‘No more than one or a few decades remain before the chance to avert the threats that we now confront will be lost and the prospects for humanity immeasurably diminished.”
- 13.
For further discussion on biosensitivity see Boyden (2005, 2011) and www.natsoc.org.au/biosensitivefutures
- 14.
Elsewhere, for the sake of brevity, ‘biohistorical understanding’ has been contracted to ‘biounderstanding’ (www.natsoc.org.au/biosensitivefuturesand Boyden 2011).
- 15.
The expressions ‘multidisciplinary’, ‘transdisciplinary’ and ‘interdisciplinary’ are now in common usage, and they have slightly different meanings. However, here ‘multidisciplinary’ is used to cover all three meanings.
- 16.
See, for example www.complexsystems.net.au/wiki/Complex_Dynamics_of_Urban_Systems
- 17.
Artefacts is used to mean ‘things made by humans’.
References
Boyden, S. (1973). Evolution and health. The Ecologist, 3, 304–309.
Boyden, S. (1987). Western civilization in biological perspective: Patterns in biohistory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Boyden, S. (1992). Biohistory: The interplay between human society and the biosphere – Past and present. Paris: Parthenon/UNESCO.
Boyden, S. (2004). The biology of civilisation: Understanding human culture as a force in nature. Sydney: UNSW Press.
Boyden, S. (2005). People and nature: The big picture. Canberra: Nature and Society Forum.
Boyden, S. (2011). Our place in nature, past present and future. Canberra: Nature and Society Forum. See also www.natsoc.org.au/biosensitivefutures/vision
Boyden, S., Millar, S., Newcombe, K., & O’Neill, B. (1981). The ecology of a city and its people: The case of Hong Kong. Canberra: Australian National University Press.
Boyden, S., Dovers, S., & Shirlow, M. (1990). Our biosphere under threat: Ecological realities and Australia’s opportunities. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Carson, R. (1962). Silent spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Cleave, D. L., & Campbell, G. R. (1966). Diabetes, coronary thrombosis and the saccharine disease. Bristol: John Wright.
Cochran, G., & Harpending, H. (2009). The 10,000 year explosion: How civilisation accelerated human evolution. New York: Basic Books.
Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, germs, and steel: A short history of everybody for the last 13 000 years. London: Jonathan Cape.
Diamond, J. (2005). Collapse: how societies choose to fail or survive. New York: Viking.
Dimbleby, G. W. (1972). Impact of early man on his environment. In P. R. Cox & J. Peel (Eds.), Population and pollution(pp. 7–13). London: Academic.
Dubos, R. (1968). So human an animal. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Dubos, R. (1980). Celebrations of life. New York: McGraw Hill.
Dunbar, R. (1997). Grooming, gossip, and the evolution of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Duvigneaud, P., & Denaeyer-De Smet, S. (1977). L’ecosysteme urbain bruxellois. In P. Duvigneaud & P. Kestemont (Eds.), Productivité en Belgique(Traveaux de la Section Belge du Programme Biologique International). Brussels, Paris: Edition Duculot.
Flannery, T. F. (1994). The future-eaters: An ecological history of the Australian lands and people. Melbourne: Reed Books.
Flinn, M. W. (Ed.) (1965). Report on the sanitary conditions of the labouring population of Britain (1842). Author E. Chadwick. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Frazer, W. M. (1950). A history of English public health. London: Balliere, Tindall and Cox.
Haberl, H., Winiwarter, V., Andersson, K., Ayres, R.U., Boone, C., Castillo, A., Cunfer, G., Fischer-Kowalski, M., Freundenberg, W. R., Furman, E., Kaufmann, R., Krausmann, F., Langthaler, E., Lotze-Campen, H. E., Mirtl, M., Redman, C. L., Reenbeg, A., Wardell, A., Warr, B., & Zechmeister, H. (2006). From LTER to LTSER: Conceptualising the socio-economic dimension of long-term socioecological research. Ecology and society, 11. (Online) http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art13/
Hanya, T., & Ambe, Y. (1976). A study on the metabolism of cities. In HESC Council of Japan (Ed.), Science for a better environment(pp. 228–233). Kyoto: HESC Council of Japan.
Hodder, I. (2006). The leopard’s tale: Revealing the mysteries of Çatalhöyük. London: Thames and Hudson.
Jones, R. (1969). Fire-stick farming. Australian Natural History, 16, 224.
Kennedy, C., Cuddihy, J., & Engel-Yan, J. (2007). The changing metabolism of cities. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 11, 43–59.
McDougall, I., Brown, F. H., & Fleagle, J. G. (2005). Stratigraphic placement and age of modern humans from Kibish, Ethiopia. Nature, 433, 733–736.
McMichael, A. (2001). Human frontiers, environments and disease: Past patterns and uncertain futures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mellaart, J. (1967). Çatal Hüyük: A Neolithic town in Anatolia. London: Thames and Hudson.
Newcombe, K., Kalma, J. D., & Aston, A. R. (1978). The metabolism of a city: The case of Hong Kong. Ambio, 7, 3–13.
Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2010). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. London: Bloomsbury Press.
Rendel, J. M. (1970). The time scale of genetic change. In S. Boyden (Ed.), The impact of civilisation on the biology of man(pp. 27–47). Canberra: Australian National University Press.
Rockström, J. W., Steffen, W., Noorie, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F. S., Lambin, E. F., Lenton, T. M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H. J., Nykvist, B., de Wit, C. A., Hughes, T., van der Leeuw, S., Rodhe, H., Sörlin, S., Snyder, P. K., Costanza, R., Svedin, U., Falkenmark, M., Karlberg, L., Corelli, R. W., Fabry, V. J., Hansen, J., Walker, B., Liverman, D., Richardson, K., Crutzen, P., & Foley, J. A. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461, 472–475.
Sands, R. (2005). Forestry in a global context. Cambridge, MA: CABI Publishing.
Singh, S. J., Haberl, H., Gaube, V., Grünbühel, C. M., Lisivieveci, P. J., Lutz, P., Matthews, R., Mirtl, M., Vadineanu, A., & Wildenberg, M. (2010). Conceptualising long-term socio-ecological research (LTSER): integrating the social dimension. In F. Müller et al. (Eds.), Long-term ecological research(pp. 377–398). Heidelberg: Springer.
Warren-Rhodes, K., & Koenig, A. (2001). Escalating trends in the urban metabolism of Hong Kong: 1971–1997. Ambio, 30, 429–443.
Wolman, A. (1965). The metabolism of cities. Scientific American, 213, 179–190.
Zinsser, H. (1935). Rats, lice and history. London: George Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix
1.1 A Transition Framework
This Appendix introduces a framework designed to facilitate thinking and communicating about the ecological and health implications of different options for the future. It recognises the crucial role of human culture in the system, and it is based on biohistorical principles discussed in this chapter.
The transition framework is depicted in Fig. 7.4. It is basically an extended version of the ‘biosensitivity triangle’ (Fig. 7.3) and it also incorporates some of the features of the ‘biohistorical framework’ depicted in Fig. 7.2.
1.2 Human Health Needs and Ecosystem Health Needs
In the biosensitivity triangle (Fig. 7.3), the two boxes on the right-hand side are Healthy people and Healthy ecosystems, which are our ultimate goals in planning for a biosensitive future. However, from the planner’s standpoint what is actually more relevant are the immediate requirements for health (e.g. clean air and water for human health, and maintaining biodiversity and soil fertility for ecosystem health). These health requirements are called Human health needs and Ecosystem health needs in Fig. 7.4.
Options for the future must be assessed ultimately in terms of their impacts on these health needs. Boxes 7.1and 7.2are working check lists of important health needs of humans and of ecosystems respectively.
1.3 Biophysical Environment
This set of factors has been inserted into the triangle because the impacts of human activities on the health needs of people and ecosystems are sometimes indirect, in that the ultimate effect on health is the result of changes brought about in the biophysical environment.
For example, the human activities that result in the release into the environment of CFCs lead to chemical reactions in the atmosphere and the destruction of ozone in the stratosphere. This change in turn results in an increase in the ultraviolet radiation at the Earth’s surface, which interferes with the health both of ecosystems and of humans.
Another example is provided by cases when the application of artificial fertilisers to farmland leads to eutrophication in creeks and rivers. The consequent excessive growth of algae results in anoxia in the aquatic ecosystem and then to loss of biodiversity and also to the production of toxins which can cause illness, even death, in humans and other large animals.
On the other hand, of course, many undesirable impacts of human activities on human and ecosystem health are direct – such as the effects of tobacco smoking on human health and the effects of oil spills on local fauna.
Recognising the crucial role of culture in determining the health both of humans and of the ecosystems on which they depend, Human societyhas been divided into two categories: Biophysical optionsand Cultural options.
1.3.1 Biophysical Options
Biophysical options include the biological and physical aspects of human situations that can be influenced by people’s decisions and that directly or indirectly affect the all-important health needs of humans and ecosystems.
Biophysical options are subdivided into four sub-categories:
-
Human population– such as numbers of people, population density, population age structure
-
Human activities– collective– such as manufacturing, farming, military activities and transportation.
-
Human activities– individuals– such as lifestyle options, travel patterns, physical exercise and consumer behaviour
-
Artefacts Footnote 17– such as buildings, roads, machines, vehicles and furniture.
1.3.2 Cultural Options
Human activities are to a large extent governed by Societal arrangements,such as the prevailing economic system, governmental regulations and the institutional structure of society.
These social arrangements are in turn determined by the worldview, assumptions and priorities of the dominant Culture.
For example, the cultural assumption that the best thing for our society is continuing economic growth, involving ever-increasing use of resources and energy, is a major factor affecting governmental economic policies, and consequently influencing human activities and, ultimately, the health of our planet’s ecosystems.
1.4 Making Use of the Transition Framework
The transition framework emphasises the fact that the ultimate objective in planning for a biosensitive society is the health both of humans and of the ecosystems on which they depend.
The framework provides a useful starting point for assessing policy options for the future – from the level of individuals and families through to the level of national governments.
In our own work we have made use of the framework to construct a check list of the essential changes that will be necessary in different parts of the total system for the achievement of biosensitivity (see www.natsoc.org.au/biosensitivefutures/vision).
Box 7.1 Human Health Needs
This working list of human health needs is based on the evolutionary health principle and our knowledge of the conditions of life in the long natural, or hunter-gatherer phase of human existence.
-
Physical
-
Clean air
-
Clean water
-
Healthy (natural) diet
-
Healthy (natural) physical activity
-
Noise levels within the natural range
-
Minimal contact with microbial or metazoan parasites and pathogens
-
Natural contact with environmental non-pathogenic microbes
-
Electromagnetic radiation at natural levels
-
Protection from extremes of weather
-
-
Psychosocial
-
Emotional support networks
-
Conviviality
-
Co-operative small-group interaction
-
Creative behaviour
-
Learning and practising manual skills
-
Recreational activities
-
Variety in daily experience
-
Sense of personal involvement/purpose
-
Sense of belonging
-
Sense of responsibility
-
Sense of challenge and achievement
-
Sense of comradeship and love
-
Sense of security
-
Box 7.2 The Health Needs of Ecosystems
In light of our knowledge of the effects of various human activities on ecosystem health at the present time, we can put together a check list of ecosystem health needs, as follows:
-
The absence of polluting gases or particles in the atmosphere which significantly disrupt natural cycles and processes and change the climate
-
The absence of polluting gases or particles in the atmosphere which interfere with living processes (e.g. particulate hydrocarbons from combustion of diesel fuel, sulphur oxides)
-
Box 7.2 (continued) The absence of substances in the atmosphere (e.g. CFCs) that result in destruction of the ozone layer in the stratosphere that protects living organisms from the ultraviolet radiation from the sun
-
The absence of chemical compounds in oceans, lakes, rivers and streams in concentrations harmful to living organisms (e.g. persistent organic pollutants – POPs)
-
No ionising radiation that can interfere with the normal processes of life and photosynthesis
-
The absence of chemical compounds in the soil that can interfere with the normal processes of life (e.g. persistent organic pollutants, heavy metals)
-
Soil loss no greater than soil formation (i.e. no soil erosion)
-
No increase in soil salinity and soil sodicity
-
The maintenance of the biological integrity of soil (i.e. maintaining a rich content of organic matter)
-
Intact nutrient cycles in agricultural ecosystems over long periods of time (requiring return of nutrients to farmland)
-
The maintenance of biodiversity in regional ecosystems (including aquatic ecosystems)
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Boyden, S. (2013). Human Biohistory. In: Singh, S., Haberl, H., Chertow, M., Mirtl, M., Schmid, M. (eds) Long Term Socio-Ecological Research. Human-Environment Interactions, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1177-8_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1177-8_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1176-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1177-8
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)