The Working Group on the Anthropocene: Summary of evidence and interim recommendations

Abstract

Since 2009, the Working Group on the ‘Anthropocene’ (or, commonly, AWG for Anthropocene Working Group), has been critically analysing the case for formalization of this proposed but still informal geological time unit. The study to date has mainly involved establishing the overall nature of the Anthropocene as a potential chronostratigraphic/geochronologic unit, and exploring the stratigraphic proxies, including several that are novel in geology, that might be applied to its characterization and definition. A preliminary summary of evidence and interim recommendations was presented by the Working Group at the 35th International Geological Congress in Cape Town, South Africa, in August 2016, together with results of voting by members of the AWG indicating the current balance of opinion on major questions surrounding the Anthropocene. The majority opinion within the AWG holds the Anthropocene to be stratigraphically real, and recommends formalization at epoch/series rank based on a mid-20th century boundary. Work is proceeding towards a formal proposal based upon selection of an appropriate Global boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP), as well as auxiliary stratotypes. Among the array of proxies that might be used as a primary marker, anthropogenic radionuclides associated with nuclear arms testing are the most promising; potential secondary markers include plastic, carbon isotope patterns and industrial fly ash. All these proxies have excellent global or near-global correlation potential in a wide variety of sedimentary bodies, both marine and non-marine

Subdividing the Holocene Series/Epoch: formalization of stages/ages and subseries/subepochs, and designation of GSSPs and auxiliary stratotypes

“…This still remains the case today because, while discussions continue on when the Anthropocene began (Ellis, ; Lewis and Maslin, ; Zalasiewicz et al ., ); on the approach that should be used to define its onset (Edgeworth et al ., ; Ruddiman, ); on what status it should have as a geological unit (Waters et al ., ); on what type of GSSP would be appropriate (Waters et al ., ); and, indeed, on whether the Anthropocene should be formalized at all (Finney and Edwards, ; Rull, ; Walker et al ., ; Zalasiewicz et al ., ), a consensus is now emerging within the SQS Anthropocene Working Group that the Anthropocene should indeed be formally defined by means of a GSSP, should hold the rank of series/epoch and should have a starting point in the mid‐20th century (Zalasiewicz et al ., ). The mid‐20th century is preferred because it coincides with the so‐called “Great Acceleration” (Steffen et al ., ) and is marked by a stratigraphic signal of radiogenic fallout from thermonuclear weapons testing that began in the early 1950 s (Waters et al ., , Zalasiewicz et al ., ; Waters et al ., ).…”

Parametrization of intensive global climate change indicators on a level of sovereign states and governments

“…Since then, a group of 26 scientists reported on reaching their conclusions and submitted their recommendations to the Working Group at the 35th International Geological Congress in Cape Town, South Africa, in August 2016. 2 The majority of the committee favors the mid 20th century to be the dividing line between the Holocene and the Anthropocene with the radioactive nuclei that result from the first nuclear testing to serve as a long lasting markers for the boundary. More recently, the IPCC in its latest report 3 (http:// IPCC.ch/reports/SR15) decided to adopt the designation as the epoch of the anthropogenic climate change.…”

Terraced Landscapes on Portofino Promontory (Italy): Identification, Geo-Hydrological Hazard and Management

“…Then terraces, as integral elements of the landscape, are both Cultural Heritage features but, at the same time, are possible area of shallow instability whose effects have been progressively worsening after the modification of the social and economic conditions starting from the second half of the XIX century the Industrial Revolution caused the initial abandonment of rural areas that Then terraces, as integral elements of the landscape, are both Cultural Heritage features but, at the same time, are possible area of shallow instability whose effects have been progressively worsening after the modification of the social and economic conditions starting from the second half of the XIX Water 2020, 12,435 3 of 20 century the Industrial Revolution caused the initial abandonment of rural areas that accelerated after the WW II in large areas of Europe. In that period, it was the beginning of the Anthropocene [41].…”