Ecomodernism is an environmental philosophy which argues that humans can protect nature by using technology to "decouple" anthropogenic impacts from the natural world. Ecomodernism is an emergent school of thought from many environmentalist scholars, critics, philosophers, and activists. In their 2015 manifesto, 18 self-professed ecomodernists—including scholars from the Breakthrough Institute, Harvard University, Jadavpur University, and the Long Now Foundation—defined their philosophy as such:
Contents
"...we affirm one long-standing environmental ideal, that humanity must shrink its impacts on the environment to make more room for nature, while we reject another, that human societies must harmonize with nature to avoid economic and ecological collapse."Overview
Ecomodernism explicitly embraces substituting natural ecological services with energy, technology, and synthetic solutions. Among other things, ecomodernists embrace agricultural intensification, genetically modified and synthetic foods, fish from aquaculture farms, desalination and waste recycling, urbanization, and substituting denser energy fuels for less dense fuels (e.g. substituting coal for wood and, ultimately, getting all energy from progressively lower carbon technologies such as nuclear power and advanced renewables). Key among the goals of an ecomodern environmental ethic is the use of technology to intensify human activity and make more room for wild nature.
Ecomodernism emerged from various debates, including the debate over when homo sapiens became a dominant force acting on Earth's ecosystems (proposed start-dates to the so-called Anthropocene range from the advent of agriculture 10,000 years ago to the invention of atomic weapons in the 20th century). Other debates that form the foundation of ecomodernism include how best to protect natural environments, how to accelerate decarbonization to mitigate climate change, and how to accelerate the economic and social development of the world's poor.
In these debates, ecomodernism distinguishes itself from other schools of thought, including sustainable development, ecological economics, degrowth or the steady-state economy, population reduction, laissez-faire economics, the "soft energy" path, and central planning. Ecomodernism considers many of its core ideologies borrowed from American pragmatism, political ecology, evolutionary economics, and modernism.
An Ecomodernist Manifesto
In April 2015, a group of 18 self-described ecomodernists collectively published "An Ecomodernist Manifesto." The authors were:
As the authors write,
"Although we have to date written separately, our views are increasingly discussed as a whole. We call ourselves ecopragmatists and ecomodernists. We offer this statement to affirm and to clarify our views and to describe our vision for putting humankind’s extraordinary powers in the service of creating a good Anthropocene."Reception and criticism
Several prominent environmental journalists have praised the Ecomodernist Manifesto. At the New York Times, Eduardo Porter wrote approvingly of Ecomodernism’s alternative approach to sustainable development. In an article titled "Manifesto Calls for an End to 'People Are Bad' Environmentalism," Slate's Eric Holthaus wrote "It's inclusive, it's exciting, and it gives environmentalists something to fight for for a change." The popular science journal Nature editorialized the Manifesto.
Common criticisms of ecomodernism have included its relative lack of consideration for justice, ethics, and political power. In "A sympathetic diagnosis of the Ecomodernist Manifesto," Paul Robbins and Sarah A. Moore describe the similarities and points of departure between Ecomodernism and political ecology.
Some environmentalists have also characterized ecomodernism as an excuse to continue the exploitation of natural resources for human gains. A major strand of criticism towards Ecomodernism comes from proponents of degrowth or the steady-state economy. 18 ecological economists published a long rejoinder titled "A Degrowth Response to an Ecomodernist Manifesto," writing "the ecomodernists provide neither a very inspiring blueprint for future development strategies nor much in the way of solutions to our environmental and energy woes."
At the Breakthrough Institute's annual Dialogue in June 2015, several prominent environmental scholars offered a critique of Ecomodernism. Bruno Latour argued that the modernity celebrated in the Ecomodernist Manifesto is a myth. Jenny Price argued that the Manifesto offered a simplistic view of "humanity" and "nature," which she said are "made invisible" by talking about them in such broad terms.
Save Diablo Canyon campaign
In January 2016, several authors of the An Ecomodernist Manifesto – including Robert Stone, David Keith, Stewart Brand, Michael Shellenberger and Mark Lynas – as well as Kerry Emanuel, James Hansen, Steven Pinker, Stephen Tindale and Burton Richter; signed an open letter urging not to close the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant. It was addressed to California Governor Jerry Brown, CEO of Pacific Gas & Electric and California state officials.
Save Illinois Nuclear
In April 2016, Shellenberger, alongside other scientists and conservationists - including James Hansen, Stewart Brand, Nobel Laureate Burton Richter, Kerry Emanuel and Mark Lynas - signed an open letter urging against the closure of the six operating nuclear power plants in Illinois: Braidwood; Byron; Clinton; Dresden; LaSalle; and Quad Cities. Together, they account for Illinois ranking first in the United States in 2010 in both nuclear capacity and nuclear generation, and generation from its nuclear power plants accounted for 12 percent of the United States total. In 2010, 48% of Illinois' electricity was generated using nuclear power.