The concept of the Anthropocene, initially proposed in 2000 by scientists Paul Crutzen and Eugene Stoermer, posits that Earth has entered a new geological epoch, defined by humanity’s massive, pervasive influence on the planet. The Anthropocene succeeds the Holocene, a roughly 12,000-year epoch of relative ecological stability during which human civilization arose. The idea of a new geological epoch is scientifically controversial, but the concept usefully underscores humanity’s enormous, profoundly destabilizing planetary impact, strikingly exhibited by climate change and biodiversity loss.

The Anthropocene concept has generated considerable interest in the humanities and social sciences, because it breaches traditional distinctions between humanity and nature and also challenges the fundamental organization of society. With the biosphere now in ongoing flux, societies must make continuous, radical adjustments and adopt flexibilities hitherto thought unnecessary.

In this context John S. Dryzek and Jonathan Pickering offer The Politics of the Anthropocene, providing a welcome contribution to the growing Anthropocene literature in environmental political theory. Written in accessible language and offering sufficient background for the layperson, their concise volume appeals not only to environmental political theorists but also to a broader public. Moreover, the book nicely brings the reader up to date on scholarly and political debates regarding not only the Anthropocene but also global climate politics; climate, intergenerational, and interspecies justice; the meaning and value of biodiversity; the definition of sustainability; and the viability of democracy in the face of environmental challenges.

The authors’ argument is twofold: (1) the institutions we have inherited from the Holocene are mired in a pathological path dependency favoring ecologically destructive outcomes, and (2) a politics of the Anthropocene must emphasize reflexivity, “the capacity of structures, systems, and sets of ideas to question their own core commitments, and if necessary change themselves” (p. 17). They focus on ecological reflexivity, which entails “the incorporation into human institutions of better ways to listen to ecological systems” and “an ability to rethink what core values such as justice, sustainability, and democracy mean in the context of an active and unstable Earth system” (p. 39). Ecological reflexivity “responds to signals from the Earth system, and has the foresight to anticipate potentially catastrophic changes in the system” (p. 18).

Dryzek and Pickering’s discussion of path dependency effectively illuminates how the state and the market systematically frustrate attempts to address environmental problems. Both are Holocene institutions that “take for granted the presence of the non-human world and the ecological systems in which human societies are embedded”; they regard the natural world largely as a resource (p. 24). The authors argue, “States typically have a priority for economic growth that subordinates ecological concerns, and a preoccupation with sovereignty that impedes global collective action. Capitalist markets for their part are equally addicted to material growth” (p. 30). The pathological path dependency of states and markets involves “feedback mechanisms that systematically repress information about the condition of the Earth system, and systematically prioritize narrowly economic concerns” (p. 23). Despite supposed innovations such as green capitalism, the basic contours of the system do not change, and fundamental threats like climate change or biodiversity loss go unaddressed.

Environmentalism itself also reflects Holocene thinking, seeking “some baseline condition of environments or natural systems that can be preserved, conserved, or restored.” By contrast, “in the Anthropocene, the condition of the system is constantly moving. We cannot rewind ecosystems back to a state untouched by humans” (p. 9). Environmental policies must “cultivate conditions for flourishing into the future rather than returning to the past” (p. 9).

Given the dynamic nature of the Anthropocene and of reflexivity itself, “no institutional solution may be stable for very long” (p. 11). Consequently, the authors reject the idea of “designing institutional blueprints,” because “it is more productive to think about changing fundamental institutional dynamics, starting from where we are now” (p. 48). They do offer some modest institutional and policy recommendations. They deemphasize actors, like the nation-state, international organizations, or corporations, that have either perpetuated or failed to address our ecological crisis (p. 54). Instead, they tout alternative political pathways, including the increasing role of networked subnational units, such as municipalities, in initiating climate action (pp. 54, 143–45).

In developing the concept of ecological reflexivity, they also instructively reevaluate core political and environmental concepts, particularly justice, sustainability, and democracy. They land in somewhat familiar territory, given Dryzek’s own long-standing theoretical engagements, by advocating a deliberative democratic approach (pp.128–50) “responsive to signals from the natural world” (pp. 17, 112–14). They envision a formative sphere including experts and ordinary citizens and also nonhuman nature (pp. 72, 131–36, 145–49). This sphere “can be thought of as the sum of activity encompassing the creation, questioning, and development of principles for collective action” (p. 128).

This is a highly recommended volume. However, inevitably with any such ambitious project, Dryzek and Pickering fall short at times, specifically on two points. First, they take an excessively top-down perspective. On the one hand, they answer a key critique of the Anthropocene concept, advanced by Giovanna Di Chiro (“Environmental Justice and the Anthropocene Meme,” in Teena Gabrielson, Cheryl Hall, John Meyer, and David Schlosberg, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Environmental Political Theory, 2016). Di Chiro argues that the concept presents a top-down view of humanity as an undifferentiated planetary actor and insufficiently recognizes how our environmental crisis is largely the fault of the world’s affluent, especially in developed nations, who have exploited not only nonhuman nature but also vast populations of human beings. Dryzek and Pickering rightly argue that the Anthropocene concept can recognize differences in responsibility and also incorporate justice (pp. 58–81). They also emphasize the key role of marginalized, vulnerable populations in the formative sphere and point to promising grassroots efforts in developing countries (pp. 136–38). However, a kernel of Di Chiro’s critique remains. Dryzek and Pickering focus on ecological reflexivity at a global scale, driven by experts and international organizations, particularly with regard to deliberations around climate change, sustainability, and biodiversity. Although they laud grassroots and municipal movements as subverting pathological path dependency, they accord less coverage and depth to these diverse, bottom-up efforts and their potential for generating new political pathways.

Second, Dryzek and Pickering put perhaps excessive faith in conceptually driven change through actors like “discourse entrepreneurs” (pp. 18, 105) while seemingly discounting structural barriers and the strong political response needed to overcome them. They acknowledge that pathological path dependency “works in part through impersonal structural forces” (p. 29), but see such structures potentially giving way to “formative agents” who “give form to what justice, sustainability, and related concepts should mean in practice” (p. 105). They list various types of formative agency, but emphasize “the use of language in creating and questioning meanings” (p. 109). “Ideas underpin institutions” (p. 109), they say, and can also motivate social change (p. 110). Yet the authors emphasize the dangerous situation we face, including the potential for “catastrophic shifts in the Earth system” (p. 10). Given the obdurate structures and path dependencies promoting environmental destruction, Dryzek and Pickering might put greater emphasis than they do on a more forceful, urgent type of formative agency, namely protest (p. 114). This could include mass movements, civil disobedience, and even, at the extreme, revolutionary action.

However, these are relatively minor criticisms of a volume that manages to be eminently readable, comprehensive, and insightfully provocative. The Politics of the Anthropocene should adorn the shelf of any scholar or layperson interested in political theory, environmental politics, and the long-term political implications of the climate crisis and the Anthropocene.