Paper short abstract:

From scrutinizing the temporality of nature underlying the concept of neobiota a historical theory emerges directing attention to: the synchronization of natural and human history; conveying agency rather than teleology; ending the presence rather than preventing the future of the Anthropocene.

Paper long abstract:

Ensuing from my dissertation concerned with the temporality of nature in the Anthropocene as inscribed in the discourse and practices around neobiota is an emerging historical theory.

The concept of the Anthropocene has unseated traditional understandings of time – both in the source materials of contemporary history and in historical research. In the former, the temporal unsettling is oftentimes presented as an acceleration of an "original" trajectory of natural history by interference of human history. The latter perceives of it as a potential for pluralizing temporalities. I argue that a synchronization of natural and human history is lacking in both and urgently needed.

Such a synchronization averts the anthropocentrism lurking in the concept of the Anthropocene. It is crucial, however, to beware of a teleology framing the upheavals of the present as a "natural" step of evolution. Contemporary history can contribute to this end: By uncovering the historical embeddedness of the Anthropocene, an awareness of human and nonhuman agency to bring about a sustainable future may be gained. Consequently, I theorize the Anthropocene not as a barely started geological epoch, but rather as an ongoing sixth mass extinction event.

This definition can shift efforts from preventing extinctions by preserving the "original" nature of the Holocene to ending them against the backdrop of the irreversible presence of the Anthropocene. Theorizing (neo-)biota forces us to address the different temporalities underlying frameworks of "preventing" an adverse future by conserving the past vis à vis "ending" an adverse present by creating a sustainable future.