Human extinction risk and uncertainty: Assessing conditions for action

Tonn, Bruce; Stiefel, Dorian

doi:10.1016/j.futures.2014.07.001

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Speculation on the matter of our own demise is not, as might perhaps appear to be the case, simply the domain of doomsayers, fear-mongers and madmen, (see especially Tonn and MacGregor, 2009; Tonn and Stiefel, 2014; Bostrom, 2009). Perhaps the most eminent such commentator is the late Frank Fenner, a world renowned virologist who helped eradicate smallpox and who states:Homo sapiens will become extinct, perhaps within 100 years […] A lot of other animals will, too.…”

Section: Accounts Of Human Extinctionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perhaps the Dodo should have accounted for human beings? Accounts of humanity and (its) extinction

Gray

Milne

2018

AAAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: We intend to offer a counter-narrative to those accounts of specific species extinction. Our intention is to offer a counter narrative that places humanity's ways of organising at the core and recognises that only fundamental re-appraisal of (western) humanity's current taken-for-granted narratives offers any hope for biodiversity and sustainability. Thus we seek to offer a narrative that might challenge producers of accounts of all sorts to reconsider the context and level of resolution of their accounts. We do this by first arguing that humankind is the root cause of most (if not all) current species extinctions. We then argue that such extinctions represent one reason why humanity might itself be threatened with extinction or indeed, why human extinction might be a good thing. We need new accounts and utopian possibilities with which to imagine other, better, futures.Design/methodological/approach: The piece is an essay which assembles a wide range of literature in order to support its contentions. Findings:There are many individual accounts of species which explore the (albeit very serious) symptoms of a problem without, we maintain, examining the systematic source of the problem. The source problem is western mankind's organisation and somewhat taciturn conception of humanity. There is a lack of accounts offering new possibilities. Research Limitations/Implications:The piece is an essay and, consequently limited to the quality of the argument presented. The essay suggests that the principal implications relate to (i) how producers of counter-accounts frame their construction of accounts and (ii) how accounts of species extinction need to be more cognizant of underlying causes.Practical Implications: Without substantial change, planetary ecology, including humanity, is very seriously threatened. Imagining a plausible future is a most practical act of faith.Social Implications: The essay suggests that as accountants we might think to approach our counter-accounts with a lower level of resolution: one that is directed towards a more challenging notion of what it is to be human. Originality/value: Whilst building upon the growing sophistication in our understanding of (new) accounts and responding to the emerging literatures on biodiversity, species extinction and utopian vision we offer what we believe to be a unique suggestion in the accounting literature about the extinction of mankind.Key Words: Humanity; Extinction; Narratives; Accounts; Biodiversity; Utopian Method

show abstract

Section: Accounts Of Human Extinctionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perhaps the Dodo should have accounted for human beings? Accounts of humanity and (its) extinction

Gray

Milne

2018

AAAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… To be able to prevent natural risks, we need research aimed at identifying potential hazards, understanding their dynamics, and eventually develop ways to reduce their rate of occurrence. To avoid unseen and latent risks, we can promote norms such as appropriate risk management principles at institutions that engage in plausibly risky activities; note that there is an extensive literature on rivalling risk management principles (e.g. Foster et al, ; O'Riordan and Cameron, ; Sandin, ; Sunstein, ; Wiener, ), especially in the face of catastrophic risks (Baum, ; Bostrom, ; Buchholz and Schymura, ; Sunstein, , ; Tonn, ; Tonn and Stiefel, ) – advocating for any particular principle is beyond the scope of this article. See also Jebari () for a discussion of how heuristics from engineering safety may help prevent unseen, latent, and accident risks.…”

Section: Classification By Origin: Types Of Prevention Failuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defence in Depth Against Human Extinction: Prevention, Response, Resilience, and Why They All Matter

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We look at classifying extinction risks in three different ways, which affect how we can intervene to reduce risk. First, how does it start causing damage? Second, how does it reach the scale of a global catastrophe? Third, how does it reach everyone? In all of these three phases there is a defence layer that blocks most risks: First, we can prevent catastrophes from occurring. Second, we can respond to catastrophes before they reach a global scale. Third, humanity is resilient against extinction even in the face of global catastrophes. The largest probability of extinction is posed when all of these defences are weak, that is, by risks we are unlikely to prevent, unlikely to successfully respond to, and unlikely to be resilient against. We find that it's usually best to invest significantly into strengthening all three defence layers. We also suggest ways to do so tailored to the classes of risk we identify. Lastly, we discuss the importance of underlying risk factorsevents or structural conditions that may weaken the defence layers even without posing a risk of immediate extinction themselves. Policy implications• We can usually best reduce extinction risk by splitting our budget between all defence layers.• We should include measures that reduce whole classes of risks, such as research uncovering currently unseen risk. We should also address risk factors that would not cause extinction themselves but weaken our defences, for example, bad global governance.

show abstract

“…What is missing is a framework for the third component of unintended consequences, the unintended-unanticipated consequences, that incorporates the general-philosophical, applied, technology assessment, and categorization literatures to explicitly and anticipatorily move UUCs into the AIC category, cyclically over time. From this cyclical work, there emerges the content for all of the constructs, including the magnitude of likely social actions to mitigate unmet obligations (Tonn and Stiefel 2014) and the impacts on obligations to future generations (Bell 1993; Slaughter 1994; Tonn 2018).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Figure 2, existential risk is captured by the x -axis and the effort that humanity may expend to deal with each level of risk is depicted on the y -axis. Responses fall into six categories, from do nothing (I) to extreme war footing (VI) (Tonn and Stiefel 2014). Category I, do nothing, and Category II, policy nudges, are the prevailing responses to existential risk in particular and the AUCs and UUCs of science and technology in general.…”

Section: Research Approach and Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anticipating the Unanticipated-Unintended Consequences of Scientific and Technological Purposive Actions

Tonn¹,

Stiefel

2018

World Futures Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As science and technology change our world, anticipating the unintended consequences becomes critical. This article presents a framework for identifying unintended consequences, especially unanticipated-unintended consequences, and prioritizing the necessary actions to mitigate or adapt. Content for the framework, and the distinctions among the anticipated-intended, anticipated-unintended, and unanticipated-unintended consequences, are generated with four scenario types: evolution over time, market-saturation, interventions in tightly coupled systems, and existential risk of human extinction. To validate the framework, each scenario type is applied to historical and emerging technologies to anticipate the unintended consequences, including the causes, initiators, effects, actions to mitigate or adapt, and unmet obligations to future generations.

show abstract

Human extinction risk and uncertainty: Assessing conditions for action

Cited by 11 publications

References 18 publications

Perhaps the Dodo should have accounted for human beings? Accounts of humanity and (its) extinction

Perhaps the Dodo should have accounted for human beings? Accounts of humanity and (its) extinction

Defence in Depth Against Human Extinction: Prevention, Response, Resilience, and Why They All Matter

Anticipating the Unanticipated-Unintended Consequences of Scientific and Technological Purposive Actions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About