Search

Modern humanity has changed the biosphere at a global scale, threatening its own sustainability. It is claimed that through technology humans maximize the extraction of energy from the natural system towards their own benefit, with rates of appropriation that surpass the time-scales for systemic adaptation. This time-decoupled coevolutionary dynamic is at the core of human societal unsustainability. Here, we developed in silico experiments of an open energy-based flowing network toy model of natural systems and study the effects that greedy evolutionary strategies, resembling human societal demands, have upon the performance and scarcity tolerance of the system. We aim to determine the flexibility that those biased evolutionary dynamics have for matching or surpassing natural evolution outcomes. We studied four different indexes of system's growth and development (total system throughflow (TST), average mutual information, ascendency and entropy difference) and compare their scarcity tolerance and performance outcomes with respect to four different greedy scenarios. The results showed that greedy strategies rarely surpassed the tolerance and performance achieved by natural systemic evolution. The nature of the greedy scenarios developed were closely related to increases in TST and therefore, we emphasized this comparison. Here, the maximum percentage of greedy networks capable of surpassing natural dynamics was around one-third (approx. 35%). However, results suggest the existence of a space parameter where local increases of energy flow can outperform the outcomes of natural systemic evolution, but no evident network property seems to characterize those greedy networks. A mild inverse relationship was found between the number of links that greedy nodes have towards the output and their capacity to outpass the control evolution. As many of the human societal effect upon biospheric processes have dissipative byproducts, knowing that such dynamics might diminish the systems tolerance and performance suggest care in their (ab)use. This article is part of the theme issue 'Evolution and sustainability: gathering the strands for an Anthropocene synthesis'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biodiversity is sustained by and is essential to the services that ecosystems provide. Different species would use these services in different ways, or adaptive strategies, which are sustained in time by continuous innovations. Using this framework, we postulate a model for a biological species (Homo sapiens) in a finite world where innovations, aimed at increasing the flux of ecosystem services (a measure of habitat quality), increase with population size, and have positive effects on the generation of new innovations (positive feedback) as well as costs in terms of negatively affecting the provision of ecosystem services. We applied this model to human populations, where technological innovations are driven by cumulative cultural evolution. Our model shows that depending on the net impact of a technology on the provision of ecosystem services ( u), and the strength of technological feedback ( j), different regimes can result. Among them, the human population can fill the entire planet while maximizing their well-being, but not exhaust ecosystem services. However, this outcome requires positive or green technologies that increase the provision of ecosystem services with few negative externalities or environmental costs, and that have a strong positive feedback in generating newtechnologies of the same kind. If the feedback is small, then the technological stock can collapse together with the human population. Scenarios where technological innovations generate net negative impacts may be associated with a limited technological stock as well as a limited human population at equilibrium and the potential for collapse. The only way to fill the planet with humans under this scenario of negative technologies is by reducing the technological stock to a minimum. Otherwise, the only feasible equilibrium is associated with population collapse. Our model points out that technological innovations per se may not help humans to grow and dominate the planet. Instead, different possibilities unfold for our future depending on their impact on the environment and on further innovation. This article is part of the themed issue 'Process and pattern in innovations from cells to societies'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]