Human-plant relationships in the Anthropocene

Kamil Dvořák

CSOn4013 Anthropocene: Violence in Places, Worlds and Earth, Masaryk University


Nowadays, there is more and more talk about the fact that we are living in the Anthropocene era,
although this is not necessarily what is being referred to directly. The global warming of the
planet and man's influence on it through CO2 emissions are becoming increasingly important. This is
being referred to in various connotations, ranging from the personal responsibility of the
individual in a consumerist and consumerist way of life, to governmental and supranational
policies. The European Green Deal, for example, seeks to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 through
a political agenda to reduce CO2 emissions (European Council, 2024).

There is talk of the need to be environmentally friendly, green and sustainable in urban
lifestyles, cities and the environment in which cities are located. It is spoken in the context of
the challenges that are present in urban local landscapes, whether it is the ageing population,
fishing in coastal areas, or the problems associated with local landscape microclimate systems such
as the warming of the local landscape or the loss of water in a given place (Bruyninckx, 2021). It
refers to a system of interacting environmental and energy influences that are interdependent and
need to be systematically corrected and addressed. It is the reflection along the lines of the
interconnectedness of the various systems of planet Earth, the consideration of its unstoppable
unending planetary flow of energies, and their mutual influence, together with the influence of
humans on this flow, that characterizes the consideration of life in the context of the
Anthropocene (Hamilton, 2020; Vine, 2018)

Although the concept has been varied, expanded and adopted by other scientific disciplines, it is
originally a geological concept. The notion that we have entered the Anthropocene was first
suggested by Paul Crutzen at the turn of this millennium (Crutzen & Stoermer, 2000). The origins of
the Anthropocene are a matter of dispute. For some, the Anthropocene begins with the start of
agriculture, when the landscape began to be significantly transformed for cultivation and farming.
Others date the beginning of the Anthropocene to the Industrial Revolution, when humans began to
use technical rationality and planning to process resources to power machines and to make more use
of and emit carbon stored in the earth. It was from the late 18th century that increased
concentrations of CO2 and methane appeared in the polar ice (Crutzen & Stoermer, 2000). It is also
a period of great acceleration, with rapidly increasing atmospheric CO2 concentrations, rising
temperatures, species extinctions and biodiversity loss (Bonneuil & Fressoz, 2017).

In thinking about the future, both contemporary pop culture and scholarly culture concerned with
the Anthropocene and future urbanism often focus on people in cities. According to studies of
future population growth and their geographic location, 6 billion people will live in them by 2050.
This is equivalent to 85% of the predicted number of people at that time (OECD, 2015). Today,
around 56% of the population already lives in an urbanised area (Ritchie et al., 2024) , and we can
observe the impact of humans on the transformation of biodiversity in these areas. A French study
in 2008 shows that plants in urban areas undergo evolutionary adaptation to the city. They observe
this in the plant Crepis sancta, which has both dispersing and non-dispersing seeds for its
reproduction. They find that dispersal seeds of Crepis sancta are 55% less likely to become
established in built-up areas than non-dispersal seeds. That there is a higher proportion of
non-dispersing seeds in the built-up area than in the undeveloped area, and there is an increase in
the size of these seeds. They also estimate that this evolution corresponds to approximately 5-12
generations of selection (Cheptou et al., 2008). The city is a place full of networks and
relationships that are both human and inhuman. A network that is spun by the act of human agency in
urban construction, and the actors of the plant kingdom that adapt to it.

In the following section, I therefore discuss 3 types of relations between the urban environment
and plant non-human actors. These are the relations between humans and the vague terrain, the
relationship between the city and the vegetation through planning, and the relationship between
humans and the vegetation that emerges from below and has a community character.


Relations between the city and the vague terrain

An example of a place that is in the web of human-plant relationships is the urban wilderness in
Knoxville. This is a collection of land owned by the city, county, state, non-profit foundations,
and private owners. The area is 688 acres around the Tennessee River. These lands have been used
for agriculture, logging, mining, or homesteads. However, their use in this way ceased within a few
decades, which may have begun nature's reclaiming of the area. This part of the city also did not
experience as much urban growth, and therefore human management, compared to the rest of the city,
due to the hilly terrain. As a result, these lands have undergone many decades of ecological
restoration (Zefferman et al., 2018).

Such a place has the potential to provide many social and ecological functions simultaneously. This
space thus serves as a place for biodiversity conservation. 724 unique plant and animal taxa were
identified here in the initial phase of the intervention, including a significant number of plant
and bird species. 250 plant species and 193 bird species were identified. In addition to these
ecological functions, the area is also intersected by many social functions, such as recreational
activities in the form of hiking and mountain biking. In addition, the site allows for outdoor
experiences, environmental education and ecosystem services (Zefferman et al., 2018). It is a space
that has been abandoned as the site of a network of rather human relations and is being
rediscovered in the context of networks of interaction, care and conversation between human and
non-human actors. However, this conversation with the rediscovered place is interwoven with power
relations as the place is further intentionally managed by humans to connect networks of human and
non-human plant actors. A place that, once rediscovered, has become a project, and a target for
intervention and management. However, this management is diverse due to the influence of the
different owners of the site and their different objectives for the use of the site. And thus, in
turn, to the different ways of managing the place.

There is targeted monitoring of invasive plants, and these have been found to make up approximately
half of the total area. It is also interesting to note the high appreciation of the site by
visitors, most of whom are people from the surrounding area. 98% of visitors wanted to see the site
expanded. In turn, 93% of visitors did not wish for further vegetation removal and modification
interventions, despite the need to remove invasive plants being highlighted to them. This suggests
that the value lies in the wild character of the site (Zefferman et al., 2018). This place is
acknowledged to be wild and untamed, yet there are attempts to tame and domesticate this wildness
for the purpose of its convenient use by man. Trails and bike paths are being built to create a
boundary between the space of people and the space of untamed nature off the roads.

A different conception of urban overgrowth and its relationship with people is found in the
orientation to bush and bushiness found in Město naruby (Haluzík, 2020). Here, the bush is
perceived as a natural-contracultural (underground) entity that reaches out and takes everything it
can reach, often associated with unused brownfields and vague terrain. Vague terrain here
represents a space excluded by the urban order. A space that is vaguely 'empty and uninteresting'.
A space that is a blind spot in our view of our home and the urban landscape, but which is also
shaped by the character and product of urban planning and building. Bushiness here is about
discovering and piercing this vegetation and terrain (mostly on the periphery) and grasping it. The
bushman is one who experiences the inner recesses of the bush. The one who moves through the bush
and is not a mere visitor and observer of the place. He is not one who comes and goes without
leaving the imprint of his temporary presence. The bushman alters the terrain by his stay and is
thus part of this vague habitat. It leaves behind legible traces, such as the stripped layers of
leaves after roosting, fire rings, traces of passage through the soft stems of reeds and nettles,
apple bites. In doing so, this individual, albeit unconsciously, leaves traces and symbols and
instructions on how to use such places (Haluzík, 2020).

The ecological function of the landscape is emphasized in the context of Knoxville. In the context
of bushiness, on the other hand, the social and phenomenological context is highlighted. While the
vegetation on the Knoxville site is shaped, organized and tended. In bushiness, the vague place is
used, felt and co-created with its own habitat. It is not only the landscapes that are wild and
untamed, but also the variety of uses and relationships that take place within these environments.

The bush as a vague terrain of the city can also be land escapes, where the bush can be used for
escape. It can represent a mass, a hiding place into which we crawl without being seen. It is a
place that is laced with various paths, tunnels, rustling. A place in which animals are present and
which contains unfertilized plants and a rather unfertilized plant itself. The notion of the bush
as a hiding place is different than in the context of bushiness. Bushiness is conceived more in
terms of the periphery. Brush as a place of escape is a place between places. It is in the park,
but also just beyond the bus stop or shop. The inside of the bush is where its own world with its
undefined rules is located and is densely separated from the world out there. It can also be a
meeting place with both human and non-human actors (Haluzík, 2020).

Places in between may be bushes on the periphery, bushes behind a bus stop, but also various
boundary spaces between two cadastral boundaries, space in a bridge structure, or space under a
bridge. It is the place where the culture of consumer society and the culture of recycling meet.
The culture of recycling is represented here by homeless people who recycle and revive discarded
materials. The places in between are often located near vague terrains. Places that appear to have
no owner, even though legally they do. These places can be places of encounter, but they can also
be places of connection, connecting two places as a non-place. This interconnection can be used,
for example, to shorten one's journey, to wander off to do graffiti, or a place of deliberate
encounter with the various non-human actors of the city (Haluzík, 2020). The city is so full of
interaction and networks, between human and non-human actors. These networks are outside the
boundaries of planning and located in a vague terrain that can, in its simplest form, represent the
vegetation between the road and the parking lot, or the vegetation in broken concrete.


Relationships between the city and the planned vegetated terrain

Debates about the future of people evoke the future of humanity in the city, given the demographic
developments. But the age of the Anthropocene is also an age of rising temperatures, emissions and
urbanisation (Purushotham Reddy et al., 2021) and increasing drought in some areas (Rosner et al.,
2019). Studies by Georgi and Dimitriou (2010) shows that greenery in the city has an effect on
reducing the discomfort index and temperatures, as it reduces temperature by shading it and
increases relative humidity by evaporation. Shade from green vegetation also represents a better
comfort index than shade created from artificial materials. The presence of vegetation in a city
also improves its microclimate and optimises its thermal conditions. Green vegetation in the city
has also been shown to reduce the effects of heat more than it increases winter cold. Planting
trees around buildings can reduce cooling and heating costs by reducing summer heating of buildings
and preventing wind cooling. The study also mentions the positive impact of planting trees through
tree plantations and parks, due to their encouraging people to walk in their shade, which may
encourage less use of the car as a means of transport.

However, this planting of trees and the creation of parks is not always possible due to their space
requirements or the possible intervention of root systems in electricity, sewage and water
networks. Therefore, different concepts and approaches are being considered for planting green
vegetation in the city. One solution is, for example, a green wall and a green roof. These can
bring benefits in terms of improved energy consumption, sound transmission or temperature. However,
current research on advantages and disadvantages focuses mainly on their quantitative factors and
little on qualitative indicators such as promoting quality of life and well-being, ecological
protection, biodiversity promotion and aesthetics. Green roofs and green walls have higher
installation and maintenance costs, but they also often have a longer lifetime than traditional
reflective materials (Manso et al., 2021).


Man's relationship with the flora from below

The third perspective on the relationship between humans and their plant landscapes comes from
below, from the actors themselves, who are faced with changing local climates and who are seeking
their own individual solutions to their problems. One such example is the changing gardening system
in Southern California. In America, people value their nice, big, green lawns. But maintaining it
is problematic in California, which has been plagued by a severe drought in recent years, to which
the city has responded with an appeal to conserve water. This brings with it a rethinking of what a
home is for local people, and experiments with the ecology of everyday life are occurring. These
involve practical dealings with material elements that bring a degree of individual financial risk,
but also moments of happy accident. These experiments also coincide with the ethos of hard work
that is present in this culture. Thus, people are turning their turf into what they call an
indigenous landscape. This includes a trough of pebbles with a variety of evergreen trees,
flowering shrubs, or experiments with artificial turf. Others, on the other hand, focus on the
practical aspect of the garden and have installed water harvesting devices, with a slow drip system
to the plants, whereupon they further experiment with their placement according to shade. However,
it is not just the garden that is becoming the subject of experimentation in this area. People are
also experimenting with home-made separating toilets, the contents of which they then transform
into fertiliser for the plants. These experiments are often shared and discussed, forming a
collective knowledge in the wake of the everyday. (Vine, 2018)

Other aspects of experimenting with vegetation in the city include, for example, growing fruit and
vegetables on rooftops, which can be included in the green roof concept. This brings a degree of
heat absorption on rooftops and gives people the opportunity to develop community growing and
access to fresh vegetables (Broadway, 2009). This approach to engaging with the landscape can
provide aesthetic enjoyment, opportunities for children's play, recreation and a haven for
tranquillity (Yuen & Nyuk Hien, 2005). In this way, people create and develop knowledge and
relationships between human and non-human actors in a network of relationships both in physical
space and on social networks in discussion forums. This knowledge emerges from, from below, through
the everyday practice of physical bodies. There has even been a handbook published on the subject
of growing on rooftops that advises how to do it, if people are interested (Pryor, 2016).


Conclusion

In the city, many contacts and communications between man and flora can be observed. These
interactions arise due to the unintended consequences of urban planning and construction and are
characterized as blind spots beyond ordinary perception. The second mode of interaction is the
network of relationship through urban design in the form of parks or alleys, although green roofs
and walls are also considered. The third mode of interaction is created through ingenuity and
experimentation in people's everyday lives.


References

Bonneuil, C., & Fressoz, J.-B. (2017). The shock of the anthropocene: The earth, history and us (D.
Fernbach, Přel.; Paperback edition). Verso.

Broadway, M. (2009). Growing Urban Agriculture in North American Cities: The Example of Milwaukee.
Focus On Geography, 52(3/4), 23-30,73.

Bruyninckx, H. (2021). Udržitelná města: Přeměna krajiny v evropských městech — Evropská agentura
pro životní prostředí. https://www.eea.europa.eu/cs/articles/udrzitelna-mesta-premena-krajiny-v

Crutzen, P., & Stoermer, E. (2000). Anthropocene—IGBP.
http://www.igbp.net/globalchange/anthropocene.4.1b8ae20512db692f2a680009238.html

European Council. (2024). Zelená dohoda pro Evropu.
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/cs/policies/green-deal/

Georgi, J. N., & Dimitriou, D. (2010). The contribution of urban green spaces to the improvement of
environment in cities: Case study of Chania, Greece. Building and Environment, 45(6), 1401–1414.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.12.003

Haluzík, R., 1969- (Ed.). (2020). Město naruby: Vágní terén, vnitřní periferie a místa mezi místy
(Vydání první). Academia.

Hamilton, C. (2020). TOWARDS A FIFTH ONTOLOGY FOR THE ANTHROPOCENE. Angelaki, 25(4), 110–119.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0969725X.2020.1790839

Cheptou, P.-O., Carrue, O., Rouifed, S., & Cantarel, A. (2008). Rapid evolution of seed dispersal
in an urban environment in the weed Crepis sancta. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
105(10), 3796–3799. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0708446105

Manso, M., Teotónio, I., Silva, C. M., & Cruz, C. O. (2021). Green roof and green wall benefits and
costs: A review of the quantitative evidence. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 135,
110111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110111

OECD. (2015). The Metropolitan Century. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264228733-en

Pryor, M. R. (2016). The Edible Roof: A Guide to Productive Rooftop Gardening. MCCM Creations.
http://hub.hku.hk/handle/10722/215842

Purushotham Reddy, M., Aneesh, A., Praneetha, K., & Vijay, S. (2021). Global Warming Analysis and
Prediction Using Data Science. 2021 Fifth International Conference on I-SMAC (IoT in Social,
Mobile, Analytics and Cloud) (I-SMAC), 1055–1059. https://doi.org/10.1109/I-SMAC52330.2021.9640944

Ritchie, H., Samborska, V., & Roser, M. (2024). Urbanization. Our World in Data.
https://ourworldindata.org/urbanization

Rosner, S., Heinze, B., Savi, T., & Dalla‐Salda, G. (2019). Prediction of hydraulic conductivity
loss from relative water loss: New insights into water storage of tree stems and branches.
Physiologia Plantarum, 165(4), 843–854. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.12790

Vine, M. (2018). Learning to feel at home in the Anthropocene: From state of emergency to everyday
experiments in California’s historic drought. American Ethnologist, 45(3), 405–416.
https://doi.org/10.1111/amet.12674

Yuen, B., & Nyuk Hien, W. (2005). Resident perceptions and expectations of rooftop gardens in
Singapore. Landscape and Urban Planning, 73(4), 263–276.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.08.001

Zefferman, E. P., McKinney, M. L., Cianciolo, T., & Fritz, B. I. (2018). Knoxville’s urban
wilderness: Moving toward sustainable multifunctional management. Wild urban ecosystems: challenges
and opportunities for urban development, 29, 357–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.09.002