Buhr Lorina, Lenzi Dominic S, Pols Auke J K, Brunner Claudia E, Fischer Andrea, Staal Arie, Hofbauer Benjamin P, Bovenkerk Bernice
Department of Philosophy, Institute for Liberal Arts & Sciences, University of Hamburg, 20146 Hamburg, Germany.
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Ethics Institute, Utrecht University, 3512 BL Utrecht, Netherlands.
PNAS Nexus. 2024 Dec 31;4(1):pgae577. doi: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae577. eCollection 2025 Jan.
The concept of "irreversibility" and its counterpart "reversibility" have become prominent in environmental and ecological research on human-induced changes, thresholds, climate tipping points, ecosystem degradation, and losses in the cryosphere and biosphere. Through a systematic literature review, we show that in these research fields, these notions are not only descriptive terms, but can have different semantic functions and normative aspects. The results suggest that, in the context of environmental and ecological research the concepts of irreversibility and reversibility have taken on additional usages in comparison to their contexts in theoretical thermodynamics and mechanics. Irreversible as a classification of anthropogenic environmental change can be used categorically, in the sense of a finite end, or relatively, i.e. on time or spatial scales of interest. Surprisingly, most of the analyzed scientific articles that use the terminology of (ir)reversibility substantively do not provide an explicit conceptualization or definition (74.7%). The research on potential (ir)reversibility of environmental change may affect the social and political willingness to bear the costs of interventions to mitigate or prevent undesirable environmental change. In particular, classifying a change as reversible or irreversible and determining the timescale(s) and spatial scale(s) involved has implications for policy and ecosystem management decisions, as suggested by its use in several high-level scientific and policy reports on ecosystem and climate change. Therefore, it is important to explicitly present a clear definition of irreversibility or reversibility for the readers from other fields, even if it could be the case that within a specific community an implicit definition was considered to be sufficient. We propose further recommendations for inter- and transdisciplinary reflection and conceptual use in the context of environmental, ecological, and sustainability research.
“不可逆性”及其对应概念“可逆性”在关于人为引起的变化、阈值、气候临界点、生态系统退化以及冰冻圈和生物圈损失的环境与生态研究中变得日益突出。通过系统的文献综述,我们表明在这些研究领域中,这些概念不仅是描述性术语,还可能具有不同的语义功能和规范层面。结果表明,在环境与生态研究背景下,与理论热力学和力学中的情况相比,不可逆性和可逆性概念有了额外的用法。作为人为环境变化的一种分类,“不可逆的”可以从有限终点的意义上进行绝对使用,或者相对地,即在感兴趣的时间或空间尺度上使用。令人惊讶的是,大多数实质性使用(非)可逆性术语的分析科学文章并未提供明确的概念化或定义(74.7%)。对环境变化潜在(非)可逆性的研究可能会影响社会和政治上承担减轻或防止不良环境变化干预成本的意愿。特别是,将一种变化分类为可逆或不可逆,并确定所涉及的时间尺度和空间尺度,对政策和生态系统管理决策有影响,正如其在几份关于生态系统和气候变化的高级别科学与政策报告中的使用所表明的那样。因此,即使在特定群体中可能认为隐含定义就足够了,为其他领域的读者明确给出不可逆性或可逆性的清晰定义也很重要。我们针对环境、生态和可持续性研究背景下的跨学科和跨领域反思及概念使用提出了进一步建议。