ISSUES OF FORMING THE SCIENCE OF ANTHROPOCENE

Objective: to study the issues of anthropocene formation as a scientific concept. Methods: dialectical method of cognition, detailization, logical generalization. Results: the concepts of ES (ecosystem, ecosystem services), environmental Economics are viewed. Strengths and weaknesses were analyzed of the concept of "Ecosystem Services". The model of socio-economic metabolism (SEM) was proposed. In addition, the anthropocene is considered in the work as a socio-cultural phenomenon. The authors concluded that in such scientific fields as climate research (adaptation to climate change), political ecology, studies of technology and science (STS) and others, where the subject of the study includes social constructs, the concepts of nature and societies are complex and are reproduced as hybrid eco-socioeconomic cultures. This idea implies a call for transdisciplinarity. Scientific novelty: anthropocene is presented as a normative scientific concept that could give hope for favorable prospects of human development. Practical significance: the provision of social request for prescriptive directions, assisting in the "recovery" of the planetary system, and approaches to the development of the anthropocene science in a normative way.

Economic theory, Ecosystem services, Socio-economic metabolism, Paradigm, Social-ecological system, Political ecology, Transdisciplinarity

1. Crutzen P., Schwagerl C. Living in the anthropocene: towards a new global ethos. Yale Environ. 360. 2011. URL: http://e360.yale.edu/feature/ living_in_the_anthropocene_toward_a_new_global_ethos/2363 (дата обращения: 26.02.2016).

2. Dalby S. Biopolitics and climate security in the Anthropocene // Geoforum. 2013. No. 49. Рр. 184-192.

3. Human domination of earth's ecosystems / P. M. Vitousek, H. A. Mooney, J. Lubchenco, J. M. Melillo // Science. 1997. No. 277 (5325). Рр. 494-499.

4. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital / R. Costanza, R. d'Arge, R. de Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R. V. O'Neill, J. Paruelo, R. G. Raskin, P. Sutton, M. van den Belt // Nature. 1997. No. 387. Рр. 253-260.

5. Daily G. C. Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Washington: Island Press, 1997.

6. Kull C. A., De Sartre X. A., Castro-Larrañaga M. The political ecology of ecosystem services // Geoforum. 2015. No. 61. Рр. 122-134.

7. Resilience scientists as change-makers-Growing the middle ground between science and advocacy? / М. Milkoreit, M.-L. Moore, М. Schoonc, C. L. Meek // Environmental science & policy. 2015. No. 53. Рр. 87-95.

8. Nel А. The choreography of sacrifice: Market environmentalism, biopolitics and environmental damage // Geoforum. 2015. No. 65. Рр. 246-254.

9. Pauliuk S., Hertwich E. G. Socioeconomic metabolism as paradigm for studying the biophysical basis of human societies // Ecological Economics. 2015. No. 119. Рр. 83-93.

10. Methods and approaches to modelling the anthropocene / P. H. Verburg, J. A. Dearing, J. G. Dyke, S. Van der Leeuw, S. Seitzinger, W. Steffen, J. Syvitski // Global Environmental Change. 2015. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.08.007 (дата обращения: 15.01.2016).

11. Who speaks for the future of Earth? How critical social science can extend the conversation on the Anthropocene / Е. Lovbrand, S. Beck, J. Chilvers, Т. Forsyth, J. Hedren, М. Hulme, R. Lidskog, Е. Vasileiadou // Global Environmental Change. 2015. No. 32. Рр. 211-218.

12. Crutzen P. J., Stoermer E. F. The "anthropocene" // Glob. Change Newsl. 2000. No. 41. Рр. 17-18.

13. The new world of the Anthropocene / A. Zalasiewic, M. Williams, W. Steffen, P. Crutzen // Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010. No. 44. Рр. 2228-2231.

14. Marsh G. P. The Earth as Modified by Human Action. New York: Scribner, Armstrong & Co.,1874. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.53722.

15. Suess E. Das Antlitz der Erde (The Face of the Earth, 1906). Vol. 1. Leipzig, Germany: G. Freytag, 1885.

16. Вернадский В. Биосфера и Ноосфера. М.: Наука, 1989. 264 с.

17. Restall В., Conrad Е. A literature review of connectedness to nature and its potential for environmental management // Journal of Environmental Management. 2015. No. 159. Рр. 264-278.

18. The dawn of Structural One Health: A new science tracking disease emergence along circuits of capital / R. G. Wallace, L. Bergmann, R. Kock, М. Gilbert, L. Hogerwerf, R. Wallace, M. Holmberg // Social Science & Medicine. 2015. No. 129. Рр. 68-77.

19. Latour B. We have never been modern. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. 1993.

20. Future Earth, 2014. Strategic Research Agenda 2014. Priorities for a Global Sustainability Research Strategy. International Council for Science. Paris.

21. Forrester J. W. World Dynamics. Pegasus Communications, Waltham, Massachusetts, 1971.

22. Klenk N., Meehan К. Climate change and transdisciplinary science: Problematizing the integration imperative // Environmental Science & Policy. 2015. No. 54. Рр. 160-167.

23. Transdisciplinary synthesis for ecosystem science, policy and management: The Australian experience / A. J. J. Lynch, R. Thackway, A. Specht, P. J. Beggs, S. Brisbane, E. L. Burns, M. Byrne, S. J. Capon, M. T. Casanova, P. A. Clarke, J. M. Davies, S. Dovers, R. G. Dwyer, E. Ens, D. O. Fisher, M. Flanigan, E. Garnier, S. M. Guru, K. Kilminster, J. Locke, R. Mac Nally, K. M. Mcmahon, P. J. Mitchell, J. C. Pierson, E. M. Rodgers, J. Russell-Smith, J. Udy, M. Waycott // Science of the Total Environment. 2015. No. 534. Рр. 173-184.