Cargando…
Assessing natural global catastrophic risks
The risk of global catastrophe from natural sources may be significantly larger than previous analyses have found. In the study of global catastrophic risk (GCR), one line of thinking posits that deep human history renders natural GCRs insignificant. Essentially, the fact that natural hazards did no...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Netherlands
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9553633/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36245947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11069-022-05660-w |
_version_ | 1784806519358881792 |
---|---|
author | Baum, Seth D. |
author_facet | Baum, Seth D. |
author_sort | Baum, Seth D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | The risk of global catastrophe from natural sources may be significantly larger than previous analyses have found. In the study of global catastrophic risk (GCR), one line of thinking posits that deep human history renders natural GCRs insignificant. Essentially, the fact that natural hazards did not cause human extinction at any previous time makes it unlikely that they would do so now. This paper finds flaws in this argument, refines the theory of natural GCR, analyzes the space of natural GCRs, and presents implications for decision-making and research. The paper analyzes natural climate change, natural pandemics, near-Earth objects (asteroids, comets, and meteors), space weather (coronal mass ejections, solar flares, and solar particle events), stellar explosions (gamma-ray bursts and supernovae), and volcanic eruptions. Almost all natural GCR scenarios involve important interactions between the natural hazard and human civilization. Several natural GCR scenarios may have high ongoing probability. Deep human history provides little information about the resilience of modern global civilization to natural global catastrophes. The natural GCRs should not be dismissed on grounds of deep human history. Work on natural GCRs should account for their important human dimensions. A case can even be made for abandoning the distinction between natural and anthropogenic GCR. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9553633 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Netherlands |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95536332022-10-12 Assessing natural global catastrophic risks Baum, Seth D. Nat Hazards (Dordr) Original Paper The risk of global catastrophe from natural sources may be significantly larger than previous analyses have found. In the study of global catastrophic risk (GCR), one line of thinking posits that deep human history renders natural GCRs insignificant. Essentially, the fact that natural hazards did not cause human extinction at any previous time makes it unlikely that they would do so now. This paper finds flaws in this argument, refines the theory of natural GCR, analyzes the space of natural GCRs, and presents implications for decision-making and research. The paper analyzes natural climate change, natural pandemics, near-Earth objects (asteroids, comets, and meteors), space weather (coronal mass ejections, solar flares, and solar particle events), stellar explosions (gamma-ray bursts and supernovae), and volcanic eruptions. Almost all natural GCR scenarios involve important interactions between the natural hazard and human civilization. Several natural GCR scenarios may have high ongoing probability. Deep human history provides little information about the resilience of modern global civilization to natural global catastrophes. The natural GCRs should not be dismissed on grounds of deep human history. Work on natural GCRs should account for their important human dimensions. A case can even be made for abandoning the distinction between natural and anthropogenic GCR. Springer Netherlands 2022-10-12 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9553633/ /pubmed/36245947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11069-022-05660-w Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022, Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Baum, Seth D. Assessing natural global catastrophic risks |
title | Assessing natural global catastrophic risks |
title_full | Assessing natural global catastrophic risks |
title_fullStr | Assessing natural global catastrophic risks |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessing natural global catastrophic risks |
title_short | Assessing natural global catastrophic risks |
title_sort | assessing natural global catastrophic risks |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9553633/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36245947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11069-022-05660-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT baumsethd assessingnaturalglobalcatastrophicrisks |