There is an approach to learning about human situations which of immense relevance to every one of us as individuals and to society as a whole. We call it biohistory. I believe that basic biohistorical understanding across the community is an essential prerequisite for the future well-being of humankind.

However, at present biohistory is not recognised as a bona fide subject in academic circles. It does not appear in school curricula and it does not feature in university degree courses or research programs.

Biohistory is the study of human situations, past and present, in biological and historical perspective - against the background of the story of life on Earth. It pays special attention to our scientific understanding of evolutionary processes and to the evolutionary background of our own species.  

An important feature of biohistory is the fact that it recognises the evolutionary emergence of the human capacity for culture as one of the crucial watersheds in the history of life on Earth – of overriding significance not only for humans themselves but also for the rest of the living world. [1]

Over recent decades a growing number of writers have emerged who could well be described as leading biohistorians. René Dubos comes first to mind. Others include Hans Zinsser, Jared Diamond, Tim Flannery and Tony McMichael. However, biohistory has yet to be developed systematically as a field of learning in its own right, and it is a long way from occupying the central place it warrants in educational programs at all levels.

Here I will focus mainly on the work of my colleagues and myself at the Australian National University. [2]

Our approach to biohistory takes as its starting point the history of life on Earth. In the beginning there was no life. Only the non-living physical world existed – called the Physical environment in Figure 1. Then, perhaps around 4500 million years ago, the first living organisms came into being.

Eventually, over many millions of years there evolved an amazing array of different life forms. Among these, emerging some 200 000 years ago, was Homo sapiens. Because of this animal’s special relevance to our studies, it is separated from other living organisms in our conceptual scheme (Human species in Figure 1).

 

Figure 1
 
Through the processes of biological evolution the human species had acquired a distinctive and extraordinarily significant biological attribute – the capacity for culture.

The most essential aspect of this capacity is the human ability to invent and learn a symbolic spoken language, and to use it for communicating among ourselves. Another aspect of human behaviour often regarded as an aspect of culture is the ability to invent and learn new technologies and to pass on this technical knowledge from one individual to another and from generation to generation..

As soon as human culture came into existence it began, through its influence on people’s behaviour, to have impacts not only on humans themselves but also on other living systems. It evolved as a new kind of force in the biosphere, destined eventually to bring about profound and far-reaching changes across the whole planet.

It is useful to elaborate this scheme a little. Because we are especially interested in the impacts on both humans and the environment of what people actually do, it is useful to split the Human species into the Human population and Human activities (Figure 2).



Figure 2

 
It is also useful to divide Human culture into two parts. The first part is Culture itself, which is the information stored in human brains and transmitted mainly through language. Culture includes knowledge of language itself, and general knowledge of the environment, history, the arts and technologies, as well as assumptions, priorities and religious beliefs. In our work the focus has often been on the Dominant culture of a society – that is, the culture that largely determines the patterns of human activity in that society.

The second part is designated Societal arrangements, which includes society’s economic, regulatory, political and educational arrangements and its institutional structure. Societal arrangements are largely determined by, and to some extent determine, the characteristics of the dominant culture.

In Figure 2 we have added another set of variables – namely Artefacts, by which we mean ‘things made by humans’. Artefacts includes buildings, roads, all kinds of machines and electronic devices, as well as clothes, tools and works of art.

Although based on the historical sequence of events, this biohistorical conceptual framework can usefully be applied to the present day. The same sets of variables are involved.

The approach of biohistory is, by its very nature, integrative. It reminds us of the interconnectedness of different parts of the total system – both biophysical and cultural - and of the broad classes of variables that determine the overall characteristics of human situations and the life experience of every one of us.

It also reminds us of the importance of the historical dimension for understanding our responses to the social and environmental challenges of the modern world.

The framework tells us nothing, of course, about the nature of the interactions between these different parts of the total system. For this we need knowledge of the fundamental biological and biohistorical principles that underlie this interplay. Some of these principles are discussed below.

The social importance of biohistory

I will now briefly discuss some of the reasons why I believe biohistorical understanding is so important. For the sake of brevity I will contract ‘biohistorical understanding’ to ‘biounderstanding’.

Biorealism

First and foremost, biounderstanding is important because it constantly reminds us that we are living organisms, products of nature and totally dependent on the processes of life, within us and around us, for our very existence.

It reminds us that life processes underpin, permeate and make possible our whole social system and everything that happens within it. Keeping them healthy must be our first priority – because everything else depends on them.

The dominant culture of our time has lost sight of these fundamental realities - with grave consequences for humankind and the rest of the living world. They are not reflected in governmental policies, political platforms, the structure of educational programs or the lifestyles of the majority of people.

Human history

Biohistory tells us that our species has been in existence for some 200 000 years

It shows us that the history of Homo sapiens falls into four distinct ecological phases, which differ both in the relationships between human populations and the rest of the living world and in the biological conditions of life and health of humans themselves. The four phases are not mutually exclusive and all of them can exist at the same time.

Phase 1 The hunter-gatherer phase

The hunter-gatherer phase of human existence was by far the longest of the four ecological phases, lasting some 180 000 or more years (over 7000 generations). [3] This phase was continuous with hunter-gatherer cultures of earlier human species.

Phase 2 The early farming phase

The introduction of farming in some parts of the world around 12 000 years ago (480 generations) marked a turning point in cultural evolution. It was a precondition for all the spectacular developments in human history since that time.

Phase 3 The early urban phase

This phase began around 9000 years ago (360 generations) when fairly large clusters of people, sometimes consisting of several thousand individuals, began to aggregate together in townships. Many of these people played no direct part in the gathering or production of food.

Although the new conditions offered protection from most of the hazards of the hunter-gatherer lifestyle, malnutrition and infectious disease became much more important as causes of ill health and death.

Phase 4 The high consumption phase

This phase was ushered in by the industrial revolution, which began a little over 200 years ago (eight generations). It has been associated with profound changes in the ecological relationships between human populations and the rest of the biosphere.

Especially significant ecologically was the introduction of machines for performing different kinds of work and depending on the use of extrasomatic energy, especially fossil fuels.  The discoveries and applications of electricity and radioactivity and the spectacular growth of the chemical industry have also been extremely important. Food processing began in this brief phase and now the diets of many people are quite unlike those of all but their most recent forebears.

Largely as a consequence of improved living conditions and the introduction of vaccination and antibiotics, the global population increased from about 1 billion in 1800 to 2 billion in the 1930s; and it is now almost 7 billion. This population growth, along with the explosive increase in intensity of techno-industrial activities, is resulting in severe ecological disturbances across the whole planet.

The crucially important factor, which should be a central consideration in governmental and corporate planning, is the inescapable fact that the days of ecological Phase 4 are numbered. This phase is simply not sustainable ecologically. Either humankind will move into a very different, ecologically sustainable and healthy fifth ecological phase of human existence, or human civilisation will collapse.

Human culture as a force in nature

The rapidity of the evolutionary development of the capacity for culture signifies that once a rudimentary ability to invent and use symbolic spoken language emerged, it at once conferred a major biological advantage on its bearers under the prevailing conditions.

Apart from its practical advantages, culture adds richness to human experience. It did so in the days of our hunter-gatherer ancestors – as in storytelling, musical traditions, dancing and other forms of artistic expression. And it does so today in so many ways. It makes a huge contribution to the sheer enjoyment of life.

However, especially under conditions of civilisation, cultural evolution has often resulted in activities that have caused a great deal of unnecessary distress to humans or damage to ecosystems. Such undesirable culturally-inspired activities are referred to as cultural maladaptations. Biohistory reveals countless examples of cultural maladaptation in human history.

Biounderstanding therefore alerts us to the need for us to be constantly vigilant – checking that the assumptions of our own society’s dominant culture are in tune with the processes of life – and that they are not leading us to behave in ways that are against nature and against the interests of our species.

Cultural reform

Fortunately, humans have the potential – actually through their capacity for culture – to correct cultural maladaptations. This culturally inspired adaptive process is referred to as cultural reform. Attempts at cultural reform are sometimes successful – and sometimes not.

Biohistory provides many examples of cultural maladaptation and cultural reform in the past, and knowledge of these patterns can help us understand, and accelerate, important cultural reform movements of the present day, including the anti-smoking campaign, efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and moves to eliminate nuclear weapons.

One of the invariable features of cultural maladaptation and cultural reform is the inevitable backlash in all reform movements from ‘antireformers’ or ‘deniers’. These antireformers are usually, but not always, representative of vested interests who believe they will be disadvantaged, financially or otherwise, by reform measures. Nowadays some of these anitireform forces are extraordinarily powerful.

The processes of cultural reform are often quite complicated, involving prolonged interactions between different interest groups in society. A key role is often played initially by minority groups, occasionally by single individuals, who start the ball rolling by drawing attention to an unsatisfactory state of affairs. They are eventually joined by other concerned people.

Almost invariably the expressions of concern coming from first-order reformers are promptly contradicted by others, the anti-reformers. This backlash often involves representatives of vested interests who fear that the proposed reforms will be to their financial disadvantage. They are likely to argue that the problem does not exist or that it has been has been grossly exaggerated, and they try to ridicule the reformers by calling them alarmists, fanatics, scaremongers and prophets of doom. Nowadays some of these anti-reform forces are extraordinarily powerful.

Biohistory provides many examples of cultural reform anti-reform in recent history and at the present time. A well-documented instance of cultural reform from the past is the Public Health Movement of the later part of the 19th century. Other more recent examples include the anti-smoking campaign and the current debates about climate change. In the latter case the anti-reformers are often referred to as climate change sceptics or deniers.

Evolution and health

One of the outcomes of the processes of evolution is the fact that the biological characteristics of any species are such that the individual animals are likely to experience good health in their natural environment. If an animal is removed from its natural environment, or if its environment changes significantly, then it is likely to be less well adapted to the new conditions, and consequently some signs of physiological or behavioural maladjustment can be expected. This evolutionary health principle is a fundamental law of nature.

Ill health or pathological behaviour due to an animal experiencing conditions which deviate from those of its natural environment are referred to as examples of phylogenetic maladjustment.

It follows from the evolutionary health principle that if we want to identify the health needs of any particular kind of animal, the first thing to do is to examine the conditions to which it is exposed in its natural habitat, because we can be sure that these conditions are capable of providing all the essential ingredients for maintaining and promoting health in that species.

Biohistory reminds us that we are basically the same animal as our ancestors who lived long before the advent of farming – that is, an animal genetically adapted through natural selection to the life of the hunter-gatherers. This fact has many important implications – for understanding ourselves and our problems.

There is, for example, no diet better for humans than the typical diet of our hunter-gatherer ancestors. Or if we take much more, or much less physical exercise than a typical hunter-gatherer − or if we inhale chemical fumes that were not present in the evolutionary environment − then we are likely to experience ill health.

There are good reasons for believing that the evolutionary health principle applies not only to such physical health needs as clean air and the need for physical exercise, but also to psychosocial aspects of life conditions. For example the lives of hunter-gatherers are usually characterised by the experience of conviviality, effective emotional support networks, incentives and opportunities for creative behaviour and a sense of personal involvement in daily activities. Most of us would agree that such conditions are likely to promote health and well-being in our own society. It is important that we take them into account in assessing the quality of life today and in considering options for the future. [4]

In summary, many case of ill health in our society today are examples of phylogenetic maladjustment – including most cases of lung cancer, coronary heart disease, obesity and probably much mental illness.

The evolutionary health principle is of enormous relevance to the health professions, public health policies and personal lifestyle choices.  However, it is seldom, if ever, mentioned in school courses and seldom in the medical literature.

Evolution and human behaviour

The innate behavioural characteristics of our species are the outcome of evolution in an environment very different from that in which we live. While we can assume that these innate behavioural characteristics, such as the capacity for culture, were of biological advantage under the conditions in which they evolved, it is questionable whether this is still the case in the modern setting.

This is an extremely important topic. However, because it is complicated and extraordinarily controversial it is not prudent to discuss it further in this essay. [5]

Biometabolism and technometabolism

Any population of living organisms takes up nutrients and energy from its environment, makes use of them in the processes of life and then discharges wastes and gives off the energy in the form of heat. This set of processes is referred to as population metabolism.

In the case of the human species cultural evolution has led to an extra dimension to population metabolism. Thus, in addition to a population's biometabolism, which consists of the inputs, internal uses and outputs of energy and materials involved in the biological processes within human bodies, there is also a significant technometabolism, which consists of the inputs, uses and outputs of energy and materials resulting from technological processes taking place outside human bodies. Technometabolism is a new phenomenon in the history of life on Earth – of tremendous significance ecologically and in many other ways.

Already in the hunter-gatherer phase of human existence technometabolism became important through the regular use of fire. This development resulted in biologically significant changes in the life conditions of humans, not only by providing them with warmth but also because it led to the consumption of cooked foods, especially meat.

The use of fire by hunter-gatherers sometimes resulted in important ecological changes. In some regions it resulted in the replacement of large areas of woodland with grassland and in big increases in herds of grazing animals, and consequently in the supply of animal protein for humans.

Massive intensification of technometabolism has become an outstanding feature of human society during the fourth high consumption ecological phase of human history, involving a huge surge in resource and energy use and technological waste production. The most evident manifestation of this is anthropogenic climate change – but there are many others.

Technoaddiction

Another important biohistorical concept is the principle of technoaddiction.

In human history it has frequently been the case that new techniques have been introduced simply for curiosity, or sometimes because they have benefited a particular individual or group within society. However, with the passing of time societies have organised themselves around the new techniques and their populations have become progressively more and more dependent on them for the satisfaction of simple, basic needs. Eventually a state of complete dependence is reached.

The dependence of the populations of high-energy societies on fossil fuels is an obvious and extremely serious example. Others include our dependence on electricity and, quite recently, on computer technology.

This insidious form of addiction passes largely unnoticed. It is of immense economic and ecological significance and it explains why our attempts to introduce effective measures to overcome anthropogenic climate change are thwart with so many difficulties.

It is noteworthy in the present cultural setting the following basic human behaviours usually cost significantly much more energy and create much more pollution than they did at other times in history: eating, seeking in-group approval; seeking to conform; seeking novelty, excitement and comfort; visiting relatives; being selfish; being greedy and being generous.

Cultural maladaptations today

Biohistory helps us appreciate that the worldview and assumptions of our dominant culture today are resulting in cultural maladaptations on a scale and of an intensity never seen before in the history of humankind − maladaptations that are totally incompatible with the survival of civilisation. All the main threats to human wellbeing and survival in the modern world are consequences of cultural maladaptations.

Biohistory also draws attention to the astonishing rate of acceleration in the increase in intensity of humans activities on Earth, and to the fact that very recently Homo sapiens has become the first species of animal in the history of life on Earth to bring about significant changes in the ecology of the whole planet.

Currently the most critical sign of this insensitive over-exploitation of the planet’s resources is rapid global climate change. Other areas for serious concern include massive loss of biodiversity on land and in the oceans, thinning of the ozone layer, global pollution of ecosystems with persistent organic pollutants, and various severe forms of land and water degradation – involving disruption of nutrient cycles, loss of topsoil, salinisation, progressive large scale deforestation, biological impoverishment of soil and acidification of the oceans.

The biosphere as a system capable of supporting civilisation will not tolerate this onslaught indefinitely. If present trends in human activity continue unabated the ecological collapse of human civilisation is inevitable.

Apart from these ecological issues, cultural developments during the past seventy years have resulted in the manufacture of weapons of mass destruction which now constitute another horrendous threat to the future of our species and the rest of the biosphere. According to recent estimates, there are around 24 000 nuclear warheads in existence. It would not take many of these to bring an end to civilisation.

Biohistory also shows us how cultural evolution has resulted in the current gross disparities in conditions of life across human populations. Today vast swards of people live in abject poverty, while some individuals have incomes of millions of dollars a year. Such disparities have been common in the early urban and high consumption ecological phases of human history, but they were not a feature of societies in the preceding 190 000 years of existence of our species.

Hope for the future  

Biounderstanding leads to appreciation that the best hope for humankind lies in a rapid transition to a society that is really in tune with and sensitive to the processes of life and that satisfies the health needs of all sections of the human population as well as those of the ecosystems of the biosphere. We call this a biosensitive society – that is, a society that is in tune with our own biology and in tune with the living systems of the biosphere on which we depend (Figure 3).



Figure 3
 

For our vision of a biosensitive society, see our paper on that topic.

The necessary changes in societal arrangements and patterns of human activity will require revolutionary changes in the dominant culture. That is, our hope for the future lies in the processes of cultural reform.

This cultural reform movement is, of course, well underway.  But it has a very long way to go. The ecologically maladaptive assumptions of the dominant culture remain firmly entrenched.

Biosensitivity cannot be achieved until the dominant culture comes to embrace at its heart a sound understanding of the human place in nature and a profound respect for the processes of life. Biosensitivity will be what matters most (Figure 4).

 

Figure 4

 

Only then will there be sufficient motivation at all levels of society to make the major changes in societal arrangements and human activities that will be necessary to achieve a sustainable relationship with the ecosystems of which we are a part and on which we depend.

However, this crucial cultural transformation will not come about until there is widespread understanding right across the community of human situations in biohistorical perspective. Therefore by far the most urgent need is in the realm of learning and education.

Apart from its influence on the cultural worldview, assumptions and priorities, of the dominant culture, biounderstanding also provides information of enormous practical value for society in its efforts to achieve biosensitivity. It makes clear what ‘being in tune with the processes of life’ means in practical terms, such as maintaining the biological integrity of soils and natural nutrient cycles, protecting biodiversity and avoiding pollution of the atmosphere. And it helps us to select lifestyle options that not only promote our own health, but that are also consistent with the health of the natural environment.

In summary, biounderstanding across the whole community is a key prerequisite for the achievement of biosensitivity and hence the survival of civilisation. Until this happens there will be no significant change in the dominant culture and therefore no significant move towards sustainability and biosensitivity.

This means that by far the most useful role of concerned individuals and community groups who wish to play a part in the transition to biosensitivity at the present time is to actively encourage this kind of understanding in the community and to promote the vision of a biosensitive society.

Biohistory should be at the core of every school curriculum – reflecting the reality that we are living beings, products of the processes of life and totally dependent on them for our survival and wellbeing.

Notes

1. The word culture is used here to mean the information stored in human brains and transmitted through learned language. It includes knowledge of language itself, and general knowledge of the environment, history, the arts and technologies, as well as assumptions, priorities and religious beliefs. This use of the term is consistent with the first definition of ‘culture’ given in Collins Dictionary: ‘The total of the inherited ideas, beliefs, values and knowledge, which constitute the shared bases of social action’ (Collins Dictionary of the English Language. 1979. Collins, Sydney, Auckland and Glasgow). Our focus is often on the Dominant culture – that is, the culture that largely determines the patterns of human activity in a society.  Back to text

2. I have discussed the themes of this paper at greater length in the following publications:
Boyden, S., S. Millar, K. Newcombe, B. O'Neill, 1981. The ecology of a city and its people: the case of Hong Kong. ANU Press, Canberra. / Boyden, S. 1987. Western civilization in biological perspective: patterns in biohistory. Oxford University Press, Oxford. / Boyden, S., S. Dovers, M. Shirlow. 1990. Our biosphere under threat: ecological realities and Australia's opportunities. Oxford University Press, Melbourne. / Boyden, S. 1992. Biohistory: the interplay between human society and the biosphere - past and present. Parthenon/Unesco, Paris. / Boyden, S. 2004. The biology of civilisation: understanding human culture as a force in nature. UNSW Press. Sydney. / Boyden, S. 2005. People and nature: the big picture. Nature and Society Forum. Canberra.  Back to text

3. A generation is here taken to be 25 years. Back to text

4. For working lists of the universal health needs of humans, physical and psychosocial, based on this principle see Section 7 of Our Place in Nature. Back to text

5. I have discussed this theme elsewhere (e.g. Chapter 6 in S.Boyden. 2004. The biology of civilisation: understanding human culture as a force in nature. UNSW Press, Sydney). There is now a substantial literature on ‘evolutionary psychology’. Back to text