Revisiting ecomodernism: Incorporating the role,of artificial intelligence,in responding to the environmental crisis

Introduction: Revisiting ecomodernism in the age of artificial intelligence

At the outset, it is important to emphasize that the invitation to the authors of the Ecomodernist Manifesto (Ellis et al., 2024) to engage in further debate and discussion regarding their proposals and the Manifesto itself opens a wide space for the inclusion of new perspectives that could enrich the ongoing reflection on Ecomodernism.

The Ecomodernist Manifesto was originally formulated as a constructive response to global environmental challenges by scientists and environmentalists. It argues that human development, made possible by technological progress, has brought immense benefit-reducing hunger, disease, and poverty and that these achievements should be celebrated and expanded. Manifesto emphasizes that technological innovation, especially in clean energy and productive agriculture, is essential for decoupling human well-being from environmental degradation. This underscores that economic growth and environmental protection can be compatible, and supports a strong role for public policy, democratic governance, and social justice in shaping a sustainable future (Asafu-Adjaye et al., 2015).

With this in mind, it is worth considering whether artificial intelligence (AI) should be explicitly addressed in Manifesto itself. Given the transformative nature of AI and its rapid deployment in sectors directly related to sustainability—from energy and agriculture to climate modeling and urban planning—its omission may risk overlooking a key enabler (and potential disruptor) of sustainable development (SD) pathways.

While the Manifesto deliberately avoids explicit endorsement of specific technologies to maintain conceptual flexibility and long-term applicability, the current pace of technological change, particularly in the field of AI, warrants consideration within the broader Ecomodernist discourse. Rather than proposing a revision of Manifesto itself, this paper seeks to contribute to the evolving interpretation of Ecomodernism by highlighting the transformative and complex role of AI in shaping a sustainable future.

This response underscores the need to integrate emerging technologies, particularly AI, into the discourse on SD and the Anthropocene. There are many important issues that—as demonstrated by the rapid development of contemporary technologies—require attention and reflection, including the role of AI in shaping the future of both humanity and the Planet. Given the rapid pace of AI development and its significant impact on various aspects of life, it is crucial that this technology become an integral part of the discourse on achieving SD. AI is not only a tool that can help combat climate change but also a challenge with potential risks and consequences that cannot be ignored in a broader vision of the future.

In addition to technological innovation, integration is a critical component of sustainable future, as envisioned by Ellis et al. (2024). AI can be a significant driver in addressing environmental challenges, from optimizing energy consumption to promoting sustainable agricultural practices. However, AI itself is not without complexities. Some scientists argue that the term “artificial intelligence” may mislead us into believing that machines possess true intelligence akin to human reasoning (Mitchell, 2025; Svensson, 2023). Instead, AI should be viewed as a powerful set of tools designed to simulate cognitive functions, with limitations and ethical concerns that must be carefully considered (Alnfiai et al., 2025). In the ongoing global debate on AI governance, discussions have emerged about the need for robust regulations to ensure that the development of AI is consistent with social good, environmental sustainability, and equity (Batool et al., 2025; Chithra and Bhambri, 2025; Machado et al., 2025).

For example, while AI has the potential to enhance environmental monitoring (Abubakar et al., 2025), it also raises critical issues related to data privacy, algorithmic bias, and job displacement (Eyo-Udo et al., 2025; Nabil et al., 2025). Thus, a balanced and anticipatory approach—which the Manifesto could potentially explicitly incorporate—will be essential to maximize the role of AI in shaping a sustainable and just future.

Technological optimism in the ecomodernist manifesto: reflections in the context of artificial intelligence

The discussion raised by Ellis et al. (2024) in The Anthropocene Review, which addresses the Ecomodernist Manifesto, may require the addition of several key aspects that have not been addressed in the context of rapidly evolving technologies, such as AI. While the authors rightly highlight the need for technological innovation that can help address environmental challenges, the article overlooks a critical issue—the impact that AI is already having on society and our ability to manage ecological crises. AI is emerging as a tool with immense potential and significant threat (Habbal et al., 2024). In particular, Silicon Valley, the epicenter of AI innovation, emphasizes the potential of this technology (Fuerlinger and Garzik, 2022) but often fails to acknowledge the risks (Shah et al., 2025).

Artificial intelligence in sustainability transitions

AI can contribute to the development of clean energy technologies, optimization of water management systems, and improvements in agricultural efficiency and biodiversity protection (Raihan et al., 2024). However, this paradox is exemplified in the energy sector. Although AI can help optimize energy use and improve efficiency, it can also lead to significant increases in energy consumption. For example, AI can be used in smart buildings to self-manage energy, resulting in reduced energy consumption (Aguilar et al., 2021; Li et al., 2025a). However, the energy required to train and operate large-scale AI models, such as those used in intelligent chatbots, can lead to an increased energy footprint (Jiang et al., 2024; Singh, 2025a).

While it is still controversial to accurately measure the energy consumption and carbon emissions of AI, it is increasingly clear that the large-scale adoption and deployment of AI presents a consequential challenge: its model training, operation, and chip manufacturing are energy intensive because its complex computing infrastructure and systems, such as hardware and data centers, require massive amounts of energy that contribute to carbon emissions (Xia et al., 2025). This dual impact poses a significant challenge to the integration of AI into SD (Rillig et al., 2023; Singh, 2025b).

Regarding the link between AI and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), recent policy frameworks, such as the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, explicitly call for the alignment of AI development with the achievement of all 17 SDGs (Li et al., 2025b; Mirković and Scurrell, 2025). This alignment poses cognitive and practical challenges, particularly in ensuring that no goal is left behind, a principle that is deeply embedded in the 2030 Agenda (Spagnuolo et al., 2025). Moreover, the inherent technological neutrality of AI—its potential to either support or hinder progress—has been widely debated in literature (Neuwirth, 2024). This underscores the importance of normative and institutional guidance in steering AI toward sustainable and inclusive outcomes.

It is also notable that younger generations of computer scientists, who are often at the forefront of AI development, are focused on the transformative potential of AI in various fields, but may overlook more immediate, tangible sustainability issues that they can personally impact, such as minimizing food waste or e-waste in daily life. While food waste is a significant problem, particularly in the global north (Martin-Rios et al., 2025), this example serves as a metaphor for the larger paradox. This highlights the gap between technological optimism (techno-optimistic perspective) and the practical challenges of sustainable living and the idea that technological innovation will positively change the world (Königs, 2022; Pyka et al., 2025). The example also raises important questions about the broader responsibility of technologists to consider not only the innovations they create, but also the environmental and social costs of their technologies, particularly in the context of the Anthropocene (Chevance et al., 2020; Rodrigues, 2020; van Uffelen et al., 2024).

Responsible integration of artificial intelligence in sustainability strategies

It is important that discussions about AI include social and environmental responsibilities, including the reduction of resource waste. In the context of the Ecomodernist Manifesto, which promotes technology as a tool for improving human conditions and protecting the environment (Paulson, 2024), it is worth considering the full integration of the role of AI. While the authors of the Ecomodernist Manifesto focus on global challenges, such as greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity loss, and pollution, they fail to recognize that technologies such as AI can both accelerate change in these areas and create new challenges that cannot be ignored. Rather than viewing AI solely as a tool to “solve” problems, we must also consider its consequences, both positive and negative. While AI serves as the foundation for many innovations, it may also introduce new forms of inequality, surveillance, and control with far-reaching social and environmental implications (Adnan et al., 2024).

Conclusion

It is therefore essential that discussions about Ecomodernism and technology not only promote innovation but also emphasize responsibility for its implementation and long-term social and environmental impact. The future of AI must be shaped in such a way that technological development is accompanied by sustainable resource management, including adherence to the principles of social and environmental responsibility in everyday life. In this context, it is worth inviting the authors of the Ecomodernist Manifesto (Ellis et al., 2024) to consider the role of AI as a key tool that can reshape the future but also brings new challenges that require thoughtful regulation, responsibility, and education for SD. This addition to the debate highlights the dual nature of AI—as both a solution and a challenge—and underscores the need for its ethical integration into global sustainability efforts. Ecohumanism reinforces this perspective by emphasizing that technological progress must be guided by human values, ethical responsibility, and a commitment to social inclusion. Balancing the risks and benefits of AI will require the establishment of enforceable international legal standards, integration of sustainability and ecohumanistic criteria into AI development protocols, and creation of multilateral governance mechanisms that promote transparency, accountability, and alignment with the UN SDGs.