Garden City Development

Contents

1 Central place theory 11.1 Building the theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.2 Predictions of the theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.2.1 K = 3 Marketing principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.2.2 K = 4 Transport/Traffic principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.2.3 K = 7 Administrative principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.3 Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31.4 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31.5 Criticism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41.6 Newer developments: a dynamic concept for CPT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41.7 The importance of a City and other Theoretical Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41.8 Making Central Place Theory operational . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.8.1 Central Place Theory and Spatial Interaction Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.9 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.10 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.11 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.12 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

2 Unified settlement planning 72.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72.2 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72.3 Recent developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82.4 Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92.5 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92.6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92.7 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92.8 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

3 Circular economy 113.1 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113.2 Origins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113.3 Moving away from the linear model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113.4 Creating the circular framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

i

ii CONTENTS

3.5 Emergence of the idea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113.6 Founding principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

3.6.1 Waste is Food . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123.6.2 Diversity is strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123.6.3 Energy must come from renewable sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123.6.4 Systems thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

3.7 The circular economy framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123.7.1 Biomimicry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123.7.2 Industrial Ecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123.7.3 Cradle to Cradle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133.7.4 Blue Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

3.8 Towards the Circular Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133.9 Impact in Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133.10 Resource . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133.11 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143.12 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143.13 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

4 Regenerative design 154.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154.2 Regenerative versus sustainable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154.3 Preservation versus conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164.4 Food systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164.5 Size of regenerative systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164.6 Quantifying regenerativity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164.7 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164.8 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

5 Systems ecology 185.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185.2 Summary of relationships in systems ecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195.3 Closely related fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

5.3.1 Deep ecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195.3.2 Earth systems engineering and management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195.3.3 Ecological economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195.3.4 Ecological energetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195.3.5 Ecological humanities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195.3.6 Ecosystem ecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205.3.7 Industrial ecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

5.4 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205.6 Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

CONTENTS iii

5.7 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

6 The Blue Economy 226.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226.2 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226.3 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226.4 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

7 Permaculture 247.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247.2 Core tenets and principles of design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247.3 Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

7.3.1 Twelve design principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257.3.2 Layers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257.3.3 Guilds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267.3.4 Edge effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267.3.5 Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267.3.6 People and permaculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277.3.7 Domesticated animals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

7.4 Common practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277.4.1 Agroforestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277.4.2 Hügelkultur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277.4.3 Natural building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277.4.4 Rainwater harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287.4.5 Sheet mulching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287.4.6 Intensive rotational grazing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287.4.7 Keyline design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287.4.8 Fruit tree management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287.4.9 Mollison and Holmgren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

7.5 Trademark and copyright issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297.6 Criticisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

7.6.1 General criticisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297.6.2 Agroforestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

7.7 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307.8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

7.8.1 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307.8.2 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

7.9 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

8 Green economy 348.1 “Green” economists and economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348.2 Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

iv CONTENTS

8.3 Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358.4 Green Energy Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358.5 Criticisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 368.6 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 368.7 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 368.8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 378.9 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

9 Passive solar building design 409.1 Passive energy gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409.2 As a science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419.3 The solar path in passive design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419.4 Passive solar thermodynamic principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

9.4.1 Convective heat transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429.4.2 Radiative heat transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

9.5 Site specific considerations during design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439.6 Design elements for residential buildings in temperate climates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439.7 Efficiency and economics of passive solar heating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449.8 Key passive solar building design concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

9.8.1 Direct solar gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449.8.2 Indirect solar gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449.8.3 Isolated solar gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449.8.4 Heat storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449.8.5 Insulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459.8.6 Special glazing systems and window coverings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459.8.7 Glazing selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459.8.8 Operable shading and insulation devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469.8.9 Exterior colors reflecting - absorbing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

9.9 Landscaping and gardens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469.10 Other passive solar principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

9.10.1 Passive solar lighting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479.10.2 Passive solar water heating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

9.11 Comparison to the Passive House standard in Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479.12 Design tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479.13 Levels of application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489.14 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489.15 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489.16 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

10 Agroforestry 5010.1 As a science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5010.2 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

CONTENTS v

10.2.1 Adaptation to climate change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5110.3 Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

10.3.1 Parkland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5110.3.2 Shade systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5110.3.3 Crop-over-tree systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5110.3.4 Alley cropping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5110.3.5 Strip cropping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5210.3.6 Fauna-based systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5210.3.7 Boundary systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5210.3.8 Taungya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5210.3.9 Physical support systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5310.3.10 Agroforests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

10.4 Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5310.5 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

10.5.1 Permaculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5310.6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5410.7 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5410.8 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

11 Agroecology 5611.1 Ecological strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5611.2 Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

11.2.1 Agro-population ecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5711.2.2 Inclusive agroecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

11.3 Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5711.3.1 Views on organic and non-organic milk production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5711.3.2 Views on no-till farming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

11.4 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5911.4.1 Pre-WWII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5911.4.2 Post-WWII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5911.4.3 Fusion with ecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

11.5 Publications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6011.6 By region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

11.6.1 Latin America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6011.6.2 Madagascar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

11.7 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6011.8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6011.9 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6111.10External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

12 Agroecological restoration 6312.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

vi CONTENTS

12.2 Reintegration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6312.2.1 Biodiversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6312.2.2 Increasing heterogeneity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6312.2.3 Monoculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6312.2.4 Organic farming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

12.3 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6412.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

13 Community-supported agriculture 6613.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6613.2 The CSA system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

13.2.1 Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6713.2.2 Ideology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6713.2.3 Distribution and marketing methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

13.3 CSAs around the world . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6813.3.1 Orti Solidali (Italy) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

13.4 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6813.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6913.6 Additional reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6913.7 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

14 Forest gardening 7114.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7114.2 In tropical climates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

14.2.1 Americas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7214.2.2 Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7214.2.3 Nepal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

14.3 In temperate climates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7214.3.1 Seven-layer system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7314.3.2 Further development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7314.3.3 Permaculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

14.4 Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7414.5 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7414.6 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7414.7 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7514.8 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

15 Food desert 7715.1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7715.2 Origin and theories for development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7715.3 Access to quality food . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7815.4 Affordability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

CONTENTS vii

15.5 Rural food deserts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7815.6 Racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7915.7 Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8015.8 Barriers and proposed solutions in the United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8115.9 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8215.10References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8215.11Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

16 Polyculture 8516.1 Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8516.2 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8516.3 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8516.4 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

17 Urban forest 8617.1 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

17.1.1 Social, psychological, recreational, wildlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8717.1.2 Economic benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8717.1.3 Air pollution reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

17.2 Biogenic volatile organic compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8817.3 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8917.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

17.4.1 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8917.4.2 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

17.5 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

18 Green roof 9118.1 Environmental benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9118.2 Costs and financial benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9318.3 Disadvantages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9418.4 Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9418.5 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9518.6 Brown roofs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9518.7 Examples by country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

18.7.1 Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9618.7.2 Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9618.7.3 Costa Rica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9618.7.4 Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9618.7.5 France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9718.7.6 Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9718.7.7 Greece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9818.7.8 Iceland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

viii CONTENTS

18.7.9 Israel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9818.7.10 Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9818.7.11 Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9818.7.12 United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9918.7.13 United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

18.8 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10018.9 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10018.10Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10218.11External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

19 Earthship 10419.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10419.2 Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10519.3 Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

19.3.1 Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10519.3.2 Greywater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10619.3.3 Black water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

19.4 Electricity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10719.5 Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

19.5.1 Natural ventilation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10719.6 Heating problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10719.7 Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10819.8 Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10919.9 Argentina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10919.10Documentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10919.11Gallery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10919.12See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10919.13Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10919.14References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11019.15Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11019.16External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

20 Transit-oriented development 11120.1 Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11120.2 TOD in cities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

20.2.1 Latin America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11220.2.2 North America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11220.2.3 Asia and Oceania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11420.2.4 Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

20.3 Equity and housing cost concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11520.4 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11620.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

CONTENTS ix

20.6 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11720.7 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

20.7.1 Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11820.7.2 Images . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12120.7.3 Content license . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

Chapter 1

Central place theory

Central place theory is a geographical theory that seeksto explain the number, size and location of human settle-ments in an urban system.[1] The theory was created bythe German geographer Walter Christaller, who assertedthat settlements simply functioned as 'central places’ pro-viding services to surrounding areas.[1]

1.1 Building the theory

To develop the theory, Christaller made the followingsimplifying assumptions:[2]

All areas have

• an unbounded isotropic (all flat), homogeneous, lim-itless surface (abstract space)

• an evenly distributed population

• all settlements are equidistant and exist in a triangu-lar lattice pattern

• evenly distributed resources

• distance decay mechanism

• perfect competition and all sellers are economicpeople maximizing their profits

• consumers are of the same income level and sameshopping behaviour

• all consumers have a similar purchasing power anddemand for goods and services

• Consumers visit the nearest central places that pro-vide the function which they demand.They mini-mize the distance to be travelled

• no provider of goods or services is able to earn ex-cess profit(each supplier has a monopoly over a hin-terland)

Therefore the trade areas of these central places who pro-vide a particular good or service must all be of equal size

• there is only one type of transport and this would beequally easy in all directions

• transport cost is proportional to distance traveled inexample, the longer the distance traveled, the higherthe transport cost

The theory then relied on two concepts: threshold andrange.

• Threshold is the minimummarket (population or in-come) needed to bring about the selling of a partic-ular good or service.

• Range is the maximum distance consumers are pre-pared to travel to acquire goods - at some point thecost or inconvenience will outweigh the need for thegood.

The result of these consumer preferences is that a systemof centers of various sizes will emerge. Each center willsupply particular types of goods forming levels of hierar-chy. In the functional hierarchies, generalizations can bemade regarding the spacing, size and function of settle-ments.

1

2 CHAPTER 1. CENTRAL PLACE THEORY

1. The larger the settlements are in size, the fewer innumber they will be, i.e. there are many small vil-lages, but few large cities.

2. The larger the settlements grow in size, the greaterthe distance between them, i.e. villages are usuallyfound close together, while cities are spaced muchfurther apart.

3. As a settlement increases in size, the range and num-ber of its functions will increase .

4. As a settlement increases in size, the number ofhigher-order services will also increase, i.e. agreater degree of specialization occurs in the ser-vices.

The higher the order of the goods and services (moredurable, valuable and variable), the larger the range ofthe goods and services, the longer the distance people arewilling to travel to acquire them.At the base of the hierarchy pyramid are shopping cen-tres, newsagents etc. which sell low order goods. Thesecentres are small. At the top of the pyramid are centresselling high order goods. These centres are large. Ex-amples for low order goods and services are: newspaperstalls, groceries, bakeries and post offices. Examples forhigh order goods and services are: jewellery, large shop-ping arcades and malls. They are supported by a muchlarger threshold population and demand.

1.2 Predictions of the theory

From this he deduced that settlements would tend to formin a triangular/hexagonal lattice, this being the most effi-cient pattern to serve areas without any overlap.[1]

In the orderly arrangement of an urban hierarchy, sevendifferent principal orders of settlement have been iden-tified by Christaller, providing different groups of goodsand services. Settlement are regularly spaced - equidis-tant spacing between same order centers, with larger cen-ters farther apart than smaller centers. Settlements havehexagonal market areas, and are most efficient in numberand functions.The different layouts predicted by Christaller have K-values which show how much the Sphere of Influenceof the central places takes in — the central place itselfcounts as 1 and each portion of a satellite counts as itsportion:

1.2.1 K = 3 Marketing principle

According to the marketing principle K = 3, the mar-ket area of a higher-order place(node) occupies 1/3rd ofthe market area of each of the consecutive lower sizeplace(node) which lies on its neighbor; the lower size

K = 3 Principle

nodes(6 in numbers and 2nd larger circles) are located atthe corner of a largest hexagon around the high-order set-tlement. Each high-order settlement gets 1/3rd of eachsatellite settlement (which are 6 in total), thus K = 1 +6×1/3 = 3.However, although in this K = 3 marketing network thedistance traveled is minimized, the transport network isnot the most efficient, because there is no intermedi-ate transport links (network) between the larger places(nodes).

1.2.2 K = 4 Transport/Traffic principle

K = 4 Principle

According to K = 4 transport principle, the market area

1.4. EXAMPLES 3

of a higher-order place includes a half of the market areaof each of the six neighbouring lower-order places, asthey are located on the edges of hexagons around thehigh-order settlements. This generates a hierarchy ofcentral places which results in the most efficient trans-port network. There are maximum central places possi-ble located on the main transport routes connecting thehigher order center.The transportation principle involvesthe minimization of the length of roads connecting cen-tral places at all hierarchy levels. In this system of nest-ing, the lower order centres are all located along the roadslinking the higher order centres. This alignment of placesalong a road leads to minimization of road length. How-ever, for each higher order centre, there are now four cen-tres of immediate lower order,as opposed to three centresunder the marketing principle.

1.2.3 K = 7 Administrative principle

K = 7 Principle

According to K = 7 administrative principle (or political-social principle), settlements are nested according to sev-ens. Themarket areas of the smaller settlements are com-pletely enclosed within the market area of the larger set-tlement. Since tributary areas cannot be split adminis-tratively, they must be allocated exclusively to a singlehigher-order place. Efficient administration is the con-trol principle in this hierarchy.

1.3 Evaluation

The validity of the central place theory may vary with lo-cal factors, such as climate, topography, history of devel-opment, technological improvement and personal prefer-ence of consumers and suppliers.

Economic status of consumers in an area is also impor-tant. Consumers of higher economic status tend to bemore mobile and therefore bypass centers providing onlylower order goods. The application of central place the-ory must be tempered by an awareness of such factorswhen planning shopping center space location.Purchasing power and density affect the spacing of cen-ters and hierarchical arrangements. Sufficient densitieswill allow, for example, a grocery store, a lower orderfunction, to survive in an isolated location.Factors shaping the extent of market areas:

• Land use: industrial areas can provide little in theway of a consuming population

• Poor accessibility: this can limit the extent of a cen-ter’s market area

• Competition: this limits the extent of market areasin all directions

• Technology: high mobility afforded by the automo-bile allows overlapping of market areas

Market area studies provide another technique for us-ing central place theory as a retail location planning tool.The hierarchy of shopping centers has been widely usedwithin the planning of "new towns". In this new town,the hierarchy of business centers is evident. One mainshopping center provides mostly durable goods (higherorder); district and local shopping centers supply, increas-ingly, convenience (lower order) goods. These centersprovided for in the new town plan are not free from out-side competition. The impacts of surrounding existingcenters on the new town centers cannot be ignored.

1.4 Examples

The newly reclaimed polders of the Netherlands providean isotropic plane on which settlements have developedand in certain areas 6 small towns can be seen surround-ing a larger town, especially in the Noord-Oostpolder andFlevoland. The Fens of East Anglia in the UK also pro-vide a large expanse of flat land with no natural barriersto settlement development. Cambridge is a good exam-ple of a K=4 Transport Model Central Place, althoughit is surrounded by 7, rather than 6, settlements. Eachsatellite is 10–15 miles from Cambridge and each lies ona major road leading out of Cambridge:

• Ely - A10 north

• Newmarket - A1303 (now bypassed by A14/A11)northeast

• Haverhill - A1307 southeast

• Saffron Walden - A1301 south

4 CHAPTER 1. CENTRAL PLACE THEORY

• Royston - A10 southwest

• St Neots - A428 west

• St Ives - A14 northwest

As all of the satellite settlements are on transport links,this is a good example of a K=4 CPT model (although inthis case it is K=4.5 due to 7 rather than 6 settlements).Another example of the use of CPT was in the delin-eation of Medical Care Regions in California. A hier-archy of primary, secondary and tertiary care cities wasdescribed, and the population size and income needed tosupport each medical care specialty in California deter-mined.

1.5 Criticism

The Central Place Theory has been criticized for beingstatic; it does not incorporate the temporal aspect in thedevelopment of central places. Furthermore, the theoryholds up well when it comes to agricultural areas, but notindustrial or postindustrial areas due to their diversifiednature of various services or their varied distribution ofnatural resources.

1.6 Newer developments: a dy-namic concept for CPT

Newer theoretical developments have shown that it ispossible to overcome the static aspect of CPT. Veneris(1984) developed a theoretical model which starts with(a) a system of evenly distributed (“medieval”) towns;(b) new economic activities are located in some townsthus causing differentiation and evolution into an hier-archical (“industrial”)city system; (c) further differentia-tion leads into a post-hierarchical (“postindustrial”) citysystem. This evolution can be modelled by means ofthe three major CPT theories: stage (a) is a system ofvon Thunen “isolated states"; stage (b) is a Christalle-rian hierarchical system; stage (c) is a Löschian post-hierarchical system. Furthermore, stage (b) correspondsto Chris Alexander’s “tree” city, while (c) is similar to his“lattice” system (following his dictum “the city is not atree”).

1.7 The importance of a City andother Theoretical Considera-tions

According to Smith, Walter Christaller erred in his de-velopment of CPT in 1930 by using size of population

and number of telephones in determining the importanceof a city. Smith recognized that although population sizewas important to the area served by a city, the numberof kinds of services offered there was more importantas a measure of the importance of a city in attractingconsumers. In applying CPT to describe the delivery ofmedical care in California, Smith counted the numberof physician specialties to determine the importance ofa city in the delivery of medical care.Christaller also erred in the assumption that cities“emerge”. In California and much of the United States,many cities were situated by the railroads at the time thetracks were laid. In California, towns founded by the rail-roads were 12 miles apart, the amount of track a sectioncrew could maintain in the 1850s; larger towns were 60miles apart, the distance a steam engine could travel be-fore needing water. Older towns were founded a day’shorse ride apart by the Spanish priests who founded earlymissions.In medical care regions described by Smith, there is a hi-erarchy of services, with primary care ideally distributedthroughout an area, middle sized cities offering secondarycare, and metropolitan areas with tertiary care. Income,size of population, population demographics, distance tothe next service center, all had an influence on the num-ber and kind of specialists located in a population center.(Smith, 1977, 1979)For example, orthopedic surgeons are found in ski areas,obstetricians in the suburbs, and boutique specialties suchas hypnosis, plastic surgery, psychiatry are more likely tobe found in high income areas. It was possible to esti-mate the size of population (threshold) needed to supporta specialty, and also to link specialties that needed to co-operate and locate near each other, such as hematology,oncology, and pathology, or cardiology, thoracic surgeryand pulmonology.Her work is important for the study of physicianlocation—where physicians choose to practice and wheretheir practices will have a sufficient population size tosupport them. The income level of the population de-termines whether sufficient physicians will practice in anarea and whether public subsidy is needed to maintain thehealth of the population.The distribution of medical care in California followedpatterns having to do with the settlement of cities. Citiesand their hinterlands having characteristics of the Traf-fic Principle (See K=4 above) usually have six thorough-fares through them—the thoroughfares including high-ways, rivers, railroads, and canals. They are most efficientand can deliver the lowest cost services because trans-portation is cheaper. Those having settled on the marketprinciple (K=3 above) have more expensive services andgoods, as they were founded at times when transporta-tion was more primitive. In Appalachia, for example, themarket principle still prevails and rural medical care ismuch more expensive.

1.9. SEE ALSO 5

1.8 Making Central Place Theoryoperational

CPT is often criticized as being “unrealistic”. However,several studies show that it can describe existing urbansystems. An important issue is that Christaller’s originalformulation is incorrect in several ways (Smith). Theseerrors become apparent if we try to make CPT “opera-tional”, that is if we try to derive numerical data out of thetheoretical schemata. These problems have been iden-tified for by Veneris (1984) and subsequently by Open-shaw and Veneris (2003), who provided also theoreticallysound and consistent solutions, based on a K=3, 37-centreCP system:1. Closure problem. Christaller’s original scheme im-plies an infinite landscape. Although each market has fi-nite size, the total system has no boundaries to it. Nei-ther Christaller, nor the early related literature provideany guidance as to how the system can be “contained”.Openshaw and Veneris (2003) identified three differenttypes of closure, namely (a) isolated state, (b) territorialclosure and (c) functional closure. Each closure type im-plies different population patterns.2. Generating trips. Following the basic Christalle-rian logic and the closure types identified, Openshaw andVeneris (2003) calculate trip patterns between the 27 cen-tres.3. Calculating inter- and intra-zonal costs/distances.Christaller assumed freedom of movement in all direc-tions, which would imply “airline” distances between cen-tres. At the same time, he provided specific road net-works for the CP system, which do not allow for airlinedistances. This is a major flaw which neither Christaller,nor early related literature have identified. Openshaw andVeneris (2003) calculate costs/distances which are con-sistent with the Christallerian principles.

1.8.1 Central Place Theory and Spatial In-teraction Models

For more details on this topic, see Spatial InteractionModels.

It was once thought that central place theory is not com-patible with spatial interaction models (SIM). It is para-doxical however that some times towns or shopping cen-tres are planned with CPT, and subsequently evaluatedwith SIM.Openshaw and Veneris (2003) succeeded in linking thesetwo major regional theories in a clear and theoreticallyconsistent way: using the data they derived from the op-erationalization of CPT, they experimented with severalSIM. Following a thorough investigation via computersimulation, they reached important theoretical and prac-

tical conclusions.Smith was able to delineate medical care regions (therange), describe the hierarchy of medical services,the population base required of each medical specialty(threshold), the efficiency of regions, and the importanceof how an area was settled to the delivery of medical care,that is, according to traffic, market or administrative prin-ciples.

1.9 See also• Demographic gravitation

• Fractal

• Penrose tiling

• Zipf’s law

• Boundary problem (in spatial analysis)

• Unified settlement planning

1.10 Notes[1] Goodall, B. (1987) The Penguin Dictionary of Human

Geography. London: Penguin.

[2] http://uprav.ff.cuni.cz/?q=system/files/christaller.pdf

1.11 References• Openshaw S, Veneris Y, 2003, “Numerical experi-ments with central place theory and spatial interac-tion modelling” Environment and Planning A 35(8)1389–1403 ()

• Smith, Margot W. Physician’s Specialties and Med-ical Trade Areas: An Application of Central PlaceTheory. Papers and Proceedings of Applied Geog-raphy Conferences, Vol. 9, West Point NY 1986.

• Smith, Margot W. A Guide to the Delineation ofMedical Care Regions, Medical Trade Areas andHospital Service Areas. Public Health Reports,94:3:247 May 1979

• Smith, Margot W. The Economics of PhysicianLocation, Western Regional Conference, AmericanAssociation of Geographers, Chicago, Illinois, 1979

• Smith, MargotW. TheDistribution ofMedical Carein Central California: a Social and Economic Anal-ysis, Thesis, School of Public Health, University ofCalifornia, Berkeley, 1977 - 1004 pages

• Veneris, Y, 1984, Informational Revolution, Cyber-netics and UrbanModelling, PhD Thesis, Universityof Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

6 CHAPTER 1. CENTRAL PLACE THEORY

1.12 External links• Walter Christaller’s Theory of Central Places

• Walter Christaller: Hierarchical Patterns of Urban-ization

• Christaller’s Central Place Theory

• Christaller - Course notes

• Central Places Theory

Chapter 2

Unified settlement planning

Unified settlement planning (USP) is the component ofregional planning where a unified approach is applied fora region’s overall development.

2.1 Overview

Regions use their land in for various purposes, includ-ing agriculture, manufacturing, and public administra-tion. For society to develop, it has to amalgamate anddevelop settlements; their coexistence is the basis for aholistic development of any society.

The original “Garden City” concept by Ebenezer Howard, 1902.

Unified settlement planning is a contemporary approachfor the bulk requirement of urban amenities, for the vastregions of the developing countries with uniformly dis-tributed human settlement patterns. The approach isgaining importance in India, primarily due to the diffi-culties posed by the high density of existing rural set-tlements, in implementing the conventional plans withcontiguous urban zones, around pre‑existing cities. Theapproach utilizes the advantages of the uniformly dis-tributed human settlement patterns and avoids the diffi-

culties caused by the dense network of roads and villages,all over the regions. Unified settlement planning allowsholistic regional development without significantly dis-turbing existing villages, farmland, bodies of water, andforests.[1]

2.2 History

The Walter Christaller concept

Sir Ebenezer Howard (29 January 1850[2]– May 1,1928[3]) is known for his publication Garden Cities ofTo-morrow (1898), the description of a utopian cityin which people live harmoniously together with na-ture,which forms the basis for unified settlement plan-ning. The publication resulted in the founding of the gar-den city movement, that realized several Garden Cities inGreat Britain at the beginning of the 20th century.Walter Christaller (April 21, 1893 – March 9, 1969)who was a German geographer, developed the idea ofCentral Place Theory. It stated that settlements simplyfunctioned as 'central places’ providing services to sur-rounding areas.[4]

August Lösch (October 15, 1906 in Öhringen-) a German

7

8 CHAPTER 2. UNIFIED SETTLEMENT PLANNING

economist,is regarded as the founder of Regional Science.[5] August Lösch expanded on Christaller’s work in hisbook 'The Spatial Organization of the Economy'(1940).Unlike Christaller, whose system of central places be-gan with the highest-order, Lösch began with a systemof lowest-order (self-sufficient) farms, which were regu-larly distributed in a triangular-hexagonal pattern.[6] Hethought that Christaller’s model led to patterns wherethe distribution of goods and the accumulation of profitswere based entirely on location. He instead focused onmaximizing consumer welfare and creating an ideal con-sumer landscape where the need to travel for any goodwas minimized and profits were held level, not maxi-mized to accrue extra.[7]

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi visioned for a free coun-try governed by their own people;he penned down hisvisions in a book Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rulein 1909.[8]Swaraj stated that every village should beits own republic, “independent of its neighbours for itsown vital wants and yet interdependent for many oth-ers in which dependence is necessary”. A decentral-ized, unexploited,co-operative, self reliant and peace lov-ing development of a region is must for development ofIndia.[9]

These ideas of swaraj was developed in light of contem-porary scenario in India as Providing Urban Amenities toRural Areas (PURA), envisioned by former president ofIndia and an eminent scientist Dr A. P. J. Abdul Kalamand framed by Prof.Emerson.PURA proposes that urban infrastructure and servicesbe provided in rural hubs to create economic oppor-tunities outside of cities.These ideas will be possiblethrough physical connectivity by providing roads, elec-tronic connectivity by providing communication networkand knowledge connectivity by establishing professionaland Technical institutions. The mentioned programs willhave to be done in an integrated way so that economicconnectivity will emanate. The Indian central govern-ment has been running pilot PURA programs in severalstates since 2004.[10]

The Regional Module of Rajnandgaon,Chhattisgarh,India

2.3 Recent developments

The regional modules in Chhattisgarh(India)

The regional modules in Madhya Pradesh(India)

Chhattisgarh, one of the fastest growing states of India,has initiated deliberations on the subject, for its develop-ment strategies. The process has started with some use-ful studies and research on the area by Dr. Devendra K.Sharma.[11]

Based on a comprehensive scheme on the Unified settle-ment Plan for India (USP for India), targeted to servethe whole nation in future, the Chhattisgarh governmentis contemplating a project for the holistic developmentof a regional module of about 700 km2. area, enclosedbetween the highways connecting Durg, Ragnandgaon &Khairagarh.[12]

2.6. REFERENCES 9

Institute of Town Planners, India (ITPI) organised a na-tional seminar on the subject of Urban Dynamics andPlanning - 2032, on 18 & 19 April 2012. The seminarhas strongly recommended that the development of ru-ral and urban settlements in India should not be plannedseparately.[13]

2.4 Principles

The fundamental objective for a unified settlement planincludes:[14]

• Low cost of living with basic requirements.

• Ample work opportunities, near the residences .

• Viability of institutions along with ample options forthe clientele.

• Efficiency of the infrastructure, without any preju-dice to the density of the settlements.

• Fool-proof security, especially for the areas withlarge population concentration.

• Each region to be self reliant and interdependentwherever necessary.

The strategies for achieving the objectives include:[13]

• Definition of the regional modules.

• Minimizing the expenditure on land for urbanamenities.

• Avoiding expenditure on the new residences for thepopulation with existing houses.

• Development of efficient and economical trans-portation systems from origin to destination.

• Comparable generation and utilisation of energy inthe module.

• Self sufficiency in water utilization .

• Cooperative ownership of the urban land and its keyfacilities.

2.5 See also• Central place theory

• Transport planning

• Rural–urban fringe

• Regional planning

• Spatial planning

• Providing Urban Amenities to Rural Areas (PURA)

2.6 References[1] ISPC, . “uspforindia”. architect and planner. www.

godaddy.com. Retrieved 27 April 2012.

[2] Penguin Pocket On This Day. Penguin Reference Library.2006. ISBN 0-14-102715-0.

[3] (1933) Enciklopedio de Esperanto

[4] Goodall, B. (1987) The Penguin Dictionary of HumanGeography. London: Penguin.

[5] Losch, August. “August Lösch”. wikipedia. Retrieved 7June 2012.

[6] losch, August. “August Lösch”. brittanica. Retrieved 7June 2012.

[7] losch, August. “The gravity model”. Retrieved 7 June2012.

[8] Gandhi, Mohandas K. (1908). Hind Swaraj. NavajivanPublishing House. ISBN 81-7229-070-5.

[9] . Verma, S. L (1990). Panchayati raj, gram swaraj, andfederal polity. the University of Michigan: Rawat Publi-cations. p. 1. ISBN 8170330890.

[10] KALAM, A.P.J. ABDUL. “Providing Urban Amenitiesto Rural Areas”. scientist and former president. Ministryof Rural Development, Government of India. Retrieved27 April 2012.

[11] Sharma, Dr. Devendra K. The Uncut Diamond. Chhatis-garh: Satpura Integrated Rural Development Institute.pp. 1–20.

[12] Samvadata, Nagar (16 March 2012). “Village Metro kablue print taiyar”. Navbharat, Durg Bhilai: 1&2. Re-trieved 28 April 2012.

[13] Seminar, National (2012). Urban Dynamics and Plan-ning. Lucknow: Institute of Town Planners. pp. 1–195.

[14] pallot, judith (1981). planning for soviet union. britishlibrary. pp. the whole book. ISBN 0-85664-571-0.

2.7 Further reading• Peter Calthorpe & William Fulton, The RegionalCity: Planning for the End of Sprawl, ISBN 1-55963-784-6

• Planning for Soviet Union,Judith pallot &Denis J.B.Shaw,1981,ISBN- 0-85664-571-0

• Openshaw S, Veneris Y, 2003, “Numerical experi-ments with central place theory and spatial interac-tion modelling” Environment and Planning A 35(8)1389–1403 ()

• Veneris, Y, 1984, Informational Revolution, Cyber-netics and UrbanModelling, PhD Thesis, Universityof Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

10 CHAPTER 2. UNIFIED SETTLEMENT PLANNING

• Smith, Margot W. Physician’s Specialties and Med-ical Trade Areas: An Application of Central PlaceTheory. Papers and Proceedings of Applied Geog-raphy Conferences, Vol. 9, West Point NY 1986.

2.8 External links• www.uspforindia.com

• www.uspforindia.org

• Countryside Agency of England’s online research li-brary of urban rural fringe

• 'Case Studies’ of the Urban Rural fringe for students

Chapter 3

Circular economy

The circular economy is a generic term for an industrialeconomy that is, by design or intention, restorative and inwhich material flows are of two types, biological nutri-ents, designed to reenter the biosphere safely, and tech-nical nutrients, which are designed to circulate at highquality without entering the biosphere.

3.1 Scope

The term encompasses more than the production andconsumption of goods and services, including a shift fromfossil fuels to the use of renewable energy, and the roleof diversity as a characteristic of resilient and productivesystems. It includes discussion of the role of money andfinance as part of the wider debate, and some of its pio-neers have called for a revamp of economic performancemeasurement tools.[1]

3.2 Origins

The circular economy is grounded in the study offeedback rich (non-linear) systems, particularly livingsystems.[2] A major outcome of this is the notion of opti-mising systems rather than components, or the notion of‘design for fit’. As a generic notion it draws from a numberof more specific approaches including cradle to cradle,biomimicry, industrial ecology, and the ‘blue economy’.Most frequently described as a framework for thinking,its supporters claim it is a coherent model that has valueas part of a response to the end of the era of cheap oil andmaterials.

3.3 Moving away from the linearmodel

Linear “Take, Make, Dispose” industrial processes andthe lifestyles that feed on them deplete finite reserves tocreate products that end up in landfills or in incinerators.This realisation triggered the thought process of a few sci-entists and thinkers, including Walter R. Stahel, an archi-

tect, economist, and a founding father of industrial sus-tainability. Credited with having coined the expression“Cradle to Cradle” (in contrast with “Cradle to Grave”,illustrating our “Resource to Waste” way of functioning)in the late 1970s, Stahel worked on developing a “closedloop” approach to production processes, co-founding theProduct-Life Institute in Geneva more than 25 years ago.

3.4 Creating the circular frame-work

In their 1976 Hannah Reekman research report to theEuropean Commission, “The Potential for SubstitutingManpower for Energy”, Walter Stahel and Genevieve Re-day sketched the vision of an economy in loops (or cir-cular economy) and its impact on job creation, economiccompetitiveness, resource savings, and waste prevention.The report was published in 1982 as the book Jobs forTomorrow: The Potential for Substituting Manpower forEnergy.[3]

Considered as one of the first pragmatic and credible sus-tainability think tanks, the main goals of Stahel’s insti-tute are product-life extension, long-life goods, recondi-tioning activities, and waste prevention. It also insists onthe importance of selling services rather than products,an idea referred to as the “functional service economy”and sometimes put under the wider notion of “perfor-mance economy” which also advocates “more localisationof economic activity”.[4]

In broader terms, the circular approach is a frameworkthat takes insights from living systems. It considers thatour systems should work like organisms, processing nu-trients that can be fed back into the cycle—whether bio-logical or technical—hence the “closed loop” or “regen-erative” terms usually associated with it.

3.5 Emergence of the idea

The generic Circular Economy label can be applied to,and claimed by, several different schools of thought, thatall gravitate around the same basic principles which they

11

12 CHAPTER 3. CIRCULAR ECONOMY

have refined in different ways. The idea itself, which iscentred on taking insights from living systems, is hardly anew one and hence cannot be traced back to one precisedate or author, yet its practical applications to moderneconomic systems and industrial processes have gainedmomentum since the late 1970s, giving birth to fourprominent movements, detailed below. The idea of cir-cular material flows as a model for the economy was pre-sented in 1966 by Kenneth E. Boulding in his paper, TheEconomics of the Coming Spaceship Earth.[5] Promot-ing a circular economy was identified as national policyin China’s 11th five-year plan starting in 2006.[6] TheEllen MacArthur Foundation, an independent charity es-tablished in 2010, has more recently outlined the eco-nomic opportunity of a circular economy. As part of itseducational mission, the Foundation has worked to bringtogether complementary schools of thought and create acoherent framework, thus giving the concept a wide ex-posure and appeal.[7]

3.6 Founding principles

3.6.1 Waste is Food

Waste does not exist… the biological and technical com-ponents (nutrients) of a product are designed by intentionto fit within a materials cycle, designed for disassemblyand re-purposing. The biological nutrients are non-toxicand can be simply composted. Technical nutrients – poly-mers, alloys and other man-made materials are designedto be used again with minimal energy.

3.6.2 Diversity is strength

Modularity, versatility and adaptiveness are to be priori-tised in an uncertain and fast evolving world. Diverse sys-tems, with many connections and scales are more resilientin the face of external shocks, than systems built simplyfor efficiency.

3.6.3 Energy must come from renewablesources

As in life, any system should ultimately aim to run on‘current sunshine’ and generate energy through renewablesources.

3.6.4 Systems thinking

The ability to understand how things influence one an-other within a whole. Elements are considered as ‘fittingin’ their infrastructure, environment and social context.Whilst a machine is also a system, systems thinking usu-ally refers to non linear systems: systems where through

feedback and imprecise starting conditions the outcomeis not necessarily proportional to the input and where evo-lution of the system is possible : the system can displayemergent properties. Examples of these systems are allliving systems and any open system such as meteorologi-cal systems or ocean currents, even the orbits of the plan-ets have non linear characteristics.Understanding a system is crucial when trying to decideand plan (corrections) in a system. Missing or misinter-preting the trends, flows, functions of, and human influ-ences on, our socio-ecological systems could result in dis-astrous results. In order to prevent errors in planning ordesign an understanding of the system should be appliedto the whole and to the details of the plan or design. TheNatural Step created a set of systems conditions (or sus-tainability principles) that can be applied when designingfor (parts of) a circular economy to ensure alignment withfunctions of the socio-ecological system.

3.7 The circular economy frame-work

The circular economy is a framework that draws upon andencompasses principles from:[8]

3.7.1 Biomimicry

Main article: Biomimicry

Janine Benyus, author of “Biomimicry: Innovation In-spired by Nature”, defines her approach as “a new dis-cipline that studies nature’s best ideas and then imitatesthese designs and processes to solve human problems.Studying a leaf to invent a better solar cell is an exam-ple. I think of it as “innovation inspired by nature.[9]Biomimicry relies on three key principles:

• Nature as model: Biomimicry studies nature’s mod-els and emulates these forms, processes, systems,and strategies to solve human problems.

• Nature as measure: Biomimicry uses an ecologicalstandard to judge the sustainability of our innova-tions.

• Nature as mentor: Biomimicry is a way of viewingand valuing nature. It introduces an era based noton what we can extract from the natural world, butwhat we can learn from it.

3.7.2 Industrial Ecology

Main article: Industrial Ecology

3.8. TOWARDS THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY 13

Industrial Ecology is the study of material and energyflows through industrial systems. Focusing on connec-tions between operators within the “industrial ecosys-tem”, this approach aims at creating closed loop processesin which waste is seen as input, thus eliminating the no-tion of undesirable by-product. Industrial ecology adoptsa systemic - or holistic - point of view, designing produc-tion processes according to local ecological constraintswhilst looking at their global impact from the outset, andattempting to shape them so they perform as close to liv-ing systems as possible. This framework is sometimes re-ferred to as the “science of sustainability”, given its inter-disciplinary nature, and its principles can also be appliedin the services sector. With an emphasis on natural cap-ital restoration, Industrial Ecology also focuses on socialwellbeing.[10]

3.7.3 Cradle to Cradle

Main article: Cradle to Cradle Design

Created by German chemist Michael Braungart andAmerican architect Bill McDonough, the Cradle to Cra-dle Design model considers that all material involved inindustrial and commercial processes can be seen as nu-trients, of which there are two main categories: technicaland biological.[11] Technical nutrients should include onlymaterials that do not have a negative impact on the en-vironment (so non-harmful synthetic ones are accepted),while Biological nutrients are organic and can be returnedto the soil without specific treatment to decompose andeventually become food for the ecosystem. What we needare “completely healthy products that are either returnedto the soil or flow back to industry forever”, say Mc-Donough and Braungart.

3.7.4 Blue Economy

Main article: The Blue Economy

Initiated by former Ecover CEO and Belgian business-man Gunter Pauli, the Blue Economy is an open-sourcemovement bringing together concrete case studies, ini-tially compiled in an eponymous report handed over tothe Club of Rome. As the official manifesto states, “us-ing the resources available in cascading systems, (...) thewaste of one product becomes the input to create a newcash flow”.[12] Based on 21 founding principles, the BlueEconomy insists on solutions being determined by theirlocal environment and physical / ecological character-istics, putting the emphasis on gravity as the primarysource of energy - a point that differentiates this school ofthought from the others within the Circular Economy.[13]The report - which doubles as the movement’s manifesto- describes “100 innovations which can create 100 mil-lion jobs within the next 10 years”, and provides many

example of winning South-South collaborative projects,another original feature of this approach intent on pro-moting its hands-on focus.

3.8 Towards the Circular Economy

In January 2012, a report was released entitled Towardsthe Circular Economy: Economic and business rationalefor an accelerated transition. The report, commissionedby the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and developed byMcKinsey & Company, was the first of its kind to con-sider the economic and business opportunity for the tran-sition to a restorative, circular model. Using product casestudies and economy-wide analysis, the report details thepotential for significant benefits across the EU. It arguesthat a subset of the EU manufacturing sector could re-alise net materials cost savings worth up to $630 billionp.a. towards 2025—stimulating economic activity in theareas of product development, remanufacturing and re-furbishment. Towards the Circular Economy also identi-fied the key building blocks in making the transition toa circular economy, namely in skills in circular designand production, new business models, skills in buildingcascades and reverse cycles, and cross-cycle/cross-sectorcollaboration.[14]

3.9 Impact in Europe

On 17 December 2012, the European Commission pub-lished a document entitled Manifesto for a Resource Ef-ficient Europe. This manifesto clearly stated that “In aworld with growing pressures on resources and the en-vironment, the EU has no choice but to go for the tran-sition to a resource-efficient and ultimately regenerativecircular economy.”[15] Furthermore, the document high-lighted the importance of “a systemic change in the useand recovery of resources in the economy” in ensuringfuture jobs and competitiveness, and outlined potentialpathways to a circular economy, in innovation and invest-ment, regulation, tackling harmful subsidies, increasingopportunities for new business models, and setting cleartargets.

3.10 Resource

In March 2014 the first large scale event for the circu-lar economy was held with over 11,000 attendees fromacross the globe and all the major stakeholders in atten-dance. The launch of such an event signals the rise ofthe topic and it will act as an enabler for business to tran-sition towards more circular business models. This an-nual large scale event is now growing to represent theuptake of circular economy principles. (see http://www.resource-event.com).

14 CHAPTER 3. CIRCULAR ECONOMY

3.11 See also• Algorithmic Regulation

• Appropriate technology

• Cradle to Cradle

• Downcycling

• Huangbaiyu

• Life cycle assessment

• List of environment topics

• Regenerative Design

• Sustainability

• Sustainable Development

• The Blue Economy

• The Natural Step

• Upcycling

• Waste & Resources Action Programme

• Sharing economy

• Resource efficiency

3.12 References[1] Walter Stahel, “How to Measure it”, The Performance

Economy second edition - Palgrave MacMillan, page 84

[2] Towards the Circular Economy: an economic and businessrationale for an accelerated transition. Ellen MacArthurFoundation. 2012. p. 24.

[3] “Cradle to Cradle | The Product-Life Institute”. Product-life.org. 2012-11-14. Retrieved 2013-11-20.

[4] Clift & Allwood, “Rethinking the economy”, The Chem-ical Engineer, March 2011

[5] “The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth”.Eoearth.org. Retrieved 25 April 2013.

[6] Zhijun F, Nailing, Y (2007) “Putting a circular economyinto practice in China” Sustain Sci 2:95–101

[7] “The Ellen MacArthur Foundation website”. Ellen-macarthurfoundation.org. Retrieved 23 January 2013.

[8] Towards the Circular Economy: an economic and businessrationale for an accelerated transition. Ellen MacArthurFoundation. 2012.

[9] “What is Biomimicry?". Biomimicry Institute. Retrieved2013-11-20.

[10] “International Society for Industrial Ecology - Home”.Is4ie.org. Retrieved 2013-11-20.

[11] “Seven Steps to Doing Good Business, Pricing Article”.Inc.com. 1993-11-01. Retrieved 2013-11-20.

[12] “Blue Economy : Green Economy 2.0”. Blueeconomy.de.Retrieved 2013-11-20.

[13]

[14] Towards the Circular Economy: an economic and businessrationale for an accelerated transition. Ellen MacArthurFoundation. 2012. p. 60.

[15] “Manifesto for a Resource Efficient Europe”. EuropeanCommission. Retrieved 21 January 2013.

3.13 External links• The Product Life Institute

• The Resource Event

• The Circle Economy

• McDonough Braungart Design Chemistry website

• Biomimicry Institute

• Blue Economy website

• Towards the Circular Economy report

• WRAP supports a circular economy

• turntoo website

• On the New Economy website

Chapter 4

Regenerative design

Regenerative design is a process-oriented systems the-ory based approach to design. The term “regenerative”describes processes that restore, renew or revitalize theirown sources of energy and materials, creating sustainablesystems that integrate the needs of society with the in-tegrity of nature. The basis is derived from systems ecol-ogy with a closed loop input–output model or a model inwhich the output is greater than or equal to the input withall outputs viable and all inputs accounted for. Regen-erative design is the biomimicry of ecosystems that pro-vide for all human systems to function as a closed viableecological economics system for all industry. It parallelsecosystems in that organic (biotic) and synthetic (abiotic)material is not just metabolized but metamorphosed intonew viable materials. Ecosystems and regeneratively de-signed systems are holistic frameworks that seek to cre-ate systems that are absolutely waste free. The model ismeant to be applied to many different aspects of humanhabitation such as urban environments, buildings, eco-nomics, industry and social systems. Simply put, it is thedesign of ecosystems and human behavior, or culture thatfunction as human habitats.Whereas the highest aim of sustainable development isto satisfy fundamental human needs today without com-promising the possibility of future generations to satisfytheirs, the end-goal of regenerative design is to redevelopsystems with absolute effectiveness, that allows for theco-evolution of the human species along with other thriv-ing species.

4.1 History

During the late 1970s, John T. Lyle (1934–1998), alandscape architecture professor, challenged graduatestudents to envision a community in which daily activi-ties were based on the value of living within the limitsof available renewable resources without environmentaldegradation. Over the next few decades an eclectic groupof students, professors and experts from around the worldand crossing many disciplines developed designs for aninstitute to be built at Cal Poly Pomona. In 1992 the LyleCenter for Regenerative Studies was built over two yearsand opened in 1994. In that same year Lyle’s book Re-

generative Design for Sustainable Development was pub-lished by Wiley. In 1995 Lyle worked with William Mc-Donough at Oberlin College for the Adam Joseph LewisCenter for Environmental Studies completed in 2000. In2002 McDonough’s book, the more popular and success-ful, Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the WayWeMake Thingswas published reiterating the concepts developed by Lyle.Lyle saw the connection between concepts developed byBob Rodale of the Rodale Institute for regenerative agri-culture and the opportunity to develop regenerative sys-tems for all other aspects of the world. While regener-ative agriculture focused solely on agriculture, Lyle ex-panded its concepts and use to all systems. With regen-erative agriculture, the concepts are very straight forwardand simple but Lyle understood that when developing forother types of systems, more complicated ideas such asentropy and emergy must be taken into consideration.Swiss architect Walter R. Stahel developed approachesentirely similar to Lyle’s also in the late 1970s but insteadcoined the term cradle-to-cradle design made popular byMcDonough and Michael Braungart

4.2 Regenerative versus sustain-able

Regenerative and sustainable are essentially the samething except for one key point: in a sustainable system,lost ecological systems are not returned to existence. Ina regenerative system, those lost systems can ultimatelybegin “regenerating” back into existence. Put more sim-ply, regenerative systems create a better world than we(humans) found it, now and into the future.There is also a linguistic problem with the word “sustain-able.” The use of the word “sustainable,” by experts in thefield, is meant to mean “self-sustaining”. However, an at-tempt to change this definition to mean self-sustaining isnot faring well with the general public. Because the rootword “sustain” means only “last” or “endure,” the generalpublic and even many non-experts in the industry definethe word only as “able to last” or “the capacity to endure.”In popular usage by designers and product manufactur-ers, “sustainable” has become a relative term referring to

15

16 CHAPTER 4. REGENERATIVE DESIGN

any material, process or product (including a building)which is less toxic or environmental harmful than thoseconventionally used. A product that contains 75% recy-cled material is often considered “sustainable”, but is infact merely MORE sustainable than a comparable prod-uct that contains no recycled material. A truly sustainablematerial would be one made of 100% recycled materialthat can, in turn, be completely recycled into a compara-ble new material or product. This is rarely the case.“Regenerative” also has a linguistic problem, however avery different one, the term is still competing with the bi-ological community in terms of its use for the re-growthof limbs. However once the word itself gains wide us-age, it may become a non-specialized word and thus beapplicable to all fields, much like the term “sustainable”has experienced. When this occurs it may not suffer thesame fate as the term “sustainable” because a system oritem must be renewable in order to be regenerated. Re-generative’s root words are “re” and “generate” respec-tively meaning “again” and “to bring into existence.” Thusthe base meaning of regenerative means the “capacity tobring into existence again.” So if an item or system is re-generative the item or system has the capacity to bringitself into existence again. Using the example above, atruly regenerative product would not only be 100% recy-cled and recyclable, but it would also improve the envi-ronmental conditions at the factory where it was made,the business where it was used and so on throughoutits life-cycle (creating habitat, filtering water, catalyzingnitrogen-fixing processes in the soil, etc.).

4.3 Preservation versus conserva-tion

Regenerists place more importance on conservation thanon preservation. It is recognized in regenerative designthat humans are a part of natural ecosystems. To excludepeople is to create dense areas that destroy pockets of ex-isting ecosystems while preserving pockets of ecosystemswithout allowing them to change naturally over time. Byincorporating people into ecosystems all inputs are pulledfrom local areas and all outputs are accounted for creatinga waste-less system. When human systems cease to createwaste, what would once have been considered waste be-comes a resource for the input in which the output comesfrom.

4.4 Food systems

Regenerists call for the creation of demand on agricul-tural systems to produce regenerative foods. This is of-ten compared to the creation of the demand for organicfood. Organic foods have a relation to regenerative foodsin that regenerative food is all organic, but not all organic

food is regenerative. Organic food is not regenerative ifthe byproduct of the food crop is not a resource for thenext seasons crops and if other inputs for the crop didnot come from other resources within the farm which itis grown in.

4.5 Size of regenerative systems

The size of the regenerative system effects its regenera-tivity. The smaller a system is designed the more likely itis to be stable and regenerative. Multiple small regenera-tive systems that are put together to create larger regener-ative systems help to create supplies for multiple human-inclusive-ecological systems.

4.6 Quantifying regenerativity

No system can be absolutely regenerative, in other wordsthere can be no system that is 100% regenerative. Dueto evolution and the continuing and largely unpredictablechanges that occur over the lifetime of Earth, it is im-possible to create a 100% regenerative system. One canonly reach 99.999% efficiency, the ultimate goal. How-ever, with the energy material interchange, it is possibleto create enough energy to potentially create the equiva-lent amount of material used to create the system in thefirst instance. See example below.A completed object (an object with emergy, or embodiedenergy) can however create more energy than was used tocreate it. I.e. a solar panel outputting more energy thanits given embodied energy. However the system used tomake up the solar panel: the inputs such as the materialsfor the object (silicone) and the solar radiation can onlybe regenerated if enough energy is produced to generatethe materials used to make up the solar panel. However,the solar energy absorbed by the solar panels is still lostor at the very least converted into something else.

4.7 See also• Adam Joseph Lewis Center for Environmental Stud-ies

• Appropriate technology

• Booker T. Whatley

• Cradle to cradle

• Landscape urbanism

• Permaculture

• Regenerative agriculture

• Sustainability

4.8. EXTERNAL LINKS 17

• Walter R. Stahel

4.8 External links• Design for Human Ecosystems

• John T. Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies

• Regenesis Collaborative

• Soil Symbiotics

• Harmonic Ecological Design

• Regenerative Design Group

• Regenerative Design Institute

• Regenerative Architecture

• Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems

• Regenerative Design for Sustainable Development

Chapter 5

Systems ecology

Ecological analysis of CO2 in an ecosystem

Systems ecology is an interdisciplinary field of ecology,taking a holistic approach to the study of ecological sys-tems, especially ecosystems. Systems ecology can beseen as an application of general systems theory to ecol-ogy. Central to the systems ecology approach is theidea that an ecosystem is a complex system exhibitingemergent properties. Systems ecology focuses on inter-actions and transactions within and between biologicaland ecological systems, and is especially concerned withthe way the functioning of ecosystems can be influencedby human interventions. It uses and extends conceptsfrom thermodynamics and develops other macroscopicdescriptions of complex systems.

5.1 Overview

Systems ecology seeks a holistic view of the interac-tions and transactions within and between biological andecological systems. Systems ecologists realise that thefunction of any ecosystem can be influenced by humaneconomics in fundamental ways. They have thereforetaken an additional transdisciplinary step by includingeconomics in the consideration of ecological-economicsystems. In the words of R.L. Kitching:[1]

• Systems ecology can be defined as the approach tothe study of ecology of organisms using the tech-

niques and philosophy of systems analysis: that is, themethods and tools developed, largely in engineering,for studying, characteriszing and making predictionsabout complex entities, that is, systems..

• In any study of an ecological system, an essentialearly procedure is to draw a diagram of the systemof interest ... diagrams indicate the system’s bound-aries by a solid line. Within these boundaries, seriesof components are isolated which have been chosento represent that portion of the world in which thesystems analyst is interested ... If there are no con-nections across the systems’ boundaries with the sur-rounding systems environments, the systems are de-scribed as closed. Ecological work, however, dealsalmost exclusively with open systems.[2]

As a mode of scientific enquiry, a central feature of Sys-tems Ecology is the general application of the principlesof energetics to all systems at any scale. Perhaps the mostnotable proponent of this view was Howard T. Odum -sometimes considered the father of ecosystems ecology.In this approach the principles of energetics constituteecosystem principles. Reasoning by formal analogy fromone system to another enables the Systems Ecologist tosee principles functioning in an analogous manner acrosssystem-scale boundaries. H.T. Odum commonly used theEnergy Systems Language as a tool for making systemsdiagrams and flow charts.The fourth of these principles, the principle of maximumpower efficiency, takes central place in the analysis andsynthesis of ecological systems. The fourth principle sug-gests that the most evolutionarily advantageous systemfunction occurs when the environmental load matches theinternal resistance of the system. The further the envi-ronmental load is from matching the internal resistance,the further the system is away from its sustainable steadystate. Therefore the systems ecologist engages in a taskof resistance and impedance matching in ecological en-gineering, just as the electronic engineer would do.

18

5.3. CLOSELY RELATED FIELDS 19

5.2 Summary of relationships insystems ecology

summary of relationships

The image to the right is a summary of relationships be-tween the storage quantity Q, the forces X, N, and theoutflows J, resistance R, conductivity L, time constants T,and transfer coefficients k of ecosystem metabolism. Thetransfer coefficient "k", is also known as the metabolicconstant.

“All these relationships are automatically im-plied by the energy circuit symbol ".[3]

5.3 Closely related fields

5.3.1 Deep ecology

Main article: Deep ecology

Deep ecology is an ecological theory defined by ArneNaess, a Norwegian philosopher, Gandhian scholar, andenvironmental activist. He argues that the prevailing ap-proach to environmental management is anthropocentric,and that the natural environment is not only “more com-plex than we imagine, it is more complex than we canimagine.”[4] Naess formulated deep ecology in 1973 atan environmental conference in Budapest.Joanna Macy, John Seed, and others developed Naess’thesis into a branch they called experiential deep ecology.Their efforts were motivated by a need they perceived forthe development of an "ecological self", which views thehuman ego as an integrated part of a living system thatencompasses the individual. They sought to transcendaltruism with a deeper self-interest based on biosphericalequality beyond human chauvinism.

5.3.2 Earth systems engineering and man-agement

Main article: Earth systems engineering andmanagement

Earth systems engineering and management (ESEM) isa discipline used to analyze, design, engineer and man-age complex environmental systems. It entails a widerange of subject areas including anthropology, engineer-ing, environmental science, ethics and philosophy. Atits core, ESEM looks to “rationally design and managecoupled human-natural systems in a highly integrated andethical fashion”

5.3.3 Ecological economics

Main article: Ecological economics

Ecological economics is a transdisciplinary field of aca-demic research that addresses the dynamic and spatialinterdependence between human economies and naturalecosystems. Ecological economics brings together andconnects different disciplines, within the natural and so-cial sciences but especially between these broad areas. Asthe name suggests, the field is made up of researchers witha background in economics and ecology. An importantmotivation for the emergence of ecological economicshas been criticism on the assumptions and approachesof traditional (mainstream) environmental and resourceeconomics.

5.3.4 Ecological energetics

Main article: Ecological energetics

Ecological energetics is the quantitative study of the flowof energy through ecological systems. It aims to uncoverthe principles which describe the propensity of such en-ergy flows through the trophic, or 'energy availing' levelsof ecological networks. In systems ecology the principlesof ecosystem energy flows or “ecosystem laws” (i.e. prin-ciples of ecological energetics) are considered formallyanalogous to the principles of energetics.

5.3.5 Ecological humanities

Main article: Ecological humanities

Ecological humanities aims to bridge the divides betweenthe sciences and the humanities, and between Western,Eastern and Indigenous ways of knowing nature. Likeecocentric political theory, the ecological humanities arecharacterised by a connectivity ontology and a commit-ment to two fundamental axioms relating to the need tosubmit to ecological laws and to see humanity as part ofa larger living system.

20 CHAPTER 5. SYSTEMS ECOLOGY

A riparian forest in the White Mountains, New Hampshire (USA)

5.3.6 Ecosystem ecology

Main article: Ecosystem ecology

Ecosystem ecology is the integrated study of biotic andabiotic components of ecosystems and their interactionswithin an ecosystem framework. This science exam-ines how ecosystems work and relates this to their com-ponents such as chemicals, bedrock, soil, plants, andanimals. Ecosystem ecology examines physical and bio-logical structure and examines how these ecosystem char-acteristics interact.The relationship between systems ecology and ecosystemecology is complex. Much of systems ecology can beconsidered a subset of ecosystem ecology. Ecosystemecology also utilizes methods that have little to do withthe holistic approach of systems ecology. However, sys-tems ecology more actively considers external influencessuch as economics that usually fall outside the boundsof ecosystem ecology. Whereas ecosystem ecology canbe defined as the scientific study of ecosystems, systemsecology is more of a particular approach to the studyof ecological systems and phenomena that interact withthese systems.

5.3.7 Industrial ecology

Main article: Industrial ecology

Industrial ecology is the study of industrial processes aslinear (open loop) systems, in which resource and capitalinvestments move through the system to become waste,to a closed loop system where wastes become inputs fornew processes.

5.4 See also

• Agroecology

• Ecological literacy

• Emergy

• Energetics

• Energy Systems Language

• Holism in science

• Holon (philosophy)

• Holistic management

• Landscape ecology

• Antireductionism

• Biosemiotics

• Ecosemiotics

5.5 References[1] R.L. Kitching 1983, p.9.

[2] (Kitching 1983, p.11)

[3] H.T.Odum 1994, p. 26.

[4] A statement attributed to British biologist J.B.S. Haldane

5.6 Literature• Gregory Bateson, Steps to an Ecology ofMind, 2000.

• Kenneth Edmund Ferguson, Systems Analysis inEcology, WATT, 1966, 276 pp.

• Efraim Halfon, Theoretical Systems Ecology: Ad-vances and Case Studies, 1979.

• J. W. Haefner, Modeling Biological Systems: Princi-ples and Applications, London., UK, Chapman andHall 1996, 473 pp.

• Richard F Johnston, Peter W Frank, Charles Dun-can Michener, Annual Review of Ecology and Sys-tematics, 1976, 307 pp.

• R.L. Kitching, Systems ecology, University ofQueensland Press, 1983.

• Howard T. Odum, Systems Ecology: An Introduc-tion, Wiley-Interscience, 1983.

• Howard T. Odum, Ecological and General Systems:An Introduction to Systems Ecology. University Pressof Colorado, Niwot, CO, 1994.

• Friedrich Recknagel, Applied Systems Ecology: Ap-proach and Case Studies in Aquatic Ecology, 1989.

• James. Sanderson & Larry D. Harris, LandscapeEcology: A Top-down Approach, 2000, 246 pp.

• Sheldon Smith, Human Systems Ecology: Studies inthe Integration of Political Economy, 1989.

5.7. EXTERNAL LINKS 21

5.7 External links

Organisations

• Systems Ecology Department at the StockholmUni-versity.

• Systems Ecology Department at the University ofAmsterdam.

• Systems ecology Lab at SUNY-ESF.

• Systems Ecology program at the University ofFlorida

• Systems Ecology program at the University of Mon-tana

• Terrestrial Systems Ecology of ETH Zurich.

Chapter 6

The Blue Economy

For the design theory, see The Blue Economy: DesignTheory.

The Blue Economy: 10 years - 100 innovations - 100million jobs is a book by Gunter Pauli. The book ex-presses the ultimate aim that a Blue Economy businessmodel will shift society from scarcity to abundance “withwhat is locally available”, by tackling issues that causeenvironmental and related problems in new ways. Thebook highlights potential benefits in connecting and com-bining seemingly disparate environmental problems withopen-source scientific solutions based upon physical pro-cesses common in the natural world, to create solutionsthat are both environmentally beneficial and which havefinancial and wider social benefits. The book suggests thatwe can alter the way in which we run our industrial pro-cesses and tackle resultant environmental problems, re-focusing from the use of rare and high-energy cost re-sources to instead seek solutions based upon simpler andcleaner technologies. The book proposes to focus on thegeneration of more value, instead of blindly cutting costs.The book aims to inspire entrepreneurs to adopt its in-sights, by demonstrating ways in which this can createeconomic benefits via job creation, reduced energy use,and more revenue streams from each step of the process,at the same time benefiting the communities involved.'The Blue Economy' is presented in 14 chapters, each ofwhich investigates an aspect of the world’s economies andoffers a series of innovations capable of making aspectsof those economies sustainable. By 2014, the book hasbeen translated into +30 languages worldwide. [1] [2]

6.1 Background

The book was written by Gunter Pauli as Founder and Di-rector of Zero Emissions Research and Initiatives. Paulicites 20 years of experiences and nearly 200 successfulprojects all over the world as the basis for the ideas pre-sented in his book.[3]

The Blue Economy began as a project to find 100 ofthe best nature-inspired technologies that could affect theeconomies of the world, while sustainably providing ba-

sic human needs - potable water, food, jobs, and habit-able shelter. Starting with 2,231 peer review articles Dr.Pauli and his team found 340 innovations that could bebundled into systems that function the way ecosystemsdo. These were then additionally reviewed by a group ofcorporate strategists, expert financiers, and public policymakers. Further meetings with entrepreneurs, financialanalysts, business reporters, and corporate strategy aca-demics reduced the list to one hundred. These are listedin an appendix of The Blue Economy.[1]

6.2 See also

• Permaculture

• Appropriate technology

• Circular Economy

• Cradle-to-cradle design

• Downcycling

• Ellen MacArthur Foundation

• Green economy

• Huangbaiyu

• Life cycle assessment

• List of environment topics

• Regenerative Design

• Sustainability

• The Blue Economy: Design Theory

• Upcycling

6.3 References[1] “The Blue Economy on Paradigm Publications

http://www.paradigm-pubs.com/catalog/detail/BluEco".Paradigm Publications. April 2010.

22

6.4. EXTERNAL LINKS 23

[2] “The Blue Economy on Google Books http://books.google.de/books?id=aJ3HZD1H7ZsC&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+blue+economy&source=bl&ots=nWyn5bba5t&sig=xIxSq9R5_o9wKFSYdEdPcHdTSCA&hl=de&ei=W2xuTfbyB43QsgbVx_SFDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q&f=false". Paradigm Publications. April2010.

[3] “Zero Emissions Research and Initiatives http://zeri.org/".ZERI.

6.4 External links• Video, speech of Gunter Pauli at next! Conference

• Cartoon video presenting the Blue Economy

• Publisher Paradigm Publications

• The Blue Economy is the ZERI Philosophy in Ac-tion

• The Official Website

Chapter 7

Permaculture

Permaculture is a branch of ecological design,ecological engineering, environmental design,construction and integrated water resources managementthat develops sustainable architecture, regenerative andself-maintained habitat and agricultural systems modeledfrom natural ecosystems.[1][2] The term permaculture(as a systematic method) was first coined by AustraliansBill Mollison and David Holmgren in 1978. The wordpermaculture originally referred to “permanent agricul-ture” [3] but was expanded to stand also for “permanentculture,” as it was seen that social aspects were integralto a truly sustainable system as inspired by MasanobuFukuoka's natural farming philosophy.

Permaculture is a philosophy of workingwith, rather than against nature; of protractedand thoughtful observation rather than pro-tracted and thoughtless labor; and of lookingat plants and animals in all their functions,rather than treating any area as a single productsystem.—Bill Mollison, [4]

7.1 History

In 1929, Joseph Russell Smith took up an antecedentterm as the subtitle for Tree Crops: A Permanent Agricul-ture, a book in which he summed up his long experienceexperimenting with fruits and nuts as crops for humanfood and animal feed.[5] Smith saw the world as an inter-related whole and suggested mixed systems of trees andcrops underneath. This book inspired many individualsintent on making agriculture more sustainable, such asToyohiko Kagawa who pioneered forest farming in Japanin the 1930s.[6]

The definition of permanent agriculture as that which canbe sustained indefinitely was supported by Australian P.A. Yeomans in his 1964 book Water for Every Farm.Yeomans introduced an observation-based approach toland use in Australia in the 1940s; and the keyline de-sign as a way of managing the supply and distribution ofwater in the 1950s.

Stewart Brand’s works were an early influence noted byHolmgren.[7] Other early influences include Ruth Stoutand Esther Deans, who pioneered “no-dig gardeningmethods”, andMasanobu Fukuoka who, in the late 1930sin Japan, began advocating no-till orchards, gardens andnatural farming.[8]

The first recorded modern application of permacultureconcepts as a systematic method was possibly by Austrianfarmer Sepp Holzer in the 1960s.

7.2 Core tenets and principles ofdesign

The three core tenets of permaculture are:[9][10][11]

• Care for the earth: Provision for all life systems tocontinue and multiply. This is the first principle, be-cause without a healthy earth, humans cannot flour-ish.

• Care for the people: Provision for people to accessthose resources necessary for their existence.

• Return of surplus: Reinvesting surpluses back intothe system to provide for the first two ethics. Thisincludes returning waste back into the system to re-cycle into usefulness.[12]

Permaculture design emphasizes patterns of landscape,function, and species assemblies. It determines wherethese elements should be placed so they can provide max-imum benefit to the local environment. The central con-cept of permaculture is maximizing useful connectionsbetween components and synergy of the final design. Thefocus of permaculture, therefore, is not on each separateelement, but rather on the relationships created amongelements by the way they are placed together; the wholebecoming greater than the sum of its parts. Permaculturedesign therefore seeks to minimize waste, human labor,and energy input by building systems with maximal ben-efits between design elements to achieve a high level ofsynergy. Permaculture designs evolve over time by tak-ing into account these relationships and elements and can

24

7.3. THEORY 25

become extremely complex systems that produce a highdensity of food and materials with minimal input.[13]

The design principles which are the conceptual foun-dation of permaculture were derived from the scienceof systems ecology and study of pre-industrial examplesof sustainable land use. Permaculture draws from sev-eral disciplines including organic farming, agroforestry,integrated farming, sustainable development, and appliedecology.[14] Permaculture has been applied most com-monly to the design of housing and landscaping, integrat-ing techniques such as agroforestry, natural building, andrainwater harvesting within the context of permaculturedesign principles and theory.

7.3 Theory

7.3.1 Twelve design principles

Twelve Permaculture design principles articulated byDavid Holmgren in his Permaculture: Principles andPathways Beyond Sustainability:[15]

1. Observe and interact: By taking time to engage withnature we can design solutions that suit our particularsituation.

2. Catch and store energy: By developing systems thatcollect resources at peak abundance, we can usethem in times of need.

3. Obtain a yield: Ensure that you are getting truly use-ful rewards as part of the work that you are doing.

4. Apply self-regulation and accept feedback: We needto discourage inappropriate activity to ensure thatsystems can continue to function well.

5. Use and value renewable resources and services:Make the best use of nature’s abundance to reduceour consumptive behavior and dependence on non-renewable resources.

6. Produce no waste: By valuing and making use of allthe resources that are available to us, nothing goesto waste.

7. Design from patterns to details: By stepping back,we can observe patterns in nature and society. Thesecan form the backbone of our designs, with the de-tails filled in as we go.

8. Integrate rather than segregate: By putting the rightthings in the right place, relationships develop be-tween those things and they work together to supporteach other.

9. Use small and slow solutions: Small and slow sys-tems are easier to maintain than big ones, makingbetter use of local resources and producing moresustainable outcomes.

10. Use and value diversity: Diversity reduces vulnera-bility to a variety of threats and takes advantage ofthe unique nature of the environment in which it re-sides.

11. Use edges and value the marginal: The interface be-tween things is where the most interesting eventstake place. These are often the most valuable, di-verse and productive elements in the system.

12. Creatively use and respond to change: We can havea positive impact on inevitable change by carefullyobserving, and then intervening at the right time.

7.3.2 Layers

Suburban permaculture garden in Sheffield, UK with differentlayers of vegetation

Layers are one of the tools used to design functionalecosystems that are both sustainable and of direct ben-efit to humans. A mature ecosystem has a huge num-ber of relationships between its component parts: trees,understory, ground cover, soil, fungi, insects, and ani-mals. Because plants grow to different heights, a diversecommunity of life is able to grow in a relatively smallspace, as each layer is stacked one on top of another.There are generally seven recognized layers in a food for-est, although some practitioners also include fungi as aneighth layer.[16]

1. The canopy: the tallest trees in the system. Largetrees dominate but typically do not saturate the area,i.e. there exist patches barren of trees.

2. Understory layer: trees that revel in the dappled lightunder the canopy.

3. Shrubs: a diverse layer of woody perennials of lim-ited height. includes most berry bushes.

4. Herbaceous: Plants in this layer die back to theground every winter (if winters are cold enough, thatis). They do not produce woody stems as the Shrublayer does. Many culinary and medicinal herbs are

26 CHAPTER 7. PERMACULTURE

in this layer. A large variety of beneficial plants fallinto this layer. May be annuals, biennials or peren-nials

5. Soil surface/Groundcover: There is some overlapwith the Herbaceous layer and the Groundcoverlayer; however plants in this layer grow much closerto the ground, grow densely to fill bare patches ofsoil, and often can tolerate some foot traffic. covercrops retain soil and lessen erosion, along with greenmanures that add nutrients and organic matter to thesoil, especially nitrogen

6. Rhizosphere: Root layers within the soil. The majorcomponents of this layer are the soil and the organ-isms that live within it such as plant roots (includingroot crops such as potatoes and other edible tubers),fungi, insects, nematodes, worms, etc.

7. Vertical layer: climbers or vines, such as runnerbeans and lima beans (vine varieties)

[16][17]

7.3.3 Guilds

There are many forms of guilds, including guilds of plantswith similar functions (that could interchange within anecosystem), but the most common perception is that of amutual support guild. Such a guild is a group of specieswhere each provides a unique set of diverse functions thatwork in conjunction, or harmony. Mutual support guildsare groups of plants, animals, insects, etc. that work welltogether. Some plants may be grown for food production,some have tap roots that draw nutrients up from deepin the soil, some are nitrogen-fixing legumes, some at-tract beneficial insects, and others repel harmful insects.When grouped together in a mutually beneficial arrange-ment, these plants form a guild. See Dave Jacke’s workon edible forest gardens for more information on otherguilds, specifically resource-partitioning and community-function guilds.[18][19][20]

7.3.4 Edge effect

The edge effect in ecology is the effect of the juxtaposi-tion or placing side by side of contrasting environmentson an ecosystem. Permaculturists argue that, where vastlydiffering systems meet, there is an intense area of produc-tivity and useful connections. An example of this is thecoast; where the land and the sea meet there is a partic-ularly rich area that meets a disproportionate percentageof human and animal needs. So this idea is played out inpermacultural designs by using spirals in the herb gardenor creating ponds that have wavy undulating shorelinesrather than a simple circle or oval (thereby increasing theamount of edge for a given area).

7.3.5 Zones

Permaculture Zones 0-5.

Zones are a way of intelligently organizing design ele-ments in a human environment on the basis of the fre-quency of human use and plant or animal needs. Fre-quently manipulated or harvested elements of the designare located close to the house in zones 1 and 2. Less fre-quently used or manipulated elements, and elements thatbenefit from isolation (such as wild species) are fartheraway. Zones are about positioning things appropriately.Zones are numbered from 0 to 5.[21]

Zone 0 The house, or home center. Here permacultureprinciples would be applied in terms of aiming toreduce energy and water needs, harnessing naturalresources such as sunlight, and generally creatinga harmonious, sustainable environment in which tolive and work. Zone 0 is an informal designation,which is not specifically defined in Bill Mollison'sbook.

Zone 1 The zone nearest to the house, the location forthose elements in the system that require frequentattention, or that need to be visited often, such assalad crops, herb plants, soft fruit like strawberriesor raspberries, greenhouse and cold frames, prop-agation area, worm compost bin for kitchen waste,etc. Raised beds are often used in zone 1 in urbanareas.

Zone 2 This area is used for siting perennial plants thatrequire less frequent maintenance, such as occa-sional weed control or pruning, including currantbushes and orchards, pumpkins, sweet potato, etc.This would also be a good place for beehives, largerscale composting bins, and so on.

7.4. COMMON PRACTICES 27

Zone 3 The area where main-crops are grown, both fordomestic use and for trade purposes. After estab-lishment, care and maintenance required are fairlyminimal (provided mulches and similar things areused), such as watering or weed control maybe oncea week.

Zone 4 A semi-wild area. This zone is mainly used forforage and collecting wild food as well as productionof timber for construction or firewood.

Zone 5 A wilderness area. There is no human interven-tion in zone 5 apart from the observation of naturalecosystems and cycles. Through this zone we buildup a natural reserve of bacteria, moulds and insectsthat can aid the zones above it.[22]

7.3.6 People and permaculture

Permaculture uses observation of nature to create regen-erative systems, and the place where this has been mostvisible has been on the landscape. There has been a grow-ing awareness though that firstly, there is the need to paymore attention to the peoplecare ethic, as it is often thedynamics of people that can interfere with projects, andsecondly that the principles of permaculture can be usedas effectively to create vibrant, healthy and productivepeople and communities as they have been in landscapes.

7.3.7 Domesticated animals

Domesticated animals are often incorporated into sitedesign.[23]

7.4 Common practices

7.4.1 Agroforestry

Agroforestry is an integrated approach of using the in-teractive benefits from combining trees and shrubs withcrops and/or livestock. It combines agricultural andforestry technologies to create more diverse, productive,profitable, healthy and sustainable land-use systems.[24]In agroforestry systems, trees or shrubs are intention-ally used within agricultural systems, or non-timber forestproducts are cultured in forest settings.Forest gardening is a term permaculturalists use to de-scribe systems designed to mimic natural forests. For-est gardens, like other permaculture designs, incorpo-rate processes and relationships that the designers under-stand to be valuable in natural ecosystems. The termsforest garden and food forest are used interchangeablyin the permaculture literature. Numerous permacultur-ists are proponents of forest gardens, such as Graham

Bell, Patrick Whitefield, Dave Jacke, Eric Toensmeierand Geoff Lawton. Bell started building his forest gardenin 1991 and wrote the book The Permaculture Garden in1995, Whitefield wrote the book How to Make a ForestGarden in 2002, Jacke and Toensmeier co-authored thetwo volume book set Edible Forest Gardening in 2005,and Lawton presented the film Establishing a Food Forestin 2008.[13][25][26]

TreeGardens, such as Kandyan tree gardens, in South andSoutheast Asia, are often hundreds of years old. Whetherthey derived initially from experiences of cultivation andforestry, as is the case in agroforestry, or whether theyderived from an understanding of forest ecosystems, asis the case for permaculture systems, is not self-evident.Many studies of these systems, especially those that pre-date the term permaculture, consider these systems to beforms of agroforestry. Permaculturalists who include ex-isting and ancient systems of polycropping with woodyspecies as examples of food forests may obscure the dis-tinction between permaculture and agroforestry.Food forests and agroforestry are parallel approaches thatsometimes lead to similar designs.

7.4.2 Hügelkultur

Hügelkultur is the practice of burying large volumes ofwood to increase soil water retention. The porous struc-ture of wood acts as a sponge when decomposing under-ground. During the rainy season, masses of buried woodcan absorb enough water to sustain crops through the dryseason.[27] This technique has been used by permacultur-alists Sepp Holzer, Toby Hemenway, Paul Wheaton andMasanobu Fukuoka.[28][29]

7.4.3 Natural building

A natural building involves a range of building systemsand materials that place major emphasis on sustainability.Ways of achieving sustainability through natural buildingfocus on durability and the use of minimally processed,plentiful or renewable resources, as well as those that,while recycled or salvaged, produce healthy living envi-ronments and maintain indoor air quality.The basis of natural building is the need to lessen theenvironmental impact of buildings and other supportingsystems, without sacrificing comfort, health or aesthetics.To be more sustainable, natural building uses primarilyabundantly available, renewable, reused or recycled ma-terials. In addition to relying on natural building mate-rials, the emphasis on the architectural design is height-ened. The orientation of a building, the utilization of lo-cal climate and site conditions, the emphasis on naturalventilation through design, fundamentally lessen opera-tional costs and positively impact the environment. Build-ing compactly and minimizing the ecological footprint is

28 CHAPTER 7. PERMACULTURE

common, as are on-site handling of energy acquisition,on-site water capture, alternate sewage treatment and wa-ter reuse.

7.4.4 Rainwater harvesting

Rainwater harvesting is the accumulating and storing ofrainwater for reuse before it reaches the aquifer.[30] It hasbeen used to provide drinking water, water for livestock,water for irrigation, as well as other typical uses. Rain-water collected from the roofs of houses and local institu-tions can make an important contribution to the availabil-ity of drinking water. It can supplement the subsoil waterlevel and increase urban greenery. Water collected fromthe ground, sometimes from areas which are especiallyprepared for this purpose, is called stormwater harvest-ing.Greywater is wastewater generated from domestic activi-ties such as laundry, dishwashing, and bathing, which canbe recycled on-site for uses such as landscape irrigationand constructed wetlands. Greywater is largely sterile,but not potable (drinkable). Greywater differs from waterfrom the toilets which is designated sewage or blackwater,to indicate it contains human waste. Blackwater is septicor otherwise toxic and cannot be reused.

7.4.5 Sheet mulching

In agriculture and gardening, mulch is a protective coverplaced over the soil. Any material or combination canbe used as mulch, stones, leaves, cardboard, wood chips,gravel, etc., though in permaculture mulches of organicmaterial are the most common because they performmore functions. These include: absorbing rainfall, reduc-ing evaporation, providing nutrients, increasing organicmatter in the soil, feeding and creating habitat for soilorganisms, suppressing weed growth and seed germina-tion, moderating diurnal temperature swings, protectingagainst frost, and reducing erosion. Sheet mulching is anagricultural no-dig gardening technique that attempts tomimic natural processes occurring within forests. Sheetmulching mimics the leaf cover that is found on forestfloors. When deployed properly and in combination withother Permacultural principles, it can generate healthy,productive and low maintenance ecosystems.[31][32]

Sheet mulch serves as a “nutrient bank,” storing the nutri-ents contained in organic matter and slowly making thesenutrients available to plants as the organic matter slowlyand naturally breaks down. It also improves the soil by at-tracting and feeding earthworms, slaters and many othersoil micro-organisms, as well as adding humus. Earth-worms “till” the soil, and their worm castings are amongthe best fertilizers and soil conditioners. Sheet mulchingcan be used to reduce or eliminate undesirable plants bystarving them of light, and can be more advantageousthan using herbicide or other methods of control.

7.4.6 Intensive rotational grazing

Grazing has long been blamed formuch of the destructionwe see in the environment. However, it has been shownthat when grazing is modeled after nature, the oppositeeffect can be seen.[33][34] Also known as cell grazing,managed intensive rotational grazing (MIRG) is a sys-tem of grazing in which ruminant and non-ruminant herdsand/or flocks are regularly and systematically moved tofresh pasture, range, or forest with the intent to maxi-mize the quality and quantity of forage growth. This dis-turbance is then followed by a period of rest which allowsnew growth. MIRG can be used with cattle, sheep, goats,pigs, chickens, rabbits, geese, turkeys, ducks and otheranimals depending on the natural ecological communitythat is being mimicked. Sepp Holzer and Joel Salatinhave shown how the disturbance caused by the animalscan be the spark needed to start ecological succession orprepare ground for planting. Allan Savory's holistic man-agement technique has been likened to “a permacultureapproach to rangeland management”.[35][36] One varia-tion on MIRG that is gaining rapid popularity is calledeco-grazing. Often used to either control invasives or re-establish native species, in eco-grazing the primary pur-pose of the animals is to benefit the environment and theanimals can be, but are not necessarily, used for meat,milk or fiber.[37][38][39][40][41][42][43]

7.4.7 Keyline design

Keyline design is a technique for maximizing beneficialuse of water resources of a piece of land developed inAustralia by farmer and engineer P. A. Yeomans. TheKeyline refers to a specific topographic feature linked towater flow which is used in designing the drainage systemof the site.[44]

7.4.8 Fruit tree management

The no-pruning option is usually ig-nored by fruit experts, though of-ten practised by default in people’sback gardens! But it has its advan-tages. Obviously it reduces work,and more surprisingly it can lead tohigher overall yields.

—Patrick Whitefield,How to make a forestgarden p16

Masanobu Fukuoka, as part of early experiments onhis family farm in Japan, experimented with no-pruningmethods, noting that he ended up killing many fruit treesby simply letting them go, whichmade them become con-voluted and tangled, and thus unhealthy.[45][46] Then herealised this is the difference between natural-form fruit

7.5. TRADEMARK AND COPYRIGHT ISSUES 29

trees and the process of change of tree form that re-sults from abandoning previously-pruned unnatural fruittrees.[45][46] He concluded that the trees should be raisedall their lives without pruning, so they form healthy andefficient branch patterns that follow their natural incli-nation. This is part of his implementation of the Tao-philosophy of Wú wéi translated in part as no-action(against nature), and he described it as no unnecessarypruning, nature farming or “do-nothing” farming, of fruittrees, distinct from non-intervention or literal no-pruning.He ultimately achieved yields comparable to or exceedingstandard/intensive practices of using pruning and chemi-cal fertilisation.[45][46][47]

7.4.9 Mollison and Holmgren

Bill Mollison in January 2008.

In the mid-1970s, Bill Mollison and David Holmgrenstarted developing ideas about stable agricultural systemson the southern Australian island state of Tasmania. Thiswas a result of the danger of the rapidly growing useof industrial-agricultural methods. In their view, highlydependent on non renewable resources, these methodswere additionally poisoning land and water, reducingbiodiversity, and removing billions of tons of topsoil frompreviously fertile landscapes. A design approach calledpermaculture was their response and was first made pub-lic with the publication of their book Permaculture Onein 1978.By the early 1980s, the concept had broadened from agri-cultural systems design towards sustainable human habi-tats. After Permaculture One, Mollison further refinedand developed the ideas by designing hundreds of per-maculture sites and writing more detailed books, notablyPermaculture: A Designers Manual. Mollison lectured inover 80 countries and taught his two-week PermacultureDesign Course (PDC) to many hundreds of students.In 1991, a four-part television documentary by ABC pro-ductions called “The Global Gardener” showed perma-culture applied to a range of worldwide situations, bring-ing the concept to a much broader public. In 2012,the UMass Permaculture Initiative won the White House“Champions of Change” sustainability contest, which de-

clared that “they demonstrate how permaculture can feeda growing population in an environmentally sustainableand socially responsible manner”.[48]

In 1997, Holmgren explained that the primary agenda ofthe permaculture movement is to assist people to becomemore self-reliant through the design and development ofproductive and sustainable gardens and farms.[14]

7.5 Trademark and copyright is-sues

There has been contention over who, if anyone, controlslegal rights to the word permaculture: is it trademarkedor copyrighted? and if so, who holds the legal rightsto the use of the word? For a long time Bill Mollisonclaimed to have copyrighted the word, and his books saidon the copyright page, “The contents of this book and theword PERMACULTURE are copyright.” These state-ments were largely accepted at face-value within the per-maculture community. However, copyright law does notprotect names, ideas, concepts, systems, or methods ofdoing something; it only protects the expression or the de-scription of an idea, not the idea itself. Eventually Molli-son acknowledged that he was mistaken and that no copy-right protection existed for the word permaculture.[49]

In 2000, Mollison’s US based Permaculture Institutesought a service mark (a form of trademark) for the word,permaculture, when used in educational services such asconducting classes, seminars, or workshops.[50] The ser-vice mark would have allowed Mollison and his two Per-maculture Institutes (one in the US and one in Australia)to set enforceable guidelines regarding how permaculturecould be taught and who could teach it, particularly withrelation to the PDC, despite the fact that he had insti-tuted a system of certification of teachers to teach thePDC in 1993.This certification was granted to teacherslike April Sampson-kelly and others in 1993. The ser-vice mark failed and was abandoned in 2001. Also in2001 Mollison applied for trademarks in Australia forthe terms “Permaculture Design Course”[51] and “Perma-culture Design”.[51] These applications were both with-drawn in 2003. In 2009 he sought a trademark for “Per-maculture: A Designers’ Manual”[51] and “Introductionto Permaculture”,[51] the names of two of his books.These applications were withdrawn in 2011. There hasnever been a trademark for the word permaculture inAustralia.[51]

7.6 Criticisms

7.6.1 General criticisms

In 2011, Owen Hablutzel argued that “permaculture hasyet to gain a large amount of specific mainstream scien-

30 CHAPTER 7. PERMACULTURE

tific acceptance,” and that “the sensitiveness to being per-ceived and accepted on scientific terms is motivated inpart by a desire for Permaculture to expand and becomeincreasingly relevant.” Bec-Hellouin permaculture farmengaged in a research program in partnership with INRAand AgroParisTech to collect scientific data.[52][53]

In his books Sustainable Freshwater Aquaculture andFarming in Ponds and Dams, Nick Romanowski ex-presses the view that the presentation of aquaculture inBill Mollison’s books is unrealistic and misleading. How-ever Sustainable Freshwater Aquaculture has likewise re-ceived criticism as being “too basic”, “for primary schoolchildren” and “negative” in its approach.[54]

Linda Chalker-Scott alleges that Toby Hemenway's viewsregarding invasive species in the permaculture bookGaia’s Garden are pseudoscience.[55][56]

7.6.2 Agroforestry

GregWilliams argues that forests cannot bemore produc-tive than farmland because the net productivity of forestsdecline as they mature due to ecological succession.[57]Proponents of permaculture respond that this is true onlyif one compares data from between woodland forest andclimax vegetation, but not when comparing farmland veg-etation with woodland forest.[58] For example, ecologicalsuccession generally results in a forest’s productivity ris-ing after its establishment only until it reaches the wood-land state (67% tree cover), before declining until fullmaturity.[13]

7.7 See also• Agrarianism

• Aquaponics

• Bill Mollison

• Biomimicry

• Climate-friendly gardening

• David Holmgren

• Ecoagriculture

• Geoff Lawton

• Holzer Permaculture

• Hügelkultur

• List of permaculture projects

• Microponics

• Paul Wheaton

• Permaforestry

• Seed saving

• Sepp Holzer

7.8 References

7.8.1 Notes[1] Hemenway, Toby (2009). Gaia’s Garden: A Guide to

Home-Scale Permaculture. Chelsea Green Publishing. p.5. ISBN 978-1-60358-029-8.

[2] Mars, Ross (2005). The Basics of Permaculture Design.Chelsea Green Publishing. p. 1. ISBN 978-1-85623-023-0.

[3] King, FH (Franklin Hiram) Farmers of Forty Centuries:Or Permanent Agriculture in China, Korea and Japan(1911)

[4] Mollison, B. (1991). Introduction to permaculture. Tas-mania, Australia: Tagari.

[5] Smith, Joseph Russell; Smith, John (1987). TreeCrops: A permanent agriculture. Island Press. ISBN9781597268738.

[6] Robert Hart (1996). Forest Gardening. p. 41. ISBN9781603580502.

[7] David Holmgren (2006). “The Essence of Permacul-ture”. Holmgren Design Services. Retrieved 10 Septem-ber 2011.

[8] Mollison, Bill (September 15–21, 1978). “TheOne-StrawRevolution by Masanobu Fukuoka”. Nation Review. p.18.

[9] Greenblott, Kara, and Kristof Nordin. 2012. Per-maculture Design for Orphans and Vulnerable Chil-dren Programming: Low-Cost, Sustainable Solutionsfor Food and Nutrition Insecure Communities. Ar-lington, VA: USAID’s AIDS Support and Techni-cal Assistance Resources, AIDSTAR -One, Task Or-der 1. http://www.aidstar-one.com/focus_areas/ovc/resources/technical_briefs/permaculture_for_OVC

[10] Mollison, Bill (1988). Permaculture: A Designers’ Man-ual. Tagari Publications. p. 2. ISBN 0-908228-01-5.

[11] Holmgren, David (2002). Permaculture: Principles &Pathways Beyond Sustainability. Holmgren Design Ser-vices. p. 1. ISBN 0-646-41844-0.

[12] Mollison, Bill. “Permaculture: A Quiet Revolution —An Interviewwith BillMollison”. http://www.scottlondon.com. Retrieved 17 May 2013.

[13] “Edible Forest Gardening”.

[14] David Holmgren (1997). “Weeds or Wild Nature”. Per-maculture International Journal. Retrieved 10 September2011.

[15] “Permaculture: Principles and Pathways Beyond Sustain-ability”. Holmgren Design. Retrieved 2013-10-21.

7.8. REFERENCES 31

[16] http://tcpermaculture.com/site/2013/05/27/nine-layers-of-the-edible-forest-garden/

[17] http://permacultureschool.ca/food-forests/seven-layers-of-a-forest/

[18] Simberloff, D; Dayan, T (1991). “The Guild Con-cept and the Structure of Ecological Communities”.Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 22: 115.doi:10.1146/annurev.es.22.110191.000555.

[19] “Encyclopaedia Britannica article on guilds”. Britan-nica.com. Retrieved 2011-10-21.

[20] Williams, SE; Hero, JM (1998). “Rainforest frogs of theAustralian Wet Tropics: guild classification and the eco-logical similarity of declining species”. Proceedings. Bio-logical sciences / the Royal Society 265 (1396): 597–602.doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0336. PMC 1689015. PMID9881468.

[21] Burnett, G, 'Permaculture a Beginner’s Guide' (Spi-ralseed, 2001 ISBN 978-0955349218)

[22] Permacultuur course

[23] Bill Mollison (1988). Permaculture: A Designers’ Manual.p. 5. Deer, rabbits, sheep, and herbivorous fish are veryuseful to us, in that they convert unusable herbage to ac-ceptable human food. Animals represent a valid methodof storing inedible vegetation as food.

[24] “USDA National Agroforestry Center (NAC)". Unl.edu.2011-08-01. Retrieved 2011-10-21.

[25] “Graham Bell’s Forest Garden”.

[26] "Establishing a Food Forest review”.

[27] Wheaton, Paul. “raised garden beds: hugelkultur insteadof irrigation” Richsoil.com. Retrieved 2012-07-15.

[28] Hemenway, Toby (2009). Gaia’s Garden: A Guide toHome-Scale Permaculture. Chelsea Green Publishing.pp. 84-85. ISBN 978-1-60358-029-8.

[29] Feineigle, Mark. “Hugelkultur: Composting Whole TreesWith Ease”. Permaculture Research Institute of Australia.Retrieved 2012-07-15.

[30] “Rainwater harvesting 2012”. 2012. Retrieved 2012.

[31] “Sheet Mulching: Greater Plant and Soil Health for LessWork”. Agroforestry.net. 2011-09-03. Retrieved 2011-10-21.

[32] Sustainable Agriculture by J. Mason, Landlinks Press 2003

[33] “Prince Charles sends a message to IUCN’s World Con-servation Congress”. International Union for Conserva-tion of Nature. Retrieved 6 April 2013.

[34] Undersander, Dan et al. “Grassland birds: Fostering habi-tat using rotational grazing”. University of Wisconsin-Extension. Retrieved 5 April 2013.

[35] Fairlie, Simon (2010). Meat: A Benign Extravagance.Chelsea Green Publishing. pp. 191–193. ISBN9781603583251.

[36] Bradley, Kirsten. “Holistic Management: Herbivores,Hats, and Hope”. Milkwood. Retrieved 25 March 2014.

[37] “Munching sheep replace lawn mowers in Paris”. TheSunday Times Apr 04, 2013. Retrieved 7 April 2013.

[38] Ash, Andrew et al. “The Ecograze Project - developingguidelines to better manage grazing country”. ISBN 0-9579842-0-0. CSIRO PUBLISHING. Retrieved 7 April2013.

[39] McCarthy, Caroline. “Things to make you happy: Googleemploys goats”. CNET. Retrieved 7 April 2013.

[40] Gordon, Ian. “A systems approach to livestock/resourceinteractions in tropical pasture systems”. The James Hut-ton Institute. Retrieved 7 April 2013.

[41] Littman, Margaret. “Getting your goat: Eco-friendlymowers”. Chicago Tribune News. Retrieved 7 April 2013.

[42] Stevens, Alexis. “Kudzu-eating sheep take a bite out ofweeds”. ajc.com. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Re-trieved 7 April 2013.

[43] Klynstra, Elizabeth. “Hungry sheep invade CandlerPark”. CBS Atlanta. Retrieved 7 April 2013.

[44] Beaver State Permaculture (4 January 2013). “CreatingPermaculture Keyline Water Systems with Don Tipping”.

[45] Masanobu Fukuoka 1985 -revised ed. 1987 "The Nat-ural Way Of Farming-The Theory and Practice ofGreen Philosophy" Japan Publications, Tokyo. -page204

[46] Masanobu Fukuoka 1978 "The One–Straw Revolution"Rodale Press, U.S.A. -pages 13, 15-18, 46, 58-60

[47] The 1988 Ramon Magsaysay Award for Public Service- “BIOGRAPHY of Masanobu Fukuoka” The RamonMagsaysay Award Foundation website. (Retrieved 2011-3-2).

[48] “UMass Amherst permaculture project winsWhite Houseaward”.

[49] Russ Grayson (2011). “The Permaculture Papers 5:time of change and challenge — 2000-2004”. www.pacific-edge.info. Retrieved 8 September 2011.

[50] United States Patent and Trademark Office (2011).“Trademark Electronic Search System (TESS)". US De-partment of Commerce. Retrieved 8 September 2011.

[51] IP Australia (2011). Commonwealth of Australia http://pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/atmoss/Falcon.Result. Re-trieved 8 September 2011. Missing or empty |title= (help)

[52] Paul, Willi (2011 date=2012-06-21). “Symbols & Pat-terns. Interview with Owen Hablutzel, Director, Perma-culture Research Institute, USA.”. Check date values in:|date= (help)

[53] “Why permaculture needs accurate data andmeasurementto persuade the mainstream date=2012-05-02”.

[54] http://www.amazon.com/Sustainable-Freshwater-Aquacultures-Complete-Backyard/dp/0868408352

32 CHAPTER 7. PERMACULTURE

[55] https://sharepoint.cahnrs.wsu.edu/blogs/urbanhort/archive/2010/04/28/permaculture-beginning-a-discussion.aspx

[56] https://sharepoint.cahnrs.wsu.edu/blogs/urbanhort/archive/2010/05/26/permaculture-my-final-thoughts.aspx

[57] Williams, Greg (2001). “Gaia’s Garden: A Guide toHome-Scale Permaculture”. Whole Earth.

[58] “A toolbox, not a tool”. Findarticles.com. Retrieved2011-10-21.

7.8.2 Bibliography

• Bell, Graham. The Permaculture Way. 1st edition,Thorsons, (1992), ISBN 0-7225-2568-0, 2nd edi-tion Permanent Publications (UK) (2004), ISBN 1-85623-028-7.

• Bell, Graham. The Permaculture Garden. Perma-nent Publications (UK) (2004), ISBN 1-85623-027-9.

• Burnett, Graham. Permaculture: A Beginner’sGuide. Spiralseed (UK).

• Fern, Ken. Plants For A Future. [PermanentPublications] (UK) (1997). ISBN 1-85623-011-2.Google Books link

• Fukuoka, Masanobu. The One Straw Revolution.Rodale Books (US). Holistic Agriculture Library

• Holmgren, David, Future Scenarios. White RiverJunction, Chelsea Green. 2009

• Holmgren, David. Permaculture: Principles andPathways Beyond Sustainability. Holmgren DesignServices.

• Holmgren, David. Melliodora (Hepburn Permacul-ture Gardens): A Case Study in Cool Climate Perma-culture 1985 - 2005. Holmgren Design Services

• Holmgren, David. David Holmgren: Collected Writ-ings & Presentations 1978 - 2006 .Holmgren DesignServices

• Holmgren, David. “Update 49: Retrofitting the sub-urbs for sustainability”. CSIRO Sustainability Net-work

• Hart, Robert. Forest Gardening. Green Books (UK)ISBN 1-900322-02-1.

• Hemenway, Toby. Gaia’s Garden. Chelsea GreenBooks (US) (2001). ISBN 1-890132-52-7.

• Jacke, Dave with Eric Toensmeier. Edible ForestGardens. Volume I: Ecological Vision and The-ory for Temperate-Climate Permaculture, Volume

II: Ecological Design and Practice for Temperate-Climate Permaculture. Edible Forest Gardens (US)2005

• King, FH (Franklin Hiram) Farmers of Forty Cen-turies: Or Permanent Agriculture in China, Koreaand Japan (1911).

• Law, Ben. The Woodland House. [Permanent Pub-lications] (UK) (2005), ISBN 1-85623-031-7.

• Law, Ben. The Woodland Way. [Permanent Publi-cations] (UK), ISBN 1-85623-009-0.

• Loofs, Mona. Permaculture, Ecology and Agri-culture: An investigation into Permaculture theoryand practice using two case studies in northern NewSouth Wales Honours thesis, Human Ecology Pro-gram, Department of Geography, Australian Na-tional University 1993

• Macnamara, Looby. People and Permaculture: car-ing and designing for ourselves, each other andthe planet. [Permanent Publications] (UK) (2012)ISBN 1-85623-087-2.

• Mollison, Bill & David Holmgren PermacultureOne. Transworld Publishers (Australia) (1978),ISBN 0-552-98060-9.

• Mollison, Bill. Permaculture: A Designer’s Manual.Tagari Press (Australia).

• Mollison, Bill Permaculture Two. Tagari Press(Australia) (1979), ISBN 0-908228-00-7.

• Odum, H.T., Jorgensen, S.E. and Brown, M.T. 'En-ergy hierarchy and transformity in the universe', inEcological Modelling, 178, pp. 17–28 (2004).

• Paull, J. “Permanent Agriculture: Precursor to Or-ganic Farming”, Journal of Bio-Dynamics Tasma-nia, no.83, pp. 19–21, 2006. Organic eprints.

• Rosemary Morrow, Earth User’s Guide to Perma-culture ISBN 0-86417-514-0

• Whitefield, Patrick. Permaculture In A Nutshell.Permanent Publications (UK) (1993), ISBN 1-85623-003-1.

• Whitefield, Patrick. The Earth Care Manual.Permanent Publications (UK) (2004), ISBN 1-85623-021-X.

• Woodrow, Linda. The Permaculture Home Garden.Penguin Books (Australia).

• Yeomans, P.A. Water for Every Farm: A prac-tical irrigation plan for every Australian property,K.G. Murray Publishing Company Pty Ltd, Sydney,N.S.W., Australia (1973).

• Various, The Same Planet a different World.. freeeBook (France).

7.9. EXTERNAL LINKS 33

7.9 External links• “Permaculture for agroecology: design, movement,practice, and worldview. A review.” - The first sys-tematic review of the permaculture literature, fromthe perspective of agroecology.

• The Permaculture Research Institute - PermacultureForums, Courses, Information, News and World-wide Reports.

• The Worldwide Permaculture Network - Databaseof permaculture people and projects worldwide.

• The Permaculture Association - UK

• The 15 pamphlets based on the 1981 PermacultureDesign Course given by Bill Mollison (co-founderof permaculture) all in 1 pdf-file.

• David Holmgren’s web site (co-founder of perma-culture)

• Ethics and principles of permaculture (Holmgren’s)

• Permaculture a Beginners Guide - a 'pictorial walk-through'

• Permaculture – Sustainability and sustainable devel-opment

• Urban Permaculture Design·a city lot with over ahundred perennial edible varieties. Permacultureland acquisition discussion.

• A quarter acre suburban property in Eugene, Ore-gon - grass to garden, reclaim automobile space, el-evated/edible landscape, rain water catchment, pas-sive solar design, education

Chapter 8

Green economy

The green economy is defined as an economy that resultsin reducing environmental risks and ecological scarci-ties, and that aims for sustainable development withoutdegrading the environment. It is closely related withecological economics, but has a more politically appliedfocus.[1][2] The 2011 UNEP Green Economy Report ar-gues “that to be green, an economy must not only be ef-ficient, but also fair. Fairness implies recognising globaland country level equity dimensions, particularly in as-suring a just transition to an economy that is low- carbon,resource efficient, and socially inclusive.” [3]

A feature distinguishing it from prior economic regimesis the direct valuation of natural capital and ecologicalservices as having economic value (see The Economics ofEcosystems and Biodiversity and Bank of Natural Capital)and a full cost accounting regime in which costs external-ized onto society via ecosystems are reliably traced backto, and accounted for as liabilities of, the entity that doesthe harm or neglects an asset.[4]

Green Sticker and ecolabel practices have emerged asconsumer facing measurements of friendliness to the en-vironment and sustainable development. Many industriesare starting to adopt these standards as a viable way topromote their greening practices in a globalizing econ-omy. Green economy and the related field of ecologicaleconomics share many of their perspectives with feministeconomics, including the focus on sustainability, nature,justice and care values.[5]

8.1 “Green” economists and eco-nomics

“Green economics” is loosely defined as any theory ofeconomics by which an economy is considered to becomponent of the ecosystem in which it resides (afterLynn Margulis). A holistic approach to the subject istypical, such that economic ideas are commingled withany number of other subjects, depending on the partic-ular theorist. Proponents of feminism, postmodernism,the ecology movement, peace movement, Green politics,green anarchism and anti-globalization movement haveused the term to describe very different ideas, all exter-

nal to some equally ill-defined “mainstream” economics.The use of the term is further ambiguated by the politi-cal distinction of Green parties which are formally orga-nized and claim the capital-G “Green” term as a uniqueand distinguishing mark. It is thus preferable to refer toa loose school of "'green economists"' who generally ad-vocate shifts towards a green economy, biomimicry and afuller accounting for biodiversity. (see The Economics ofEcosystems and Biodiversity especially for current author-itative international work towards these goals and Bank ofNatural Capital for a layperson’s presentation of these.)Some economists view green economics as a branch orsubfield of more established schools. For instance, itis regarded as classical economics where the traditionalland is generalized to natural capital and has some at-tributes in common with labor and physical capital (sincenatural capital assets like rivers directly substitute forman-made ones such as canals). Or, it is viewed asMarxist economics with nature represented as a formof Lumpenproletariat, an exploited base of non-humanworkers providing surplus value to the human economy,or as a branch of neoclassical economics in which theprice of life for developing vs. developed nations is heldsteady at a ratio reflecting a balance of power and that ofnon-human life is very low.An increasing commitment by the UNEP (and nationalgovernments such as the UK) to the ideas of natural capi-tal and full cost accounting under the banner 'green econ-omy' could blur distinctions between the schools and re-define them all as variations of “green economics”. As of2010 the Bretton Woods institutions (notably the WorldBank[6] and International Monetary Fund (via its “GreenFund” initiative) responsible for global monetary policyhave stated a clear intention to move towards biodiversityvaluation and a more official and universal biodiversityfinance. Taking these into account targeting not less butradically zero emission and waste is what is promoted bythe Zero Emissions Research and Initiatives. The UNEP2011 Green Economy Report informs that "[b]ased onexisting studies, the annual financing demand to greenthe global economy was estimated to be in the range US$1.05 to US$ 2.59 trillion. To place this demand in per-spective, it is about one-tenth of total global investmentper year, as measured by global Gross Capital Forma-

34

8.3. MEASUREMENT 35

tion.” [7]

8.2 Definition

Karl Burkart defines a green economy as based on sixmain sectors:[8]

• Renewable energy

• Green buildings

• Sustainable transport

• Water management

• Waste management

• Land management

The three pillars of sustainability.

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) rep-resenting global business defines green economy as“an economy in which economic growth and environ-mental responsibility work together in a mutually re-inforcing fashion while supporting progress on socialdevelopment”.[9][10]

In 2012, the ICC published the Green EconomyRoadmap, containing contributions from experts fromaround the globe brought together in a two-year consul-tation process. The Roadmap represents a comprehen-sive and multidisciplinary effort to clarify and frame theconcept of “green economy”. It highlights the essentialrole of business in bringing solutions to common globalchallenges. It sets out the following 10 conditions whichrelate to business/intra-industry and collaborative actionfor a transition towards a green economy:

• Open and competitive markets

• Metrics, accounting, and reporting

• Finance and investment

• Awareness

• Life cycle approach

• Resource efficiency and decoupling

• Employment

• Education and skills

• Governance and partnership

• Integrated policy and decision-making

8.3 Measurement

The Global Green Economy Index™ (GGEI), [11] mea-sures the green economic performance of 60 countriesand 70 cities as judged by expert practitioners and thirdparty indicators and datasets. The 2014 GGEI resultsrank these countries and cities on four primary dimen-sions:

1. Leadership & Climate Change and the extent towhich national leaders are champions for green is-sues and addressing climate change on the local andinternational stage

2. Efficiency Sectors and how well each countryperforms at greening its building, transportation,tourism and energy sectors

3. Markets & Investment and the perceived and ac-tual opportunities for renewable energy and clean-tech investment and the climate for innovation andcommercialization of green products and services ineach country

4. Environment & Natural Capital and the extent towhich countries protect their environmental assetsand use natural capital efficiently

This index is arguably deceptive as being designed for ap-pearance rather than ecologically factual. [12]

8.4 Green Energy Issues

Green economies require green energy generation basedon renewable energy to replace fossil fuels as well asenergy conservation and efficient energy use.There is justification for market failure to respond toenvironmental protection and climate protection needswith the excuse that high external costs and high initialcosts for research, development, and marketing of greenenergy sources and green products prevents firms fromvoluntarily reducing their ecological footprints. [13] Thegreen economy may need government subsidies as mar-ket incentives to motivate firms to invest and producegreen products and services. The German Renewable En-ergy Act, legislations of many other member states of theEuropean Union and the American Recovery and Rein-vestment Act of 2009, all provide such market incen-tives. However, other experts[14] argue that green strate-gies can be highly profitable for corporations that under-stand the business case for sustainability and can marketgreen products and services beyond the traditional greenconsumer.

36 CHAPTER 8. GREEN ECONOMY

8.5 Criticisms

A number of organisations and individuals have criticisedaspects of the 'Green Economy', particularly the main-stream conceptions of it based on using pricemechanismsto protect nature, arguing that this will extend corporatecontrol into new areas from forestry to water. The re-search organisation ETC Group argues that the corporateemphasis on bio-economy “will spur even greater conver-gence of corporate power and unleash the most massiveresource grab in more than 500 years.”[15] Venezuelanprofessor Edgardo Lander says that the UNEP’s report,Towards a Green Economy,[16] while well-intentioned“ignores the fact that the capacity of existing political sys-tems to establish regulations and restrictions to the freeoperation of the markets – even when a large majorityof the population call for them – is seriously limited bythe political and financial power of the corporations.”[17]Ulrich Hoffmann, in a paper for UNCTAD also says thatthe focus on Green Economy and “green growth” in par-ticular, “based on an evolutionary (and often reduction-ist) approach will not be sufficient to cope with the com-plexities of climate change” and “may rather give muchfalse hope and excuses to do nothing really fundamen-tal that can bring about a U-turn of global greenhousegas emissions.[18] Clive Spash, an ecological economist,has criticised the use of economic growth to address en-vironmental losses,[19] and argued that the Green Econ-omy, as advocated by the UN, is not a new approach atall and is actually a diversion from the real drivers ofenvironmental crisis.[20] He has also criticised the UN’sproject on the economics of ecosystems and biodiversity(TEEB),[21] and the basis for valuing ecosystems servicesin monetary terms.[22]

8.6 See also

• Agroecology

• Alternative energy indexes

• Chemical Leasing

• Circular Economy

• Eco-capitalism

• Ecological Economics

• Ecology of contexts

• Embodied energy

• Embodied water

• Energy accounting

• Energy economics

• Energy policy

• Energy quality

• Environmental economics

• Environmental ethics

• Exergy

• Feed-in tariff

• Free-market environmentalism

• Green accounting

• Human development theory

• Human ecology

• ISO 14000

• Industrial ecology

• Land value tax

• List of Green topics

• Market Governance Mechanisms

• Natural capital

• Natural resource economics

• Passive solar building design

• Pigovian tax

• Renewable energy commercialization

• Renewable heat

• Restoration economy

• Sustainable design

• Clean Tech Nation

• The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity(TEEB)

• World energy resources and consumption

8.7 Notes[1] United Nations Environment Programme

[2] Lynn R. Kahle, Eda Gurel-Atay, Eds (2014). Communi-cating Sustainability for the Green Economy. New York:M.E. Sharpe. ISBN 978-0-7656-3680-5.

[3] UNEP, 2011, Towards a Green Economy: Pathways toSustainable Development and Poverty Eradication, www.unep.org/greeneconomy

[4] Runnals, D. (2011) “Environment and economy: joined atthe hip or just strange bedfellows?”. S.A.P.I.EN.S. 4 (1)

8.8. REFERENCES 37

[5] Aslaksen, Iulie; Bragstad, Torunn; Ås, Berit (2014).“Feminist Economics as Vision for a Sustainable Fu-ture”. In Bjørnholt, Margunn; McKay, Ailsa. Count-ing on Marilyn Waring: New Advances in Feminist Eco-nomics. Demeter Press/Brunswick Books. pp. 21–36.ISBN 9781927335277.

[6] BBC.co.uk

[7] UNEP, 2011, Towards a Green Economy: Pathways toSustainable Development and Poverty Eradication, www.unep.org/greeneconomy

[8] “How do you define the 'green' economy?". MNN -Mother Nature Network. 2009-01-09. Retrieved 2013-11-09.

[9] International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), (2012). ICCGreen Economy Roadmap. A guide for business, policy-makers and society.

[10] UNDESA, (2012). A guidebook to the Green Economy.

[11] “2014 Global Green Economy Index”. Dual Citizen LLC.19 October 2014. Retrieved 19 October 2014.

[12] “Indicators in Practice”. Yale University.

[13] (Reinhardt, 1999; King and Lenox, 2002; Wagner, 203;Wagner, et al., 2005)

[14] Amory Lovins, Hunter Lovins, and Paul Hawken, authorsofNatural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolu-tion, and Jay Conrad Levinson and Shel Horowitz, authorsof Guerrilla Marketing Goes Green

[15] Etcgroup (2011) “Who will control the Green Economy”

[16] “Green Economy - Green Economy Report”. UNEP.2011-11-16. Retrieved 2013-11-09.

[17] E.Lander (2011), “The Green Economy: A Wolf inSheep’s Clothing”

[18] U.Hoffmann (2011), “Some reflections on climate change,green growth illusions and development space”

[19] Spash, C.L. 2007. Fallacies of economic growth in ad-dressing environmental losses: Human induced climaticchange. Newsletter of the Australia New Zealand Societyfor Ecological Economics (ANZSEE), no. May, 2-4

[20] Spash, C.L. 2012. Green Economy, Red Herring. Envi-ronmental Values, vol. 21, no. 2, 95-99

[21] Spash, C.L. 2011. Terrible economics, ecosystems andbanking. Environmental Values, vol. 20, no. 2, 141-145

[22] Spash, C.L. 2008. Howmuch is that ecosystem in the win-dow? The one with the bio-diverse trail. EnvironmentalValues, vol. 17, no. 2, 259-284

8.8 References

• Jeremy Rifkin (2013), “The Third Industrial Revo-lution”. VII,233-242

• Brand, Ulrich (2012), "Green Economy - the NextOxymoron? No Lessons Learned from Failuresof Implementing Sustainable Development. GAIA21(1): 28-35.

• Common, M. and Stagl, S. 2005. Ecological Eco-nomics: An Introduction. New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.

• Daly, H. and Townsend, K. (eds.) 1993. ValuingThe Earth: Economics, Ecology, Ethics. Cambridge,Mass.; London, England: MIT Press.

• Georgescu-Roegen, N. 1975. Energy and economicmyths. Southern Economic Journal 41: 347-381.

• Hahnel, R. (2010), Green Economics: Confrontingthe Ecological Crisis. New York: M. E. Sharpe.

• Horowitz, S. 2010. “Amory Lovins: Reinvent-ing Human Enterprise for Sustainability” Downto Business magazine, http://frugalmarketing.com/dtb/amorylovins.shtml.

• International Chamber of Commerce (ICC),(2012), “ICC Green Economy Roadmap. A guidefor business, policymakers and society”.

• Kennet M., and Heinemann V, (2006) Green Eco-nomics, Setting the Scene. in International Journalof Green Economics, Vol 1 issue 1/2 (2006) Inder-science, Geneva.

• Kennet M., (2009) Emerging Pedogogy in anEmerging Discipline, Green Economics in ReardonJ., (2009) Pluralist education, Routledge.

• Kennet M., (2008) Introduction to Green Eco-nomics, in Harvard School Economics Review.

• Kennet M.,and Kamarudin N., (2012) Green Eco-nomics: The Greening of Asia and China. TheGreen Economics Institute.

• Kennet M.,and Winston Ka-Ming Mak (2012)Green Economics and Climate Change. The GreenEconomics Institute

• Kennet M., and Michelle Gale De Oliveira,and Winchester A., (2012) Green Economics:Women’{}s Unequal Pay and Poverty. The GreenEconomics Institute

• Kennet M.,and Winchester A. and Felton J. (2012)Green Economics:Voices of Africa. The GreenEconomics Institute.

38 CHAPTER 8. GREEN ECONOMY

• KennetM., and Felton J.,(2012)TheGreen Built En-vironment:A Handbook. The Green Economics In-stitute.

• Kennet M., and Courea E, Pepinyte (2011) Hand-book of Green Economics. The Green EconomicsInstitute.

• Kennet M., (2012) The Green Economics Reader.The Green Economics Institute.

• Kennet M., Heinemann V. and Gale De OlivieraM.,(2010) Green Economics in Il Libro del Anno, Tre-cani. Italy.

• Kennet M.(2011) Green Economics. in Latvian In-stitute of Science Papers. (2011)

• Kennet M., (2009) Green Economics and the So-cio Ecological Transformation, in Rosa LuxemburgFoundation Occasional Papers.71. G. Krause Dietz.

• Kennet M., (2010) Kennet, in 200 Visionaries. inMurtha. W. (2010) Red Wheel Publishers.

• Kennet M., and Gale de Oliveira (2012) Greeningthe Academy. Syracuse University.

• Kennet M., (2010) Green Economics. in ReardonJ., Pluralist Education. Routledge.

• Kennet M., and Jocuite K., (2011) Green Eco-nomics and the Age of Global Transformation. inProceedings of the 6th Annual Oxford UniversityConference on Green Economics, The Green Eco-nomics Institute. Ed. K.Jociute. (2011).

• King, Andrew; Lenox, Michael, 2002. ‘Does it re-ally pay to be green?’ Journal of Industrial Ecology5, 105-117.

• Krishnan R, Harris JM, Goodwin NR. (1995). ASurvey of Ecological Economics. Island Press. ISBN1-55963-411-1, ISBN 978-1-55963-411-3.

• Martinez-Alier, J. (1990) Ecological Economics:Energy, Environment and Society. Oxford, Eng-land: Basil Blackwell.

• Martinez-Alier, J., Ropke, I. eds.(2008), RecentDevelopments in Ecological Economics, 2 vols., E.Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.

• Røpke, I. (2004) The early history of modern eco-logical economics. Ecological Economics 50(3-4):293-314.

• Røpke, I. (2005) Trends in the development of eco-logical economics from the late 1980s to the early2000s. Ecological Economics 55(2): 262-290.

• Reinhardt, F. (1999) ‘Market failure and the envi-ronmental policies of firms: economic rationales for‘beyond compliance’ behavior.’ Journal of IndustrialEcology 3(1), 9-21.

• Scott Cato, Molly (2009). Green Economics: An In-troduction to Theory, Policy and Practice. Earthscan.ISBN 1844075710. Retrieved 1 July 2014.

• Spash, C. L. (1999) The development of environ-mental thinking in economics. Environmental Val-ues 8(4): 413-435.

• Vatn, A. (2005) Institutions and the Environment.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar

• United Nations Division for Sustainable Develop-ment (UNDESA) (2012), “A guidebook to theGreen Economy”.

• United Nations Environment Programme(2010), Green Economy Report: A Preview.http://www.unep.org/GreenEconomy/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=JvDFtjopXsA%3d&tabid=1350&language=en-US

• United Nations Environment Programme (2010),Developing Countries Success Stories. http://www.unep.org/pdf/GreenEconomy_SuccessStories.pdf

• United Nations Environment Programme (2010),A Brief for Policymakers on the Green Econ-omy and Millennium Development Goals.http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/30/docs/policymakers_brief_GEI&MDG.pdf

• United Nations Environment Programme(2010), Driving a Green Economy ThroughPublic Finance and Fiscal Policy Reform.http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/30/docs/DrivingGreenEconomy.pdf

• United Nations Environment Programme(2009), Global Green New Deal Update,http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=ciH9RD7XHwc%3d&tabid=1394&language=en-US

• United Nations Environment Programme(2009), Global Green New Deal, Policy brief,http://www.unep.org/pdf/A_Global_Green_New_Deal_Policy_Brief.pdf

• United Nations Environment Programme (2008),Green Jobs: Towards Decent Work in a Sus-tainable, Low-Carbon World (Policy mes-sages and main findings for decision makers),http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=hR62Ck7RTX4%3d&tabid=1377&language=en-US

• United Nations Environment Programme (2008),‘Global green new deal - environmentally-focusedinvestment historic opportunity for 21st centuryprosperity and job generation.’ London/Nairobi,October 22.

8.9. EXTERNAL LINKS 39

• Wagner, Ma. (2003) “Does it pay to be eco-efficientin the European energy supply industry?" Zeitschriftfür Energiewirtschaft 27(4), 309-318.

• Wagner, M. et al. (2002) “The relationship betweenenvironmental and economic performance of firms:what does the theory propose and what does the em-pirical evidence tell us?" Greener Management In-ternational 34, 95-108.

8.9 External links• ICC Green Economy Roadmap

• The Green Economy Coalition

• The Green Economist

• UNEP – The Green Economy Initiative

• The 2012 Earth Summit

• The Green Economics Institute

• The Green Economics Institute Global Campaign-ing Forum

• The International Society for Ecological Economics(ISEE)

• Green Recovery

• The International Journal of Green Economics

• Eco-Economy Indicators

• EarthTrends World Resources Institute

• The Inspired Economist

• Ecological Economics Encyclopedia

• The academic journal, Ecological Economics

• The US Society of Ecological Economics

• The Beijer International Institute for EcologicalEconomics

• Green Economist website

• Sustainable Prosperity

• The Gund Institute of Ecological Economics

• Ecological Economics at Rensselaer Polytechnic In-stitute

• An ecological economics article about reconcilingeconomics and its supporting ecosystem

• “Economics in a Full World”, by Herman E. Daly

• NOAA Economics of Ecosystems Data & Products

Chapter 9

Passive solar building design

Active and passive solar systems are used in the Solar Umbrellahouse to achieve nearly 100% energy neutrality.

In passive solar building design, windows, walls, andfloors are made to collect, store, and distribute solar en-ergy in the form of heat in the winter and reject solarheat in the summer. This is called passive solar designbecause, unlike active solar heating systems, it does notinvolve the use of mechanical and electrical devices.[1]

The key to designing a passive solar building is to besttake advantage of the local climate. Elements to be con-sidered include window placement and size, and glazingtype, thermal insulation, thermal mass, and shading.[2]Passive solar design techniques can be applied most easilyto new buildings, but existing buildings can be adapted or“retrofitted”.

Elements of passive solar design, shown in a direct gain applica-tion

9.1 Passive energy gain

Passive solar technologies use sunlight without active me-chanical systems (as contrasted to active solar). Suchtechnologies convert sunlight into usable heat (in wa-ter, air, and thermal mass), cause air-movement forventilating, or future use, with little use of other en-ergy sources. A common example is a solarium on theequator-side of a building. Passive cooling is the use ofthe same design principles to reduce summer cooling re-quirements.Some passive systems use a small amount of conventionalenergy to control dampers, shutters, night insulation, andother devices that enhance solar energy collection, stor-age, and use, and reduce undesirable heat transfer.Passive solar technologies include direct and indirectsolar gain for space heating, solar water heating sys-tems based on the thermosiphon or geyser pump, useof thermal mass and phase-change materials for slowingindoor air temperature swings, solar cookers, the solarchimney for enhancing natural ventilation, and earth shel-tering.More widely, passive solar technologies include the solarfurnace and solar forge, but these typically require someexternal energy for aligning their concentrating mirrors orreceivers, and historically have not proven to be practicalor cost effective for widespread use. 'Low-grade' energy

40

9.3. THE SOLAR PATH IN PASSIVE DESIGN 41

needs, such as space and water heating, have proven, overtime, to be better applications for passive use of solar en-ergy.

9.2 As a science

The scientific basis for passive solar building designhas been developed from a combination of climatology,thermodynamics ( particularly heat transfer: conduction(heat), convection, and electromagnetic radiation ), fluidmechanics / natural convection (passive movement ofair and water without the use of electricity, fans orpumps), and human thermal comfort based on heat in-dex, psychrometrics and enthalpy control for buildings tobe inhabited by humans or animals, sunrooms, solariums,and greenhouses for raising plants.Specific attention is divided into: the site, location andsolar orientation of the building, local sun path, the pre-vailing level of insolation ( latitude / sunshine / clouds/ precipitation (meteorology) ), design and constructionquality / materials, placement / size / type of windows andwalls, and incorporation of solar-energy-storing thermalmass with heat capacity.While these considerations may be directed toward anybuilding, achieving an ideal optimized cost / perfor-mance solution requires careful, holistic, system integra-tion engineering of these scientific principles. Modern re-finements through computer modeling (such as the com-prehensive U.S. Department of Energy “Energy Plus”[3]building energy simulation software), and application ofdecades of lessons learned (since the 1970s energy crisis)can achieve significant energy savings and reduction ofenvironmental damage, without sacrificing functionalityor aesthetics.[4] In fact, passive-solar design features suchas a greenhouse / sunroom / solarium can greatly enhancethe livability, daylight, views, and value of a home, at alow cost per unit of space.Much has been learned about passive solar building de-sign since the 1970s energy crisis. Many unscientific,intuition-based expensive construction experiments haveattempted and failed to achieve zero energy - the totalelimination of heating-and-cooling energy bills.Passive solar building construction may not be difficultor expensive (using off-the-shelf existing materials andtechnology), but the scientific passive solar building de-sign is a non-trivial engineering effort that requires signif-icant study of previous counter-intuitive lessons learned,and time to enter, evaluate, and iteratively refine thesimulation input and output.One of the most useful post-construction evaluationtools has been the use of thermography using digitalthermal imaging cameras for a formal quantitative scien-tific energy audit. Thermal imaging can be used to docu-ment areas of poor thermal performance such as the neg-ative thermal impact of roof-angled glass or a skylight on

a cold winter night or hot summer day.The scientific lessons learned over the last three decadeshave been captured in sophisticated comprehensivebuilding energy simulation computer software systems(like U.S. DOE Energy Plus, et al.).Scientific passive solar building design with quantitativecost benefit product optimization is not easy for a novice.The level of complexity has resulted in ongoing bad-architecture, and many intuition-based, unscientific con-struction experiments that disappoint their designers andwaste a significant portion of their construction budgeton inappropriate ideas.The economic motivation for scientific design and en-gineering is significant. If it had been applied compre-hensively to new building construction beginning in 1980(based on 1970’s lessons learned), America could be sav-ing over $250,000,000 per year on expensive energy andrelated pollution today.Since 1979, Passive Solar Building Design has beena critical element of achieving zero energy by educa-tional institution experiments, and governments aroundthe world, including the U.S. Department of Energy, andthe energy research scientists that they have supported fordecades. The cost effective proof of concept was estab-lished decades ago, but cultural assimilation into archi-tecture, construction trades, and building-owner decisionmaking has been very slow and difficult to change.The new terms “Architectural Science” and “Architec-tural Technology” are being added to some schools ofArchitecture, with a future goal of teaching the above sci-entific and energy-engineering principles.

9.3 The solar path in passive design

23.5 deg

23.5 deg

(90 deg - Local Latitude)

Dec 21 (winter solstice)

Mar 21, Sep 21 (equinox)

June 21 (summer solstice)

47 deg

Solar altitude over a year; latitude based on New York, New York

Main articles: Sun path and Position of the Sun

The ability to achieve these goals simultaneously is funda-mentally dependent on the seasonal variations in the sun’spath throughout the day.

42 CHAPTER 9. PASSIVE SOLAR BUILDING DESIGN

This occurs as a result of the inclination of the Earth’saxis of rotation in relation to its orbit. The sun path isunique for any given latitude.In Northern Hemisphere non-tropical latitudes fartherthan 23.5 degrees from the equator:

• The sun will reach its highest point toward the south(in the direction of the equator)

• As winter solstice approaches, the angle at which thesun rises and sets progressivelymoves further towardthe South and the daylight hours will become shorter

• The opposite is noted in summer where the sun willrise and set further toward theNorth and the daylighthours will lengthen[5]

The converse is observed in the Southern Hemisphere,but the sun rises to the east and sets toward the west re-gardless of which hemisphere you are in.In equatorial regions at less than 23.5 degrees, the posi-tion of the sun at solar noon will oscillate from north tosouth and back again during the year.[6]

In regions closer than 23.5 degrees from either north-or-south pole, during summer the sun will trace a completecircle in the sky without setting whilst it will never appearabove the horizon six months later, during the height ofwinter.[7]

The 47-degree difference in the altitude of the sun at solarnoon between winter and summer forms the basis of pas-sive solar design. This information is combined with localclimatic data (degree day) heating and cooling require-ments to determine at what time of the year solar gainwill be beneficial for thermal comfort, and when it shouldbe blocked with shading. By strategic placement of itemssuch as glazing and shading devices, the percent of solargain entering a building can be controlled throughout theyear.One passive solar sun path design problem is that althoughthe sun is in the same relative position six weeks be-fore, and six weeks after, the solstice, due to “thermallag” from the thermal mass of the Earth, the tempera-ture and solar gain requirements are quite different be-fore and after the summer or winter solstice. Movableshutters, shades, shade screens, or window quilts can ac-commodate day-to-day and hour-to-hour solar gain andinsulation requirements.Careful arrangement of rooms completes the passive so-lar design. A common recommendation for residentialdwellings is to place living areas facing solar noon andsleeping quarters on the opposite side.[8] A heliodon is atraditional movable light device used by architects anddesigners to help model sun path effects. In moderntimes, 3D computer graphics can visually simulate thisdata, and calculate performance predictions.[4]

9.4 Passive solar thermodynamicprinciples

Personal thermal comfort is a function of personal healthfactors (medical, psychological, sociological and situ-ational), ambient air temperature, mean radiant tem-perature, air movement (wind chill, turbulence) andrelative humidity (affecting human evaporative cooling).Heat transfer in buildings occurs through convection,conduction, and thermal radiation through roof, walls,floor and windows.[9]

9.4.1 Convective heat transfer

Convective heat transfer can be beneficial or detrimen-tal. Uncontrolled air infiltration from poor weatherization/ weatherstripping / draft-proofing can contribute up to40% of heat loss during winter;[10] however, strategicplacement of operable windows or vents can enhanceconvection, cross-ventilation, and summer cooling whenthe outside air is of a comfortable temperature andrelative humidity.[11] Filtered energy recovery ventilationsystems may be useful to eliminate undesirable humidity,dust, pollen, and microorganisms in unfiltered ventilationair.Natural convection causing rising warm air and fallingcooler air can result in an uneven stratification of heat.This may cause uncomfortable variations in temperaturein the upper and lower conditioned space, serve as amethod of venting hot air, or be designed in as a natural-convection air-flow loop for passive solar heat distributionand temperature equalization. Natural human cooling byperspiration and evaporation may be facilitated throughnatural or forced convective air movement by fans, butceiling fans can disturb the stratified insulating air layersat the top of a room, and accelerate heat transfer from ahot attic, or through nearby windows. In addition, highrelative humidity inhibits evaporative cooling by humans.

9.4.2 Radiative heat transfer

Themain source of heat transfer is radiant energy, and theprimary source is the sun. Solar radiation occurs predom-inantly through the roof and windows (but also throughwalls). Thermal radiation moves from a warmer surfaceto a cooler one. Roofs receive the majority of the solarradiation delivered to a house. A cool roof, or green roofin addition to a radiant barrier can help prevent your atticfrom becoming hotter than the peak summer outdoor airtemperature[12] (see albedo, absorptivity, emissivity, andreflectivity).Windows are a ready and predictable site for thermal radi-ation.[13] Energy from radiation can move into a windowin the day time, and out of the same window at night. Ra-diation uses photons to transmit electromagnetic waves

9.6. DESIGN ELEMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS IN TEMPERATE CLIMATES 43

through a vacuum, or translucent medium. Solar heatgain can be significant even on cold clear days. Solarheat gain through windows can be reduced by insulatedglazing, shading, and orientation. Windows are partic-ularly difficult to insulate compared to roof and walls.Convective heat transfer through and around window cov-erings also degrade its insulation properties.[13] Whenshading windows, external shading is more effective atreducing heat gain than internal window coverings.[13]

Western and eastern sun can provide warmth and light-ing, but are vulnerable to overheating in summer if notshaded. In contrast, the low midday sun readily admitslight and warmth during the winter, but can be easilyshaded with appropriate length overhangs or angled lou-vres during summer and leaf bearing summer shade treeswhich shed their leaves in the fall. The amount of radiantheat received is related to the location latitude, altitude,cloud cover, and seasonal / hourly angle of incidence (seeSun path and Lambert’s cosine law).Another passive solar design principle is that thermal en-ergy can be stored in certain building materials and re-leased again when heat gain eases to stabilize diurnal(day/night) temperature variations. The complex interac-tion of thermodynamic principles can be counterintuitivefor first-time designers. Precise computer modeling canhelp avoid costly construction experiments.

9.5 Site specific considerationsduring design

• Latitude, sun path, and insolation (sunshine)

• Seasonal variations in solar gain e.g. cooling orheating degree days, solar insolation, humidity

• Diurnal variations in temperature

• Micro-climate details related to breezes, humidity,vegetation and land contour

• Obstructions / Over-shadowing - to solar gain or lo-cal cross-winds

9.6 Design elements for residentialbuildings in temperate climates

• Placement of room-types, internal doors and walls,and equipment in the house.

• Orienting the building to face the equator (or a fewdegrees to the East to capture the morning sun)[8]

• Extending the building dimension along theeast/west axis

• Adequately sizing windows to face the midday sunin the winter, and be shaded in the summer.

• Minimising windows on other sides, especially west-ern windows[13]

• Erecting correctly sized, latitude-specific roofoverhangs,[14] or shading elements (shrubbery, trees,trellises, fences, shutters, etc.)[15]

• Using the appropriate amount and type of insulationincluding radiant barriers and bulk insulation tominimise seasonal excessive heat gain or loss

• Using thermal mass to store excess solar energy dur-ing the winter day (which is then re-radiated duringthe night)[16]

The precise amount of equator-facing glass and thermalmass should be based on careful consideration of latitude,altitude, climatic conditions, and heating/cooling degreeday requirements.Factors that can degrade thermal performance:

• Deviation from ideal orientation andnorth/south/east/west aspect ratio

• Excessive glass area (“over-glazing”) resulting inoverheating (also resulting in glare and fading of softfurnishings) and heat loss when ambient air temper-atures fall

• Installing glazing where solar gain during the dayand thermal losses during the night cannot be con-trolled easily e.g. West-facing, angled glazing,skylights[17]

• Thermal losses through non-insulated or unpro-tected glazing

• Lack of adequate shading during seasonal periods ofhigh solar gain (especially on the West wall)

• Incorrect application of thermal mass to modulatedaily temperature variations

• Open staircases leading to unequal distribution ofwarm air between upper and lower floors as warmair rises

• High building surface area to volume - Too manycorners

• Inadequate weatherization leading to high air infil-tration

• Lack of, or incorrectly installed, radiant barriersduring the hot season. (See also cool roof and greenroof)

• Insulation materials that are not matched to the mainmode of heat transfer (e.g. undesirable convec-tive/conductive/radiant heat transfer)

44 CHAPTER 9. PASSIVE SOLAR BUILDING DESIGN

9.7 Efficiency and economics ofpassive solar heating

Technically, PSH is highly efficient. Direct-gain systemscan utilize (i.e. convert into “useful” heat) 65-70% ofthe energy of solar radiation that strikes the aperture orcollector.Passive solar fraction (PSF) is the percentage of the re-quired heat load met by PSH and hence represents po-tential reduction in heating costs. RETScreen Interna-tional has reported a PSF of 20-50%. Within the field ofsustainability, energy conservation even of the order of15% is considered substantial.Other sources report the following PSFs:

• 5-25% for modest systems

• 40% for “highly optimized” systems

• Up to 75% for “very intense” systems

In favorable climates such as the southwest United States,highly optimized systems can exceed 75% PSF.[18]

For more information see Solar Air Heat

9.8 Key passive solar building de-sign concepts

There are six primary passive solar energyconfigurations:[19]

• direct solar gain

• indirect solar gain

• isolated solar gain

• heat storage

• insulation and glazing

• passive cooling

9.8.1 Direct solar gain

Direct gain attempts to control the amount of direct solarradiation reaching the living space. This direct solar gainis a critical part of passive solar house designation as itimparts to a direct gain.The cost effectiveness of these configurations are cur-rently being investigated in great detail and are demon-strating promising results.[20]

9.8.2 Indirect solar gain

Indirect gain attempts to control solar radiation reachingan area adjacent but not part of the living space. Heatenters the building through windows and is captured andstored in thermal mass (e.g. water tank, masonry wall)and slowly transmitted indirectly to the building throughconduction and convection. Efficiency can suffer fromslow response (thermal lag) and heat losses at night. Otherissues include the cost of insulated glazing and develop-ing effective systems to redistribute heat throughout theliving area.

9.8.3 Isolated solar gain

Isolated gain involves utilizing solar energy to passivelymove heat from or to the living space using a fluid, suchas water or air by natural convection or forced convection.Heat gain can occur through a sunspace, solarium or so-lar closet. These areas may also be employed usefullyas a greenhouse or drying cabinet. An equator-side sunroom may have its exterior windows higher than the win-dows between the sun room and the interior living space,to allow the low winter sun to penetrate to the cold sideof adjacent rooms. Glass placement and overhangs pre-vent solar gain during the summer. Earth cooling tubesor other passive cooling techniques can keep a solariumcool in the summer.Measures should be taken to reduce heat loss at night e.g.window coverings or movable window insulationExamples:

• Thermosiphon

• Barra system

• Double envelope house

• Thermal buffer zone[21]

• Solar space heating system

• Solar chimney

9.8.4 Heat storage

The sun doesn't shine all the time. Heat storage, orthermal mass, keeps the building warmwhen the sun can'theat it.In diurnal solar houses, the storage is designed for one ora few days. The usual method is a custom-constructedthermal mass. This includes a Trombe wall, a ventilatedconcrete floor, a cistern, water wall or roof pond. It is alsofeasible to use the thermal mass of the earth itself, eitheras-is or by incorporation into the structure by banking orusing rammed earth as a structural medium.[22]

9.8. KEY PASSIVE SOLAR BUILDING DESIGN CONCEPTS 45

In subarctic areas, or areas that have long terms with-out solar gain (e.g. weeks of freezing fog), purpose-builtthermal mass is very expensive. Don Stephens pioneeredan experimental technique to use the ground as thermalmass large enough for annualized heat storage. His de-signs run an isolated thermosiphon 3 m under a house,and insulate the ground with a 6 m waterproof skirt.[23]

9.8.5 Insulation

Main article: Building insulation

Thermal insulation or superinsulation (type, placementand amount) reduces unwanted leakage of heat.[9] Somepassive buildings are actually constructed of insulation.

9.8.6 Special glazing systems and windowcoverings

Main articles: Insulated glazing and Window covering

The effectiveness of direct solar gain systems is signifi-cantly enhanced by insulative (e.g. double glazing), spec-trally selective glazing (low-e), or movable window insu-lation (window quilts, bifold interior insulation shutters,shades, etc.).[24]

Generally, Equator-facing windows should not employglazing coatings that inhibit solar gain.There is extensive use of super-insulated windows in theGerman Passive House standard. Selection of differentspectrally selective window coating depends on the ratioof heating versus cooling degree days for the design loca-tion.

9.8.7 Glazing selection

Equator-facing glass

The requirement for vertical equator-facing glass is dif-ferent from the other three sides of a building. Reflectivewindow coatings and multiple panes of glass can reduceuseful solar gain. However, direct-gain systems are moredependent on double or triple glazing to reduce heat loss.Indirect-gain and isolated-gain configurations may still beable to function effectively with only single-pane glazing.Nevertheless, the optimal cost-effective solution is bothlocation and system dependent.

Roof-angle glass / Skylights

Skylights admit harsh direct overhead sunlight andglare[25] either horizontally (a flat roof) or pitched at thesame angle as the roof slope. In some cases, horizontal

skylights are used with reflectors to increase the intensityof solar radiation (and harsh glare), depending on the roofangle of incidence. When the winter sun is low on thehorizon, most solar radiation reflects off of roof angledglass ( the angle of incidence is nearly parallel to roof-angled glass morning and afternoon ). When the summersun is high, it is nearly perpendicular to roof-angled glass,which maximizes solar gain at the wrong time of year,and acts like a solar furnace. Skylights should be coveredand well-insulated to reduce natural convection ( warmair rising ) heat loss on cold winter nights, and intensesolar heat gain during hot spring/summer/fall days.The equator-facing side of a building is south in the north-ern hemisphere, and north in the southern hemisphere.Skylights on roofs that face away from the equator pro-vide mostly indirect illumination, except for summer dayswhen the sun rises on the non-equator side of the building(depending on latitude). Skylights on east-facing roofsprovide maximum direct light and solar heat gain in thesummer morning. West-facing skylights provide after-noon sunlight and heat gain during the hottest part of theday.Some skylights have expensive glazing that partially re-duces summer solar heat gain, while still allowing somevisible light transmission. However, if visible light canpass through it, so can some radiant heat gain (they areboth electromagnetic radiation waves).You can partially reduce some of the unwanted roof-angled-glazing summer solar heat gain by installing a sky-light in the shade of deciduous (leaf-shedding) trees, orby adding a movable insulated opaque window coveringon the inside or outside of the skylight. This would elim-inate the daylight benefit in the summer. If tree limbshang over a roof, they will increase problems with leavesin rain gutters, possibly cause roof-damaging ice dams,shorten roof life, and provide an easier path for pests toenter your attic. Leaves and twigs on skylights are un-appealing, difficult to clean, and can increase the glazingbreakage risk in wind storms.“Sawtooth roof glazing” with vertical-glass-only canbring some of the passive solar building design benefitsinto the core of a commercial or industrial building, with-out the need for any roof-angled glass or skylights.Skylights provide daylight. The only view they provideis essentially straight up in most applications. Well-insulated light tubes can bring daylight into northernrooms, without using a skylight. A passive-solar green-house provides abundant daylight for the equator-side ofthe building.Infrared thermography color thermal imaging cameras (used in formal energy audits ) can quickly document thenegative thermal impact of roof-angled glass or a skylighton a cold winter night or hot summer day.The U.S. Department of Energy states: “vertical glazingis the overall best option for sunspaces.”[26] Roof-angled

46 CHAPTER 9. PASSIVE SOLAR BUILDING DESIGN

glass and sidewall glass are not recommended for passivesolar sunspaces.The U.S. DOE explains drawbacks to roof-angled glaz-ing: Glass and plastic have little structural strength.When installed vertically, glass (or plastic) bears its ownweight because only a small area (the top edge of the glaz-ing) is subject to gravity. As the glass tilts off the verticalaxis, however, an increased area (now the sloped cross-section) of the glazing has to bear the force of gravity.Glass is also brittle; it does not flexmuch before breaking.To counteract this, you usually must increase the thick-ness of the glazing or increase the number of structuralsupports to hold the glazing. Both increase overall cost,and the latter will reduce the amount of solar gain intothe sunspace.Another common problem with sloped glazing is its in-creased exposure to the weather. It is difficult to main-tain a good seal on roof-angled glass in intense sunlight.Hail, sleet, snow, and wind may cause material failure.For occupant safety, regulatory agencies usually requiresloped glass to be made of safety glass, laminated, or acombination thereof, which reduce solar gain potential.Most of the roof-angled glass on the Crowne Plaza HotelOrlando Airport sunspace was destroyed in a single wind-storm. Roof-angled glass increases construction cost, andcan increase insurance premiums. Vertical glass is lesssusceptible to weather damage than roof-angled glass.It is difficult to control solar heat gain in a sunspace withsloped glazing during the summer and even during themiddle of a mild and sunny winter day. Skylights are theantithesis of zero energy building Passive Solar Coolingin climates with an air conditioning requirement.

Angle of incident radiation

The amount of solar gain transmitted through glass isalso affected by the angle of the incident solar radiation.Sunlight striking glass within 20 degrees of perpendicularis mostly transmitted through the glass, whereas sunlightat more than 35 degrees from perpendicular is mostlyreflected[27]

All of these factors can be modeled more precisely witha photographic light meter and a heliodon or opticalbench, which can quantify the ratio of reflectivity totransmissivity, based on angle of incidence.Alternatively, passive solar computer software can deter-mine the impact of sun path, and cooling-and-heatingdegree days on energy performance. Regional climaticconditions are often available from local weather services.

9.8.8 Operable shading and insulation de-vices

A design with too much equator-facing glass can result inexcessive winter, spring, or fall day heating, uncomfort-

ably bright living spaces at certain times of the year, andexcessive heat transfer on winter nights and summer days.Although the sun is at the same altitude 6-weeks beforeand after the solstice, the heating and cooling require-ments before and after the solstice are significantly dif-ferent. Heat storage on the Earth’s surface causes “ther-mal lag.” Variable cloud cover influences solar gain po-tential. This means that latitude-specific fixed windowoverhangs, while important, are not a complete seasonalsolar gain control solution.Control mechanisms (such as manual-or-motorized inte-rior insulated drapes, shutters, exterior roll-down shadescreens, or retractable awnings) can compensate for dif-ferences caused by thermal lag or cloud cover, and helpcontrol daily / hourly solar gain requirement variations.Home automation systems that monitor temperature, sun-light, time of day, and room occupancy can precisely con-trol motorized window-shading-and-insulation devices.

9.8.9 Exterior colors reflecting - absorbing

Materials and colors can be chosen to reflect or absorbsolar thermal energy. Using information on a Color forelectromagnetic radiation to determine its thermal radi-ation properties of reflection or absorption can assist thechoices.See Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and OakRidge National Laboratory: “Cool Colors”

9.9 Landscaping and gardens

Main article: Energy-efficient landscaping

Energy-efficient landscaping materials for careful pas-sive solar choices include hardscape building material and"softscape" plants. The use of landscape design prin-ciples for selection of trees, hedges, and trellis-pergolafeatures with vines; all can be used to create summershading. For winter solar gain it is desirable to usedeciduous plants that drop their leaves in the autumngives year round passive solar benefits. Non-deciduousevergreen shrubs and trees can be windbreaks, at vari-able heights and distances, to create protection and shel-ter from winter wind chill. Xeriscaping with 'maturesize appropriate' native species of-and drought tolerantplants, drip irrigation, mulching, and organic garden-ing practices reduce or eliminate the need for energy-and-water-intensive irrigation, gas powered garden equip-ment, and reduces the landfill waste footprint. Solar pow-ered landscape lighting and fountain pumps, and cov-ered swimming pools and plunge pools with solar waterheaters can reduce the impact of such amenities.

• Sustainable gardening

9.11. COMPARISON TO THE PASSIVE HOUSE STANDARD IN EUROPE 47

• Sustainable landscaping

• Sustainable landscape architecture

9.10 Other passive solar principles

9.10.1 Passive solar lighting

Main article: Passive solar lighting

Passive solar lighting techniques enhance taking advan-tage of natural illumination for interiors, and so reducereliance on artificial lighting systems.This can be achieved by careful building design, ori-entation, and placement of window sections to collectlight. Other creative solutions involve the use of reflect-ing surfaces to admit daylight into the interior of a build-ing. Window sections should be adequately sized, andto avoid over-illumination can be shielded with a Brisesoleil, awnings, well placed trees, glass coatings, andother passive and active devices.[19]

Another major issue for many window systems is thatthey can be potentially vulnerable sites of excessive ther-mal gain or heat loss. Whilst high mounted clerestorywindow and traditional skylights can introduce daylightin poorly oriented sections of a building, unwanted heattransfer may be hard to control.[28][29] Thus, energy thatis saved by reducing artificial lighting is often more thanoffset by the energy required for operating HVAC sys-tems to maintain thermal comfort.Various methods can be employed to address this includ-ing but not limited to window coverings, insulated glazingand novel materials such as aerogel semi-transparent insu-lation, optical fiber embedded in walls or roof, or hybridsolar lighting at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.Reflecting elements, from active and passive daylightingcollectors, such as light shelves, lighter wall and floor col-ors, mirrored wall sections, interior walls with upper glasspanels, and clear or translucent glassed hinged doors andsliding glass doors take the captured light and passivelyreflect it further inside. The light can be from passive win-dows or skylights and solar light tubes or from active day-lighting sources. In traditional Japanese architecture theShōji sliding panel doors, with translucent Washi screens,are an original precedent. International style, Modernistand Mid-century modern architecture were earlier inno-vators of this passive penetration and reflection in indus-trial, commercial, and residential applications.

9.10.2 Passive solar water heating

Main article: Solar hot water

There are many ways to use solar thermal energy toheat water for domestic use. Different active-and-passivesolar hot water technologies have different location-specific economic cost benefit analysis implications.Fundamental passive solar hot water heating involves nopumps or anything electrical. It is very cost effective inclimates that do not have lengthy sub-freezing, or very-cloudy, weather conditions.[30] Other active solar waterheating technologies, etc. may be more appropriate forsome locations.It is possible to have active solar hot water which is alsocapable of being “off grid” and qualifies as sustainable.This is done by the use of a photovoltaic cell which usesenergy from the sun to power the pumps.

9.11 Comparison to the PassiveHouse standard in Europe

Main article: Passive house

There is growing momentum in Europe for the approachespoused by the Passive House (Passivhaus in German)Institute in Germany. Rather than relying solely on tradi-tional passive solar design techniques, this approach seeksto make use of all passive sources of heat, minimises en-ergy usage, and emphasises the need for high levels ofinsulation reinforced by meticulous attention to detail inorder to address thermal bridging and cold air infiltration.Most of the buildings built to the Passive House standardalso incorporate an active heat recovery ventilation unitwith or without a small (typically 1 kW) incorporatedheating component.The energy design of Passive House buildings is devel-oped using a spreadsheet-based modeling tool called thePassive House Planning Package (PHPP) which is up-dated periodically. The current version is PHPP2007,where 2007 is the year of issue. A building may be cer-tified as a “Passive House” when it can be shown that itmeets certain criteria, the most important being that theannual specific heat demand for the house should not ex-ceed 15kWh/m2a.

9.12 Design tools

Traditionally a heliodon was used to simulate the alti-tude and azimuth of the sun shining on a model build-ing at any time of any day of the year.[31] In moderntimes, computer programs can model this phenomenonand integrate local climate data (including site impactssuch as overshadowing and physical obstructions) to pre-dict the solar gain potential for a particular building de-sign over the course of a year. GPS-based smartphoneapplications can now do this inexpensively on a hand

48 CHAPTER 9. PASSIVE SOLAR BUILDING DESIGN

held device. These design tools provide the passive solardesigner the ability to evaluate local conditions, designelements and orientation prior to construction. Energyperformance optimization normally requires an iterative-refinement design-and-evaluate process. There is no suchthing as a “one-size-fits-all” universal passive solar build-ing design that would work well in all locations.

9.13 Levels of application

Many detached suburban houses can achieve reductionsin heating expense without obvious changes to their ap-pearance, comfort or usability.[32] This is done using goodsiting and window positioning, small amounts of ther-mal mass, with good-but-conventional insulation, weath-erization, and an occasional supplementary heat source,such as a central radiator connected to a (solar) waterheater. Sunrays may fall on a wall during the daytimeand raise the temperature of its thermal mass. This willthen radiate heat into the building in the evening. Exter-nal shading, or a radiant barrier plus air gap, may be usedto reduce undesirable summer solar gain.An extension of the “passive solar” approach to seasonalsolar capture and storage of heat and cooling. These de-signs attempt to capture warm-season solar heat, and con-vey it to a seasonal thermal store for use months laterduring the cold season (“annualised passive solar.”) In-creased storage is achieved by employing large amountsof thermal mass or earth coupling. Anecdotal reportssuggest they can be effective but no formal study hasbeen conducted to demonstrate their superiority. The ap-proach also can move cooling into the warm season. Ex-amples:

• Passive Annual Heat Storage (PAHS) - by John Hait

• Annualized Geothermal Solar (AGS) heating - byDon Stephen

• Earthed-roof

A “purely passive” solar-heated house would have no me-chanical furnace unit, relying instead on energy capturedfrom sunshine, only supplemented by “incidental” heatenergy given off by lights, computers, and other task-specific appliances (such as those for cooking, entertain-ment, etc.), showering, people and pets. The use of nat-ural convection air currents (rather than mechanical de-vices such as fans) to circulate air is related, though notstrictly solar design. Passive solar building design some-times uses limited electrical and mechanical controls tooperate dampers, insulating shutters, shades, awnings,or reflectors. Some systems enlist small fans or solar-heated chimneys to improve convective air-flow. A rea-sonable way to analyse these systems is bymeasuring theircoefficient of performance. A heat pump might use 1 Jfor every 4 J it delivers giving a COP of 4. A system that

only uses a 30 W fan to more-evenly distribute 10 kW ofsolar heat through an entire house would have a COP of300.Passive solar building design is often a foundational ele-ment of a cost-effective zero energy building.[33][34] Al-though a ZEB uses multiple passive solar building de-sign concepts, a ZEB is usually not purely passive, hav-ing active mechanical renewable energy generation sys-tems such as: wind turbine, photovoltaics, micro hy-dro, geothermal, and other emerging alternative energysources.

9.14 See also

• Architecture 2030

• Daylighting

• Energy plus house

• List of low-energy building techniques

• List of pioneering solar buildings

• Low energy building

• Low-energy house

• Earthship

• PlusEnergy

• Solar architecture

• The 2010 Imperative

Energy Rating systems

• House Energy Rating (Aust.)

• Home energy rating (USA)

• EnerGuide (Canada)

• National Home Energy Rating (UK)

9.15 References[1] Doerr, Thomas (2012). Passive Solar Simplified (1st ed.).

Retrieved October 24, 2012.

[2] Norton, Brian (2014). Harnessing Solar Heat. Springer.ISBN 978-94-007-7275-5.

[3] “U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Efficiency and Re-newable Energy - Energy Plus Energy Simulation Soft-ware”. Retrieved 2011-03-27.

[4] “Rating tools”. Archived from the original on September30, 2007. Retrieved 2011-11-03.

9.16. EXTERNAL LINKS 49

[5] http://www.srrb.noaa.gov/highlights/sunrise/fig5_40n.gif

[6] http://www.srrb.noaa.gov/highlights/sunrise/fig5_0n.gif

[7] http://www.srrb.noaa.gov/highlights/sunrise/fig5_90n.gif

[8] Your Home - Orientation

[9] Your Home - Insulation

[10] “BERC -Airtightness”. Ornl.gov. 2004-05-26. Retrieved2010-03-16.

[11] Your Home - Passive Cooling

[12] “EERE Radiant Barriers”. Eere.energy.gov. 2009-05-28.Retrieved 2010-03-16.

[13] “Glazing”. Archived from the original on December 15,2007. Retrieved 2011-11-03.

[14] Springer, John L. (December 1954). “The 'Big Piece'Way to Build”. Popular Science 165 (6): 157.

[15] Your Home - Shading

[16] Your Home - Thermal Mass

[17] “Introductory Passive Solar Energy TechnologyOverview”. U.S. DOE - ORNL Passive Solar Workshop.Retrieved 2007-12-23.

[18] “Passive Solar Design”. New Mexico Solar Association.

[19] Chiras, D. The Solar House: Passive Heating and Cooling.Chelsea Green Publishing Company; 2002.

[20] “Zero Energy Buildings”. Fsec.ucf.edu. Retrieved 2010-03-16.

[21] “Two Small Delta Ts Are Better Than One Large DeltaT”. Zero Energy Design. Retrieved 2007-12-23.

[22] Earthships

[23] Annualized Geo-Solar Heating, Don Stephens- Accessed2009-02-05

[24] Shurcliff, William A.. Thermal Shutters & Shades - Over100 Schemes for Reducing Heat Loss through Windows1980. ISBN 0-931790-14-X.

[25] “Florida Solar Energy Center - Skylights”. Retrieved2011-03-29.

[26] “U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Efficiency and Re-newable Energy - Sunspace Orientation and Glazing An-gles”. Retrieved 2011-03-28.

[27] “Solar Heat Gain Through Glass”. Irc.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca.2010-03-08. Retrieved 2010-03-16.

[28] "[ARCHIVED CONTENT] Insulating and heating yourhome efficiently : Directgov - Environment and greenerliving”. Direct.gov.uk. Retrieved 2010-03-16.

[29] “Reduce Your Heating Bills This Winter - OverlookedSources of Heat Loss in the Home”. Allwoodwork.com.2003-02-14. Retrieved 2010-03-16.

[30] Brian Norton (2011) Solar Water Heaters: A Review ofSystems Research and Design Innovation, Green. 1, 189–207, ISSN (Online) 1869-8778

[31]

[32] “Industrial Technologies Program: Industrial DistributedEnergy”. Eere.energy.gov. Retrieved 2010-03-16.

[33] “Cold-Climate Case Study for Affordable Zero EnergyHomes: Preprint” (PDF). Retrieved 2010-03-16.

[34] “Zero Energy Homes: A Brief Primer” (PDF). Retrieved2010-03-16.

9.16 External links• www.solarbuildings.ca - Canadian Solar BuildingsResearch Network

• www.eere.energy.gov - US Department of Energy(DOE) Guidelines

• “Passive Solar Building Design”. Energy Efficiencyand Renewable Energy. U.S. Department of En-ergy. Retrieved 2011-03-27.

• www.climatechange.gov.au - Australian Dept ofClimate Change and Energy Efficiency

• www.ornl.gov - Oak Ridge National Laboratory(ORNL) Building Technology

• www.FSEC.UCF.edu - Florida Solar Energy Center

• www.ZeroEnergyDesign.com - 28 Years of PassiveSolar Building Design

• - Prefabricated Passive Solar Home Kits

• Passive Solar Design Guidelines

• http://www.solaroof.org/wiki

• www.PassiveSolarEnergy.info - Passive Solar En-ergy Technology Overview

• www.yourhome.gov.au/technical/index.html -Your Home Technical Manual developed by theCommonwealth of Australia to provide infor-mation about how to design, build and live inenvironmentally sustainable homes.

• amergin.tippinst.ie/downloadsEnergyArchhtml.html- Energy in Architecture, The European Pas-sive Solar Handbook, Goulding J.R, Owen LewisJ, Steemers Theo C, Sponsored by the EuropeanCommission, published by Batsford 1986, reprinted1993

Chapter 10

Agroforestry

Parkland in Burkina Faso: sorghum grown under Faidherbia al-bida and Borassus akeassii near Banfora

Agroforestry or agro-sylviculture is a land use manage-ment system in which trees or shrubs are grown around oramong crops or pastureland. It combines agricultural andforestry technologies to create more diverse, productive,profitable, healthy, and sustainable land-use systems.[1]

10.1 As a science

The theoretical base for agroforestry comes from ecology,via agroecology.[2] From this perspective, agroforestry isone of the three principal land-use sciences. The othertwo are agriculture and forestry.[3]

The efficiency of photosynthesis drops off with increas-ing light intensity, and the rate of photosynthesis hardlyincreases once the light intensity is over about one tenththat of direct overhead sun. This means that plants undertrees can still growwell even though they get less light. Byhaving more than one level of vegetation, it is possible toget more photosynthesis than with a single layer.Agroforestry has a lot in common with intercropping.Both have two or more plant species (such as nitrogen-fixing plants) in close interaction, both provide multipleoutputs, as a consequence, higher overall yields and, be-cause a single application or input is shared, costs are re-duced. Beyond these, there are gains specific to agro-forestry.

10.2 Benefits

Further information: Ecoscaping

Agroforestry systems can be advantageous over con-ventional agricultural, and forest production methods.They can offer increased productivity, economic bene-fits, and more diversity in the ecological goods and ser-vices provided.[4]

Biodiversity in agroforestry systems is typically higherthan in conventional agricultural systems. With two ormore interacting plant species in a given land area, it cre-ates a more complex habitat that can support a wider vari-ety of birds, insects, and other animals. Depending uponthe application, impacts of agroforestry can include:

• Reducing poverty through increased production ofwood and other tree products for home consumptionand sale

• Contributing to food security by restoring the soilfertility for food crops

• Cleaner water through reduced nutrient and soilrunoff

• Countering global warming and the risk of hungerby increasing the number of drought-resistant treesand the subsequent production of fruits, nuts andedible oils

• Reducing deforestation and pressure on woodlandsby providing farm-grown fuelwood

• Reducing or eliminating the need for toxic chemi-cals (insecticides, herbicides, etc.)

• Through more diverse farm outputs, improved hu-man nutrition

• In situations where people have limited access tomainstream medicines, providing growing space formedicinal plants

• Increased crop stability

50

10.3. APPLICATIONS 51

• Multifunctional site use i.e crop production and an-imal grazing.

• Typically more drought resistant.

• Stabilises depleted soils from erosion

• Bioremediation

Agroforestry practices may also realize a number of otherassociated environmental goals, such as:

• Carbon sequestration

• Odour, dust, and noise reduction

• Green space and visual aesthetics

• Enhancement or maintenance of wildlife habitat

10.2.1 Adaptation to climate change

There is some evidence that, especially in recent years,poor smallholder farmers are turning to agroforestry as amean to adapt to the impacts of climate change. A studyfrom the CGIAR research program on Climate Change,Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) found from asurvey of over 700 households in East Africa that at least50% of those households had begun planting trees ontheir farms in a change from their practices 10 yearsago.[5] The trees ameliorate the effects of climate changeby helping to stabilize erosion, improving water and soilquality and providing yields of fruit, tea, coffee, oil, fod-der and medicinal products in addition to their usual har-vest. Agroforestry was one of the most widely adoptedadaptation strategies in the study, along with the use ofimproved crop varieties and intercropping.[5]

10.3 Applications

Agroforestry represents a wide diversity in applicationand in practice. One listing includes over 50 distinctuses.[2] The 50 or so applications can be roughly classi-fied under a few broad headings. There are visual sim-ilarities between practices in different categories. Thisis expected as categorization is based around the prob-lems addressed (countering winds, high rainfall, harmfulinsects, etc.) and the overall economic constraints and ob-jectives (labor and other inputs costs, yield requirements,etc.). The categories include :

• Parklands

• Shade systems

• Crop-over-tree systems

• Alley cropping

• Strip cropping

• Fauna-based systems

• Boundary systems

• Taungyas

• Physical support systems

• Agroforests

• Wind break and shelterbelt.

10.3.1 Parkland

Parklands are visually defined by the presence of treeswidely scattered over a large agricultural plot or pasture.The trees are usually of a single species with clear regionalfavorites. Among the benefits, the trees offer shade tograzing animals, protect crops against strong wind bursts,provide tree prunings for firewood, and are a roost forinsect or rodent-eating birds.There are other gains. Research with Faidherbia albidain Zambia showed that mature trees can sustain maizeyields of 4.1 tonnes per hectare compared to 1.3 tonnesper hectare without these trees. Unlike other trees, Faid-herbia sheds its nitrogen-rich leaves during the rainy cropgrowing season so it does not compete with the crop forlight, nutrients and water. The leaves then regrow dur-ing the dry season and provide land cover and shade forcrops.[6]

10.3.2 Shade systems

With shade applications, crops are purposely raised undertree canopies and within the resulting shady environment.For most uses, the understory crops are shade tolerant orthe overstory trees have fairly open canopies. A conspicu-ous example is shade-grown coffee. This practice reducesweeding costs and increases the quality and taste of thecoffee.[7][8]

10.3.3 Crop-over-tree systems

Not commonly encountered, crop-over-tree systems em-ploy woody perennials in the role of a cover crop. Forthis, small shrubs or trees pruned to near ground level areutilized. The purpose, as with any cover crop, is to in-crease in-soil nutrients and/or to reduce soil erosion.

10.3.4 Alley cropping

With alley cropping, crop strips alternate with rows ofclosely spaced tree or hedge species. Normally, the treesare pruned before planting the crop. The cut leafy mate-rial is spread over the crop area to provide nutrients for

52 CHAPTER 10. AGROFORESTRY

the crop. In addition to nutrients, the hedges serve aswindbreaks and eliminate soil erosion.Alley cropping has been shown to be advantageous inAfrica, particularly in relation to improving maize yieldsin the sub-Saharan region. Use here relies upon the nitro-gen fixing tree species Sesbania sesban, Tephrosia vogelii,Gliricidia sepium and Faidherbia albida. In one exam-ple, a ten-year experiment in Malawi showed that, by us-ing fertilizer trees such as Tephrosia vogelii and Gliricidiasepium, maize yields averaged 3.7 tonnes per hectare ascompared to one tonne per hectare in plots without fer-tilizer trees or mineral fertilizer.[9]

10.3.5 Strip cropping

Strip cropping is similar to alley cropping in that treesalternate with crops. The difference is that, with alleycropping, the trees are in single row. With strip cropping,the trees or shrubs are planted in wide strip. The purposecan be, as with alley cropping, to provide nutrients, inleaf form, to the crop. With strip cropping, the trees canhave a purely productive role, providing fruits, nuts, etc.while, at the same time, protecting nearby crops from soilerosion and harmful winds.

10.3.6 Fauna-based systems

Silvopasture over the years (Australia).

There are situations where trees benefit fauna. Themost common examples are the silvopasture where cattle,goats, or sheep browse on grasses grown under trees.[10]In hot climates, the animals are less stressed and put onweight faster when grazing in a cooler, shaded environ-ment. Other variations have these animals directly eatingthe leaves of trees or shrubs.There are similar systems for other types of fauna. Deerand hogs gain when living and feeding in a forest ecosys-tem, especially when the tree forage suits their dietaryneeds. Another variation, aquaforestry, is where treesshade fish ponds. In many cases, the fish eat the leavesor fruit from the trees.

10.3.7 Boundary systems

There are a number of applications that fall under theheading of a boundary system. These include the living

A riparian buffer bordering a river in Iowa.

fences, the riparian buffer, and windbreaks.

• A living fence can be a thick hedge or fencing wirestrung on living trees. In addition to restricting themovement of people and animals, living fences offerhabitat to insect-eating birds and, in the case of aboundary hedge, slow soil erosion.

• Riparian buffers are strips of permanent vegeta-tion located along or near active watercourses or inditches where water runoff concentrates. The pur-pose is to keep nutrients and soil from contaminatingsurface water.

• Windbreaks reduce the velocity of the winds overand around crops. This increases yields through re-duced drying of the crop and/or by preventing thecrop from toppling in strong wind gusts.

10.3.8 Taungya

Taungya is a system originating in Burma. In the initialstages of an orchard or tree plantation, the trees are smalland widely spaced. The free space between the newlyplanted trees can accommodate a seasonal crop. Insteadof costly weeding, the underutilized area provides an ad-ditional output and income. More complex taungyas usethe between-tree space for a series of crops. The cropsbecome more shade resistant as the tree canopies growand the amount of sunlight reaching the ground declines.

10.5. SEE ALSO 53

If a plantation is thinned in the latter stages, this opensfurther the between-tree cropping opportunities.

10.3.9 Physical support systems

In the long history of agriculture, trellises are compar-atively recent. Before this, grapes and other vine cropswere raised atop pruned trees. Variations of the physicalsupport theme depend upon the type of vine. The advan-tages come through greater in-field biodiversity. In manycases, the control of weeds, diseases, and insect pests areprimary motives.

10.3.10 Agroforests

These are widely found in the humid tropics and arereferenced by different names (forest gardening, forestfarming, tropical home gardens and, where short-staturedtrees or shrubs dominate, shrub gardens). Through acomplex, disarrayed mix of trees, shrubs, vines, and sea-sonal crops, these systems, through their high levels ofbiodiversity, achieve the ecological dynamics of a forestecosystem. Because of the internal ecology, they tendto be less susceptible to harmful insects, plant diseases,drought, and wind damage. Although they can be highyielding, complex systems tend to produce a large num-ber of outputs. These are not utilizedwhen a large volumeof a single crop or output is required.

10.4 Challenges

Agroforestry is relevant to almost all environments andis a potential response to common problems around theglobe, and agroforestry systems can be advantageouscompared to conventional agriculture or forestry.[11][4]Yet agroforestry is not very widespread, at least accordingto current but incomplete USDA surveys as of November,2013.[12][11]

As suggested by a survey of extension programs in theUnited States, some obstacles (ordered most critical toleast critical) to agroforestry adoption include:[12]

• Lack of developed markets for products

• Unfamiliarity with technologies

• Lack of awareness of successful agroforestry exam-ples

• Competition between trees, crops, and animals

• Lack of financial assistance

• Lack of apparent profit potential

• Lack of demonstration sites

• Expense of additional management

• Lack of training or expertise

• Lack of knowledge about where to market products

• Lack of technical assistance

• Cannot afford adoption or start up costs, includingcosts of time

• Unfamiliarity with alternative marketing approaches(e.g. web)

• Unavailability of information about agroforestry

• Apparent inconvenience

• Lack of infrastructure (e.g. buildings, equipment)

• Lack of equipment

• Insufficient land

• Lack of seed/seedling sources

Some solutions to these obstacles have already been sug-gested althoughmany depend on particular circumstanceswhich vary from one location to the next.[12]

10.5 See also

10.5.1 Permaculture

Agroforestry is a key component of the Permaculture sys-tem.

• Sustainable agriculture

• Sustainable gardening

• Permaculture

• Permaforestry

• Orchard

• Climate-friendly gardening

• Farmer-managed natural regeneration

• Fertilizer tree

• Forest gardening

• Forest farming

• Analog forestry

• Wildcrafting

• Buffer strip

• Afforestation

54 CHAPTER 10. AGROFORESTRY

• Deforestation

• Megaprojects

• Mycoforestry

• World Forestry Congress

• Agropastoralism

• Sylvopasture

• Deforestation and climate change

10.6 References

[1] “National Agroforestry Center”. USDA National Agro-forestry Center (NAC). Retrieved 2 April 2014.

[2] Wojtkowski, Paul A. (1998) The Theory and Practice ofAgroforestry Design. Science Publishers Inc., Enfield,NH, 282p.

[3] Wojtkowski, Paul A. (2002) Agroecological Perspectivesin Agronomy, Forestry and Agroforestry. Science Pub-lishers Inc., Enfield, NH, 356p.

[4] “Benefits of agroforestry”.

[5] Kristjanson, P; Neufeldt H, Gassner A, Mango J, KyazzeFB, Desta S, Sayula G, Thiede B, ForchW, Thornton PK,Coe R (2012). “Are food insecure smallholder house-holds making changes in their farming practices? Evi-dence form East Africa”. Food Security 4 (3): 381–397.doi:10.1007/s12571-012-0194-z.

[6] “Turning the tide on farm productivity in Africa: an agro-forestry solution”. July 8, 2009. Retrieved 2 April 2014.

[7] Muschler, R. (1999) Árboles en Cafetales. Materiales deEnseñanza No. 45, CATIE, Turrialba, Costa Rica, 139pp.

[8] Muschler, R.G. (2001) Shade improves coffee quality in asub-optimal coffee-zone of Costa Rica. Agroforestry Sys-tems 85:131-139.

[9] “Evergreen Agriculture Project”. World AgroforestryCentre. Retrieved 2 April 2014.

[10] “Silvopasture”.

[11] “Agroforestry Frequently Asked Questions”. UnitedStates Department of Agriculture. Retrieved 19 February2014.

[12] Jacobson, Michael; Shiba Kar (August 2013). “Extent ofAgroforestry Extension Programs in the United States”.Journal of Extension 51 (Number 4). Retrieved 19 Febru-ary 2014.

10.7 Further reading

• Patish, Daizy Rani, ed. (2008). Ecological basis ofagroforestry. CRC Press. ISBN 978-1-4200-4327-3.

• The Springer Journal, “Agroforestry Systems”(ISSN 1572-9680) ; Editor-In-Chief: Prof. ShibuJose, H.E. Garrett Endowed Professor and Director,The Center for Agroforestry, University of Missouri

• Robbins, Jim (November 21, 2011). “A Quiet Pushto Grow Crops Under Cover of Trees”. The NewYork Times. Retrieved November 22, 2011.

10.8 External links

• National Agroforesty Center (USDA)

• World Agroforestry Centre

• The Center for Agroforestry at the University ofMissouri

• Online Masters Degree in Agroforestry Universityof Missouri

• Australian Agroforestry

• The Green Belt Movement

• Plants For A Future

• Ya'axché Conservation Trust

• Trees for the Future

• Free Distance Agroforestry Training Manual (fromTrees for the Future)

• Vi-Agroforestry

• Agroforst in Deutschland

Media

• “Agroforestry makes sense for marginalised peoplein the Philippines uplands” (Erhardt/Bünner), articlein themagazine D+CDevelopment and Cooperation

• The short film Agroforestry Practices - Alley Crop-ping (2004) is available for free download at theInternet Archive

• The short film Agroforestry Practices - Forest Farm-ing (2004) is available for free download at theInternet Archive

• The short film Agroforestry Practices - Riparian For-est Buffers (2004) is available for free download atthe Internet Archive

10.8. EXTERNAL LINKS 55

• The short film Agroforestry Practices - Silvopasture(2004) is available for free download at the InternetArchive

• The short film Agroforestry Practices - Windbreaks(2004) is available for free download at the InternetArchive

Chapter 11

Agroecology

A community-supported agriculture share of crops.

Agroecology is the study of ecological processes thatoperate in agricultural production systems. The prefixagro- refers to agriculture. Bringing ecological princi-ples to bear in agroecosystems can suggest novel man-agement approaches that would not otherwise be consid-ered. The term is often used imprecisely and may re-fer to “a science, a movement, [or] a practice.”[1] Agroe-cologists study a variety of agroecosystems, and the fieldof agroecology is not associated with any one particularmethod of farming, whether it be organic, integrated, orconventional; intensive or extensive.

11.1 Ecological strategy

Agroecologists do not unanimously oppose technology orinputs in agriculture but instead assess how, when, and iftechnology can be used in conjunction with natural, so-cial and human assets.[2] Agroecology proposes a context-or site-specific manner of studying agroecosystems, andas such, it recognizes that there is no universal formulaor recipe for the success and maximum well-being of anagroecosystem. Thus, agroecology is not defined by cer-tain management practices, such as the use of natural en-emies in place of insecticides, or polyculture in place ofmonoculture.Instead, agroecologists may study questions relatedto the four system properties of agroecosystems:

productivity, stability, sustainability and equitability.[3]As opposed to disciplines that are concerned with onlyone or some of these properties, agroecologists seeall four properties as interconnected and integral tothe success of an agroecosystem. Recognizing thatthese properties are found on varying spatial scales,agroecologists do not limit themselves to the studyof agroecosystems at any one scale: gene-organism-population-community-ecosystem-landscape-biome,field-farm-community-region-state-country-continent-global.Agroecologists study these four properties through aninterdisciplinary lens, using natural sciences to under-stand elements of agroecosystems such as soil propertiesand plant-insect interactions, as well as using social sci-ences to understand the effects of farming practices onrural communities, economic constraints to developingnew production methods, or cultural factors determiningfarming practices.

11.2 Approaches

Agroecologists do not always agree about what agroecol-ogy is or should be in the long-term. Different definitionsof the term agroecology can be distinguished largely bythe specificity with which one defines the term “ecology,”as well as the term’s potential political connotations. Def-initions of agroecology, therefore, may be first groupedaccording to the specific contexts within which they sit-uate agriculture. Agroecology is defined by the OECDas “the study of the relation of agricultural crops andenvironment.”[4] This definition refers to the "-ecology”part of “agroecology” narrowly as the natural environ-ment. Following this definition, an agroecologist wouldstudy agriculture’s various relationships with soil health,water quality, air quality, meso- and micro-fauna, sur-rounding flora, environmental toxins, and other environ-mental contexts.A more common definition of the word can be takenfrom Dalgaard et al., who refer to agroecology as thestudy of the interactions between plants, animals, humansand the environment within agricultural systems. Conse-

56

11.3. APPLICATIONS 57

quently, agroecology is inherently multidisciplinary, in-cluding factors from agronomy, ecology, sociology, eco-nomics and related disciplines.[5] In this case, the “-ecology” portion of “agroecology is defined broadly toinclude social, cultural, and economic contexts as well.Francis et al. also expand the definition in the same way,but put more emphasis on the notion of food systems.[6]

Agroecology is also defined differently according to geo-graphic location. In the global south, the term often car-ries overtly political connotations. Such political defini-tions of the term usually ascribe to it the goals of socialand economic justice; special attention, in this case, is of-ten paid to the traditional farming knowledge of indige-nous populations.[7] North American and European usesof the term sometimes avoid the inclusion of such overtlypolitical goals. In these cases, agroecology is seen morestrictly as a scientific discipline with less specific socialgoals.

11.2.1 Agro-population ecology

This approach is derived from the science of ecology pri-marily based on population ecology, which over the pastthree decades has been displacing the ecosystems biologyof Odum. Buttel explains the main difference betweenthe two categories, saying that “the application of pop-ulation ecology to agroecology involves the primacy notonly of analyzing agroecosystems from the perspectiveof the population dynamics of their constituent species,and their relationships to climate and biogeochemistry,but also there is a major emphasis placed on the role ofgenetics.”[8]

11.2.2 Inclusive agroecology

Rather than viewing agroecology as a subset of agricul-ture, Wojtkowski [9][10] takes a more encompassing per-spective. In this, natural ecology and agroecology are themajor headings under ecology. Natural ecology is thestudy of organisms as they interact with and within nat-ural environments. Correspondingly, agroecology is thebasis for the land-use sciences. Here humans are the pri-mary governing force for organisms within planned andmanaged, mostly terrestrial, environments.As key headings, natural ecology and agroecology pro-vide the theoretical base for their respective sciences.These theoretical bases overlap but differ in a majorway. Economics has no role in the functioning of natu-ral ecosystems whereas economics sets direction and pur-pose in agroecology.Under agroecology are the three land-use sciences,agriculture, forestry, and agroforestry. Although theseuse their plant components in different ways, they sharethe same theoretical core.Beyond this, the land-use sciences further subdivide. The

subheadings include agronomy, organic farming, tradi-tional agriculture, permaculture, and silviculture. Withinthis system of subdivisions, agroecology is philosophi-cally neutral. The importance lies in providing a theoret-ical base hitherto lacking in the land-use sciences. Thisallows progress in biocomplex agroecosystems includingthe multi-species plantations of forestry and agroforestry.

11.3 Applications

To arrive at a point of view about a particular way offarming, an agroecologist would first seek to understandthe contexts in which the farm(s) is(are) involved. Eachfarm may be inserted in a unique combination of factorsor contexts. Each farmer may have their own premisesabout the meanings of an agricultural endeavor, and thesemeanings might be different from those of agroecolo-gists. Generally, farmers seek a configuration that is vi-able in multiple contexts, such as family, financial, tech-nical, political, logistical, market, environmental, spir-itual. Agroecologists want to understand the behaviorof those who seek livelihoods from plant and animal in-crease, acknowledging the organization and planning thatis required to run a farm.

11.3.1 Views on organic and non-organicmilk production

Because organic agriculture proclaims to sustain thehealth of soils, ecosystems, and people,[11] it has muchin common with Agroecology; this does not mean thatAgroecology is synonymous with organic agriculture, northat Agroecology views organic farming as the 'right' wayof farming. Also, it is important to point out that thereare large differences in organic standards among coun-tries and certifying agencies.Three of the main areas that agroecologists would lookat in farms, would be: the environmental impacts, animalwelfare issues, and the social aspects.Environmental impacts caused by organic and non-organic milk production can vary significantly. For bothcases, there are positive and negative environmental con-sequences.Compared to conventional milk production, organic milkproduction tends to have lower eutrophication potentialper ton of milk or per hectare of farmland, because it po-tentially reduces leaching of nitrates (NO3

−) and phos-phates (PO4

−) due to lower fertilizer application rates.Because organic milk production reduces pesticides uti-lization, it increases land use per ton of milk due to de-creased crop yields per hectare. Mainly due to the lowerlevel of concentrates given to cows in organic herds, or-ganic dairy farms generally produce less milk per cowthan conventional dairy farms. Because of the increased

58 CHAPTER 11. AGROECOLOGY

use of roughage and the, on-average, lower milk pro-duction level per cow, some research has connected or-ganic milk production with increases in the emission ofmethane.[12]

Animal welfare issues vary among dairy farms and are notnecessarily related to the way of producing milk (organ-ically or conventionally).A key component of animal welfare is freedom to per-form their innate (natural) behavior, and this is stated inone of the basic principles of organic agriculture. Also,there are other aspects of animal welfare to be consid-ered - such as freedom from hunger, thirst, discomfort,injury, fear, distress, disease and pain. Because organicstandards require loose housing systems, adequate bed-ding, restrictions on the area of slatted floors, a minimumforage proportion in the ruminant diets, and tend to limitstocking densities both on pasture and in housing for dairycows, they potentially promote good foot and hoof health.Some studies show lower incidence of placenta retention,milk fever, abomasums displacement and other diseasesin organic than in conventional dairy herds.[13] However,the level of infections by parasites in organically managedherds is generally higher than in conventional herds.[14]

Social aspects of dairy enterprises include life quality offarmers, of farm labor, of rural and urban communities,and also includes public health.Both organic and non-organic farms can have good andbad implications for the life quality of all the differentpeople involved in that food chain. Issues like labor con-ditions, labor hours and labor rights, for instance, do notdepend on the organic/non-organic characteristic of thefarm; they can be more related to the socio-economicaland cultural situations in which the farm is inserted, in-stead.As for the public health or food safety concern, organicfoods are intended to be healthy, free of contaminationsand free from agents that could cause human diseases.Organic milk is meant to have no chemical residues toconsumers, and the restrictions on the use of antibioticsand chemicals in organic food production has the pur-pose to accomplish this goal. But dairy cows in organicfarms, as in conventional farms, indeed do get exposedto virus, parasites and bacteria that can contaminate milkand hence humans, so the risks of transmitting diseasesare not eliminated just because the production is organic.In an organic dairy farm, an agroecologist could evaluatethe following:1. Can the farm minimize environmental impacts and in-crease its level of sustainability, for instance by efficientlyincreasing the productivity of the animals to minimizewaste of feed and of land use?2. Are there ways to improve the health status of the herd(in the case of organics, by using biological controls, forinstance)?

3. Does this way of farming sustain good quality of lifefor the farmers, their families, rural labor and communi-ties involved?

11.3.2 Views on no-till farming

No-tillage is one of the components of conservation agri-culture practices and is considered more environmentalfriendly than complete tillage.[15][16] Due to this belief, itcould be expected that agroecologists would not recom-mend the use of complete tillage and would rather recom-mend no-till farming, but this is not always the case. Infact, there is a general consensus that no-till can increasesoils capacity of acting as a carbon sink, especially whencombined with cover crops.[15][17]

No-till can contribute to higher soil organic matter andorganic carbon content in soils,[18][19] though reports ofno-effects of no-tillage in organic matter and organic car-bon soil contents also exist, depending on environmen-tal and crop conditions.[20] In addition, no-till can indi-rectly reduce CO2 emissions by decreasing the use of fos-sil fuels.[18][21]

Most crops can benefit from the practice of no-till,but not all crops are suitable for complete no-tillagriculture.[22][23] Crops that do not perform well whencompeting with other plants that grow in untilled soil intheir early stages can be best grown by using other con-servation tillage practices, like a combination of strip-tillwith no-till areas.[23] Also, crops which harvestable por-tion grows underground can have better results with strip-tillage, mainly in soils which are hard for plant roots topenetrate into deeper layers to access water and nutrients.The benefits provided by no-tillage to predators may leadto larger predator populations,[24] which is a good way tocontrol pests (biological control), but also can facilitatepredation of the crop itself. In corn crops, for instance,predation by caterpillars can be higher in no-till than inconventional tillage fields.[25]

In places with rigorous winter, untilled soil can takelonger to warm and dry in spring, which may delay plant-ing to less ideal dates.[26][27] Another factor to be consid-ered is that organic residue from the prior year’s crops ly-ing on the surface of untilled fields can provide a favorableenvironment to pathogens, helping to increase the risk oftransmitting diseases to the future crop. And because no-till farming provides good environment for pathogens, in-sects and weeds, it can lead farmers to a more intensiveuse of chemicals for pest control. Other disadvantagesof no-till include underground rot, low soil temperaturesand high moisture.Based on the balance of these factors, and because eachfarm has different problems, agroecologists will not at-est that only no-till or complete tillage is the right wayof farming. Yet, these are not the only possible choicesregarding soil preparation, since there are intermediate

11.4. HISTORY 59

practices such as strip-till, mulch-till and ridge-till, all ofthem - just as no-till - categorized as conservation tillage.Agroecologists, then, will evaluate the need of differentpractices for the contexts in which each farm is inserted.In a no-till system, an agroecologist could ask the follow-ing:1. Can the farm minimize environmental impacts and in-crease its level of sustainability; for instance by efficientlyincreasing the productivity of the crops to minimize landuse?2. Does this way of farming sustain good quality of lifefor the farmers, their families, rural labor and rural com-munities involved?

11.4 History

11.4.1 Pre-WWII

The notions and ideas relating to crop ecology have beenaround since at least 1911when F.H. King releasedFarm-ers of Forty Centuries. King was one of the pioneers as aproponent of more quantitative methods for characteriza-tion of water relations and physical properties of soils.[6]In the late 1920s the attempt to merge agronomy andecology was born with the development of the field ofcrop ecology. Crop ecology’s main concern was wherecrops would be best grown.[28] Actually, it was only in1928 that agronomy and ecology were formally linked byKlages.[6][29]

The first mention of the term agroecology was in 1928,with the publication of the term by Bensin in 1928.[30]The book of Tischler (1965), was probably the first to beactually titled ‘agroecology'.[31] He analysed the differentcomponents (plants, animals, soils and climate) and theirinteractions within an agroecosystem as well as the im-pact of human agricultural management on these compo-nents. Other books dealing with agroecology, but withoutusing the term explicitly were published by the Germanzoologist Friederichs (1930) with his book on agriculturalzoology and related ecological/environmental factors forplant protection[32] and by American crop physiologistHansen in 1939[33] when both used the word as a syn-onym for the application of ecology within agriculture.[5]

11.4.2 Post-WWII

Gliessman mentions that post-WWII, groups of scientistswith ecologists gave more focus to experiments in thenatural environment, while agronomists dedicated theirattention to the cultivated systems in agriculture.[28] Ac-cording to Gliessman,[28] the two groups kept their re-search and interest apart until books and articles usingthe concept of agroecosystems and the word agroecol-ogy started to appear in 1970.[30] Dalgaard[5] explains

the different points of view in ecology schools, and thefundamental differences, which set the basis for the de-velopment of agroecology. The early ecology school ofHenry Gleason investigated plant populations focusing inthe hierarchical levels of the organism under study.Friederich Clement’s ecology school, however includedthe organism in question as well as the higher hierarchi-cal levels in its investigations, a “landscape perspective”.However, the ecological schools where the roots of agroe-cology lie are even broader in nature. The ecology schoolof Tansley, whose view included both the biotic organismand their environment, is the one from which the conceptof agroecosystems emerged in 1974 with Harper.[5][34]

In the 1960s and 1970s the increasing awareness of howhumans manage the landscape and its consequences setthe stage for the necessary cross between agronomy andecology. Even though, in many ways the environmentalmovement in the US was a product of the times, theGreen Decade spread an environmental awareness ofthe unintended consequences of changing ecological pro-cesses. Works such as Silent Spring, and The Limits toGrowth, and changes in legislation such as the Clean AirAct, Clean Water Act, and the National Environmen-tal Policy Act caused the public to be aware of societalgrowth patterns, agricultural production, and the overallcapacity of the system.[5]

11.4.3 Fusion with ecology

After the 1970s, when agronomists saw the value of ecol-ogy and ecologists began to use the agricultural systems asstudy plots, studies in agroecology grew more rapidly.[28]Gliessman describes that the innovative work of Prof.Efraim Hernandez X., who developed research based onindigenous systems of knowledge in Mexico, led to edu-cation programs in agroecology.[35] In 1977 Prof. EfraimHernandez X. explained that modern agricultural systemshad lost their ecological foundation when socio-economicfactors became the only driving force in the food sys-tem.[6] The acknowledgement that the socio-economicinteractions are indeed one of the fundamental compo-nents of any agroecosystems came to light in 1982, withthe article Agroecologia del Tropico Americano by Mon-taldo. The author argues that the socio-economic contextcannot be separated from the agricultural systems whendesigning agricultural practices.[6]

In 1995 Edens et al. in Sustainable Agriculture andIntegrated Farming Systems solidified this idea provinghis point by devoting special sections to economics ofthe systems, ecological impacts, and ethics and values inagriculture.[6] Actually, 1985 ended up being a fertile andcreative year for the new discipline. For instance in thesame year, Miguel Altieri integrated how consolidationof the farms, and cropping systems impact pest popu-lations. In addition, Gliessman highlighted that socio-economic, technological, and ecological components give

60 CHAPTER 11. AGROECOLOGY

rise to producer choices of food production systems.[6]These pioneering agroecologists have helped to framethe foundation of what we today consider the interdis-ciplinary field of agroecology.

11.5 Publications[36]

11.6 By region

The principles of agroecology are expressed differentlydepending on local ecological and social contexts.

11.6.1 Latin America

Main article: Agroecology in Latin America

Latin America’s experiences with North American GreenRevolution agricultural techniques have opened space foragroecologists. Traditional or indigenous knowledge rep-resents a wealth of possibility for agroecologists, includ-ing “exchange of wisdoms.” See Miguel Alteiri’s En-hancing the Productivity of Latin American TraditionalPeasant Farming Systems Through an Agroecological Ap-proach for information on agroecology in Latin America.

11.6.2 Madagascar

Main article: Agroecology in Madagascar

Most of the historical farming in Madagascar has beenconducted by indigenous peoples. The French colonialperiod disturbed a very small percentage of land area,and even included some useful experiments in Sustainableforestry. Slash-and-burn techniques, a component ofsome shifting cultivation systems have been practised bynatives in Madagascar for centuries. As of 2006 someof the major agricultural products from slash-and-burnmethods are wood, charcoal and grass for Zebu grazing.These practices have taken perhaps the greatest toll onland fertility since the end of French rule, mainly due tooverpopulation pressures.

11.7 See also

11.8 References

[1] Wezel, A., Bellon, S., Doré, T., Francis, C., Vallod, D.,David, C. (2009). Agroecology as a science, a movement

or a practice. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable De-velopment (published online)

[2] Pretty, Jules. 2008. Agricultural sustainability: concepts,principles and evidence. Philosophical Transactions of theRoyal Society, 363, 447-465.

[3] Conway, Gordon R. 1985. Agroecosystem analysis. Agri-cultural Administration, 20, 31-55.

[4] Agroecology, Glossary of Statistical Terms

[5] Dalgaard, Tommy, and Nicholas Hutchings, John Porter.“Agroecology, Scaling and Interdisciplinarity.” Agricul-ture Ecosystems and Environment 100(2003): 39-51.

[6] Francis et al (2003). “Agroecology: the ecology of foodsystems”. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 22 (3): 99–118. doi:10.1300/J064v22n03_10.

[7] Agroecology.org

[8] Buttel, Frederick. “Envisioning the Future Developmentof Farming in the USA: Agroecology between Extinctionand Multifunctionality?" New Directions in AgroecologyResearch and Education (2003)

[9] Wojtkowski, Paul A. (2002) Agroecological Perspectivesin Agronomy, Forestry and Agroforestry. Science Pub-lishers Inc., Enfield, NH, 356p.

[10] Wojtkowski, Paul A. (2006) Introduction to Agroecology:Principles and Practices. Haworth Press, Binghamton,NY, 404p.

[11] IFOAM (International Federation for Organic AgricultureMovements)

[12] Boer, I J. M. 2003. Environmental impact assessment ofconventional and organic milk production. Livestock Pro-duction Science. Vol 80, p 69–77.

[13] Hovi, M. el al. 2003. Animal health andwelfare in organiclivestock production in Europe: current state and futurechallenges. Livestock Production Science. Vol 80, p 41–53.

[14] Bennedsgaard, T.W. et al. 2003. Eleven years of organicdairy production in Denmark: herd health and productionrelated to time of conversion and compared to conven-tional production. Livestock production science. Vol 80,p 121-131.

[15] Garcia-Torres, L. et al. 2002. Summary of the Workshopon Soil Protection and Sustainable Agriculture organizedby the EU Commission DG Environment and the DG En-vironmental Quality of the Spanish Ministry of Environ-ment (Soria, Spain)

[16] Branco, H. and Lal, R. 2008. Principles of ConservationManagement. No Tillage-Farming (Ch.8). Springer Ver-lag. Netherlands. P. 195

[17] Bolliger, A. et al. 2006. Taking stock of the Brazilian“Zero Till Revolution”: A review of landmark researchand farmers’ practice. Adv. Agron. Vol 91, p 47–110

11.9. FURTHER READING 61

[18] Calegari, A. et al. 2008. Impact of Long-Term No-Tillage and Cropping System Management on Soil Or-ganic Carbon in an Oxisol: A Model for Sustainability.Agronomy Journal. Vol 100, Issue 4, p 1013-1019

[19] West, T. and Post, W. 2002. Soil Organic Carbon Se-questration Rates by Tillage and Crop Rotation: A GlobalData Analysis. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 66:1930–1946

[20] Machado, P.L.O.A. and Silva, C.A. 2001. Soil manage-ment under no-tillage systems in the tropics with specialreference to Brazil. Nutr. Cycling Agroecosyst. Vol 61,p 119–130

[21] Koga, N. et al. 2003. Fuel consumption-derived CO2

emissions under conventional and reduced tillage crop-ping systems in northern Japan. Agriculture, Ecosystemsand Environment. Vol 99, p 213–219.

[22] Fleizo et al. 2002

[23] Koller, K. 2003. Techniques of soil tillage. Ed. Adel ElTiti (CRC Press)

[24] Pavuk, D.M. 1994. Influence of weeds within Zea mayscrop plantings on populations of adult Diabrotica barberiand Diabrotica virgifera virgifera. Agriculture, Ecosys-tems & Environment. Vol 50, p 165-175

[25] G. E. Brust, B. Stinner & D. McCartney. 1986. Predatoractivity and predation in corn agroecosystems. Environ-mental Entomology 15:1017-1021

[26] Randall, G.W., and P.R. Hill. 2000. Fall strip-tillagesystems. p. 193–199. In R.C. Reeder (ed.) Conserva-tion tillage systems and management. MWPS-45, 2nd ed.Iowa State Univ., Ames.

[27] Licht, M.A. and Al-Kaisi, M. 2005. Strip-tillage effect onseedbed soil temperature and other soil physical proper-ties. Soil and Tillage Research. Vol 80, p 233-249

[28] Gliessman, Stephen. R Agroecology: Ecological Pro-cesses in Sustainable Agriculture. Ann Arbor: SleepingBear Press, 1998.

[29] Klages, K.H.W. 1928. Crop ecology and ecological cropgeography in the agronomic curriculum. J. Amer. Soc.Agron. 20:336-353.

[30] Wezel, A., Soldat, V. (2009). A quantitative and qualita-tive historical analysis of the scientific discipline agroecol-ogy. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 7(1): 3-18.

[31] Tischler, W. (1965). Agrarökologie. Gustav Fischer Ver-lag, Jena, Germany, 499 pp.

[32] Friederichs, K. (1930) Die Grundfragen und Geset-zmäßigkeiten der land- und forstwirtschaftlichen Zoolo-gie. Vol. 1: Ökologischer Teil, Vol. 2: WirtschaftlicherTeil. Verlagsbuchhandlung Paul Parey, Berlin, Germany,417 and 443 pp.

[33] Hansen, B., Alrøe, H.F., Kristensen, E.S., 2001. Ap-proaches to assess the environmental impact of organicfarming with particular regard to Denmark. Agric.Ecosys. Environ. 83, 11–26.

[34] Harper, J.L., 1974. Agric. Ecosyst. Agroecosyst. 1, 1–6.

[35] qtd. in Francis et al. 2003.

[36] Reproduced from Francis et al., 2003 and Wezel et al.,2009.

11.9 Further reading• Altieri, M.A. 1987. Agroecology: the scientific ba-sis of alternative agriculture. Boulder: WestviewPress.

• Altieri, M.A. 1992. Agroecological foundations ofalternative agriculture in California. Agriculture,Ecosystems and Environment 39: 23-53.

• Buttel, F.H. and M.E. Gertler 1982. Agricul-tural structure, agricultural policy and environmen-tal quality. Agriculture and Environment 7: 101-119.

• Carrol, C. R., J.H. Vandermeer and P.M. Rosset.1990. Agroecology. McGraw Hill Publishing Com-pany, New York.

• Paoletti, M.G., B.R. Stinner, and G.G. Lorenzoni,ed. Agricultural Ecology and Environment. NewYork: Elsevier Science Publisher B.V., 1989.

• Robertson, Philip, and Scott M Swinton. “Reconcil-ing agricultural productivity and environmental in-tegrity: a grand challenge for agriculture.” Frontiersin Ecology and the Environment 3.1 (2005): 38-46.

• Savory, Allan; Jody Butterfield (1998-12-01)[1988]. Holistic Management: A New Frameworkfor Decision Making (2nd ed. ed.). Washington,D.C.: Island Press. ISBN 1-55963-487-1.

• The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived PeakOil. Yellow Springs,Ohio 45387: The CommunitySolution.

• Vandermeer, J. 1995. The ecological basis of al-ternative agriculture. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 26:201-224

• Wojtkowski, P.A. 2002. Agroecological perspec-tives in agronomy, forestry and agroforestry. Sci-ence Publishers Inc., Enfield, New Hampshire.

Advances in Agroecology Book Series

• Soil Organic Matter in Sustainable Agriculture (Ad-vances in Agroecology) by FredMagdoff and Ray R.Weil (Hardcover - May 27, 2004)

• Agroforestry in Sustainable Agricultural Systems(Advances in Agroecology) by Louise E. Buck,James P. Lassoie, and Erick C.M. Fernandes (Hard-cover - Oct 1, 1998)

62 CHAPTER 11. AGROECOLOGY

• Agroecosystem Sustainability: Developing PracticalStrategies (Advances in Agroecology) by Stephen R.Gliessman (Hardcover - Sep 25, 2000)

• Interactions Between Agroecosystems and RuralCommunities (Advances in Agroecology) by Cor-nelia Flora (Hardcover - Feb 5, 2001)

• Landscape Ecology in Agroecosystems Man-agement (Advances in Agroecology) by LechRyszkowski (Hardcover - Dec 27, 2001)

• Integrated Assessment of Health and Sustainabilityof Agroecosystems (Advances in Agroecology) byThomas Gitau, Margaret W. Gitau, David Waltner-ToewsClive A. Edwards June 2008 | Hardback:978-1-4200-7277-8 (CRC Press)

• Multi-Scale Integrated Analysis of Agroecosystems(Advances in Agroecology) by Mario Giampietro2003 | Hardback: 978-0-8493-1067-6 (CRC Press)

• Soil Tillage in Agroecosystems (Advances in Agroe-cology) edited by Adel El Titi 2002 | Hardback:978-0-8493-1228-1 (CRC Press)

• Tropical Agroecosystems (Advances in Agroecol-ogy) edited by John H. Vandermeer 2002 | Hard-back: 978-0-8493-1581-7 (CRC Press)

• Structure and Function in Agroecosystem DesignandManagement (Advances in Agroecology) editedby Masae Shiyomi, Hiroshi Koizumi 2001 | Hard-back: 978-0-8493-0904-5 (CRC Press)

• Biodiversity in Agroecosystems (Advances inAgroecology) edited by Wanda W. Collins, CalvinO. Qualset 1998 | Hardback: 978-1-56670-290-4(CRC Press)

• Sustainable Agroecosystem Management: Integrat-ing Ecology, Economics and Society. (Advances inAgroecology) edited by Patrick J. Bohlen and GarHouse 2009 | Hardback: 978-1-4200-5214-5 (CRCPress)

11.10 External links

• University of Wisconsin–Madison AgroecologyGraduate Program

• The Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems

• Agroecology in action

• agroecology

• Agroecoloy seminars in Montpellier, France

• Agroecology/Sustainable Agriculture Program atUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

• Agroecology at Iowa State University

• Agroecology Program at Penn State

• European Master Agroecology

• MSc Agroecology at Norwegian University of LifeSciences (UMB)

• Agroecology Program at The University of BritishColumbia

• UC Santa Cruz Center for Agroecology & Sustain-able Food Systems

• FacilitatingMechanism of the Global Plan of Actionfor the Conservation and Sustainable Utilization ofPlant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture

• http://www.agroeco.org/index.html

• Agroecology in Brazil

• Agroecology in Spain

Chapter 12

Agroecological restoration

Agroecological restoration is the practice of re-integrating natural systems into agriculture in orderto maximize sustainability, ecosystem services, andbiodiversity. This is one example of a way to apply theprinciples of agroecology to an agricultural system.

12.1 Overview

Farms cannot be restored to a purely natural state be-cause of the negative economic impact on farmers, butreturning processes, such as pest control to nature withthe method of intercropping, allows a farm to be moreecologically sustainable and, at the same time, econom-ically viable. Agroecological restoration works towardthis balance of sustainability and economic viability be-cause conventional farming is not sustainable over thelong run without the integration of natural systems andbecause the use of land for agriculture has been a drivingforce in creating the present world biodiversity crisis. Itsefforts are complementary to, rather than a substitute for,biological conservation.[1]

"...biodiversity is just as important onfarms and in fields as it is in deep river valleysor mountain cloud forests.”

FAO, 15 October 2004Agriculture creates a conflict over the use of land betweenwildlife and humans. Though the domestication of cropplants occurred 10,000 years ago, a 500% increase in theamount of pasture and crop land over the last three hun-dred years has led to the rapid loss of natural habitats.[2]In recent years, the world community acknowledged thevalue of biodiversity in treaties, such as the 1992 land-mark Convention on Biological Diversity.[3]

12.2 Reintegration

The reintegration of agricultural systems into more nat-ural systems will result in decreased yield and producea more complex system, but there will be considerablegains in biodiversity and ecosystem services.

12.2.1 Biodiversity

The Food andAgriculture Organization of the United Na-tions estimates that more than 40% of earth’s land surfaceis currently used for agriculture. And because so muchland has been converted to agriculture, habitat loss is rec-ognized as the driving force in biodiversity loss (FAO).This biodiversity loss often occurred in two steps, as inthe American Midwest, with the introduction of mixedfarming carried out on small farms and then with thewidespread use of mechanized farming and monoculturebeginning after World War II.[4] The decline in farm-land biodiversity can now be traced to changes in farmingpractices and increased agricultural intensity.[5]

12.2.2 Increasing heterogeneity

Heterogeneity (here, the diversity or complexity of thelandscape) has been shown to be associated with speciesdiversity. For example, the abundance of butterflies hasbeen found to increase with heterogeneity. One im-portant part of maintaining heterogeneity in the spacesbetween different fields is made up of habitat that isnot cropped, such as grass margins and strips, scrubalong field boundaries, woodland, ponds, and fallow land.These seemingly unimportant pieces of land are crucialfor the biodiversity of a farm. The presence of fieldmargins benefits many different taxa: the plants attractherbivorous insects, will which attract certain species ofbirds and those birds will attract their natural predators.Also, the cover provided by the no cropped habitat al-lows the species that need a large range to move acrossthe landscape.[6]

12.2.3 Monoculture

In the absence of cover, species face a landscape in whichtheir habitat is greatly fragmented. The isolation of aspecies to a small habitat that it can’t safely wander fromcan create a genetic bottleneck, decreasing the resilienceof the particular population, and be another factor lead-ing to the decline of the total population of the species.[7]Monoculture, the practice of producing a single crop over

63

64 CHAPTER 12. AGROECOLOGICAL RESTORATION

a wide area, causes fragmentation. In conventional farm-ing, monoculture, such as with rotations of corn and soy-bean crops planted in alternating growing seasons, is usedso that very high yields can be produced. After the mech-anization of farming, monoculture became a standardpractice in corn-beans rotation, and had broad implica-tions for the long-term sustainability and biodiversity offarms. Whereas organic fertilizers, had kept the soil’s nu-trients fixed to the ecosystem, the introduction of mono-culture removed the nutrients and farmers compensatedfor that loss by using inorganic fertilizers. It is estimatedthat humans have doubled the rate of nitrogen input intothe nitrogen cycle, mostly since 1975. As a result, the bi-ological processes that controlled the way crops used thenutrients changed and the leached nitrogen from farmlandsoils has become a source of pollution.[8]

12.2.4 Organic farming

Organic farming is defined in different legal terms by dif-ferent nations, but its main distinction from conventionalfarming is that it prohibits the use of synthetic chemi-cals in crop and livestock production. Often, it also in-cludes diverse crop rotations and provides non-croppedhabitat for insects that provide ecosystem services, suchas pest control and pollination.[9] However, it is merelyencouraged that organic farmers follow those kinds ofwildlife friendly practices, and as a result there is a greatdifference between the ecosystem services that similarlysized but distinctly managed organic farms provide.[10]A recent review of the 76 studies concerning the rela-tionship between biodiversity and organic farming listedthree practices associated with organic farming that ac-counted for the higher biodiversity counts found in or-ganic farms as compared to conventional farms.

“1. Prohibition/reduced use of chemicalpesticides and inorganic fertilizers is likely tohave a positive impact through the removalof both direct and indirect negative effects onarable plants, invertebrates and vertebrates.2. Sympathetic management of non-crop habi-tats and field margins can enhance diversityand abundance of arable plants, invertebrates,birds and mammals.3. Preservation of mixed farming is likelyto positively impact farmland biodiversitythrough the provision of greater habitat het-erogeneity at a variety of temporal and spacialscales within the landscape.[11]"

12.3 Notes

[1] 1.^ Jackson et al., The Farm as Natural Habitat, Introduc-tion

[2] ^ Macdonald, Key Topics in Conservation Biology, Chap-ter 16

[3] 3.^ http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/focus/2004/51102/index.html

[4] 4. Jackson et al., The Farm as Natural Habitat, Ch. 10

[5] 5.^ Benton et al., 182

[6] 6.^ Benton et al., 183–184

[7] 7.^Macdonald et al., Key Topics in Conservation Biology,Ch 4

[8] 8. Jackson et al., The Farm as Natural Habitat, Ch. 10

[9] 9.^ Zhang et al., 255

[10] 10.^ Hole D.G. et al., 114

[11] 11.^ Hole D.G. et al., 120

12.4 References

• Altieri, Miguel A. 1999. The ecological role of bio-diversity in agroecosystems: Agriculture, Ecosys-temsand Environment 74: 19–31.

• Benton, Tim G., Vickery, Juliet A., Wilson, JeremyD. 2003. Farmland biodiversity: is habitat hetero-geneity the key? Trends in Ecology and Evolution18: 182–188

• Dabbert, Stephan, 2002, Organic Agriculture andthe Environment. OECD Publications Service

• FAO, http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/focus/2004/51102/index.html

• Fiedler, Anna K., Landis, Douglas A., Wratten,Steve D. 2008. Maximizing ecosystem servicesfrom conservation biological control: The role ofhabitat management. Biological Control 45: 254–271

• Hole. D.G., Perkins, A.J., Wilson, D.J., Alexan-der, I.H., Grice, P.V., Evans, A.D. 2005. BiologicalConservation 112:113–130

• Jackson, Dana L, Jackson, Laura L. 2002. The Farmas Natural Habitat. Island Press, Washington.

• Leopold, Aldo. 1939. The Farmer as a Conserva-tionist. Pages 255–265 in Flader, Susan L., Calli-cott, J. Baird, editors. The River of the Mother ofGod. University of Wisconsin Press.

• Macdonald, David W., Service, Katrina. 2007. KeyTopics in Conservation Biology. Blackwell Publish-ing, Oxford.

12.4. REFERENCES 65

• Schmidt, Martin H. Tscharntke, Teja. 2005. Therole of perennial habitats for Central Europeanfarmland spiders. Agriculture, Ecosystems and En-vironment 105: 235–242

• Shannon, D., Sen, A.M., Johnson, D.B. 2002. Acomparative study of the microbiology of soils man-aged under organic and conventional regimes. SoilUse and Management 18: 274–283

• Zhang, Wei., Rickets, Taylor H., Kremen, Claire.,Carney, Karen., Swinton, Scott M. 2007. Ecosys-tem services and dis-services to agriculture. Eco-logical Economics 64: 253–260

Chapter 13

Community-supported agriculture

An example of a week’s CSA share, including bell peppers, okra,tomatoes, beans, potatoes, garlic, eggplant, and squash.

Community-supported agriculture (CSA; sometimesknown as community-shared agriculture) is an alter-native, locally-based economic model of agriculture andfood distribution. A CSA also refers to a particular net-work or association of individuals who have pledged tosupport one or more local farms, with growers and con-sumers sharing the risks and benefits of food production.CSAmembers or subscribers pay at the onset of the grow-ing season for a share of the anticipated harvest; once har-vesting begins, they receive weekly shares of vegetablesand fruit, in a vegetable box scheme. Often, CSAs alsoinclude herbs, honey, eggs, dairy products and meat, inaddition to conventional produce offerings. In theory aCSA can provide any product to its members, althoughthe majority of CSA operations tend to provide produce,fruits, and various edibles. Some CSA programs also in-clude cut flowers and various ornamental plants as partof their weekly pickup arrangement. Some CSAs pro-vide for contributions of labor in lieu of a portion of sub-scription costs. While some CSAs include small com-munity deliveries, other CSAs expand to large neighbor-hoods and beyond, centering with a farmer’s market typesetup where members can pickup their shares and estab-lish an open forum for other topics that members may beinterested in discussing. The farmer’s market type CSAusually leads to a more dynamic community stemmingfrom this pickup location.

13.1 History

Community-supported agriculture began in the UnitedStates in the 1980s, influenced by European biodynamicagriculture ideas formulated by Rudolf Steiner.[1] TwoEuropean farmers, Jan Vander Tuin from Switzerlandand Trauger Groh from Germany, brought European bio-dynamic farming ideas to the United States in the mid-1980s.[1] Vander Tuin had co-founded a community-supported agricultural project named Topinambur lo-cated near Zurich, Switzerland. Coinage of the term“community-supported agriculture” stems from VanderTuin.[2] This influence led to the separate and simulta-neous creation of two CSAs in 1986. The CSA Gar-den at Great Barrington was created in Massachusetts byJan Vander Tuin, Susan Witt, and Robyn Van En. TheTemple-Wilton Community Farm was created in NewHampshire by Anthony Graham, Trauger Groh, and Lin-coln Geiger.[1]

The CSA Garden at Great Barrington remained togetheruntil 1990 when many members left to form theMahaiweHarvest CSA. One of the original founders, Robyn VanEn, became incredibly influential in the CSA movementin America and founded CSA North America in 1992.[1]The Temple-Wilton Community Garden was more suc-cessful and still operates as a CSA today. It became animportant member of the Wilton community and it re-ceives funding from state, federal, and local sources.[1]

Since the 1980s, community supported farms have beenorganized throughout North America — mainly in NewEngland, the Northwest, the Pacific coast, the Upper-Midwest and Canada. North America now has at least13,000 CSA farms of which 12,549 are in the US ac-cording to the US Department of Agriculture in 2007.[3]The rise of CSAs seems to be correlated with the in-crease in awareness of the environmental movement inthe United States.Some examples of larger and well estab-lished CSAs in the US are Angelic Organics[4] and Rox-bury Farm.[5] CSAs have even become popular in urbanenvironments as proven by the New York City CoalitionAgainst Hunger's own CSA program that maintains loca-tions in all five boroughs of the city.[6] The largest sub-scription CSA with over 13,000 families is Farm FreshTo You in Capay Valley, California.[7] The Québec CSA

66

13.2. THE CSA SYSTEM 67

network (17 years old in 2012) is one of the larger in theworld. It is a unique system where a non-profit organiza-tion reach the customers for the farmers and provide thesefarmers with technical support. More than one hundredfarms are part of this network.Since 2008, the international CSA network Urgencihas been coordinating dissemination and exchange pro-grammes that have resulted in the creation of dozens ofsmall scale CSA in Central and Eastern Europe.

13.2 The CSA system

CSAs generally focus on the production of high qual-ity foods for a local community, often using organicor biodynamic farming methods, and a shared riskmembership–marketing structure. This kind of farmingoperates with a much greater degree of involvement ofconsumers and other stakeholders than usual — resultingin a stronger consumer-producer relationship.[8] The coredesign includes developing a cohesive consumer groupthat is willing to fund a whole season’s budget in order toget quality foods. The system has many variations on howthe farm budget is supported by the consumers and howthe producers then deliver the foods. CSA theory pur-ports that the more a farm embraces whole-farm, whole-budget support, the more it can focus on quality and re-duce the risk of food waste or

13.2.1 Structure

Community-supported agriculture farms in the UnitedStates today share three common characteristics: an em-phasis on community and/or local produce, share or sub-scriptions sold prior to season, and weekly deliveriesto members/subscribers. Though CSA operation variesfrom farm to farm and has evolved over time, these threecharacteristics have remained constant.[9] The function-ing of a CSA also relies on four practical arrangements:for farmers to know the needs of a community, for con-sumers to have the opportunity to express to farmers whattheir needs and financial limitations are, for commitmentsbetween farmers and consumers to be consciously estab-lished, and for farmers needs to be recognized.[10]

From this base, four main types of CSAs have been de-veloped:

• Farmer managed: A farmer sets up and maintains aCSA, recruits subscribers, and controls managementof the CSA.

• Shareholder/subscriber: Local residents set up aCSA and hire a farmer to grow crops, sharehold-ers/subscribers control most management.

• Farmer cooperative: Multiple farmers develop aCSA program

• Farmer-shareholder cooperative: Farmers and localresidents set up and cooperativelymanage a CSA.[11]

In most original CSAs, a core group of members existed.This core group of members helped to make decisionsabout and run the CSA including marketing, distribu-tion, administrative, and community organization func-tions. CSAs with a core group of members are mostprofitable and successful. However, in 1999, 72 percentof CSAs did not have a core group of members. CSAswith a core group of members operate more successfullyas a farmer-shareholder cooperative and CSAs withouta group of core members rely much more on subscrip-tions and run most prominently as shareholder/subscriberCSAs.[12]

13.2.2 Ideology

Community-supported agriculture in America was influ-enced by the ideas of Rudolf Steiner, an Austrian philoso-pher. He developed the concepts of anthroposophy andbiodynamic agriculture. The Temple-Wilton CommunityFarm used his ideas to develop three main goals of CSAs:

• New forms of property ownership: the idea that landshould be held in common by a community througha legal trust, which leases the land to farmers

• New forms of cooperation: the idea that a networkof human relationships should replace the traditionalsystem of employers and employees

• New forms of economy: that the economy should notbe based on increasing profit, but should be based onthe actual needs of the people and land involved inan enterprise[1]

As CSAs have increased in both number and size sincethey were first developed, they have also change ideo-logically. While original CSAs and some more currentCSAs are still philosophically oriented, most CSAs to-day are commercially oriented and community-supportedagriculture is predominantly seen as a beneficial market-ing strategy.[1] This has led to three ideologically basedtypes of CSAs. The first type is instrumental, the CSAis considered a market in the traditional sense, insteadof an alternative form of economy and relationship. Thesecond type is functional; there is a relationship of sol-idarity between the farmer and the subscribers, but thisextends mostly to social functions, not managerial or ad-ministrative functions. This is the most common type ofCSA. The final type is collaborative; this is the closest tothe original aims of CSAs where the relationship betweenthe farmer and the subscribers is seen as a partnership.[13]

68 CHAPTER 13. COMMUNITY-SUPPORTED AGRICULTURE

13.2.3 Distribution and marketing meth-ods

Shares of a CSA originally and predominantly consist ofproduce. In more recent years, shares have diversifiedand include non-produce products including eggs, meat,flowers, honey, dairy and soaps.[9] Share prices vary fromCSA to CSA. Shares are sold as full shares, which feed 2through 5 people, and half shares, which feed 1 through3 people. Prices range from $200 to $500. Full sharesare sold at a median of $400 and half shares are soldat a median of $250.[14] Share prices are mostly deter-mined by overhead costs of production, but are also de-termined by share prices of other CSAs, variable costsof production, market forces, and income level of thecommunity.[9] Many CSAs have payment plans and low-income options.Shares are distributed in several different ways. Sharesare most often distributed weekly. Most CSAs allowshare pick up at the farm. Shares are also distributedthrough regional drop off, direct home or office dropoff, farmers markets, and community center/ church dropoff.[9] For example the new “Farmie Markets” of upstateNY [15] take orders online and have a number of farmerswho send that week’s orders to a central point in a limitedregion, for distribution by the organizers.CSAs market their farms and shares in different ways.CSAs employ different channels of marketing to diver-sify their sales efforts and increase subscriptions. CSAsuse local farmers markets, restaurants, on-farm retail,wholesale to natural food stores, and wholesale to localgroceries in addition to their CSAs to market shares. Oneproblem that CSAs encounter is over-production. So,CSAs often sell their produce and products in ways otherthan shares. Often, CSA farms also sell their productsat local farmers markets. Excess products are sometimesalso given to foods banks.[9]

13.3 CSAs around the world

The term CSA is mostly used in the USA but a variety ofsimilar production and economic sub-systems are in useworldwide:

• Association pour le maintien de l’agriculturepaysanne (AMAP) in France

• Agriculture soutenue par la communauté (ASC) inQuébec

• Teikei ( ) in Japan

• Reciproco in Portugal

• Solidarische Landwirtschaft in Germany

• Pergola(-landbouw) in the Netherlands

• Andelslandbruk in Norway

• Gruppi di Acquisto Solidale (GAS) in Italy, (see also,Ethical purchasing groups)

• Съпричастно земеделие in Bulgaria

• Asociația pentru Susținerea Agriculturii Țărănești(ASAT) in Romania

• Grupa solidarne razmjene (GSR) in Croatia

All these different models are represented in the interna-tional network, Urgenci, under the terminology of localand solidarity-based partnerships between producers andconsumers. Some of them have been documented in Ur-genci’s newsletter, Teikei. The Romanian, Croatian andBulgarian models were directly implemented as a resultof Urgenci’s dissemination programmes.

13.3.1 Orti Solidali (Italy)

Orti Solidali (meaning Solidarity Gardens) is an exampleof a CSA project in Italy; the reasons for participating aremostly ethical. Participants’ commitment to sustainable,local produce protect the development of the networkfrom mainstream market forces, allowing it to developindependently and flourish. Key to its success are sharedethical and environmental values, as well as the nature ofthe relationships that are formed, which help to shape andconstitute this protective environment. Orti Solidali usesa sustainable agronomic method for food production andsupplies locally-sourced produce while providing revenueand fair working conditions for the producers. With oneof the aims being the reduction of economic growth, alsoknown as degrowth, the objective is to transition to a neweconomic system based on environmental protection andsocial equity.[16]

13.4 See also

• Civic agriculture

• Community supported fishery

• Development-supported agriculture

• Farmers’ market

• Local food

• Sustainable agriculture

• Vegetable box scheme

• WWOOF

13.7. EXTERNAL LINKS 69

13.5 References[1] “History of Community Supported Agriculture, Part 1”

(2005), Rosdale Institute, accessed 05-15-2013.

[2] “Community Supported Agriculture” (PDF). Retrieved2010-09-05.

[3] “USDA 2007 Agricultural Census Table 44” (PDF). Re-trieved 2012-08-09.

[4] Honeybrook Organic Farm

[5] Roxbury farm.com Roxbury Farm

[6] Farm-fresh project

[7] Mark Anderson (22 August 2010). Capay farm, distribu-tor buys West Sac warehouse. Sacramento Business Jour-nal

[8] Committee on Twenty-First Century Systems Agricul-ture, Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources, Divi-sion on Earth and Life Sciences (2010). Toward Sustain-able Agricultural Systems in the 21st Century. Washington,D.C.: National Academies Press. ISBN 9780309148962.

[9] 2009 Survey of Community Supported Agriculture Pro-ducers, University of Kentucky, accessed 05-15-2013.

[10] “Community Supported Agriculture”, The Center for So-cial Research. Accessed 05-15-2013.

[11] “Community Supported Agriculture”, Technotes: Officeof Community Development, US Department of Agricul-ture, accessed 05-15-2013.

[12] “CSA Across the Nation” Center for Integrated Agricul-tural Services. Accessed 05-22-2013

[13] “Devon Acres CSA: local struggles in a global food sys-tem” (2008), retrieved 04-11-2013.

[14] “Community Supported Agriculture Entering the 21stCentury”. Accessed 23 May 2013.

[15] “Farmie Markets of Upstate NY”.

[16] Agricultural Innovation: Sustaining What Agriculture?For What European Bio-Economy? page 26 of theCREPE report

13.6 Additional reading• Bryant, Greg. (1992). “Community SupportedAgriculture,” RAIN magazine 14(2), Winter/Spring.

• Cone, C. A., & Myhre, A. (2000). Community-Supported Agriculture: A Sustainable Alternative toIndustrial Agriculture? Human Organization 59(2),187-197.

• DeMuth, Suzanne. (1993). “Community SupportedAgriculture (CSA): An Annotated Bibliography andResource Guide”, September.

• Egan, Timothy. (2003). “Amid Dying Towns ofRural Plains, One Makes a Stand,” New York Times,December 1.

• En, Robyn Van. (1995). “Eating for Your Com-munity: A Report from the Founder of CommunitySupported Agriculture,” Context, Fall, p, 29.

• Greenwood, Deborah, and Robin Leichenko.(2012). “Community-Supported Agriculture.” InDanto, William, ed., Food and Famine in the 21stCentury, Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 86-94.

• Groh, Trauger, and Steven McFadden. (1990).Farms of Tomorrow: Community Supported Farms- Farm Supported Communities. Biodynamic Farm-ing and Gardening Association

• Groh, Trauger, and Steven McFadden. (1998).Farms of Tomorrow Revisited: Community Sup-ported Farms - Farm Supported Communities. Bio-dynamic Farming and Gardening Association.

• Kumar, S., Duell, J., Soergell, A., & Ali, R. (2011).Towards direct marketing of produce by farmers inIndia: Lessons from the United States of America.Journal of International Development, 23(4), 539-547. doi:10.1002/jid.1600

• Lawson, Jered. (1993). “Cabbages and Compas-sion”, RAIN magazine 14(3), Spring.

• McFadden, Steven. (2004). “The History of Com-munity Supported Agriculture, Part II: CSA‘sWorldof Possibilities.” Rodale.

• McFadden, Steven. (2011). The Call of the Land:An Agrarian Primer for the 21st Century, 2nd ed.NorLights Press.

• Organic Gardening. (1984). “Produce by Subscrip-tion,” April.

• Organic Gardening. (1986). “From Farms to Fami-lies,” July.

• Speth, James Gustav. (2008). The bridge at the edgeof the world. New Haven: Yale University Press.

• Time. (2003). “Fresh Off the Farm, A new breed ofplanters and eaters are joining forces to nurture thelocal-foods movement,”, November. 3.

• VanderTuin, Jan. (1992). “Zürich Supported Agri-culture”, RAIN magazine 14(2), Winter/Spring.

13.7 External links

• Urgenci, the international CSA network, also feedsa blog

70 CHAPTER 13. COMMUNITY-SUPPORTED AGRICULTURE

• Wilson College’s community-supported agriculturedatabase for CSA registration or research.

• Directory of US CSAs

• National Agricultural Library of the U.S. Depart-ment of Agriculture CSA resource

• Comprehensive map of CSAs in the United States

• Going beyond CSAs with Community Food Sys-tems

Chapter 14

Forest gardening

“Home garden” redirects here. For other uses, see Homegarden (disambiguation).Forest gardening is a low-maintenance sustainable

Robert Hart's forest garden in Shropshire

plant-based food production and agroforestry systembased on woodland ecosystems, incorporating fruit andnut trees, shrubs, herbs, vines and perennial vegetableswhich have yields directly useful to humans. Making useof companion planting, these can be intermixed to growin a succession of layers, to build a woodland habitat.Forest gardening is a prehistoric method of securing foodin tropical areas. In the 1980s, Robert Hart coined theterm “forest gardening” after adapting the principles andapplying them to temperate climates.[1]

14.1 History

Forest gardens are probably the world’s oldest form ofland use and most resilient agroecosystem.[2][3] Theyoriginated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad riverbanks and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions. In thegradual process of families improving their immediateenvironment, useful tree and vine species were identified,protected and improved whilst undesirable species wereeliminated. Eventually superior foreign species were se-lected and incorporated into the gardens.[4]

Forest gardens are still common in the tropics and knownby various names such as: home gardens in Kerala inSouth India, Nepal, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Tanzania;Kandyan forest gardens in Sri Lanka;[5] huertos famil-iares, the “family orchards” of Mexico; and pekarangan,the gardens of “complete design”, in Java.[6] These arealso called agroforests and, where the wood componentsare short-statured, the term shrub garden is employed.Forest gardens have been shown to be a significant sourceof income and food security for local populations.[7]

Robert Hart adapted forest gardening for the UnitedKingdom's temperate climate during the 1980s.[1] Histheories were later developed by Martin Crawford fromthe Agroforestry Research Trust and various permacul-turalists such as Graham Bell, Patrick Whitefield, DaveJacke and Geoff Lawton.

14.2 In tropical climates

Forest gardens, or home gardens, are common in thetropics, using intercropping to cultivate trees, crops, andlivestock on the same land. In Kerala in south India aswell as in northeastern India, the home garden is the mostcommon form of land use and is also found in Indonesia.One example combines coconut, black pepper, cocoaand pineapple. These gardens exemplify polyculture, andconserve much crop genetic diversity and heirloom plantsthat are not found in monocultures. Forest gardens havebeen loosely compared to the religious concept of theGarden of Eden.[8]

71

72 CHAPTER 14. FOREST GARDENING

14.2.1 Americas

The BBC’s Unnatural Histories claimed that the Amazonrainforest, rather than being a pristine wilderness, hasbeen shaped by humans for at least 11,000 years throughpractices such as forest gardening and terra preta.[9] Thiswas also explored in the bestselling book 1491 by authorCharles C. Mann. Since the 1970s, numerous geoglyphshave also been discovered on deforested land in theAmazon rainforest, furthering the evidence about Pre-Columbian civilizations.[10][11]

On the Yucatán Peninsula, much of the Maya food sup-ply was grown in “orchard-gardens”, known as pet kot.[12]The system takes its name from the low wall of stones(pet meaning circular and kot wall of loose stones) thatcharacteristically surrounds the gardens.[13]

14.2.2 Africa

In many African countries, for example Zambia,Zimbabwe, Ethiopia and Tanzania, gardens arewidespread in rural, periurban and urban areas andthey play an essential role in establishing food security.Most well known are the Chaga or Chagga gardenson the slopes of Mt. Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. Theseare an excellent example of an agroforestry system. Inmany countries, women are the main actors in homegardening and food is mainly produced for subsistence.In North-Africa, oasis layered gardening with palm trees,fruit trees and vegetables is a traditional type of forestgarden.

14.2.3 Nepal

In Nepal, the Ghar Bagaincha, literally “home garden”,refers to the traditional land use system around a home-stead, where several species of plants are grown andmaintained by household members and their products areprimarily intended for the family consumption (Shresthaet al., 2002). The term “home garden” is often consideredsynonymous to the kitchen garden. However, they differin terms of function, size, diversity, composition and fea-tures (Sthapit et al., 2006). In Nepal, 72% of householdshave home gardens of an area 2–11% of the total landholdings (Gautam et al., 2004). Because of their smallsize, the government has never identified home gardensas an important unit of food production and they therebyremain neglected from research and development. How-ever, at the household level the system is very importantas it is an important source of quality food and nutritionfor the rural poor and, therefore, are important contrib-utors to the household food security and livelihoods offarming communities in Nepal. The gardens are typi-cally cultivated with a mixture of annual and perennialplants that can be harvested on a daily or seasonal basis.Biodiversity that has an immediate value is maintained in

home gardens as women and children have easy access topreferred food, and for this reason alone we should pro-mote home gardens as a key element for a healthy wayof life. Home gardens, with their intensive and multipleuses, provide a safety net for households when food isscarce. These gardens are not only important sources offood, fodder, fuel, medicines, spices, herbs, flowers, con-struction materials and income in many countries, theyare also important for the in situ conservation of a widerange of unique genetic resources for food and agricul-ture (Subedi et al., 2004). Many uncultivated, as well asneglected and underutilised species could make an im-portant contribution to the dietary diversity of local com-munities (Gautam et al., 2004).In addition to supplementing diet in times of diffi-culty, home gardens promote whole-family and whole-community involvement in the process of providing food.Children, the elderly, and those caring for them can par-ticipate in this infield agriculture, incorporating it withother household tasks and scheduling. This tradition hasexisted in many cultures around the world for thousandsof years.[14][15]

14.3 In temperate climates

Robert Hart, forest gardening pioneer

Robert Hart coined the term “forest gardening” dur-ing the 1980s. Hart began farming at WenlockEdge in Shropshire with the intention of providing ahealthy and therapeutic environment for himself andhis brother Lacon.[16] Starting as relatively conventionalsmallholders, Hart soon discovered that maintaining largeannual vegetable beds, rearing livestock and taking careof an orchard were tasks beyond their strength. However,a small bed of perennial vegetables and herbs he plantedwas looking after itself with little intervention.Following Hart’s adoption of a raw vegan diet for healthand personal reasons, he replaced his farm animals withplants. The three main products from a forest garden

14.3. IN TEMPERATE CLIMATES 73

are fruit, nuts and green leafy vegetables.[17] He cre-ated a model forest garden from a 0.12 acre (500 m²)orchard on his farm and intended naming his garden-ing method ecological horticulture or ecocultivation.[18]Hart later dropped these terms once he became awarethat agroforestry and forest gardens were already beingused to describe similar systems in other parts of theworld.[19] He was inspired by the forest farming meth-ods of Toyohiko Kagawa and James Sholto Douglas, andthe productivity of the Keralan home gardens as Hartexplains:[20]

From the agroforestry point of view, per-haps the world’s most advanced country is theIndian state of Kerala, which boasts no fewerthan three and a half million forest gardens...Asan example of the extraordinary intensivity ofcultivation of some forest gardens, one plot ofonly 0.12 hectares (0.30 acres) was found bya study group to have twenty-three young co-conut palms, twelve cloves, fifty-six bananas,and forty-nine pineapples, with thirty peppervines trained up its trees. In addition, the smallholder grew fodder for his house-cow.[21]

14.3.1 Seven-layer system

The seven layers of the forest garden

Robert Hart pioneered a system based on the observationthat the natural forest can be divided into distinct levels.He used intercropping to develop an existing small or-chard of apples and pears into an edible polyculture land-scape consisting of the following layers:

1. ‘Canopy layer’ consisting of the original mature fruittrees.

2. ‘Low-tree layer’ of smaller nut and fruit trees ondwarfing root stocks.

3. ‘Shrub layer’ of fruit bushes such as currants andberries.

4. ‘Herbaceous layer’ of perennial vegetables andherbs.

5. ‘Rhizosphere’ or ‘underground’ dimension of plantsgrown for their roots and tubers.

6. ‘Ground cover layer’ of edible plants that spread hor-izontally.

7. ‘Vertical layer’ of vines and climbers.

A key component of the seven-layer systemwas the plantshe selected. Most of the traditional vegetable cropsgrown today, such as carrots, are sun loving plants notwell selected for the more shady forest garden system.Hart favoured shade tolerant perennial vegetables.

14.3.2 Further development

The Agroforestry Research Trust (ART), managed byMartin Crawford, runs experimental forest gardeningprojects on a number of plots in Devon, United King-dom.[22] Crawford describes a forest garden as a low-maintenance way of sustainably producing food and otherhousehold products.[23]

Ken Fern had the idea that for a successful temperate for-est garden a wider range of edible shade tolerant plantswould need to be used. To this end, Fern created the or-ganisation Plants for a Future (PFAF) which compiled aplant database suitable for such a system. Fern used theterm woodland gardening, rather than forest gardening,in his book Plants for a Future.[24][25]

The Movement for Compassionate Living (MCL) pro-mote forest gardening and other types of vegan organicgardening to meet society’s needs for food and naturalresources. Kathleen Jannaway, the founder of MCL,wrote a book outlining a sustainable vegan future calledAbundant Living in the Coming Age of the Tree in 1991.In 2009, the MCL provided a grant of £1,000 to theBangor Forest Garden project in Gwynedd, North WestWales.[26]

In 2005, Dave Jacke and Eric Toensmeier’s two-volumebook Edible Forest Gardens provided a deeply researchedreference focused on North American forest gardeningclimates, habitats, and species. The book attempts toground forest gardening deeply in ecological science. TheApios Institute wiki grew out of their work, and seeks todocument and share the experience of people around theworld working with the species in polycultures.

14.3.3 Permaculture

Bill Mollison, who coined the term permaculture, visitedRobert Hart at his forest garden in Wenlock Edge in Oc-tober 1990.[27] Hart’s seven-layer system has since beenadopted as a common permaculture design element.Numerous permaculturalists are proponents of forest gar-dens, or food forests, such as Graham Bell, Patrick

74 CHAPTER 14. FOREST GARDENING

Whitefield, Dave Jacke, Eric Toensmeier and Geoff Law-ton. Bell started building his forest garden in 1991and wrote the book The Permaculture Garden in 1995,Whitefield wrote the book How to Make a Forest Gar-den in 2002, Jacke and Toensmeier co-authored the twovolume book set Edible Forest Gardening in 2005, andLawton presented the film Establishing a Food Forest in2008.[28][29][30]

Austrian SeppHolzer practices "Holzer Permaculture" onhis Krameterhof farm, at varying altitudes ranging from1,100 to 1,500 metres above sea level. His designs createmicro-climates with rocks, ponds and living wind barri-ers, enabling the cultivation of a variety of fruit trees, veg-etables and flowers in a region that averages 4°C, and withtemperatures as low as −20°C in the winter.

14.4 Projects

El Pilar on the Belize-Guatemala border features a for-est garden to demonstrate traditional Maya agriculturalpractices.[31][32] A further 1-acre model forest garden,called Känan K’aax (meaning well-tended garden inMayan), is being funded by the National Geographic So-ciety and developed at Santa Familia Primary School inCayo.[33]

In the United States the largest known food forest on pub-lic land is believed to be the 7-acre Beacon Food Forestin Seattle, WA.[34] Other forest garden projects includethose at the Central Rocky Mountain Permaculture In-stitute in Basalt, Colorado and Montview Neighborhoodfarm in Northampton, Massachusetts.[35][36]

In Canada food forester Richard Walker has been de-veloping and maintaining food forests in the province ofBritish Columbia for over 30 years. He developed a 3-acre food forest that when at maturity provided raw ma-terials for a nursery and herbalism business as well as foodfor his family.[37] The Living Centre have developed var-ious forest garden projects in Ontario.[38]

In the United Kingdom, other than those run by the Agro-forestry Research Trust (ART), there are numerous for-est garden projects such as the Bangor Forest Gardenin Gwynedd, North West Wales.[39] Martin Crawfordfrom ART administers the Forest Garden Network, aninformal network of people and organisations around theworld who are cultivating their own forest gardens.[40][41]

14.5 See also• Agroecology

• Analog forestry

• Climate-friendly gardening

• Deep ecology

• Forest farming

• List of companion plants

• Mycoforestry

• Multiple cropping

• Natural farming

• Nutrient cycle

• Orchard

• Permaculture

• Polyculture

• Vegan organic gardening

14.6 Notes[1] Crawford, Martin (2010). Creating a Forest Garden.

Green Books. p. 18.

[2] Hart, Robert A. de J. (1996a), p.124: “Forest gardening,in the sense of finding uses for and attempting to controlthe growth of wild plants, is undoubtedly the oldest formof land use in the world.”

[3] Douglas John McConnell (2003). The Forest Farms ofKandy: And Other Gardens of Complete Design, p.1, “For-est garden farms are probably the world’s oldest and mostresilient agroecosystem.”

[4] Douglas John McConnell (1992). The Forest-GardenFarms of Kandy, Sri Lanka. p. 1. ISBN 9789251028988.

[5] Jacob, V. J.; Alles, W. S. (1987). “Kandyan gar-dens of Sri Lanka”. Agroforestry Systems 5 (2): 123.doi:10.1007/BF00047517.

[6] timeshighereducation.co.uk

[7] Douglas John McConnell (1973). The economic structureof Kandyan forest-garden farms.

[8] Graham Bell (2004). The Permaculture Garden, p.129,“The Forest Garden...This is the original garden of Eden.It could be your garden too.”

• Also see Rob Hopkins (foreword), Martin Craw-ford (2010). Creating a Forest Garden: Workingwith Nature to Grow Edible Crops, p.10 “Perhapswhat Hart created was the closest to what we imag-ine the Garden of Eden as being.”

• Helmut Lieth (1989). Tropical Rain Forest Ecosys-tems: Biogeographical and Ecological Studies, p.611“Important food plants, such as sago-producingpalms, fruit-producing trees and medicinal plantswere purposefully aggregated and tended in conve-nient places. Eventually, the forest garden, a kindof Garden of Eden, emerged. These jungle gardenson good soils of easy access required little mainte-nance and hardly any hard work.”

14.7. REFERENCES 75

• Dave Jacke and Eric Toensmeier (2005). EdibleForest Gardens - Volume One, p.1

• Robert Hart (1996a), p.80• Deborha d'Arms (2011). Jardin D'Or: A Treatiseon Forest Gardening, Recreating Sustainable Gar-dens of Eden

[9] “Unnatural Histories - Amazon”. BBC Four.

[10] Simon Romero (January 14, 2012). “Once Hidden byForest, Carvings in Land Attest to Amazon’s Lost World”.The New York Times.

[11] Martti Pärssinen, Denise Schaan and Alceu Ranzi (2009).“Pre-Columbian geometric earthworks in the upper Purús:a complex society in western Amazonia”. Antiquity 83(322): 1084–1095.

[12] Michael Ernest Smith and Marilyn A. Masson (2000).The Ancient Civilizations of Mesoamerica. p. 127. ISBN9780631211167.

[13] David L. Lentz, ed. (2000). Imperfect Balance: Land-scape Transformations in the Precolumbian Americas. p.212. ISBN 9780231111577.

[14] Killion, Thomas W., Gardens of Prehistory: The Archae-ology of Settlement Agriculture in Greater Mesoamerica,University of Alabama Press, 1992

[15] Heidelberg, Kurt, “Ethnographic Analogy and Its Prob-lems in the Northern Maya Lowlands”. In Lifeways in theNorthern Maya Lowlands: New Approaches to Archaeol-ogy in the Yucatan Peninsula. Edited by JenniferMathews.University of Arizona Press. 2006

[16] Graham Burnett. “Seven Storeys of Abundance; A visit toRobert Hart’s Forest Garden”.

[17] Patrick Whitefield (2002). How to Make a Forest Garden.p. 5. ISBN 9781856230087.

[18] Hart, Robert A. de J. (1996a), p. 45

[19] Hart, Robert A. de J. (1996a), pages 28 and 43

[20] Hart, Robert A. de J. (1996a), p. 41

[21] Hart, Robert A. de J. (1996a), pages 4–5

[22] “Agroforestry Research Trust”.

[23] “Forest gardening”. Agroforestry Research Trust. Re-trieved 13 Feb 2013.

[24] “Woodland Gardening”.

[25] “Plants for a Future - The book”.

[26] “Bangor Forest Garden”. The Movement for Compas-sionate Living - NewLeaves (issue no.93). 2009. pp. 6–8.

[27] Hart, Robert A. de J. (1996a), p. 149

[28] “Graham Bell’s Forest Garden”.

[29] “Edible Forest Gardening”.

[30] "Establishing a Food Forest review”.

[31] Ford, Anabel (May 2, 2009). “El Pilar Archaeologi-cal Reserve for Maya Flora and Fauna”. The GuatemalaTimes. Retrieved 2009-07-26.

[32] Ford, Anabel (December 15, 2010). “Legacy of the An-cient Maya: The Maya Forest Garden”. Popular Archae-ology.

[33] “National Geographic Society Funds Mayan Garden”.

[34] Mellinger, Robert (16 February 2012). “Nations LargestFood Forest takes root on Beacon Hill”. Crosscut. Re-trieved 14 March 2012.

[35] “The Central Rocky Mountain Permaculture Institute”.

[36] “Montview Neighborhood farm”.

[37] “Richard Walker”.

[38] “Forest Gardening”.

[39] “Bangor Forest Garden”.

[40] “The Agroforestry and Forest Garden Network”.

[41] Martin Crawford (2014). “List of visitable forest gardenand agroforestry projects in the UK, Europe and NorthAmerica”. Agroforestry Research Trust.

14.7 References

• Crawford, Martin 2010. Creating a Forest Garden:Working with Nature to Grow Edible Crops. Totnes:Green Books. ISBN 1-900322-62-5.

• d'Arms, Deborha 2011. Jardin d’Or (Garden ofGold): A Treatise on Forest Gardening, Recreat-ing Sustainable Gardens of Eden. Los Gatos, CA:Robertson Publishing. ISBN 978-1611700299.

• Douglas, J. Sholto and Hart, Robert A. de J. 1985.Forest Farming. Intermediate Technology. ISBN 0-946688-30-3.

• Fern, Ken 1997. Plants for a Future: Edible andUseful Plants for a Healthier World. Hampshire:Permanent Publications. ISBN 1-85623-011-2.

• Hart, Robert A. de J. (1996a). Forest Gardening:Cultivating an Edible Landscape. White River Junc-tion, VT: Chelsea Green. ISBN 0-930031-84-9.

• Hart, Robert A. de J. 1996b. Beyond the Forest Gar-den. Gaia Books. ISBN 1-85675-037-X.

• Jacke, Dave, and Toensmeier, Eric 2005. EdibleForest Gardens. Two volume set. Volume One:Ecological Vision and Theory for Temperate ClimatePermaculture, ISBN 1-931498-79-2. Volume Two:Ecological Design and Practice for Temperate Cli-mate Permaculture, ISBN 1-931498-80-6. WhiteRiver Junction, VT: Chelsea Green.

76 CHAPTER 14. FOREST GARDENING

• Jannaway, Kathleen 1991. Abundant Living in theComing Age of the Tree. Movement for Compas-sionate Living. ISBN 0-9517328-0-3.

• Smith, Joseph Russell 1988 (first published in1929). Tree Crops: A Permanent Agriculture. IslandPress. ISBN 0-933280-44-0

• Whitefield, P. 2002. How to Make a Forest Gar-den. Hampshire: Permanent Publications. ISBN 1-85623-008-2.

14.8 External links• Why Food Forests?, Permaculture Research Insti-tute

• Plant an Edible Forest Garden, Mother Earth News

• The garden of the future?, The Guardian

• Edible Forest Gardens: an Invitation to Adventure,The Natural Farmer

• Forest gardens, Permaculture Association

• El Pilar Forest Garden Network, information on tra-ditional Maya forest gardening

Chapter 15

Food desert

A food desert is a geographic area where affordable andnutritious food is difficult to obtain, particularly for thosewithout access to an automobile.[1] Food deserts usuallyexist in rural areas and low-income communities. Someresearch links them to diet-related health problems inaffected populations.[2] Food deserts are sometimes as-sociated with supermarket shortages and food security.The relation between food deserts and obesity has beendisputed.[3]

15.1 Definitions

The term “food desert” is first documented in a 1995United Kingdom government report from a workinggroup in the Nutrition Task Force Low Income ProjectTeam of the Department of Health and was originallydefined as “populated areas with little or no food retailprovision”[4] or more specifically “areas of relative exclu-sion where people experience physical and economic bar-riers to accessing healthy foods”.[5] British food desertscan be broadly classified into twelve geographical types,based on the interaction of socio-economic factors ofphysical access to shops, financial access (affordabilityof) healthy food, and attitudes towards consumption ofhealthy food, the desire to consume it rather than fast /convenience food, possession of cooking skills, that is,pyschological access. These twelve neighbourhood typesare, 1) Inner city executive flat areas (too fast lifestyle tocook healthily), 2) inner city ethnic minority areas (costof food vs low wages), 3) inner city deprived areas sev-ered by main roads from retail areas (poor physical ac-cess), 4) declining suburban areas (shops closing, poorphysical access to supermarkets), 5) planned local author-ity housing areas (low income, and shops often lack freshproduce), 6) student residence areas (preference for fastfood outlets, litle demand for fresh produce), 7) Wealthysuburban areas, most shop by car, but some less mo-bile pensioners with no car. Areas 8 - 12 are rural fooddeserts. 8) is small market town centres losing trade toout-of-town supermarkets, leaving the car-less withouteasy access, 9) market town suburbs, poor bus service tocentre perhaps 1 or 2 miles (2 - 3 kilometres) distant, 10),smaller rural towns, lack full range of fresh produce, 11)remoter villages, no shop, and under-served by mobile

shops, 12) dispersed settlements, no focal point for shop(Shaw H, The Consuming Geographies of Food: Diet,Food Deserts and Obesity, 2014, Routledge, 2014, pp.132–133), see also www.fooddeserts.orgIn general, there is no specific agreed-upon definition forthe term.[6] An initial definition counts the type and qual-ity of foods available for purchase and the neighborhoodresidents being impoverished and unable to buy suchfoods.[5][7][8] A second definition takes into account “ac-cess, or the degree to which individuals live within closeproximity to a large supermarket or supercenter”, whichoffers “consumers a wider array of food choices at rela-tively lower costs”.[6] Such a definition weights “the num-ber, type and size of food stores available to residents”.[8]One study counted food deserts as “urban areas with 10or fewer (grocery) stores and no stores with more than20 employees”.[9] The existence of multiple definitionswhich can even change by country and the uncertaintyover the exact measures by which a food desert can berecognized have fueled controversy over the existence offood deserts.[8]

Maps, showing the distribution of food deserts in theUnited States can be found in Morton and Blanchard’s2007 article.[6]

Despite differences in terminology, most research in theUnited States supports the hypothesis that on the neigh-borhood level, there are disparities in the retail foodenvironment.[10]

15.2 Origin and theories for devel-opment

“Land-use policies that facilitate development of pre-dominantly wealthy and white suburban neighborhoods”have altered the distribution of food stores. In the in-terest of profitability, larger supermarkets have followedthis trend and are most prevalent in these white suburbanneighborhoods.[11] Prevalence of food deserts in poorerneighborhoods is driven by lack of consumer demand, asthe poor have less money to spend on healthful, nutritiousfood. From an economic standpoint, low demand doesnot justify supply. Food retailers are also discouraged

77

78 CHAPTER 15. FOOD DESERT

from opening chains in low-income rural and urban com-munities because of crime rates, transportation costs andlow return of investment.[12] Furey et al. describes fooddesert creation as arising where “high competition fromlarge chain supermarkets has created a void”.[13] As a re-sult, the food supply within inner cities includes less vari-ety, denying some urban residents the benefits of health-ful foods at affordable prices.[14] Remaining food retail-ers in inner-cities are gas stations, convenience stores, to-bacco stores, drugstores, and liquor stores. A diet basedon foods from these locations consists primarily of pro-cessed foods high in calories, sugars, salt, fat, and artifi-cial ingredients.

15.3 Access to quality food

The main factor used to classify a community as a fooddesert is distance from nutritional food retailers. Thereis no standard for “inadequate” access or “adequate” ac-cess to foods. This can be a limited classification andscientific limitation as individuals may live close to a re-tailer that provides nutritious food, but this food may bemore expensive, creating an additional barrier to access.Access to food is calculated by distance of consumer res-idence to nearest supermarket or grocery store. Distanceis measured from centroid of an area (by zip code, censustract, or block) to nearest supermarket or grocery store.Standards of access and methods of measurement varyamong researchers to determine food deserts. Researchsuggests food deserts exist if consumer residence is one toten miles away from the nearest supermarket. Other mea-surements include “urban areas with 10 or fewer storeswith no more than 20 employers”.[9] The USDA’s ThriftyFood Plan aims to standardize the methods of assessmentfor the availability and price of foods in stores.Residents of food desert areas have no alternative but toutilize private cars, travel several miles on foot, or usepublic transit to gain access to healthful food. Consumerswithout cars are dependent on food sources in their clos-est proximity. Ownership and access to a vehicle may bethe best marker for access regardless of Socioeconomicstatus. A study by Inagami reveals that the distance trav-eled to food stores is an independent predictor of BMI.[10]The problem increases in rural food desert areas, whereclosing the distance to nutritional food access is impossi-ble on foot.Researchers have determined that distance to food is alsopsychological. The physical distance from fresh foods de-termine eating behaviors and preferences for palatable,processed foods. To create a healthy relationship withfood, researchers recommend creating a direct connec-tion between fresh produce and consumer. Examplesof this include urban farm programs and incorporatinghealthful foods in schools.According to a report to Congress prepared by the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, assessing the extent of lim-ited access to affordable, nutritious food, approximately2.4 million households in the United States are morethan a mile from a supermarket and lack access to avehicle.[15] The physical distance from full service super-markets leaves residents of these areas to be more likelyto purchase food from convenience stores or corner shopsthat stock mainly cheap, processed foods or foods high infats and sugars.[16]

15.4 Affordability

Research indicates that low-income households shopwhere food prices are lower, and generally cannot af-ford healthful foods. Compared with residents of higher-income neighborhoods, low SES individuals generallyhave diets higher in meat and processed foods with alow intake of fruits and vegetables.[14] It has been sug-gested that people of low socioeconomic status ultimatelyspend up to 37% more on their food purchases, due tosmaller weekly food budgets and poorly stocked grocerystores.[11]

Fringe food retailers in food deserts can have a 30-60%markup on prices, provide a limited selection of prod-ucts and a dominant marketing of processed foods. Com-paring prices that consumers pay for similar foods pur-chased at a different outlets determines disparities in realfood prices. Low-income individuals are more likelyto purchase inexpensive fats and sugars over fresh fruitsand vegetables that are more expensive on a per calo-rie basis.[2] Nutritious foods such as whole grain prod-ucts and fresh fruits and vegetables are more expensivethan high calorie junk foods. “Energy-dense [junk foods]cost on average $1.76 per 1,000 calories, compared with$18.16 per 1,000 calories for low-energy but nutritiousfoods”.

15.5 Rural food deserts

A rural food desert is generally classified as a countywhere residents must drive more than 10 miles to thenearest supermarket chain or supercenter, whereas an ur-ban food desert is classified as having to drive more than amile. Using this definition, twenty percent of rural coun-ties are considered food deserts.[17] Within these coun-ties, there are approximately 2.4 million individuals de-termined to have low access to a large supermarket.[18][19]This number may underestimate or overestimate thosetruly at risk of food insecurity since it only takes into ac-count the number of individuals 10 miles or more awayfrom the nearest supermarket. There may be individualsthat live closer, however if they don’t have a vehicle orpublic transportation, then even being just a mile awaycan present access issues. Likewise there may be a largeportion of this population with easy access to a vehicle,

15.6. RACIAL, ETHNIC, AND SOCIOECONOMIC DISPARITIES 79

which regularly drives more than 10 miles to buy food.This is an unfortunate data limitation in studies of ruralfood deserts.There is an increased risk of rural food deserts as mar-ket pressures continue to negatively impact small grocers.Smaller grocers in rural areas struggle to be profitable formany reasons, such as low sales volumes, which can causecosts of goods to increase or make it difficult to purchaselarge volumes of perishable foods. This in turn createsissues with meeting wholesale food supplier’s minimumpurchasing requirements.[15] “Economies of scale, whichis when the costs of operating a store decrease as storesize increases, and economies of scope, which is whenthe costs decrease as more product variety increases, sug-gests that larger stores that offer greater variety can do soand offer lower prices. Both factors may account for theability of larger stores to survive more easily than smallerstores.”[12] Small grocers tend to offer less variety and lessproduce as a result.The market pressures experienced by small grocers in ru-ral areas also lend to groceries being more expensive inthese areas than in urban areas. For example, in NewMexico the same basket of groceries cost $85 for ruralresidents, and $55 for urban residents.[17] However, thisis not true of all rural areas. A study in Iowa showedthat four rural food desert counties had lower costs on keyfoods that make up a nutritionally balanced diet than didthe nearby larger supermarkets.[6] This suggests an areain which further research is needed.Barriers to food access for elderly living in rural fooddesertsAs of 2007, the elderly made up 7.5 million of the 50million people living in rural America.[20] The U.S Cen-sus website includes maps showing the percentage of res-idents aged 65 and older.[21] Of these elderly citizens,nearly a half million live in rural food deserts and are foodinsecure, while many more may be at risk.[18][19]

There are many barriers to healthful, affordable food forelderly living in rural food deserts. First of all, most el-derly live on a fixed income. According to a study of ru-ral seniors living in the Brazos Valley by Sharkey, et al.,about 14% of respondents indicated that on a monthly ba-sis household food supplies did not last, 13% could not af-ford to eat balanced meals, and 8.3% of respondents hadto cut the size of their meals or skip meals altogether.[22]A second issue faced by seniors is that they struggle withlimited mobility. This can mean anything from havingdifficulty cooking and moving about their home, to nothaving a car or anyone nearby who could drive them toa store. Older persons and those with limited incomesare more likely to be dependent on family, friends, neigh-bors and others for transportation to purchase food.[23]Older women are more likely than men to stop drivingat younger ages or to have never driven, and minoritywomen are even less likely to drive.[24] Additionally, thedeath rate frommotor vehicle accidents among those ages

75 and older is second only to (and virtually identicalwith) the highest risk group of those ages 15–25.[25]

A third concern is that elderly have higher nutrient needsand are less able to tolerate the high sodium and sugarcontent typically found in processed foods. As peopleage, the degree of nutrient absorption in their digestivetract declines. Also, elderly tend to have existing diseasesand/or take medications that interfere with nutrient ab-sorption. There is evidence that elderly people living inrural areas suffer from inadequate nutrition intake due tolow diet variety.[26] If an elderly individual does not havea reliable source and access to an adequate amount offruits and vegetables, as is the case in rural food deserts,their health is put in jeopardy and sets them up for futureailments.Lastly, some seniors have time constraints that make itdifficult to perform daily activities such as food shopping,especially when they are living with a sick spouse requir-ing a lot of their time and care. And for those who haverecently lost a spouse and are suffering from depression,the desire to go to the store or cook for themselves can begreatly diminished, especially in the case of widows.[24]

15.6 Racial, ethnic, and socioeco-nomic disparities

Health disparities related to food access and consumptionare associated with residential segregation, low incomes,and neighborhood deprivation.In a study on urban food environments, participants de-scribed the lack of supermarkets as both a “practical im-pediment to healthful food purchase and a symbol oftheir neighborhoods’ social and economic struggles”.[27]Within cities, there are more than three times as manysupermarkets in wealthier neighborhoods compared withpoorer areas.[14] Residents in low-income urban areas areoften “forced to depend on small stores with limited se-lections of foods at substantially higher prices”.[11]

Research has found parallel trends between high ratesof obesity and individuals of low SES and non-whiteethnicity, particularly in the case of women. Researchby Morland et al., found that areas with a majority ofconvenience stores have a higher prevalence of over-weight and obese individuals, compared to areas withonly supermarkets.[11] Fast food restaurants are dispro-portionately placed in low-income and minority neigh-borhoods, and are often the closest and cheapest foodoptions. “People living in the poorest SES areas have2.5 times the exposure to fast-food restaurants as thoseliving in the wealthiest areas”.[14] The lack of adequatefood sources and limited transportation available to low-income communities are contributing factors to malnu-trition among those living in low SES neighborhoods.[11]

Research has documented inequalities of access to su-

80 CHAPTER 15. FOOD DESERT

permarkets in urban city areas, and found a differencein access to supermarkets in poor vs non-poor areas. Astudy by Baker et al., found that mixed-race areas weresignificantly less likely to have access to foods that ad-here to a healthful diet compared to predominantly white,high income areas.[10] Research by Mari Gallagher hasfound that African Americans are farther from health-ful foods than other racial groups.[28][29][30] The availabil-ity of supermarkets in African American neighborhoodsis 52% of their prevalence in white neighborhoods.[31]Moreover, Morland’s study of food-frequency data in theAtherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study re-vealed that dominantly white populations had five timesmore supermarkets than neighborhoods with a domi-nantly non-white population. African Americans wholived in the same census tract with access to a supermar-ket were more likely to meet dietary guidelines for fruitand vegetable consumption. For each additional super-market, an increase of 32% in fruit and vegetable intakewas found.[32]

A 2010 study by Michael Correll published by the DukeJournal of Gender Law & Policy entitled “Getting Faton Government Cheese: The Connection Between So-cial Welfare Participation, Gender and Obesity in Amer-ica”, analyzed data from the Centers for Disease Con-trol and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Ser-vices to assess the health outcomes of women participat-ing in the government Food Stamps and Temporary Aidto Needy Families programs. The study primarily exam-ines and critiques the structure of current social welfarepolicies, but it also notes: 1) Many of the participants inthe food stamps program live in “food deserts”. Some25% of food stamps participants do not have easy accessto a supermarket; and 2) Under welfare-to-work reformsenacted in 1996, an adult recipient must have 30 hoursa week of “work activity” to receive these benefits. Be-cause many women are single with children and thus havelimited time, this work obligation may limit their abilityto travel to find nutritious foods, prepare healthful mealsfor themselves and their families, and exercise.[33]

Prevalence of obesity is generally higher in rural areas ascompared to urban areas. Socioeconomic factors inhibitaccess to private cars as well as limited reliable publictransportation.

15.7 Research

Initial research on food deserts explored the impact ofretail flight from the urban core.[10] More recent studieshave explored the impact of food deserts in other geo-graphic areas (e.g., rural and frontier), as well as amongspecific populations, such as minorities and elderly peo-ple. Studies of urban and rural food environments re-veal significant potential for evidence-based interventionsand policies to combat the growing obesity epidemic, andto decrease some health disparities. “Multilevel, mixed

methods studies offer the potential to provide a morecomplete picture of the direct and perceived environmen-tal influences on healthy behaviors”.[10]

A 2011 study published in the Archives of InternalMedicine, “Fast Food Restaurants and Food Stores”, used15 years of data on more than 5,000 young adults 18–30years old in a variety of places around the United States.The study’s findings include: 1) Higher levels of fastfood consumption were strongly correlated to fast foodavailability, particularly among low-incomemen with fastfood restaurants within 1.00 to 2.99 km of their homes. A1% increase in fast food availability within 1 km and 3 kmof the home was associated with a 0.13% and 0.34% in-crease in fast food consumption, respectively; 2) Greaterproximity to supermarkets was not correlated in any con-sistent fashion with diet outcomes, nor was it associatedwith fruit and vegetable intake levels; 3) There were noconsistent or strong correlations between neighborhoodfast food availability and individual consumption of fastfood for women of any income level; 4) On average, menof all income levels consumed fast food 2.1 times a week,while their female counterparts consumed such food only1.6 times. The study’s authors conclude that by “pro-moting greater access to supermarkets, several U.S. poli-cies aim to improve diets through provision of affordablehealthful foods, particularly fresh produce in underservedareas. Our findings do not support this initiative in youngto middle-aged adults. Rather, they suggest that addingneighborhood supermarkets may have little benefit to dietquality across the income spectrum and that alternativepolicy options such as targeting specific foods or shiftingfood costs (subsidization or taxation) should be furtherconsidered.”[34]

A 2009 study of rural food deserts found a numberof key differences in overall health, access to food,and the social environment when compared with urbanenvironments.[35] In terms of health, rural residents re-port overall poorer health and more physical limitations,with 12% of them rating their health as fair or poor,compared to 9% of urban residents[35] Communities thatare smaller and isolated from urban influences have de-creased access to the broader global market and conse-quently have fewer choices in food retailers. Lack ofcompetition in the community not only restricts accessto food resources, but can also result in higher food costs.Respondents in this study felt that food quality and varietyin their area were poor at times. The authors also foundthat although personal factors impact eating behavior forrural people, it is the physical and social environmentsthat place constraints on food access, even in civically en-gaged communities.But the study of food deserts requires further research, in-cluding longitudinal studies of food environments, to sup-port associations with obesity and to support neighbor-hood interventions. Longitudinal studies “permit tempo-ral associations” between exposure to nutritious food andobesity.[10] They also provide historical data on grocery

15.8. BARRIERS AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES 81

store location, nutritional environments, and data associ-ated with life-course exposure to food.[10]

Future research is required to overcome the barriers fac-ing residents of food deserts, including retail trends andlocation of supermarkets, in order that food retailers andcity planners may develop multilevel interventions to ad-dress barriers to health at the individual and environmen-tal level. Studies that examine geographic differences inthe access and availability of food, as well as nutritionalquality of food, provide information for public health toexplain disparities.Other recent studies have shown some correlations be-tween food availability and health, including a 2010study that correlated distance from supermarkets withincreases in body mass index.[36] Among elderly peo-ple in particular, malnutrition caused by inadequate ac-cess to food can lead to other health risks. For thosesuffering from weight loss and undernutrition, risks in-clude increased and longer hospitalizations, early admis-sion to long term care facilities, and overall increasedmorbidity and mortality.[37] Nutritional disorders withco-morbidities are the ninth most frequent diagnostic cat-egory among hospitalized rural elderly Medicare benefi-ciaries. Elderly adults struggling with obesity and overnu-trition related to limited food choices are at risk of exac-erbating existing chronic conditions, such as heart diseaseand diabetes, and increased functional decline.[37][38]

15.8 Barriers and proposed solu-tions in the United States

Access is not the only determinant to healthful eating.There are many environmental determinants that predicta positive outcome in healthful eating for residents of cur-rent food desert areas, such as transportation, culture, so-cial capital, and food price. A criticism of current re-search on food access and obesity assumes a “simplis-tic deprivation effect associated with poor-quality foodenvironments”.[10]

Audit research suggests that supermarkets are the mosteffective way to supply communities with a wide selectionof fresh and relatively affordable healthful food. More-over, supermarkets typically are open year-round, pro-vide convenient hours of operation, and generally acceptElectronic Benefit Transfer (EBT).[39] As a result, manyprograms focus on increasing incentives for supermarketsto operate in these underserved areas. Some incentivesinclude property or sales tax breaks. Community-levelinterventions that focus on getting healthful food to low-income areas through farmers markets, mobile carts orcommunity gardens.[15]

One community intervention that increases food accessis the community garden. Community gardens enable in-dividuals to grow their own food on a designated area

of land that is shared with other community members.Community garden programs successfully increased ac-cess to affordable, nutritious food in rural, suburban andurban areas. They also help strengthen community andsocial support for participants.[40]

The USDA released an extensive report to Congress in2009 as a request to reform the Food, Conservation,and Energy Act of 2008. The study outlines a list ofrecommendations for addressing access issues in fooddeserts that include the above options, but also includestransportation reform as a solution.[15] Transportation isa significant barrier in rural food deserts (rural reali-ties). Evaluating current transportation in these commu-nities and developing community-specific solutions cantarget populations limited by current transportation op-tions (rural realities). According to Morton and Blan-chard, there is a need to address the added complica-tions of individuals living in these isolated communi-ties. Proposed solutions include utilizing a combinationof public and private resources. Current transit assistanceand meal-provisioning programs that are already estab-lished in many communities, suchMeals onWheels, haveinitiatives that focus on providing food residents withlimited mobility and ability to shop at traditional foodretailers.[41]

In early 2010 the Obama administration unveiled theHealthy Food Financing Initiative (HFFI) that will pro-mote a range of interventions that expand access to nu-tritious foods, including developing and equipping gro-cery stores and other small businesses and retailers sellinghealthful food in communities that currently lack theseoptions. The initiative provided more than $400 millionin funding intended to bring grocery stores and health-ful food retailers to low-income rural and urban commu-nities. This effort is in concert with Michelle Obama’s“Let’s Move” campaign to counter childhood obesity.The initiative receives funding from the Treasury De-partment, Department of Agriculture and Department ofHealth and Human Services.[42]

Several states and cities within the United States arealso implementing comprehensive programs that involvepublic-private partnership and a combination of financ-ing initiatives and community-level interventions.[15] ThePennsylvania Fresh Food Financing Intitative, for exam-ple is a public-private partnership aimed at encourag-ing the development of new supermarkets by providinggrants of up to $250,000 or loans of up to $2.5 millionper store to defray the infrastructure costs of developinga new store. So far, $41.8 million in grants and loans havefunded 58 stores.[15]

The New York City FRESH program (Food Retail Ex-pansion Health) is one of the most comprehensive at-tempts to increase access to full-service grocery storesin underserved areas. They offer an abatement of landor building taxes for a period of 25 years and a sales taxexemption on building materials.[31]

82 CHAPTER 15. FOOD DESERT

Community-level interventions are useful in that they areless expensive and easier to implement than programsthat encourage the creation of new stores. They requireless space, promote local farmers and increase commu-nity and social capital.Citizens of a rural community in North Carolina collab-orated to develop and implement a solution to the prob-lem of access to food in Bertie County, the poorest inthe state.[43] Community members, in conjunction with aclass at the public high school, designed and constructeda pavilion to serve as the home for a local farmers’ mar-ket. This is one example of committed civic engagement,which can be a strong determinant in the successful de-velopment of community-specific solutions and improvedaccess to food. Community involvement and the incor-poration of local organizations and volunteerism can im-prove the effectiveness of food safety nets and alternativesolutions such as community gardens.[35]

However, farmers markets can be costly for low-incomeindividuals living in these communities.[31] The City ofNew York has implemented several community-level ini-tiatives such as increasing the number farmers markets inunderserved areas and increasing their use by residentsthrough the Health Bucks program. This program offers$2 coupons purchasing fresh fruits and vegetables at par-ticipating farmers markets. This programwas intended toreduce barriers to access based on affordability. Throughthis program, EBT sales at farmers’ markets more thandoubled from $40,000 in 2007 to over $89,000 in 2008.The program is being expanded into upstate New York asthe Fresh Bucks program.[44]

Another proposed solution involves increased local foodproduction and distribution in urban centers. The NewYork City Regional Foodshed is an initiative examiningthe local food production capacity of the New York CityMetropolitan Region.[45]

15.9 See also• Food desert in West Oakland, California

15.10 References[1] USDA Defines Food Deserts | American Nutrition Asso-

ciation

[2] Story, Mary; Kaphingst, Karen M.; Robinson-O'Brien,Ramona; Glanz, Karen (2008). “Creating Healthy Foodand Eating Environments: Policy and Environmental Ap-proaches”. Annual Review of Public Health 29: 253–72. doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.29.020907.090926.PMID 18031223.

[3] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/health/research/pairing-of-food-deserts-and-obesity-challenged-in-studies.html

[4] Cummins S, Macintyre S (1999). “The locationof food stores in urban areas: a case study inGlasgow”. British Food Journal 101 (7): 545–53.doi:10.1108/00070709910279027.

[5] Reising Vmt, Hobbiss A (June 2000). “Food desertsand how to tackle them: a study of one city’s ap-proach”. Health Education Journal 59 (2): 137–49.doi:10.1177/001789690005900203.

[6] Morton L, Blanchard T (2007). “Starved for access: lifein rural America’s food deserts”. Rural Realities (RuralSociological Society) 1 (4): 1–10.

[7] Cummins, Steven; MacIntyre, S (2002). "'Fooddeserts’—evidence and assumption in healthpolicy making”. BMJ 325 (7361): 436–8.doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7361.436. PMC 1123946.PMID 12193363.

[8] Walker RE, Keane CR, Burke JG (September2010). “Disparities and access to healthy foodin the United States: A review of food desertsliterature”. Health & Place 16 (5): 876–84.doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2010.04.013. PMID20462784.

[9] Hendrickson D, Smith C, Eikenberry N (October2006). “Fruit and vegetable access in four low-incomefood deserts communities in Minnesota”. Agricul-ture and Human Values (Springer) 23 (3): 371–83.doi:10.1007/s10460-006-9002-8.

[10] Ford, Paula B.; David A. Dzewaltowski. et al. (2008).“Disparities in Obesity Prevalence Due to Variation in theRetail Food Environment: Three Testable Hypotheses”.Nutrition Reviews 66 (4): 216–28. doi:10.1111/j.1753-4887.2008.00026.x. PMID 18366535.

[11] Morland, K.; Wing, S.; Diez Roux, A.; Poole, C. (2002).“Neighborhood characteristics associated with the loca-tion of food stores and food service places”. Amer-ican Journal of Preventive Medicine 22 (1): 23–29.doi:10.1016/s0749-3797(01)00403-2. PMID 11777675.

[12] Haider, Steven J.; Bitler, Marianne (March 2009). “AnEconomic View of Food Deserts in the United States”.Understanding the Economic Concepts and Characteris-tics of Food Access. National Poverty Center.

[13] Furey, Sinead; Strugnell, Christopher; McIlveen, Heather(2001). “An Investigation of the Potential Existence of'Food Deserts’ in Rural and Urban Areas of Northern Ire-land”. Agriculture and Human Values 18 (4): 447–457.

[14] Ming-Chen Yeh and David L. Katz. “Food, Nutrition, andthe Health of Urban Populations”. In Cities and the Healthof the Public (Nicholas Freudenberg, Sandro Galea, andDavid Vlahov, eds.). Vanderbilt University Press (2006),pp. 106-127. ISBN 0-8265-1512-6.

[15] Ver Ploeg, Michele (June 2009). Access to Affordableand Nutritious Food—Measuring and Understanding FoodDeserts and Their Consequences: Report to Congress.USDA. ISBN 978-1-4379-2134-2.

15.10. REFERENCES 83

[16] Bauer, K. W. (2004, January 201). Priceand Availability Matter. From The New YorkTimes: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/01/23/can-wal-mart-make-us-healthier/access-to-healthy-foods-and-lower-prices-matter

[17] Policy Link and The Food Trust (2010). The grocerygap: who has access to health food and why it mat-ters. Retrieved from: http://www.policylink.org/atf/cf/%7B97C6D565-BB43-406D-A6D5-ECA3BBF35AF0%7D/FINALGroceryGap.pdf

[18] United States Department of Agriculture-Economic Re-search Service. Food desert locator. Available at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/data/fooddesert/index.htm.

[19] United States Department of Agriculture-Economic Re-search Service. Rural income, poverty, and welfare re-port. Available at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/IncomePovertyWelfare/.

[20] Rural Assistance Center. (2011). “Aging”.

[21] CensusScope. (2011). [Map illustration of percentage ofAmericans 65+]. Demographic Maps: An Aging Pop-ulation. Retrieved from http://www.censusscope.org/us/map_65plus.html

[22] Sharkey, Joseph R; Johnson, Cassandra M; Dean, WesleyR (2010). “Food Access and Perceptions of the Commu-nity and Household Food Environment as Correlates ofFruit and Vegetable Intake among Rural Seniors”. BMCGeriatrics 10: 32. doi:10.1186/1471-2318-10-32. PMC2892496. PMID 20525208.

[23] Bitto, Ella Annette; Morton, Lois Wright; Oakland,Mary Jan; Sand, Mary (2003). “Grocery StoreAccess Patterns In Rural Food Deserts”. Journalfor the Study of Food and Society 6 (2): 35–48.doi:10.2752/152897903786769616.

[24] Quandt, SA; McDonald, J; Arcury, TA; Bell, RA; Vi-tolins, MZ (2000). “Nutritional self-management of el-derly widows in rural communities”. The Gerontolo-gist 40 (1): 86–96. doi:10.1093/geront/40.1.86. PMID10750316.

[25] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2009).“Motor Vehicle–Related Death Rates—United States,1999-2005”. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 58(7): 161–5. PMID 19247261.

[26] Marshall, Teresa A., et al. “Inadequate nutrient intakesare common and are associated with low diet variety inrural, community-dwelling elderly.” The Journal of nutri-tion 131.8 (2001): 2192-2196.

[27] Cannuscio, Carolyn C., Eve E.Weiss, and David A. Asch.“The contribution of urban foodways to health dispari-ties.” Journal of Urban Health 87.3 (2010): 381-393.

[28] Examining the Impact of Food Deserts on Public Healthin Chicago, Mari Gallagher Research & ConsultingGroup, 2006. Retrieved from http://www.marigallagher.com/projects/4/

[29] Examining the Impact of Food Deserts on Public Healthin Detroit, Mari Gallagher Research & Consulting Group,2007. Retrieved from http://www.marigallagher.com/projects/4/

[30] Women and Children Last (In the Food Desert), Mari Gal-lagher Research & Consulting Group, 2007

[31] Leone, Angela F.; Rigby, Samantha; Betterley, Connie;Park, Sohyun; Kurtz, Hilda; Johnson, Mary Ann; Lee,Jung Sun (2011). “Store Type and Demographic Influ-ence on the Availability and Price of Healthful Foods,Leon County, Florida, 2008”. Preventing Chronic Disease8 (6): A140. PMC 3221579. PMID 22005633.

[32] Morland, K.; Diez Roux, A. V.; Wing, S. (2006).“Supermarkets, other food stores, and obesity: Theatherosclerosis risk in communities study”. Ameri-can Journal of Preventive Medicine 30 (4): 333–339.doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2005.11.003.

[33] Correll, Michael (2010). “Getting Fat on GovernmentCheese: The Connection Between Social Welfare Partic-ipation, Gender, and Obesity in America”. Duke Journalof Gender Law & Policy 18: 45–77.

[34] “Fast Food Restaurants and Food Stores”. Journalist’s Re-source.org.

[35] Smith, Chery; Morton, Lois W. (2009). “RuralFood Deserts: Low-income Perspectives on FoodAccess in Minnesota and Iowa”. Journal of Nu-trition Education and Behavior 41 (3): 176–87.doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2008.06.008. PMID 19411051.

[36] “Review: Research on Availability of Healthy Food inFood Deserts. Web-based document at DataHaven withsummary of numerous recent studies on food desert im-pacts on health.”. DataHaven. 2011-01-31. Retrieved2011-02-01.

[37] Martin, Carolyn Thompson; Kayser-Jones, Jeanie; Stotts,Nancy; Porter, Carol; Froelicher, Erika Sivarajan (2006).“Nutritional Risk and Low Weight in Community-LivingOlder Adults: A Review of the Literature (1995–2005)".The Journals of Gerontology: Series A 61 (9): 927–34.doi:10.1093/gerona/61.9.927. PMID 16960023.

[38] Jensen, Gordon L.; Friedmann, Janet M. (2002). “Obe-sity Is Associated with Functional Decline in Community-Dwelling Rural Older Persons”. Journal of the AmericanGeriatrics Society 50 (5): 918–23. doi:10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50220.x. PMID 12028181.

[39] Neckerman, K. M., Bader, M., Purciel, M., & Youse-fzadeh, P. (2009). Measuring Food Access in Urban Ar-eas. Built Environment and Health . Neighborhood Re-vitalization. (2011). Retrieved 3 10, 2011, from TheDistrict of Columbia: http://dmped.dc.gov/DC/DMPED/Programs+and+Initiatives/Neighborhood+Revitalization

[40] Hale, James; Knapp, Corrine; Bardwell, Lisa; Buchenau,Michael; Marshall, Julie; Sancar, Fahriye; Litt, JillS. (2011). “Connecting food environments and healththrough the relational nature of aesthetics: Gain-ing insight through the community gardening experi-ence”. Social Science & Medicine 72 (11): 1853–63.

84 CHAPTER 15. FOOD DESERT

doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.03.044. PMC 3114166.PMID 21596466.

[41] Meals on Wheels Association of America. (2011). Therural initiative. Retrieved from http://www.mowaa.org/page.aspx?pid=244.

[42] http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2010pres/02/20100219a.html

[43] Schwartz, A. (2011). High school students builda farmer’s market in a food desert. Co-exist.Available at: http://www.fastcoexist.com/1678622/high-school-students-build-a-farmers-market-in-a-food-desert

[44] Michele Ver Ploeg (2010). Access to Affordable and Nu-tritious Food: Measuring and Understanding Food Desertsand Their Consequences: Report to Congress. DIANEPublishing. p. 107. ISBN 978-1-4379-2134-2. This arti-cle incorporates text from this source, which is in the publicdomain.

[45] http://www.urbandesignlab.columbia.edu/?pid=nyc_foodshed

15.11 Further reading• Annotated bibliography of literature on food envi-ronments

Chapter 16

Polyculture

Polyculture is agriculture using multiple crops in thesame space, in imitation of the diversity of naturalecosystems, and avoiding large stands of single crops, ormonoculture. It includes multi-cropping, intercropping,companion planting, beneficial weeds, and alley cropping.It is the raising at the same time and place of more thanone species of plant or animal.

16.1 Details

Polyculture, though it often requires more labor, has sev-eral advantages over monoculture:

• The diversity of crops avoids the susceptibility ofmonocultures to disease. For example, a study inChina reported in Nature showed that planting sev-eral varieties of rice in the same field increasedyields by 89%, largely because of a dramatic (94%)decrease in the incidence of disease, which madepesticides redundant.[1]

• The greater variety of crops provides habitat formore species, increasing local biodiversity. This isone example of reconciliation ecology, or accom-modating biodiversity within human landscapes. Itis also a function of a biological pest control pro-gram.

Polyculture is one of the principles of permaculture.

16.2 See also

• Agroecology

• Aquaponics

• Beneficial weeds

• Companion planting

• Forest gardening

• Heirloom plant

• Holistic management

• Home gardens

• Integrated Multi-trophic Aquaculture

• Monoculture

• Nurse crop

16.3 References[1] (August 17, 2000.) Genetic Diversity andDisease Control

in Rice Nature 406, 718 - 722.

16.4 External links• Crop rotation and polyculture

• Polycultures in the Brazilian drylands

• Polyculture and disease prevention

• PolyCultures: Food Where We Live

• Integrated Polyculture Farming System

85

Chapter 17

Urban forest

See also: Urban forestryAn urban forest is a forest or a collection of trees

A skyscraper surrounded by trees in Atlanta, which is known as“the city in a forest” and possesses the highest percentage of treecoverage of any major United States city

that grow within a city, town or a suburb. In a widersense it may include any kind of woody plant vegeta-tion growing in and around human settlements. In a nar-rower sense (also called forest park) it describes areaswhose ecosystems are inherited from wilderness leftoversor remnants. Care and management of urban forests iscalled urban forestry.Urban forests play an important role in ecology of humanhabitats in many ways: they filter air, water, sunlight, pro-vide shelter to animals and recreational area for people.They moderate local climate, slowing wind and stormwa-

ter, and shading homes and businesses to conserve en-ergy. They are critical in cooling the urban heat islandeffect, thus potentially reducing the number of unhealth-ful ozone days that plague major cities in peak summermonths.In many countries there is a growing understanding of theimportance of the natural ecology in urban forests. Thereare numerous projects underway aimed at restoration andpreservation of ecosystems, ranging from simple elimi-nation of leaf-raking and elimination of invasive plants tofull-blown reintroduction of original species and riparianecosystems.In Adelaide, South Australia(a city of 1.3 million), Pre-mier Mike Rann (2002 to 2011) launched a major ur-ban forest initiative in 2003 to plant 3 million native treesand shrubs by 2014 on 300 project sites across the metroarea. The projects range from large habitat restorationprojects to small amenity gardens and local biodiversityprojects. Thousands of Adelaide citizens have partici-pated on well publicised community planting days. Sitesinclude parks, reserves, transport corridors, schools, wa-ter courses, coastline council land and other public openspace. Only indigenous trees and shrubs native to the par-ticular local area are planted to ensure genetic integrity.Premier Rann said the project aimed to beautify and coolthe city and make it more liveable; improve air and wa-ter quality and reduce Adelaide’s greenhouse gas emis-sions by 600,000 tonnes of C02 a year. He said it wasalso about creating and conserving habitat for preciouswildlife and preventing species loss.[1]

The largest man-made urban forest in the world is locatedin Johannesburg, the capital of the Gauteng province inSouth Africa.[2][3][4]

17.1 Benefits

The benefits of urban trees and shrubs are many, in-cluding beautification, reduction of the urban heat islandeffect, reduction of stormwater runoff, reduction of airpollution, reduction of energy costs through increasedshade over buildings, enhancement of property values,improved wildlife habitat, and mitigation of overall ur-

86

17.1. BENEFITS 87

Forest has grown around abandoned rail line in city of Yonkers

ban environmental impact.[5]

17.1.1 Social, psychological, recreational,wildlife

The presence of trees reduces stress, and trees have longbeen seen to benefit the health of urban dwellers.[6] Theshade of trees and other urban green spaces make placefor people to meet and socialize and play. The Biophiliahypothesis argues that people are instinctively drawnto nature, while Attention Restoration Theory goes onto demonstrate tangible improvements in medical, aca-demic and other outcomes, from access to nature. Properplanning and community involvement are important forthe positive results to be realized.Trees and shrubs provide nesting sites and food for birdsand other animals. People appreciate watching, feeding,photographing, and painting urban wildlife and the en-vironment they live in. Urban trees, shrubs and wildlifehelp people maintain their connection with nature.

17.1.2 Economic benefits

The economic benefits of trees and various other plantshave been understood for a long time. Recently, more ofthese benefits are becoming quantified. Quantification ofthe economic benefits of trees helps justify public and pri-vate expenditures to maintain them. One of the most ob-vious examples of economic utility is the example of thedeciduous tree planted on the south and west of a building(in the Northern Hemisphere), or north and east (in theSouthern Hemisphere). The shade shelters and cools thebuilding during the summer, but allows the sun to warmit in the winter after the leaves fall.

The USDA Guide[7] notes on page 17 that “Businessesflourish, people linger and shop longer, apartments andoffice space rent quicker, tenants stay longer, propertyvalues increase, new business and industry is attracted” bytrees. The physical effects of trees—the shade (solar reg-ulation), humidity control, wind control, erosion control,evaporative cooling, sound and visual screening, trafficcontrol, pollution absorption and precipitation—all haveeconomic benefits.

17.1.3 Air pollution reduction

As cities struggle to comply with air quality standards,the ways that trees can help to clean the air should not beoverlooked. The most serious pollutants in the urban at-mosphere are ozone, nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfuric ox-ides (SOx) and particulate pollution. Ground-level ozone,or smog, is created by chemical reactions between NOxand volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the presenceof sunlight. High temperatures increase the rate of thisreaction. Vehicle emissions (especially diesel), and emis-sions from industrial facilities are the major sources ofNOx. Vehicle emissions, industrial emissions, gasolinevapors, chemical solvents, trees and other plants are themajor sources of VOCs. Particulate pollution, or partic-ulate matter (PM10 and PM25), is made up of micro-scopic solids or liquid droplets that can be inhaled andretained in lung tissue causing serious health problems.Most particulate pollution begins as smoke or diesel sootand can cause serious health risk to people with heart andlung diseases and irritation to healthy citizens. Trees arean important, cost-effective solution to reducing pollutionand improving air quality.

Trees reduce temperatures and smog

With an extensive and healthy urban forest air quality canbe drastically improved. Trees help to lower air tempera-tures and the urban heat island effect in urban areas (see:'Trees are energy savers’ for more information on this pro-cess). This reduction of temperature not only lowers en-ergy use, it also improves air quality, as the formation ofozone is dependent on temperature.

• As temperatures climb, the formation of ozone in-creases.

• Healthy urban forests decrease temperatures, andreduce the formation of ozone.

• Large shade trees can reduce local ambient temper-atures by 3 to 5 °C

• Maximum mid-day temperature reductions due totrees range from 0.04 °C to 0.2 °C per 1% canopycover increase.

• In Sacramento County, California, it was estimatedthat doubling the canopy cover to five million trees

88 CHAPTER 17. URBAN FOREST

would reduce summer temperatures by 3 degrees.This reduction in temperature would reduce peakozone levels by as much as 7% and smoggy days by50%.

Lower temperatures reduce emissions in parking lots

Temperature reduction from shade trees in parking lotslowers the amount of evaporative emissions from parkedcars. Unshaded parking lots can be viewed as miniatureheat islands, where temperatures can be even higher thansurrounding areas. Tree canopies will reduce air tem-peratures significantly. Although the bulk of hydrocar-bon emissions come from tailpipe exhaust, 16% of hy-drocarbon emissions are from evaporative emissions thatoccur when the fuel delivery systems of parked vehiclesare heated. These evaporative emissions and the exhaustemissions of the first few minutes of engine operation aresensitive to local microclimate. If cars are shaded in park-ing lots, evaporative emissions from fuel and volatilizedplastics will be greatly reduced.

• Cars parked in parking lots with 50% canopy coveremit 8% less through evaporative emissions thancars parked in parking lots with only 8% canopycover.

• Due to the positive effects trees have on reducingtemperatures and evaporative emissions in parkinglots, cities like Davis, California, have establishedparking lot ordinances that mandate 50% canopycover over paved areas.

• “Cold Start” emissions

The volatile components of asphalt pavement evaporatemore slowly in shaded parking lots and streets. The shadenot only reduces emissions, but reduces shrinking andcracking so that maintenance intervals can be lengthened.Less maintenance means less hot asphalt (fumes) and lessheavy equipment (exhaust). The same principle applies toasphalt-based roofing.

Active pollutant removal

Trees also reduce pollution by actively removing it fromthe atmosphere. Leaf stomata, the pores on the leaf sur-face, take in polluting gases which are then absorbed bywater inside the leaf. Some species of trees are more sus-ceptible to the uptake of pollution, which can negativelyaffect plant growth. Ideally, trees should be selected thattake in higher quantities of polluting gases and are resis-tant to the negative affects they can cause.A study across the Chicago region determined that treesremoved approximately 17 tonnes of carbon monoxide(CO), 93 tonnes of sulfur dioxide (SO2), 98 tonnes ofnitrogen dioxide (NO2), and 210 tonnes of ozone (O3) in1991.

Carbon sequestration

Urban forest managers are sometimes interested in theamount of carbon removed from the air and stored in theirforest as wood in relation to the amount of carbon dioxidereleased into the atmosphere while running tree mainte-nance equipment powered by fossil fuels.

Interception of particulate matter

In addition to the uptake of harmful gases, trees also actas filters intercepting airborne particles and reducing theamount of harmful particulate matter. The particles arecaptured by the surface area of the tree and its foliage.These particles temporarily rest on the surface of the tree,as they can be washed off by rainwater, blown off by highwinds, or fall to the ground with a dropped leaf. Althoughtrees are only a temporary host to particulate matter, ifthey did not exist, the temporarily housed particulatemat-ter would remain airborne and harmful to humans. In-creased tree cover will increase the amount of particulatematter intercepted from the air.

• Large evergreen trees with dense foliage collect themost particulate matter.

• The Chicago study determined that trees removedapproximately 234 tonnes of particulate matter lessthan 10 micrometres (PM10) in 1991.

• Large healthy trees greater than 75 cm in trunk di-ameter remove approximately 70 times more airpollution annually (1.4 kg/yr) than small healthytrees less than 10 cm in diameter (0.02 kg/yr).

17.2 Biogenic volatile organic com-pounds

One important thing to consider when assessing the ur-ban forest’s effect on air quality is that trees emit somebiogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs). Theseare the chemicals (primarily isoprene and monoterpenes)that make up the essential oils, resins, and other organiccompounds that plants use to attract pollinators and repelpredators. As mentioned above, VOCs react with nitro-gen oxides (NOx) to form ozone. BVOCs account forless than 10% of the total amount of BVOCs emitted inurban areas. This means that BVOC emissions from treescan contribute to the formation of ozone. Although theircontribution may be small compared with other sources,BVOC emissions could exacerbate a smog problem.Not all species of trees, however, emit high quantities ofBVOCs. The tree species with the highest isoprene emis-sion rates should be planted with caution:

• Casuarina (Beefwood)

17.4. REFERENCES 89

• Eucalyptus

• Liquidambar (Sweetgum)

• Nyssa (Tupelo or Black gum)

• Platanus (Plane)

• Populus (Poplar)

• Quercus (Oak)

• Robinia (Black locust)

• Salix (Willow)

Trees that are well adapted to and thrive in certain envi-ronments should not be replaced just because theymay behigh BVOC emitters. The amount of emissions spent onmaintaining a tree that may emit low amounts of BVOCs,but is not well suited to an area, could be considerableand outweigh any possible benefits of low BVOC emis-sion rates.Trees should not be labeled as polluters because their to-tal benefits on air quality and emissions reduction far out-weigh the possible consequences of BVOC emissions onozone concentrations. Emission of BVOCs increase ex-ponentially with temperature. Therefore, higher emis-sions will occur at higher temperatures. In desert cli-mates, locally native trees adapted to drought conditionsemit significantly less BVOCs than plants native to wetregions. As discussed above, the formation of ozone isalso temperature dependent. Thus, the best way to slowthe production of ozone and emission of BVOCs is to re-duce urban temperatures and the effect of the urban heatisland. As suggested earlier, the most effective way tolower temperatures is with an increased canopy cover.These effects of the urban forest on ozone productionhave only recently been discovered by the scientific com-munity, so extensive and conclusive research has not yetbeen conducted. There have been some studies quantify-ing the effect of BVOC emissions on the formation ofozone, but none have conclusively measured the effectof the urban forest. Important questions remain unan-swered. For instance, it is unknown if there are enoughchemical reactions between BVOC emissions and NOxto produce harmful amounts of ozone in urban environ-ments. It is therefore, important for cities to be aware thatthis research is still continuing and conclusions should notbe drawn before proper evidence has been collected. Newresearch may resolve these issues.

17.3 See also• North Saskatchewan River valley parks system —North America’s largest expanse of urban parkland,located in Edmonton, Alberta.

• Atlanta — known as “the city in a forest.”

• Forest Park— one of the largest urban forests in theUnited States located in Portland, Oregon.

• Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy a non-profit that as-sists local governments since 1996 in maintaining anetwork of urban greenbelts.

• Green belt

• Jacksonville, Florida — home to the largest urbanpark system in the United States.

• Jefferson Memorial Forest — largest municipal ur-ban forest in the United States

• Košutnjak — large urban forest in Belgrade, Serbia

• Banjica Forest — urban forest in Belgrade, Serbia,41.6 ha. Protected due to diversity of bird species.

• Million Tree Initiative

• Sanjay Gandhi National Park in Mumbai, India; thelargest national park in the world located within citylimits.

• Tijuca Forest— the largest urban forest in the world,in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

• Toronto ravine system

• Urban forestry

• Urban reforestation

17.4 References

17.4.1 Notes[1] Center for National Policy, Washington DC “What States

Can Do-Part 7, Plant Forests”, 23 July 2012; and www.milliontrees.com.au

[2] http://www.gauteng.net/guide/green_tourism/

[3] http://www.joburg.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1553&Itemid=201

[4] http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/africa/11/18/johannesburg.urban.forest/index.html

[5] W.G. Wilson (2011). Constructed Climates: A primeron urban environments. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress. ISBN 0-226-90146-7.

[6] Maller, Cecily; Townsend, Mardie; St Leger, Lawrence(March 2008). Healthy parks, healthy people: The healthbenefits of contact with nature in a park context. DeakinUniversity and Parks Victoria.

[7] Craig W. Johnson, Fred A. Baker, Wayne S. Johnson(1990). “Urban & Community Forestry, a Guide for theInterior Western United States”. USDA Forest Service,Intermountain Region, Ogden, Utah.

90 CHAPTER 17. URBAN FOREST

17.4.2 Bibliography

• Nowak, D. (2000). Tree Species Selection, Design,and Management to Improve Air Quality Construc-tion Technology. Annual meeting proceedings of theAmerican Society of Landscape Architects (availableonline, pdf file).

• Nowak, D. The Effects of Urban Trees on Air QualityUSDA Forest Service (available online, pdf file).

• Nowak, D. (1995). Trees Pollute? A “Tree ExplainsIt All”. Proceedings of the 7th National Urban ForestConference (available online, pdf file).

• Nowak, D. (1993). Plant Chemical Emissions.Miniature Roseworld 10 (1) (available online, pdffile).

• Nowak, D. & Wheeler, J. Program Assistant,ICLEI. February 2006.

• McPherson, E. G. & Simpson, J. R. (2000). Reduc-ing Air Pollution Through Urban Forestry. Proceed-ings of the 48th meeting of California Pest Council(available online, pdf file).

• McPherson, E. G., Simpson, J. R. & Scott, K.(2002). Actualizing Microclimate and Air QualityBenefits with Parking Lot Shade Ordinances. Wetterund Leben 4: 98 (available online, pdf file).

17.5 External links• Urban Forestry South

• Center for Urban Forest Research

• Urban Forest Ecosystems Institute

• Urban Forestry

• USDA Forest Service Northeastern Area

Chapter 18

Green roof

Traditional sod roof, in Ljungris, Sweden

Traditional sod roofs can be seen in many places in the FaroeIslands.

A green roof or living roof is a roof of a building thatis partially or completely covered with vegetation anda growing medium, planted over a waterproofing mem-brane. It may also include additional layers such as a rootbarrier and drainage and irrigation systems. Containergardens on roofs, where plants are maintained in pots, arenot generally considered to be true green roofs, althoughthis is debated. Rooftop ponds are another form of greenroofs which are used to treat greywater.Green roofs serve several purposes for a building, suchas absorbing rainwater, providing insulation, creating ahabitat for wildlife, increasing benevolence and decreas-ing stress of the people around the roof by providinga more aesthetically pleasing landscape, and helping to

Green roof of City Hall in Chicago, Illinois.

lower urban air temperatures and mitigate the heat is-land effect.[1] There are two types of green roof: inten-sive roofs, which are thicker, with a minimum depth of12.8 cm, and can support a wider variety of plants butare heavier and require more maintenance, and extensiveroofs, which are shallow, ranging in depth from 2 cm to12.7 cm, lighter than intensive green roofs, and requireminimal maintenance.[2]

The term green roof may also be used to indicate roofsthat use some form of green technology, such as a coolroof, a roof with solar thermal collectors or photovoltaicpanels. Green roofs are also referred to as eco-roofs,oikosteges, vegetated roofs, living roofs, greenroofs andVCPH[3] (Horizontal Vegetated Complex Partitions).

18.1 Environmental benefits

Green roofs are used to:

• Reduce heating (by adding mass and thermal resis-tance value)

A 2005 study by Brad Bass of the University of Torontoshowed that green roofs can also reduce heat loss and en-ergy consumption in winter conditions.[5]

• Reduce cooling (by evaporative cooling) loads on a

91

92 CHAPTER 18. GREEN ROOF

A modern green roof (California Academy of Sciences). Con-structed for low maintenance by intentionally neglecting manynative plant species, with only the hardiest surviving varieties se-lected for installation on the roof.[4]

building by fifty to ninety percent,[6] especially if itis glassed in so as to act as a terrarium and passivesolar heat reservoir – a concentration of green roofsin an urban area can even reduce the city’s averagetemperatures during the summer

• Reduce stormwater run off[7] —see water-wise gar-dening

A study presented at the Green Roofs for Healthy CitiesConference in June of 2004, cited by the EPA, found wa-ter runoff was reduced by over 75% during rainstorms.See the PDF at [8] for more information.

• Natural Habitat Creation[9] — see urban wilderness

• Filter pollutants and carbon dioxide out of the airwhich helps lower disease rates such as asthma[10]—see living wall

• Filter pollutants and heavy metals out of rainwater

• Help to insulate a building for sound; the soil helps toblock lower frequencies and the plants block higherfrequencies[11]

• If installed correctly many living roofs can con-tribute to LEED points

• Increase agricultural space

• With green roofs, water is stored by the substrateand then taken up by the plants from where it is re-turned to the atmosphere through transpiration andevaporation.

• Green roofs not only retain rainwater, but also mod-erate the temperature of the water and act as naturalfilters for any of the water that happens to run off.

Green roof planted with dune plants from the shores of LakeOntario, SUNY-ESF, Syracuse, NY

Many green roofs are installed to comply with local regu-lations and government fees, often regarding stormwaterrunoff management.[12] In areas with combined sewer-stormwater systems, heavy storms can overload thewastewater system and cause it to flood, dumping rawsewage into the local waterways. Green roofs decreasethe total amount of runoff and slow the rate of runofffrom the roof. It has been found that they can retain upto 75% of rainwater, gradually releasing it back into theatmosphere via condensation and transpiration, while re-taining pollutants in their soil.[13] Often, phosphorus andnitrogen are in this category of environmentally harmfulsubstances even though they are stimulating to the growthof plant life and agriculture. When these substances areadded to a system, it can create mass biological activitysince they are considered limiting factors of plant growthand by adding more of them to a system, it allows formore plant growth.[14]Elevation 314, a new developmentin Washington, D.C. uses green roofs to filter and store

18.2. COSTS AND FINANCIAL BENEFITS 93

some of its storm water on site, avoiding the need for ex-pensive underground sand filters to meet D.C. Depart-ment of Health storm-water regulations.Combating the urban heat island effect[15] is another rea-son for creating a green roof. Traditional building mate-rials soak up the sun’s radiation and re-emit it as heat,making cities at least 4 degrees Celsius (7 °F) hotterthan surrounding areas. On Chicago’s City Hall, by con-trast, which features a green roof, roof temperatures ona hot day are typically 1.4–4.4 degrees Celsius (2.5–8.0°F) cooler than they are on traditionally roofed build-ings nearby.[16] Green roofs are becoming common inChicago, as well as in Atlanta, Portland, and other UnitedStates cities, where their use is encouraged by regula-tions to combat the urban heat-island effect. Green roofsare a type of low impact development.[17] In the case ofChicago, the city has passed codes offering incentivesto builders who put green roofs on their buildings. TheChicago City Hall green roof is one of the earliest andmost well-known examples of green roofs in the UnitedStates; it was planted as an experiment to determine theeffects a green roof would have on the microclimate ofthe roof. Following this and other studies, it has now beenestimated that if all the roofs in amajor city were greened,urban temperatures could be reduced by as much as 7 de-grees Celsius.[18]

Green roofs also provide habitats for plants, insects, andanimals that otherwise have limited natural space in cities.Even in high-rise urban settings as tall as 19 stories, it hasbeen found that green roofs can attract beneficial insects,birds, bees and butterflies. Rooftop greenery comple-ments wild areas by providing stepping stones for song-birds, migratory birds and other wildlife facing shortagesof natural habitat.

18.2 Costs and financial benefits

Roof gardens provide residents of an apartment complex inTongyang Town, Tongshan County, Hubei with fresh produce

A properly designed and installed extensive green-roofsystem can cost $108–248/m2 ($10–23/ft2) while an in-

tensive green roof costs $355–2368/m2 ($33–220/ft2)however, since most of the materials used to build thegreen roof can be salvaged it is estimated that the cost ofreplacing a green roof is generally one third of the initialinstallation costs.[19]

With the initial cost of installing a green roof in mind,there are many financial benefits that accompany greenroofing.

• Green roofing can extend the lifespan of a roof byover 200% by covering the waterproofing mem-brane with growing medium and vegetation, thisshields themembrane from ultra-violet radiation andphysical damage.[20] Further, Penn State Univer-sity’s Green Roof Research Center expects the lifes-pan of a roof to increase by as much as three timesafter greening the roof.[21]

• It is estimated that the installation of a green roofcould increase the real estate value of an averagehouse by about 7%.[22]

• Reduction in energy use is an important propertyof green roofing. By improving the thermal per-formance of a roof, green roofing allows buildingsto better retain their heat during the cooler win-ter months while reflecting and absorbing solar ra-diation during the hotter summer months, allow-ing buildings to remain cooler. A study conductedby Environment Canada found a 26% reduction insummer cooling needs and a 26% reduction in win-ter heat losses when a green roof is used.[23] Withrespect to hotter summer weather, green roofing isable to reduce the solar heating of a building by re-flecting 27% of solar radiation, absorbing 60% bythe vegetation through photosynthesis and evapo-transpiration, and absorbing the remaining 13% intothe growing medium. Such mitigation of solar ra-diation has been found to reduce building temper-atures by up to 20 °C and reduce energy needs forair-conditioning by 25% to 80%. This reduction inenergy required to cool a building in the summer isaccompanied by a reduction in energy required toheat a building in the winter, thus reducing the en-ergy requirements of the building year-round whichallows the building temperature to be controlled at alower cost.[24]

• Depending on the region in which a green roof isinstalled, incentives may be available in the form ofstormwater tax reduction, grants, or rebates. Theregions where these incentives will most likely befound are areas where failing storm water manage-ment infrastructure is in place, urban heat island ef-fect has significantly increased the local air temper-ature, or areas where environmental contaminantsin the storm water runoff is of great concern.[25] Anexample of such an incentive is a one-year propertytax credit is available in New York City, since 2009,

94 CHAPTER 18. GREEN ROOF

for property owners who green at least 50% of theirroof area.[26]

18.3 Disadvantages

The main disadvantage of green roofs is that the initialcost of installing a green roof can be double that of anormal roof.[27] The additional mass of the soil substrateand retained water places a large strain on the structuralsupport of a build. This makes it unlikely for intensivegreen roofs to become widely implemented due to a lackof buildings that are able to support such a large amountof added weight as well as the added cost of reinforc-ing buildings to be able to support such weight.[28] Sometypes of green roofs do have more demanding struc-tural standards especially in seismic regions of the world.Some existing buildings cannot be retrofitted with cer-tain kinds of green roof because of the weight load of thesubstrate and vegetation exceeds permitted static loading.Depending on what kind of green roof it is, the mainte-nance costs could be higher, but some types of green roofhave little or no ongoing cost. Some kinds of green roofsalso place higher demands on the waterproofing systemof the structure, both because water is retained on theroof and due to the possibility of roots penetrating thewaterproof membrane. Another disadvantage is that thewildlife they attract may include pest insects which couldeasily infiltrate a residential building through open win-dows.

18.4 Types

An intensive and an extensive green roof

Section of a Gudbrandsdal type sod roof with elaborate “turflog”. Drawing by Roede.

Green roofs can be categorized as intensive, semi-intensive, or extensive, depending on the depth of plant-ing medium and the amount of maintenance they need.Extensive green roofs traditionally support 10-25 poundsof vegetation per square foot (50–120 kg/m2)[29] whileintensive roofs support 80-150 pounds of vegetation persquare foot (390–730 kg/m2).[30] Traditional roof gar-dens, which require a reasonable depth of soil to growlarge plants or conventional lawns, are considered inten-sive because they are labour-intensive, requiring irriga-tion, feeding, and other maintenance. Intensive roofs aremore park-like with easy access andmay include anythingfrom kitchen herbs to shrubs and small trees.[31] Exten-sive green roofs, by contrast, are designed to be virtu-ally self-sustaining and should require only a minimum ofmaintenance, perhaps a once-yearly weeding or an appli-cation of slow-release fertiliser to boost growth. Exten-sive roofs are usually only accessed for maintenance.[31]They can be established on a very thin layer of soil (mostuse specially formulated composts): even a thin layer ofrockwool laid directly onto a watertight roof can supporta planting of Sedum species and mosses. Some greenroof designs incorporate both intensive and extensive ele-ments. To protect the roof, a waterproofing membrane isoften used, which is manufactured to remain watertight inextreme conditions including constant dampness, pond-ing water, high and low alkaline conditions and exposureto plant roots, fungi and bacterial organisms.[32]

Advances in green roof technology have led to the devel-opment of new systems that do not fit into the traditionalclassification of green roof types. Comprehensive greenroofs bring the most advantageous qualities of extensiveand intensive green roofs together. Comprehensive greenroofs support plant varieties typically seen in intensivegreen roofs at the depth and weight of an extensive greenroof system.[33]

18.6. BROWN ROOFS 95

Another important distinction is between pitched greenroofs and flat green roofs. Pitched sod roofs, a traditionalfeature of many Scandinavian buildings, tend to be of asimpler design than flat green roofs. This is because thepitch of the roof reduces the risk of water penetratingthrough the roof structure, allowing the use of fewer wa-terproofing and drainage layers.

18.5 History

Re-creation of Viking houses in Newfoundland

Sod roofs on 18th century farm buildings in Heidal, Norway.

Modern green roofs, which are made of a system of man-ufactured layers deliberately placed over roofs to supportgrowing medium and vegetation, are a relatively new phe-nomenon. However, green roofs or sod roofs in NorthernScandinavia have been around for centuries. The moderntrend started when green roofs were developed in Ger-many in the 1960s, and has since spread to many coun-tries. Today, it is estimated that about 10% of all Ger-man roofs have been “greened”.[21] Green roofs are alsobecoming increasingly popular in the United States, al-though they are not as common as in Europe.A number of European Countries have very active as-sociations promoting green roofs, including Germany,

On the green roof of the Mountain Equipment Co-op store inToronto, Canada.

Switzerland, the Netherlands, Norway, Italy, Austria,Hungary, Sweden, the UK, and Greece.[34] The City ofLinz in Austria has been paying developers to installgreen roofs since 1983, and in Switzerland it has beena federal law since the late 1990s. In the UK, their up-take has been slow, but a number of cities have devel-oped policies to encourage their use, notably London andSheffield.Rooftop water purification is also being implementedin green roofs. These forms of green roofs are ac-tually treatment ponds built into the rooftops. Theyare built either from a simple substrate (as be-ing done in Dongtan[35]) or with plant-based ponds(as being done by WaterWorks UK Grow System[36]

and Waterzuiveren.be[37] Plants used include calamus,Menyanthes trifoliata, Mentha aquatica, etc.[38])Several studies have been carried out in Germany sincethe 1970s. Berlin is one of the most important cen-ters of green roof research in Germany. Particularlyin the last 10 years, much more research has begun.About ten green roof research centers exist in the USand activities exist in about 40 countries. In a recentstudy on the impacts of green infrastructure, in particulargreen roofs in the Greater Manchester area, researchersfound that adding green roofs can help keep tempera-tures down, particularly in urban areas: “adding greenroofs to all buildings can have a dramatic effect on max-imum surface temperatures, keeping temperatures belowthe 1961–1990 current form case for all time periods andemissions scenarios. Roof greening makes the biggestdifference…where the building proportion is high and theevaporative fraction is low. Thus, the largest differencewas made in the town centers.”[39]

18.6 Brown roofs

Industrial brownfield sites can be valuable ecosystems,supporting rare species of plants, animals and inverte-

96 CHAPTER 18. GREEN ROOF

brates. Increasingly in demand for redevelopment, thesehabitats are under threat. “Brown roofs”, also knownas “biodiverse roofs”,[40] can partly mitigate this loss ofhabitat by covering the flat roofs of new developmentswith a layer of locally sourced material. Constructiontechniques for brown roofs are typically similar to thoseused to create flat green roofs, the main difference beingthe choice of growing medium (usually locally sourcedrubble, gravel, soil, etc...) to meet a specific biodiversityobjective.[41] In Switzerland, it is common to use alluvialgravels from the foundations; in London, a mix of brickrubble and some concrete has been used. The originalidea was to allow the roofs to self-colonise with plants,but they are sometimes seeded to increase their biodiver-sity potential in the short term. Such practices are deridedby purists.[42] The roofs are colonised by spiders and in-sects (many of which are becoming extremely rare in theUK as such sites are developed) and provide a feedingsite for insectivorous birds. Laban, a centre for contem-porary dance in London, has a brown roof specifically de-signed to encourage the nationally rare black redstart.[43]A green roof, 160m above ground level, and claimed tobe the highest in the UK and Europe “and probably in theworld” to act as nature reserve, is on the Barclays BankHQ in Canary Wharf.[44] Designed combining the prin-ciples of green and brown roofs, it is already home to arange of rare invertebrates.

18.7 Examples by country

18.7.1 Australia

Green roofs have been increasing in popularity in Aus-tralia over the past 10 years. Some of the early examplesinclude the Freshwater Place residential tower in Mel-bourne (2002) with its Level 10 rooftop Half Acre Gar-den, CH2 building housing the Melbourne City Council(2006) – Australia’s first 6-star Green Star Design com-mercial office building as certified by the Green BuildingCouncil of Australia, and Condor Tower (2005) with a75-square-metre lawn on the 4th floor.In 2010, the largest Australian green roof project wasannounced. The Victorian Desalination Project [45] willhave a “living tapestry” of 98,000 Australian indigenousplants over a roof area spanning more than 26,000 squaremetres. The roof will form part of the desalination plant’ssophisticated roof system, designed to blend the buildinginto the landscape, and provide acoustic protection, cor-rosion resistance, thermal control, and reduced mainte-nance. The green roof was designed by ASPECT Studios,ARM / pecvkvonhartel architecture, and will be installedby Fytogreen Australia [46]

Since 2008, City Councils and influential business groupsin Australia have become active promoting the bene-fits of green roofs. “The Blueprint to Green Roof Mel-bourne” is one program being run by the Committee for

Melbourne.[47]

18.7.2 Canada

The green roof on top of the Canadian War Museum in Ottawalooks like a wheatfield, with the towers of Canada’s Parliamentvisible in the distance

The city of Toronto approved a by-law in May 2009,[48]mandating green roofs on residential and industrial build-ings. There is criticism from Green Roofs for HealthyCities that the new laws are not stringent enough, sincethey will only apply to residential building that are a min-imum of six storeys high. By 31 January 2011, indus-trial buildings were required to render 10% or 2,000m² oftheir roofs green.[49] Toronto City Hall's Podium roof wasrenovated to include a 32,000 square foot rooftop garden,the largest publicly accessible roof in the city. The greenroof was opened to the public in June 2010.[50]

In 2008, the Vancouver Convention Centre installed asix-acre living roof of indigenous plants and grasses onits West building, making it the largest green roof inCanada.[51] The new Canadian War Museum in Ottawa,opened in 2005, also features a grass-covered roof.During the renovation of the Hamilton City Hall inHamilton, Ontario that spanned from 2007 to 2010,many efforts were taken to enhance the environmentallyfriendly nature of the structure, which included the addi-tion of a grass-covered roof.[52]

18.7.3 Costa Rica

Living Green roofs have been built and grown at SaintMichael’s Sustainable community since 2012. Nativeplants, mostly flowers chosen for the environment, max-imum shade and mass provide a colorful and functionalliving roof. .[53]

18.7.4 Egypt

In Egypt, soil-less agriculture is used to grow plants on theroofs of buildings. No soil is placed directly on the roof

18.7. EXAMPLES BY COUNTRY 97

itself, thus eliminating the need for an insulating layer; in-stead, plants are grown on wooden tables. Vegetables andfruit are the most popular candidates, providing a fresh,healthy source of food that is free from pesticides.[54]

A more advanced method, (aquaponics), being used ex-perimentally in Egypt, is farming fish next to plants ina closed cycle. This allows the plants to benefit fromthe ammonia excreted by the fish, helping the plants togrow better and at the same time eliminating the need forchanging the water for the fish, because the plants help tokeep it clean by absorbing the ammonia. The fish also getsome nutrients from the roots of the plants.

18.7.5 France

Green roof planted with native species at L'Historial de laVendée, a new museum in western France

In France, an 8,000 square metres (86,000 sq ft) exten-sive, cable-supported green roof has been created on theInternational School in Lyon.[55] Another huge green roofof roughly 8,000 squaremetres (86,000 sq ft) has been in-corporated into the newmuseum L'Historial de la Vendéewhich opened in June 2006 at Les Lucs-sur-Boulogne.

18.7.6 Germany

Long-held green roof traditions started in the early indus-trialization period more than 100 years ago exist in Ger-many. In the 70s, green roof technology was elevatedto the next level. Serious storm-water issues made citiesthink about innovative solutions, preferably with livingplants. Modern green roof technology with high perfor-mance, lightweight materials were utilized to grow hardyvegetation even on roofs that can hardly support any ad-ditional load. In the 80s modern Green Roof Technol-ogy was common knowledge in Germany while it waspractically unknown in any other country in the world.In Stuttgart, with one of the most innovative Departmentof Parks and Recreation and with the worlds oldest horti-cultural Universities, modern green roof technology wasperfected and implemented on a large scale.With the first green roof industry boom in Germany there

were quality issues recorded. The FLL formed a com-mittee that is focused on modern green roof technology.FLL stands for Forschungsgesellschaft Landschaftsen-twicklung Landschaftsbau e.V. (FLL)or in English: TheGerman Landscape Research, Development and Con-struction Society. The FLL is an independent non-profitorganization. It was founded in 1975 by eight profes-sional organizations for “the improvement of environ-mental conditions through the advancement and dissem-ination of plant research and its planned applications”.The FLL green roof working group is only one of 40 com-mittees which have published a long list of guidelines andlabor instructions. Some of these guidelines also availablein English including the German FLL-Guideline for thePlanning, Execution and Upkeep of Green-Roof Sites.The results of the research and synthesis done by FLLmembers are constantly updated and promulgated utiliz-ing the same principles which govern the compilation ofDIN standards and are published as either guiding prin-ciples or labor instructions.The current Green Roof Guideline was published in2008. There is also an introduction to FLL to downloadat a FLL member and promoter.[56] Today most elementsof the German FLL are part of standards and guidelinesaround the world (FMGlobal, ASTM, NRCA, SPRI etc..Fachvereinigung Bauwerksbegrünung (FBB) wasfounded in 1990 as the second green roof associationafter DDV (Deutscher Dachgaertner Verband) in 1985.FBB was founded as an open forum for manufacturersand planners, merchants and operators in 1990. Theorganization was born from the then-visionary ideaof understanding the relationship between nature andconstructions not as oppositional, but as an opportunity.Both the green roofing and conventional roofing indus-tries are equally represented. The FBB has developedto become an innovative lobbying group with a strongmarket presence, internationally known through itscooperation with other European associations. To-day, approximately 100 member companies use themultifaceted services offered by FBB, which offers agreater degree of market expertise and competitiveness.“Kompetenz im Markt”.Today, about 10,000,000m² (or 100,000,000 square feet)of new green roofs are being constructed each year. Ac-cording latest studies about 3/4 of these are extensive;the last 1/4 are roof gardens. The cities with the mostgreen roofs in Germany are Berlin and Stuttgart. Surveysabout the status of regulation are done by the FBB. Nearlyone third of all German cities have regulations to sup-port green-roof and rain-water technology. Green-roofresearch institutions are located in several cities as includ-ing Hannover, Berlin, Geisenheim and Neubrandenburg.Germany is the country with the most green roofs in theworld and it is the country with the most advanced knowl-edge in modern green roof technology. Green Roofs inGermany are part of the 2 –3 years apprentice educations

98 CHAPTER 18. GREEN ROOF

system of landscaping professionals. Since green roof arecommon knowledge and common sense it is interestingto take a look at the German Wikipedia page for greenroofs – there is no need to describe projects, case stud-ies or related research. The green roof technology wasimplemented before the internet age.

18.7.7 Greece

The oikostegi, a green roof on the Treasury building in Athens

The Greek Ministry of Finance has now installed a greenroof on the Treasury in Constitution Square in Athens.[57]The so-called “oikostegi” (Greek – oiko, pronouncedeeko, meaning building-ecological, and stegi, pronouncedstaygee, meaning roof-abode-shelter) was inaugurated inSeptember, 2008. Studies of the thermodynamics of theroof in September 2008 concluded that the thermal per-formance of the building was significantly affected by theinstallation.[58] In further studies, in August 2009, energysavings of 50% were observed for air conditioning in thefloor directly below the installation. The ten-floor build-ing has a total floor space of 1.4 hectares. The oikostegicovers 650m², equalling 52% of the roof space and 8%of the total floor space. Despite this, energy savings to-talling €5,630 per annum were recorded, which trans-lates to a 9% saving in air conditioning and a 4% sav-ing in heating bills for the whole building.[59] An addi-tional observation and conclusion of the study was thatthe thermodynamic performance of the oikostegi had im-proved as biomass was added over the 12months betweenthe first and second study. This suggests that further im-provements will be observed as the biomass increases stillfurther. The study also stated that while measurementswere being made by thermal cameras, a plethora of ben-eficial insects were observed on the roof, such as butter-flies, honey bees and ladybirds. Obviously this was notthe case before installation. Finally, the study suggestedthat both the micro-climate and biodiversity of Constitu-tion Square, in Athens, Greece had been improved by theoikostegi.

18.7.8 Iceland

Sod roof Church at Hof, Iceland

Sod roofs are frequently found on traditional farmhousesand farm buildings in Iceland.[60]

18.7.9 Israel

The book of 2 Kings in the Hebrew Bible mentions “thegrass on the housetops” (2 Kings 19:26) suggesting thisas an ancient practice.

18.7.10 Switzerland

Switzerland has one of Europe’s oldest green roofs, cre-ated in 1914 at the Moos lake water-treatment plant,Wollishofen, Zürich. Its filter tanks have 30,000 squaremetres (320,000 sq ft) of flat concrete roofs. To keep theinterior cool and prevent bacterial growth in the filtrationbeds, a drainage layer of gravel and a 15-cm (6-in) layerof soil was spread over the roofs, which had been water-proofed with asphalt. A meadow developed from seedsalready present in the soil; it is now a haven for many plantspecies, some of which are now otherwise extinct in thedistrict, most notably 6,000 Orchis morio (green-wingedorchid). More recent Swiss examples can be found atKlinikum 1 and Klinikum 2, the Cantonal Hospitals ofBasel, and the Sihlpost platform at Zürich’s main railwaystation.

18.7.11 Sweden

What is claimed[61] to be the world’s first green roofbotanical garden was set up in Augustenborg, Malmöin May 1999. The International Green Roof Institute(IGRI) opened to the public in April 2001 as a researchstation and educational facility. (It has since been re-named the Scandinavian Green Roof Institute (SGRI), inview of the increasing number of similar organisationsaround the world.) Green roofs are well-established inMalmö: the Augustenborg housing development near the

18.7. EXAMPLES BY COUNTRY 99

SGRI botanical garden incorporates green roofs and ex-tensive landscaping of streams, ponds, and soak-ways be-tween the buildings to deal with storm water run-off.The new Bo01 urban residential development (in theVästra Hamnen (Western Harbour) close to the foot ofthe Turning Torso office and apartment block, designedby Santiago Calatrava) is built on the site of old shipyardsand industrial areas, and incorporates many green roofs.In 2012, the shopping mall Emporia with its 27,000square metre roof garden, was opened. The size of theroof garden is approximately equivalent to 4 soccer fields,which makes it one of the biggest green roof parks in Eu-rope that is accessible to the public.

18.7.12 United Kingdom

In 2003 English Nature concluded that 'in the UK pol-icy makers have largely ignored green roofs’.[62] How-ever, British examples can be found with increasing fre-quency. A notable early roof garden was built above theDerry & Toms Department Store in Kensington, Londonin 1938.[63] More recent examples can be found at theUniversity of Nottingham Jubilee Campus, and in Lon-don at Sainsbury’s Millennium Store in Greenwich, theHorniman Museum and at Canary Wharf. The EthelredEstate, close to the River Thames in central London, isthe British capital’s largest roof-greening project to date.Toxteth in Liverpool is also a candidate for a major roof-greening project.In the United Kingdom, intensive green roofs are some-times used in built-up city areas where residents andworkers often do not have access to gardens or localparks. Extensive green roofs are sometimes used to blendbuildings into rural surroundings, for example by Rolls-RoyceMotor Cars, who has one of the biggest green roofsin Europe (covering more than 32,000m² on their factoryat Goodwood, West Sussex.[64]

The University of Sheffield has created a Green RoofCentre of Excellence and conducted research, particu-larly in a UK context, into green roofs.[65] Dr Nigel Dun-nett of Sheffield University published a UK-centric bookabout green roofing in 2004 (updated 2008).[66]

Fort Dunlop has the largest green roof in the UK since itsredevelopment between 2004 and 2006.

18.7.13 United States

One of the largest expanses of extensive green roof isto be found in the US, at Ford Motor Company's RiverRouge Plant, Dearborn, Michigan, where 42,000 squaremetres (450,000 sq ft) of assembly plant roofs are cov-ered with sedum and other plants, designed by WilliamMcDonough; the $18 million assembly avoids the needof what otherwise would be $50 million worth of me-chanical treatment facilities on site. Built over Mil-

An intensive roof garden in Manhattan

The undulating green roof of the California Academy of Sci-ences, under construction in San Francisco in 2007.

lennium Park Garage, Chicago’s 24.5-acre (99,000 m2)MillenniumPark is considered one of the largest intensivegreen roofs.[67] Other well-knownAmerican examples in-clude Chicago’s City Hall and the former Gap headquar-ters, now the headquarters of YouTube, in San Bruno,CA. Recently, the American Society of Landscape Ar-chitects retrofitted their existing headquarters building inWashington, D.C. with a green roof designed by land-scape architect Michael Van Valkenburgh.[68]

Another example of a green roof in the United States isthe Ballard Library in Seattle. This green roof has over18,000 plants to help with insulation and reduce runoff.The plants used on the roof include Achillea tomen-tosa (woolly yarrow), Armeria maritima (sea pink, seathrift), Carex inops pensylvanica (long-stoloned sedge),Eriophyllum lanatum (Oregon sunshine), Festuca rubra(red creeping fescue), Festuca idahoensis (Idaho fescue),Phlox subulata (creeping phlox), Saxifraga caespitosa(tufted saxifrage), Sedum oreganum (Oregon stonecrop),Sedum album (white stonecrop), Sedum spurium (two-rowstonecrop), Sisyrinchium idahoense (blue-eyed grass),Thymus serpyllum (wild thyme), Triteleia hyacinthina(fool’s onion).The new California Academy of Sciences building in

100 CHAPTER 18. GREEN ROOF

San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park has a green roof thatprovides 2.5 acres (10,000 m2) of native vegetation de-signed as a habitat for indigenous species, including thethreatened Bay checkerspot butterfly. According to theAcademy’s fact sheet on the building,[69] the building con-sumes 30–35% less energy than required by code.An early green-roofed building (completed in 1971) isthe 358,000 sq ft (33,300 m2) Weyerhaeuser CorporateHeadquarters building in Federal Way, Washington. Its5-story office roof system comprises a series of steppedterraces covered in greenery. From the air, the buildingblends into the landscape.The largest green roof in New York City was installedin midtown Manhattan atop the United States Postal Ser-vice's Morgan Processing and Distribution Center. Con-struction on the 109,000 sq ft (10,100 m2) project be-gan in September 2008, and was finished and dedicatedin July 2009. Covered in native vegetation and havingan expected lifetime of fifty years, this green roof willnot only save the USPS approximately $30,000 a year inheating and cooling costs, but will also significantly re-duce the amount of storm water contaminants enteringthe municipal water system.[70][71]

The 14,000 square feet of outdoor space on the sev-enth floor of Zeckendorf Towers, formerly an undistin-guished rooftop filled with potted plants, make up thelargest residential green roof in New York.[72][73][74] Theroof was transformed in 2010 as part of Mayor MichaelBloomberg's NYC Green Infrastructure campaign, andsupposedly serves to capture some of the rain that fallson it rather than letting it run off and contribute to flood-ing in the adjacent Union Square subway station.[72]

Some cost can also be attributed to maintenance. Ex-tensive green roofs have low maintenance requirementsbut they are generally not maintenance free. Germanresearch has quantified the need to remove unwantedseedlings to approximately 6 seconds/m²/year.[75] Main-tenance of green roofs often includes fertilization to in-crease flowering and succulent plant cover. If aestheticsare not an issue, fertilization and maintenance are gener-ally not needed. Extensive green roofs should only be fer-tilized with controlled-release fertilizers in order to avoidpollution of the storm water. Conventional fertilizersshould never be used on extensive vegetated roofs.[76][77]German studies have approximated the nutrient require-ment of vegetated roofs to 5gN/m². It is also importantto use a substrate that does not contain too many avail-able nutrients. The FLL guidelines specify maximum-allowable nutrient content of substrates.[78]

One of the oldest American green roofs in existence isatop the Rockefeller Center in Manhattan, built in 1936.This roof was primarily an aesthetic undertaking for theenjoyment of the Center’s workers, and remains to thisday, having been refurbished in 1986. [79]

18.8 See also• Arcology

• Blue roof

• Eco-village

• Energy-efficient landscaping

• Hanging Gardens of Babylon

• Low impact development

• Rainwater harvesting

• Ralph Hancock, designer, The Rockefeller CenterRoof Gardens

• Roof garden

• Sod roof, traditional roof in Scandinavia

• Sustainable city

• Subtropical climate vegetated roof

18.9 References[1] Vandermeulen, Valerie; Verspecht, A., Vermeire, B., Van

Huylenbroeck, G., Gellynck, X. (November 30, 2011).“The use of economic valuation to create public sup-port for green infrastructure investments in urban ar-eas”. Landscape and Urban Planning 103 (2): 198–206. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.07.010. Retrieved28 February 2014.

[2] Volder, Astrid; Dvorak (February 2014). “Event size,substrate water content and vegetation affect storm wa-ter retention efficiency of an un-irrigated extensive greenroof system in Central Texas”. Sustainable Cities and Soci-ety 10: 59–64. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2013.05.005. Retrieved27 February 2014.

[3] Vegetated Complex Partition research presentation onAurélien P. JEAN research website

[4] California (magazine of the University of CaliforniaAlumni Association), Sept/Oct 2008, cover and pp. 52–53

[5] “University of Toronto – News@UofT – Green roofs inwinter: Hot design for a cold climate”. 17 November2005. Archived from the original on 11 April 2008. Re-trieved 10 June 2008.

[6] Living Roofs designer http://www.roofgreening.ca/living_roofs.php

[7] http://www.roofgreening.ca/content/Improved_Final.pdf

[8] http://www.epa.gov/heatisland/resources/pdf/GreenRoofsCompendium.pdf

[9] http://www.roofgreening.ca/content/Habitat_Final.pdf

18.9. REFERENCES 101

[10] http://www.roofgreening.ca/content/AirQuality_Final.pdf

[11] Green Roofs for Healthy Cities: About Green Roofs.www.greenroofs.org

[12] Earth Pledge (2005). Green Roofs : Ecological Design andConstruction. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Pub.

[13] U.S. EPA. “Green Roofs – Heat Island Effect”. Retrieved10 June 2008.

[14] Sharpley, A.N. (September 2003). Agricultural Phospho-rus and Eutrophication.

[15] “Here Comes Urban Heat”. Retrieved 10 June 2008.

[16] “Plant-Covered Roofs Ease Urban Heat”. Retrieved 10June 2008.

[17] “Urban Waterways”. Retrieved 14 June 2012.

[18] “Is that a Garden on Your Roof? - Enterprise The Futureof Energy - MSNBC.com”. Archived from the original on23 May 2008. Retrieved 10 June 2008.

[19] Sproul, Julian; Wan, Mandel, Rosenfeld (March 2014).“Economic comparison of white, green, and black flatroofs in the United States”. Energy and Buildings 71:20–27. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.11.058. Retrieved 27February 2014.

[20] Carter, Timothy; Keeler (May 2008). “Life-cycle cost–benefit analysis of extensive vegetated roof systems”.Journal of Environmental Management 87 (3): 350–363. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.01.024. Retrieved 27February 2014.

[21] “Penn State Green Roof Research: About Green Roofs”.Retrieved 10 June 2008.

[22] Bianchini, Fabricio; Hewage (December 2012).“Probabilistic social cost-benefit analysis for greenroofs: A lifecycle approach”. Building and Environment58: 152–162. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.07.005.Retrieved 27 February 2014.

[23] “Green Roofs for Healthy Cities – About Green Roofs”.Retrieved 10 June 2008.

[24] Saadatian, Omidreza; Sopian, K.; Salleh, E.; Lim, C. H.;Riffat, S.; Saadatian, E.; Toudeshki, A.; Sulaiman, M. Y.(July 2013). “A review of energy aspects of green roofs”.Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 23: 155–168.doi:10.1016/j.rser.2013.02.022. Retrieved 27 February2014.

[25] Anderson, Jeffrey A.; Rugh, C. L.; Fernandez, R. T.;Xiao, L. (May 2005). “Green Roof Stormwater Reten-tion”. Journal of Environmental Quality 34 (3): 1036–1044. doi:10.2134/jeq2004.0364. Retrieved 27 February2014.

[26] 'Tax Credits For Green Rooftops In NYC', EnvironmentalLeader, 29 June 2008. Retrieved 10 July 2012.

[27] Getter, Kristin L.; Rowe, D. Bradley (2006). “The Roleof Extensive Green Roofs in Sustainable Development”.HortScience 41 (5): 1276–1285.

[28] Currie, Beth; Bass, B. (December 2008). “Estimates ofair pollution mitigation with green plants and green roofsusing the UFORE model”. Urban Ecosystems 11 (4):409–422. Retrieved 27 February 2014.

[29]

[30] “Green Roof”. Raingardennetwork.com. Retrieved2012-08-15.

[31] Seattle Department of Planning and Development (12February 2007, 3 November 2008). “City Green Build-ing – Green Roofs”. Check date values in: |date= (help)

[32] The Vinyl Roofing Division of the Chemical Fabrics& Film Association (22 June 2012). “Green (Planted)roofs”.

[33] Omni Ecosystems (9 March 2013). “ComprehensiveGreen Roofs”.

[34] “European Federation of Green Roof Associations –EFB”. Efb-greenroof.eu. Retrieved 25 April 2012.

[35] “Dongtan green roofs filter water”.

[36] “WWUK rooftop water purification with plants”.

[37] waterzuiveren.be. “Building water-purifying roofponds”.

[38] “Description of plants used in water-purifying rooftopponds”.

[39] Gill, S.E., J.F. Handley, A.R. Ennos and S. Pauleit.“Adapting Cities for climate Change: The Role of theGreen Infrastructure.” Built Environment Vol 33 No. 1,page 122-123.

[40] “Brown Roofs and Biodiversity”.

[41] “Biodiverse Roofs”.

[42] “Creating Brown Roof Habitats”.

[43] “Case Study – Laban Dance Centre, Deptford SE8”.

[44] “Green roof case study – Barclays Bank HQ, CanaryWharf”.

[45] Aquasure Victorian Desalination Project

[46] Fytogreen web site

[47] “Growing Up” - Blueprint to green roof Melbourne

[48] “Toronto Makes Green Roofs the Law, Approves Contro-versial Bike Lanes”.

[49] “Council approves stringent green-roof rules”. Globe andMail (Canada). 23 August 2012.

[50] “Toronto City Hall’s Podium Green Roof”. City ofToronto. Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 27 June 2013.

[51] “Vancouver Convention Centre Expansion Project”.

[52] “City Hall Reno Photo Tour: Part 2”.

[53] http://www.saintmichaelscostarica.com. Missing orempty |title= (help)

102 CHAPTER 18. GREEN ROOF

[54] “Al-Ahram Weekly | Environment | May your roof begreen”. Weekly.ahram.org.eg. 8 June 2005. Retrieved25 April 2012.

[55] “Chic Sustainability”. Greenroofs.com. 14 March 2006.Retrieved 25 April 2012.

[56] “Green Roof Technology_Casestudies”.

[57] "Διαδικτυακή Πύλη Υπουργείου Οικονομικών –Κεντρική Σελίδα". Mnec.gr. 20 April 2012. Retrieved25 April 2012.

[58] "Σχολή Μηχανολόγων Μηχανικών Ε.Μ.Π. – ΜέλοςΔΕΠ". Mech.ntua.gr. Retrieved 25 April 2012.

[59] "Μελέτες". Oikosteges.gr. 24 September 2009. Re-trieved 25 April 2012.

[60] “Greenroofs101: History”. Greenroofs.com. Retrieved2012-08-15.

[61] “Green Roof – Augustenborg’s Botanical Roof Garden –History”. Greenroof.se. Retrieved 25 April 2012.

[62] Grant, G., Engleback, L., and Nicholson, B., Green Roofs:their existing status and potential for conserving biodiver-sity in urban areas [Report No. 498], Publisher: EnglishNature Reports (2003)

[63] “London Gardens Online”. London Gardens Online. Re-trieved 25 April 2012.

[64] Rolls-Royce Motor Cars / The Company Environmental

[65] “About TGRC”. The Green Roof Centre. Retrieved 25April 2012.

[66] Dunnett, N., Kingsbury, N., Planting Green Roofs andLiving Walls, Publisher: Timber Press (2004)

[67] Nelson, Bryn (15April 2008). “Green roofs popping up inbig cities - Business - Going Green”. MSNBC. Retrieved25 April 2012.

[68] “ASLA Green Roof Demonstration Project”.

[69] “California Academy of Sciences – Newsroom”. Re-trieved 10 June 2008.

[70] “USPS News Release: U.S. Postal Service Opens FirstGreen Roof”. 22 July 2009. Retrieved 11 February 2011.

[71] “Green Roof: Morgan Processing and Distribution Center(P&DC)" (PDF). Archived from the original on 11 Febru-ary 2011. Retrieved 2014-03-03.

[72] One Union Square East Opens City’s Largest Residen-tial Green Roof, Zeckendorf Towers press release of 15November 2010.

[73] Zeckendorf Towers Unveils City’s Largest Green Roof,DNAinfo, 16 November 2010.

[74] A New Roof That Works for a Living, The New YorkTimes, 23 December 2010.

[75] Kolb, W. and T. Schwarz (2002). “Gepflegtes grün aufdem dach”. Deutscher Gartenbau (7): 32–34.

[76] Emilsson, T., Czemiel Berndtsson, J., Mattsson, J-E andRolf, K., 2007 Effect of using conventional and con-trolled release fertilizer on nutrient runoff from variousvegetated roof systems, Ecological Engineering, Volume29, Issue 3, Pages 260–271, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2006.01.001

[77] Czemiel Berndtsson, J., Emilsson, T. and Bengtsson, L.,2006 The influence of extensive vegetated roofs on runoffwater quality, Science of The Total Environment, Volume355, Issues 1–3, Pages 48–63, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2005.02.035

[78] Forschungsgesellschaft Landschaftsentwicklung Land-schaftsbau e.V., http://www.fll.de

[79] “Greenroofs.com Projects - Rockefeller Center Roof Gar-dens.” Greenroofs.com Projects - Rockefeller CenterRoof Gardens. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 July 2014. <http://www.greenroofs.com/projects/pview.php?id=666>.

18.10 Further reading

• Snodgrass, E. and McIntyre, L., The Green RoofManual: A Professional Guide to Design, Instal-lation, and Maintenance Publisher: Timber Press(2010).

• Dunnett, N. and Kingsbury, N., Planting GreenRoofs and Living Walls Publisher: Timber Press(updated 2008).

• Miller-Klein, Jan. Gardening for Butterflies, Beesand other beneficial insects ISBN 978-0-9555288-0-4 has large section on green and brown roofs andbrownfields, including how to make your own, withcontributions from several UK practitioners.

• Scholz-Barth, Katrin. “Harvesting $ from GreenRoofs: Green Roofs Present a Unique Business Op-portunity with Tangible Benefits for Developers.”Urban land 64.6 (2005): 83–7.

• Roland Appl, Reimer Meier, Wolfgang Ansel:Green Roofs – Bringing Nature Back to Town.Publisher: International Green Roof Asso-ciation IGRA, ISBN 978-3-9812978-1-2,http://www.greenroofworld.com/bestellform/bestellformular.php?lang=EN

• Jorg Breuning / Peter Philippi. PDF-File"Introduction of the German FLL-Guidelinefor the Planning, Execution and Upkeep of GreenRoof Sites”

• Fire and Wind on Extensive Green Roofs. Link toPDF Fire and Wind Link to Web Fire and Wind

• Diversity of Fauna on Green Roofs , Diversity offauna

18.11. EXTERNAL LINKS 103

• Princes Trust Award '2008 East Midlands En-terprise Award' goes to green roofing company,Sustainable Green Roof Systems

• Wong, E., Hogan, K., Rosenberg, J., and Denny,A. Reducing Urban Heat Islands: Compendium ofStrategies Climate Protection Partnership Divisionin the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Of-fice of Atmospheric Programs. (October 2008).Chapter 3: Green Roofs. Link to PDF Green Roofs

18.11 External links• Media related to Green roofs (sustainability) atWikimedia Commons

• Green roof at DMOZ

Chapter 19

Earthship

South and East view of an Earthship passive solar home

Earthship typical floorplan

AnEarthship is a type of passive solar house that ismadeof both natural and recycledmaterials (such as earth-filledtires), designed and marketed by Earthship Biotectureof Taos, NewMexico. The term is a registered trademarkof Michael Reynolds.Earthships are primarily designed to work as autonomousbuildings using thermal mass construction and a naturalcross ventilation that is assisted by thermal draught (Stackeffect) to regulate indoor temperature. Earthships are de-signed to be "off-the-grid ready” homes, minimizing theirreliance on both public utilities and fossil fuels.Earthships are built to use available local resources, es-pecially energy from the sun. For example, windows onsun-facing walls admit lighting and heating, and the build-ings are often horseshoe-shaped to maximize natural lightand solar-gain during winter months. The thick and dense

earth-rammed tire walls provide thermal mass that natu-rally regulates the interior temperature during both coldand hot outside temperatures.Internal, non-load-bearing walls are often made of ahoneycomb of recycled cans joined by concrete and arereferred to as tin can walls. These walls are usually thicklyplastered with adobe. Tin can walls can also be used ontop of the tire walls (“can and concrete bond beams”)as an alternative to wooden shoes. An alternative tothese concrete bond beams are wooden bond beams withwooden shoes. Thewooden shoes aremade using woodenshimming blocks (of 6x6x8' dimensions) placed on top ofthe wooden bond beam (the latter is basically just 2 lay-ers of 2x12 lumber bolted on concrete anchors; concreteanchors are poured blocks of concrete located inside thetop tyres). Re-bar is used to “nail” the wooden shoes tothe wooden bond beam. The tire walls are additionallystrengthened by using concrete in the tires on the ends(called “concrete half blocks”). The roof is made usingtrusses or vigas (wooden support beams) which rest onthe wooden shoes (or tin can walls) placed on the wooden(or concrete) bond beams. The roof as well as the north,east and west facing walls of an Earthship are also heavilyinsulated to prevent heat loss.

19.1 History

Michael Reynolds’ first building, the “Thumb House”, was builtin the early 1970s. It included features incorporated into laterEarthship designs.

104

19.2. SYSTEMS 105

The Earthship as it exists today, began to take shape inthe 1970s. Mike Reynolds, founder of Earthship Biotec-ture, a company that specializes in designing and build-ing Earthships, wanted to create a home that would dothree things; first, it would be sustainable architecture,using material indigenous to the local area as well as re-cycled materials wherever possible. Second, the homeswould rely on natural energy sources and be independentfrom the “grid,” therefore being less susceptible to natu-ral disasters and free from the electrical and water linesthat Reynolds considered unsightly and wasteful. Finally,it would be economically feasible for the average personwith no specialized construction skills to be able to create.

A building being built of cans in the 1970s

water from roofcollects in storage tank

roof (may be partly orentirely earth covered)

wing walls: to preventeast-west movement

vertical wood decking placedover horizontal beams

tyres rammedwith earth

windows

The design used with most earthships. A large series of windowsand the use of tires characterize the earthsheltered building

Eventually, Reynolds’ vision took the form of the com-mon U-shaped earth-filled tire homes seen today. Theearth-rammed tire is used in the vast majority of Earth-ships, but the design is not limited to tires – any densematerial with a potential for thermal mass, such as con-crete, adobe, earthbags, or stone could theoretically beused to create a building similar to an Earthship.Rammed-earth and tires are easily accessible and allowfor owner build structures and use of untrained labour.Scrap tires are plentiful around the world and easy tocome by; there are an estimated 2 billion tires throughoutthe United States. As of 1996, as many as 253 millionscrap tires were being generated each year in the UnitedStates, with 70% being reclaimed by the scrap tire mar-

ket (leaving perhaps 75 million scrap tires available forreuse as whole tires).[1] The method by which scrap tiresare converted into usable “bricks” (the ramming of theearth) is simple and affordable but labour-intensive.The earth-rammed tires of an Earthship are usually as-sembled by teams of two people working together as partof a larger construction team. One member of the twoperson team shovels dirt, which usually comes from thebuilding site, placing it into the tire one scoop at a time.The second member, who stands on the tire, uses a sledgehammer to pack the dirt in. The second person moves ina circle around the tire to keep the dirt even and avoidwarping the tire. These rammed earth tires in an Earth-ship are made in place since they can weigh as much as300 pounds and therefore can be difficult to relocate.Additional benefits of the rammed earth tire are its highload-bearing capacity and its resistance to fire.A fully rammed tire, which is about 2 feet 8 inches wide,is massive enough to surpass conventional requirementsfor structural load distribution to the earth. Because thetire is full of soil, it does not burn when exposed to fire. In1996 after a fire swept through many conventional homesin New Mexico, an Earthship discovered in the after-math was relatively unharmed.[2] Only the south-facingwall and the roof had burned away.Currently, Earthships are in use in almost every state inthe United States and Canada, as well as many Europeancountries. The colder climates require the use of stronginsulation on the outside of the tire walls, which was notcommon in earlier designs. Earthships are continually be-ing built around the world by Taos based Earthship Bio-tecture. In addition, books, plans and training sessions(Earthship Academy) are made available by Reynolds.This owner builder approach together with the use ofinexpensive materials has inspired people worldwide tobuild their own passive solar homes.

19.2 Systems

The Earthship was designed as a structure that would befree of the constraints of centralized utilities, on whichmost modern shelters rely. Earthships must be able tocreate their own utilities, and to use readily available sus-tainable materials. In order to be entirely self-sufficient,the Earthship needs to be able to handle the three systemsof water, electricity, and climate.

19.3 Water

19.3.1 Collection

Earthships are designed to catch and use water from thelocal environment without bringing in water from a cen-

106 CHAPTER 19. EARTHSHIP

A domestic rainwater harvesting system

tralized source. Water used in an Earthship is harvestedfrom rain, snow, and condensation. As water collects onthe roof, it is channeled through a silt-catching device andinto a cistern. The cisterns are positioned so they gravity-feed a WOM (water organization module) that filters outbacteria and contaminants andmakes it suitable for drink-ing. TheWOM consists of filters and a DC-pump that arescrewed into a panel. Water is then pushed into a conven-tional pressure tank to create common household waterpressure.Water collected in this fashion is used for every house-hold activity except flushing toilets. The water used forflushing toilets has been used at least once already: fre-quently it is filtered waste-water from sinks and showers,and described as “Greywater”.

19.3.2 Greywater

Greywater, used water that is unsuitable for drinking, isused within the Earthship for a multitude of purposes.First, before the greywater can be reused, it is channeledthrough a grease and particle filter/digester and into a30"−60” deep rubber-lined botanical cell,[3] a miniatureliving machine, within the Earthship. With embeddedplants, this filter also potentially can be used to producefood (for example, by using a fruit tree). Oxygenation,filtration, transpiration, and bacteria-encounter all takeplace within the cell and help to cleanse the water.[4]Within the botanical cell, filtration is achieved by passingthe water through a mixture of gravel and plant roots. Be-cause of the nature of plants, oxygen is added to the wa-ter as it filters, while nitrogen and phosphate is removed.Note that plant root cells do not produce oxygen but con-sume it; only the leaves of plants produce oxygen. Watertaken up through the plants and transpired at their topshelps to humidify the air. In the cell, bacteria will natu-rally grow and help to cleanse the water.

Water from the low end of the botanical cell is then di-rected through a peat-moss filter and collected in a reser-voir or well. This reclaimed water is then passed oncemore through a greywater board and used to flush con-ventional toilets.Often, greywater made at earthships is not pollutedenough to justify treatment (its “pollution” being usu-ally just soap, which is often not environmentally dam-aging). At earthships, plants are placed at outlets of fix-tures to regain the water and the nutrients lost (e.g. fromthe soaps). Usually, a single plant is placed directly infront of the pipe, but mini drain-fields are also sometimesused. The pipe is made large enough (5,08 cm) so thatthe formation of underground gas (from the greywater) isavoided. This is done with kitchen and bathroom sinks,and even showers, washing machines, and dishwashingmachines. The plants are usually placed indoors withthe sinks and outdoors with the washing/dishwashing ma-chines and shower (to avoid indoor “floods”). Also, withthe latter, larger drain-fields are used instead of a mereplant being placed before an outlet.[5]

19.3.3 Black water

The water system with integrated flush toilet, as used in mostearthships

Black water, water that has been used in a toilet, wasusually not created within many of the earliest earth-ships as the use of conventional toilets was discouraged.[6]Early designs advocated composting toilets, which use nowater at all. The new greywater treatment system de-sign (as used in Nautilus and Helios) created by MichaelReynolds, flush toilets have found a place in the earthshipand the general water system has been redesigned accord-ing to the new “6-step process”.[7][8]

When the newly included flush-toilets are used, blackwa-ter is not reused within the Earthship. Instead, blackwa-ter is sent to a solar-enhanced septic tank with leach-fieldand planter cells (the whole being often referred to as the“incubator”). The solar-enhanced septic tank is a reg-ular septic tank which is heated by the sun and glazedwith an equator-facing window. The incubator stores thesun’s heat in its concrete mass, and is insulated, to helpthe anaerobic process. Water from the incubator is chan-neled out to an exterior leach field and then to landscaping“planter cells” (spaces surrounded by concrete in whichplants have been put). The cells are similar to the botani-

19.6. HEATING PROBLEMS 107

cal cell used in greywater treatment and are usually placedjust before and under the windows of the earthship.In cases where it is not possible to use flush-toilets oper-ating on water, dry solar toilets are advocated, instead ofregular composting toilets. If this is the case, no blackwater is formed and the use of an incubator is thus (usu-ally) not necessary. Instead, regular “planters” (plantsused for sucking up water/nutrients) are then used. Whenusing regular planters as well, no chemical soaps or de-tergents can be used.The space where the WOM (water organization module),graywater pump panel, pressure tank, (first set of) batter-ies, and POM (power organising module) are stored is ina small room referred to as the “systems package”.

19.4 Electricity

Earthships are designed to collect and store their own en-ergy from a variety of sources. The majority of electricalenergy is harvested from the sun and wind. Photovoltaicpanels and windturbines located on or near the Earthshipgenerate DC energy that is then stored in several typesof deep-cycle batteries. The space in which the batteriesare kept is usually a special, purpose-built room placed onthe roof. Additional energy, if required, can be obtainedfrom gasoline-powered generators or by integrating withthe city grid.In an Earthship, a Power Organizing Module is used totake stored energy from batteries and invert it for AC use.The Power Organizing Module is a prefabricated systemprovided by Earthship Biotecture that is simply attachedto a wall on the interior of the Earthship and wired ina conventional manner. It includes the necessary equip-ment such as circuit breakers and converters. The energyrun through the Power Organizing Module can be usedto run any house-hold appliance including washing ma-chines, computers, kitchen appliances, print machines,and vacuums. Ideally, none of the electrical energy inan Earthship is used for heating or cooling.

19.5 Climate

The interior climate of an Earthship is stabilized by tak-ing advantage of natural phenomena. Mainly, the Earth-ship is designed to use the properties of thermal massand passive solar heating and cooling. Examples arelarge front windows with integrated shades, trombe wallsand other technologies such as skylights or Steve Baer's“Track Rack” solar trackers (doubling as an energy gen-eration device and passive solar source).The load-bearing walls of an Earthship, which are madefrom steel-belted tires rammed with earth, serve two pur-poses. First, they hold up the roof, and second, they pro-vide a dense thermal mass that will soak up heat during

the day and radiate heat during the night, keeping the in-terior climate relatively comfortable all day.In addition to high thermal mass, some Earthships maybe earth-sheltered. The benefits of earth-sheltering aretwofold because it adds to the thermal mass and, if theEarthship is buried deep enough, allows the structure totake advantage of the Earth’s stable temperature.The Earthship is designed in such a way that the sun pro-vides heating, ventilation, and lighting. To take advantageof the sun, an Earthship is positioned so that its princi-pal wall, which is nonstructural and made mostly of glasssheets, faces directly towards the equator. This position-ing allows for optimum solar exposure.To allow the sun to heat the mass of the Earthship, thesolar-oriented wall is angled so that it is perpendicular tolight from the winter sun. This allows for maximum ex-posure in the winter, when heat is wanted, and lesser ex-posure in the summer, when heat is to be avoided. SomeEarthships, especially those built in colder climates, useinsulated shading on the solar-orientated wall to reduceheat loss during the night.[4]

19.5.1 Natural ventilation

Natural convection cooling an Earthship

The earthships usually use their own natural ventilationsystem. It consists of cold(er) air coming in from a front(“hopper”) window, especially made for this purpose andflowing out through (one of) the skylights that are placedon the earthship. As the hot air rises, the system createsa steady airflow - of cooler air coming in, and warmer airblowing out.

19.6 Heating problems

Earthships rely on a balance between the solar heat gainand the ability of the tire walls and subsoil to transportand store heat. The design intends to require little if anyauxiliary heat. Some earthships have suffered from over-heating and some from overcooling.Some earthships appear to have serious problems withheat loss. In these cases heat appears to be leaking intothe ground constantly during the heating season and be-ing lost. This situation may have arisen from the mis-taken belief that ground-coupled structures (building in

108 CHAPTER 19. EARTHSHIP

thermal contact with the ground) do not require insula-tion. The situation may also be due to large climatic dif-ferences between the sunny, arid, and warm Southwest(of the USA) where earthships were first built and thecloudier, cooler, and wetter climates where some are nowbeing built. Malcolm Wells, an architect and authorityon earth-sheltered design, recommends an imperial R-value 10 insulation between deep soils and heated spaces.Wells’s insulation recommendations increase as the depthof the soil decreases.In very limited and specific situations, uncommon dur-ing the heating season, thermal mass can marginally in-crease the apparent R-value of a building assembly suchas a wall. Generally speaking thermal mass and R-valueare distinct thermodynamic properties and should not beequated. Thermal performance problems apparently seenin some earthship designs may have occurred because ofthermal mass being erroneously equated to R-value. Theimperial R-value of soil is about 1 per foot.[9]

19.7 Europe

Brighton Earthship, UK

In 2000, Michael Reynolds and his team came to buildthe first residential earthship in Boingt (Belgium). Whilewater, power module, solar panels and the team were ontheir way to Europe, the mayor of Boingt put his veto onthe building permit. Josephine Overeem, the woman whowanted to build the earthship, and Michael Reynolds de-cided to do a demonstration model in her back yard ather residence in Strombeek (Belgium). CLEVEL[10] in-vited Reynolds from Belgium to Brighton in the UK, andorchestrated plans for the earthship in Brighton, startedin 2003. This was the beginning of a series of trips madeby Reynolds and the construction of earthships in the UK,France and the Netherlands.In 2004, the very first Earthship in the UK was openedat Kinghorn Loch in Fife, Scotland. It was built by vol-unteers of the SCI charity. In 2005, the first earthship inEngland was established in Stanmer Park, Brighton withthe Low Carbon Trust.In 2007, CLEVEL and Earthship Biotecture obtainedfull planning permission to build on a development siteoverlooking the Brighton Marina in the UK. The applica-tion followed a six-month feasibility study, orchestrated

by Daren Howarth, Kevan Trott and Michael Reynoldsand funded by the UK Environment Agency and the En-ergy Savings Trust. The successful application was forsixteen one, two, and three-bedroom earthship homes onthis site. Expected to have a sale price of 250 - 400,000pounds,[11] the homes are all designed according to basicearthship principles developed in the United States andadapted to the UK. 15,000 tires will be recycled to con-struct these homes (the UK burns approximately 40 mil-lion tires each year). The plans include the enhancementof habitats on the site for lizards that already live there,which is the reasoning behind entitling the project “TheLizard”. This would have been the first development ofits kind in Europe.[12]

The first official Earthship home in mainland Europe withofficial planning permission approval was built in a smallFrench village called Ger. The home, which is ownedby Kevan and Gillian Trott, was built in April 2007 byKevan, Mike Reynolds and an Earthship Crew from Taos.The design was modified for a European climate and isseen as the first of many for the European arena. It iscurrently used as a holiday home for eco-tourists.[13]

Further adaptation to the European context was under-taken by Daren Howarth and Adrianne Nortje in Brittany,France. They obtained full planning permission in 2007and finished the Brittany Groundhouse as their own homeduring 2009. The build experience and learning is doc-umented in the UK Grand Designs series and in theirbook.[14]

Meanwhile earthships have been built or are being builtin Portugal, Spain, France, Belgium, The Netherlands,United Kingdom, Sweden, Estonia and Czech Republic.A good overview of the earthships built in Europe canbe found on the web page of European Earthship BuilderUnited,[15] together with information on earthships beingbuilt.[16] A good chronological overview on the earthshipsbuilt in Europe by Michael Reynolds can be found in thearticle 'Europe'.[17]

The first official earthship district (23 earthships) in Eu-rope is currently being developed in Olst (the Nether-lands). Building will start in spring 2012.[18] In Belgium,1 earthship hybrid is also being built, intended as demon-stration buildings. Since it is illegal to use tires in Belgium(for risk of leaking toxic metals like lead and zinc),[19] theproject uses earthbags to build their earthship instead.The Earthships built in Europe by Michael Reynoldsaren't always performing as promised and some showproblems with moisture and mould.[20] Some researchinto performance was done by the University of Brightonon the Brighton Earthship.[21] which was then used to cre-ate the most detailed thermal monitoring ever carried outon an earthship (reported with a series of design recom-mendations to make earthships more effective in differ-ent climatic conditions in the book Earthships: building azero carbon future for homes [22])

19.11. GALLERY 109

19.8 Africa

The first earthship in South Africa was built by Angeland Yvonne Kamp from 1996 to 1998. They rammeda total of 1,500 tires for the walls. The earthship, nearHermanus, is located in a 60 hectare private nature re-serve which is part of a 500000 hectare area enclosedin a game fence and borders the Walker Bay NatureReserve.[23]

The second earthship in South Africa is a recyclingcentre in Khayelitsha run as a swop shop concept.The centre was finished in December 2010.[24] Anotherlow cost house built with tyres is in development inBloemfontein.[25][26]

A project nearing completion in South Africa is a com-bined living quarters for 4 to 5 people, a bed and break-fast, and an information/training centre in Orania.[27]This earthship is based on the global earthship model andis built with a foundation of tyres, has roof bearing wallsbuilt with earthbags, and interior walls built with cob,cans and plastic bottles. This earthship adheres to all sixprinciples of an earthship. This is the largest earthbagearthship in the world.[28]

A residential house is in the planning phase forSwaziland.[29]

In 2011, construction began on the Goderich WaldorfSchool of Sierra Leone. The school was the first educa-tional institution to use earthship architecture. AlthoughMike Reynolds and a team of interns helped completethe first two classrooms, the majority of the building wasbuilt by community members who had been trained inReynolds’ building techniques.[30][31]

A new project will commence in Malawi in October2013.[32]

19.9 Argentina

NaveTierra MDQ[33] is a Mar del Plata-based projectactivating people and resources to build a demonstra-tion NaveTierra (Spanish preferred contraction for Earth-ship). Until land for the project is acquired, knowledge isdeveloped and put to work towards assembling the puzzleat the Estación Permacultural (Permacultural Station).

19.10 Documentary

The film Garbage Warrior is about Earthships andReynolds’ struggle with the law.

19.11 Gallery• E.V.E project (Earthship Village Economies) underconstruction.

• Front face of a Global model Earthship.

• Vaulted Earthship entrance.

• An Earthship interacts with the elements as part ofthe ecosystem.

• Earthships are made of earth-rammed tires, cement,steel, bottles and cans.

• Earthships collect rainwater on the roof that runsinto a catchment gutter.

• Earthship inside greenhouse.

• Bottle walls are used in earthships mainly as nonload bearing interior walls, as in this bathroom(Taos, NM, USA).

• Interior of the Solaria Earthship with sun coming infrom the south facing windows (Taos, NM, USA).

19.12 See also• Solar thermal energy

• Hurricane-proof building

• Permaculture

• Repurposing

• Spaceship Earth

• Peter Vetsch

19.13 Notes[1] Verde, Tom (December 2, 1996). “At Heart of Dispute,

Tires by the Acre”. The New York Times.

[2] Earthship Biotecture (25 March 2009). “An Earthshipgoes through the Hondo Fire!".

[3] botanical cell

[4] Reynolds, Mike (2000). Comfort In Any Climate. Taos,NM: Solar Survival Press. ISBN 0-9626767-4-8.

[5] Plants placed at fixtures in earthships

[6] Earthship Volume 2:Systems and components

[7] New water purification system process at Helios house:overview with pictures

[8] Wastewater path

[9] Kansas State University Extension Service

110 CHAPTER 19. EARTHSHIP

[10] CLEVEL

[11] http://ecohomenews.wordpress.com/2010/10/18/docking-into-mother-earthship/

[12] Earthship Homes development (archived from the originalon 2007-12-13).

[13] Kevin Telfer, Super green European breaks (26 April2008 ), The Guardian.

[14] Groundhouse

[15] European Earthship Builders United - European earthshipmap

[16] European Earthship Builders United - European projectsmap

[17] Article - Europe

[18] Web site Aardehuis - The project

[19] EOS magazine, march 2012

[20] Article - Performance

[21] Source: Thermal behaviour of an earth sheltered au-tonomous building – the Brighton Earthship, Dr. KennethIp and Prof. Andrew Miller, Centre for Sustainability ofthe Built Environment - University of Brighton - UnitedKingdom

[22] Hewitt, M. and Telfer, K. (2007). Earthships: building azero carbon future for homes. ISBN 978-1-86081-972-8

[23] “Views of walker bay and South Africa’s first earthship”.property24.com.

[24] E, Michael (November 11, 2010). “khayelitsha earthship:help set sail for a new housing destination”. UrbanSprout.Retrieved 14 May 2013.

[25] Everson, Ludwig (December 22, 2012). “Aardskip.comsupports Qala Tala to create earthship RDP housing”.aardskip.blogspot.com. aardskip.com. Retrieved 14 May2013.

[26] “Qala Tala Project”. Growing Tomorrow (AgriTV). TheWeekly. January 18, 2013. Retrieved 14 May 2013.

[27] “Where in the world is Project Aardskip?". aardskip.com.Retrieved 14 May 2013.

[28] “Top Travel in Orania”.

[29] Harding, Stewart. “Archive for the ‘Swaziland Project’Category”. earthships.co.za. Retrieved 14 May 2013.

[30] Elliot, Sam (March 21, 2012). “Ten Days in Africa”.earthship.com. Earthship Biotecture. Retrieved 14 May2013.

[31] Hughes, Amanda. “University of Cincinnati alum buildshomes with recycled materials”. UC Magazine (May2009). Retrieved 14 May 2013.

[32] Nardone, Jeane (April 5, 2013). “Earthship Malawi,Africa – Join Us!". earthship.com. Earthship Biotecture.Retrieved 14 May 2013.

[33] “Proyecto NaveTierra MDQwebsite”. Retrieved 19 April2013.

19.14 References• Hewitt, M. and Telfer, K. (2007). Earthships: build-ing a zero carbon future for homes. ISBN 978-1-86081-972-8

• Klippel, James H. http://www.garrellassociates.com/EcoDesign.html, green page

• Howarth, D. & Nortje, A. (2010). “GroundhouseBuild & Cook”. ISBN 978-0-9566947-0-6

• EARTHSHIP VOL.1 - HOW TO BUILD YOUR OWN.M.REYNOLDS - 1990

• EARTH-SHELTEREDHOUSES. HOWTOBUILDANAFFORDABLE UNDERGROUND HOME. R.ROY -2006

• COMPLETE BOOK OF UNDERGROUND HOUSES.R.ROY - How to Build a Low-cost Home - 1994

19.15 Further reading• Schirber, Michael. “Making Earthships Main-stream” on Going Green at msnbc.com, November12, 2007.

• Raets, W.J.L., “Flagship Design Guides - General -Pre-Building and Design”, June 15, 2012

19.16 External links• Official website

• Earthship Europe

• Earthship Belgium

• Earthship Denmark

• Earthship Biotecture: The New Norm? on Honest-Blue

• Earthship Brighton

Chapter 20

Transit-oriented development

The local government of Arlington County, Virginia encouragestransit-oriented development within 1 ⁄4 to 1 ⁄2 mile (400 to 800 m)from the County’s Washington Metro rapid transit stations, withmixed-use development, bikesharing and walkability.

A transit-oriented development (TOD) is a mixed-useresidential and commercial area designed to maximizeaccess to public transport, and often incorporates featuresto encourage transit ridership. A TOD neighborhood typ-ically has a center with a transit station or stop (train sta-tion, metro station, tram stop, or bus stop), surroundedby relatively high-density development with progressivelylower-density development spreading outward from thecenter. TODs generally are located within a radius ofone-quarter to one-half mile (400 to 800 m) from a tran-sit stop, as this is considered to be an appropriate scalefor pedestrians, thus solving the last mile problem.

20.1 Description

Many of the new towns created after World War II inJapan, Sweden, and France have many of the character-istics of TOD communities. In a sense, nearly all com-munities built on reclaimed land in the Netherlands oras exurban developments in Denmark have had the localequivalent of TOD principles integrated in their planning,including the promotion of bicycles for local use.In the United States, a half-mile-radius circle has becomethe de facto standard for rail-transit catchment areas forTODs. A half mile (800 m) corresponds to the distancesomeone can walk in 10 minutes at 3 mph (4.8 km/h) and

is a common estimate for the distance people will walk toget to a rail station. The half-mile ring is a little morethan 500 acres (2.0 km2) in size.[1]

Transit-oriented development is sometimes distinguishedby some planning officials from "transit-proximate devel-opment" (see, e.g., comments made during a Congres-sional hearing [2]) because it contains specific featuresthat are designed to encourage public transport use anddifferentiate the development from urban sprawl. Ex-amples of these features include mixed-use developmentthat will use transit at all times of day, excellent pedes-trian facilities such as high quality pedestrian crossings,narrow streets, and tapering of buildings as they becomemore distant from the public transport node. Anotherkey feature of transit-oriented development that differen-tiates it from “transit-proximate development” is reducedamounts of parking for personal vehicles.Opponents of compact, or transit oriented developmenttypically argue that Americans, and persons throughoutthe world, prefer low-density living, and that any poli-cies that encourage compact development will result insubstantial utility decreases and hence large social wel-fare costs.[3] Proponents of compact development arguethat there are large, often unmeasured benefits of com-pact development[4] or that the American preference forlow-density living is a misinterpretation made possible inpart by substantial local government interference in theland market.[5][6]

20.2 TOD in cities

Many cities throughout the world are developing TODpolicy. Portland, Montreal, San Francisco, andVancouver among many other cities have developed, andcontinue to write policies and strategic plans which aimto reduce automobile dependency and increase the use ofpublic transit.

111

112 CHAPTER 20. TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

20.2.1 Latin America

Curitiba’s BRT corridors run along high-density devel-oped areas

Land use planning allowed high density to develop alongCuritiba’s BRT corridors

Guatemala City, Guatemala

In an attempt to control rapid growth of Guatemala City,the long-time Mayor of Guatemala City Álvaro Arzúimplemented a plan to control growth based on tran-sects along important arterial roads and exhibiting transit-oriented development (TOD) characteristics. This planadopted POT (Plan de Ordenamiento Territorial) aims toallow the construction of taller, mixed-use building struc-tures right by large arterial roads; the buildings wouldgradually decrease in height and density the farther theyare from arterial roads.[7] This is simultaneously beingimplemented along with a bus rapid transit (BRT) systemcalled Transmetro.

Curitiba, Brazil

One of the earliest and most successful examples of TODis Curitiba, Brazil.[8] Curitiba was organized into trans-port corridors very early on in its history. Over the years,it has integrated its zoning laws and transportation plan-ning to place high-density development adjacent to high-capacity transportation systems, particularly its BRT cor-ridors. Since the failure of its first, rather grandiose,city plan due to lack of funding, Curitiba has focused onworking with economical forms of infrastructure, so ithas arranged unique adaptations, such as bus routes (inex-pensive infrastructure) with routing systems, limited ac-cess and speeds similar to subway systems. The source ofinnovation in Curitiba has been a unique form of partic-ipatory city planning that emphasizes public education,

discussion and agreement..

20.2.2 North America

Aerial view of Rosslyn-Ballston corridor in Arlington,Virginia. High density, mixed use development isconcentrated within ¼–½ mile from the Rosslyn, CourtHouse and Clarendon Washington Metro stations (shownin red), with limited density outside that area.

Street-level view of the area around the BallstonMetro Station — also in Arlington, Virginia. Notethe mixed-use development (from left to right: groundfloor retailunder apartment building, office buildings,shopping mall (at the end of the street), apartment build-ing, office building with ground floor retail), pedestrianoriented facilities including wide sidewalk, and bus stopfacility in the center distance. Parking in this location islimited, relatively expensive, and located underground.

Arlington County, Virginia

For over 30 years, the government has pursed adevelopment strategy of concentrating much of its newdevelopment within 1⁄4 to 1⁄2 mile (400 to 800 m) fromthe County’s Washington Metro rapid transit stations andthe high-volume bus lines of Columbia Pike.[9] Withinthe transit areas, the government has a policy of en-couraging mixed-use and pedestrian- and transit-orienteddevelopment.[10] Some of these "urban village" commu-nities include: Rosslyn, Ballston, Clarendon, Courthouse,Pentagon City, Crystal City, Lyon Village, Shirlington,Virginia Square, and WestoverIn 2002, Arlington received the EPA's National Awardfor Smart Growth Achievement for “Overall Excellencein Smart Growth" — the first ever granted by theagency.[11]

20.2. TOD IN CITIES 113

In September 2010, Arlington County, Virginia, in part-nership with Washington, D.C., opened Capital Bike-share, a bicycle sharing system.[12][13][14] By February2011, Capital Bikeshare had 14 stations in the PentagonCity, Potomac Yard, and Crystal City neighborhoods inArlington.[12] Arlington County also announced plans toadd 30 stations in fall 2011, primarily along the denselypopulated corridor between the Rosslyn and Ballstonneighborhoods, and 30 more in 2012.[15]

San Francisco Bay Area, California

The San Francisco Bay Area includes nine counties and101 cities, including San Jose, San Francisco, Oaklandand Fremont. Local and regional governments [16] en-courage transit-oriented development to decrease trafficcongestion, protect natural areas, promote public healthand increase housing options. The region has designatedPriority Development Areas and Priority ConservationAreas. Current population forecasts [17] for the regionpredict that it will grow by 2 million people by 2035 dueto both the natural birth rate and job creation, and esti-mate that 50% of this growth can be accommodated inPriority Development Areas through transit-oriented de-velopment.Major transit village projects have been developed overthe past 20 years at several stations linked to the BayArea Rapid Transit (BART) system. In their 1996 book,Transit Villages in the 21st Century, Michael Bernickand Robert Cervero identified emerging transit villagesat several BART stations, including Pleasant Hill / Con-tra Costa Centre, Fruitvale, Hayward and Richmond.[18]

Salt Lake City Metro Area, Utah

The Salt Lake City Metro Area has seen a strong pro-liferation of transit-oriented developments due to theconstruction of new transit lines within the Utah Tran-sit Authority's TRAX, FrontRunner and streetcar lines.New developments in West Valley, Farmington, Murray,Provo, Kaysville, Sugarhouse and downtown Salt LakeCity have seen rapid growth and construction despite theeconomic downturn. The population along the WasatchFront has reached 1.7 million and is expected to grow50% over the next two decades. At 29.8%, Utah’s pop-ulation growth more than doubled the population growthof the nation (13.2%), with a vast majority of this growthoccurring along the Wasatch Front.Transportation infrastructure has been vastly upgraded inthe past decade as a result of the 2002 Olympic WinterGames and the need to support the growth in population.This has created a number of transit-oriented commercialand residential projects to be proposed and completed.

New Jersey

New Jersey has become a national leader in promotingtransit oriented development. The New Jersey Depart-ment of Transportation established the Transit VillageInitiative in 1999 offering multi-agency assistance andgrants from the annual $1 million fund to any munici-pality with a ready to go project specifying appropriatemixed land-use strategy, available property, station-areamanagement, and commitment to affordable housing, jobgrowth, and culture. Transit village development mustalso preserve the architectural integrity of historically sig-nificant buildings. Since 1999 the state has made 28Transit Village designations, which are in different stagesof development:Pleasantville (1999), Morristown (1999), Rutherford(1999), South Amboy (1999), South Orange (1999),Riverside (2001), Rahway (2002), Metuchen (2003),Belmar (2003), Bloomfield (2003), Bound Brook (2003),Collingswood (2003), Cranford (2003) Matawan (2003),New Brunswick (2005), Journal Square/Jersey City(2005), Netcong (2005), Midtown Elizabeth (2007),Burlington City (2007), Orange (2009), Montclair(2010), Somerville (2010), Linden (2010), West Wind-sor (2012), Dunellen (2012), and Plainfield (2014).[19][20]

Vancouver, British Columbia

Greater Vancouver has had a strong history of creatingnew development around its SkyTrain lines and also cre-ated the concept of regional town centres on the majorstations and transit corridors. Of note is the Metrotownarea of the suburb of Burnaby, British Columbia near theMetrotown SkyTrain Station. The areas around stationshave spurred the development of billions of dollars ofhigh-density real estate, with multiple highrises near themany stations.

Toronto, Ontario

Vicinity of Finch subway station, Toronto

114 CHAPTER 20. TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

Toronto has a longstanding policy of encouraging newconstruction along the route of its primary Yonge Streetsubway line. Most notable are the development of theYonge and Eglinton area in the 1960s and 1970s; andthe present development of the 2 km of the Yonge Streetcorridor north of Sheppard Avenue, which began in thelate 1980s. In the period since 1997 alone the latterstretch has seen the appearance of a major new shoppingcentre and the building and occupation of over twentythousand new units of condominium housing. Since theopening of the Sheppard subway line in 2002, there isa condominium construction boom along the route onSheppard Avenue East between Yonge Street and DonMills Road.

Calgary, Alberta

Bridgeland, Calgary

Calgary is home to a very successful TOD commu-nity called The Bridges, located in the community ofBridgeland. The Bridges is home to a diverse range ofcondos, shops, services, and parks. Some other TODscurrently being constructed are London and Westbrook,both high rise condo and retail communities in suburbanareas of the City. The City continues to create TOD pol-icy for other Calgary communities. Calgary City Councilhas allocated funding for the creation of six Station AreaPlans around the city, to guide increasing developmentpressure around some of the light rail transit stations. OnJune 9, 2008, Calgary City Council approved the first sta-tion area plan in Calgary’s history.

Edmonton, Alberta

Most of the suburban high rises were not along majorrail lines like other cities until recently, when there hasbeen incentive to do so. Century Park is a growing condocommunity in southern Edmonton at the south end ofEdmonton’s LRT. It will include low to high rise con-dos, recreational services, shops, restaurants, and a fit-ness centre. Edmonton has also had a transit-proximatedevelopment for some time in the northeastern suburbsat Clareview which includes a large park and ride, andlow rise apartments among big box stores and associ-ated power center parking. Edmonton is also looking intosome new TODs in various parts of the city. In the north-east, there are plans to redevelop underutilized land attwo sites around existing LRT, Fort Road and StadiumStation.[21][22] In the west, there is plans to have somemedium density condos in the Glenora neighbourhoodalong a future LRT route as well as a TOD in the south-east in the Strathearn neighbourhood along the same fu-ture LRT on existing low rise apartments.

Winnipeg, Manitoba

There is currently one TOD being built in Winnipegbeside the rapid transit corridor. In phase two of thesouthwest rapid transit corridor, there will be four moreTODs.[23]

Montreal, Quebec

According to the Metropolitan Development and Plan-ning Regulation[24] of late 2011, 40% of new householdswill be build as TOD neighbourhoods.

Aurora, Colorado

The city has developed within its plan as of 2007 stan-dardization measures. For instance, streets’ width hasbeen set according to the position of the site.[25][26]

20.2.3 Asia and Oceania

Hong Kong

In the mid-20th century, no railway was built until an areawas well developed. However, in recent decades, HongKong has started to have some TODs, where a railway isbuilt simultaneously with residential development aboveor nearby. Examples include:

• LOHAS Park

• Olympian City

• Tung Chung

20.3. EQUITY AND HOUSING COST CONCERNS 115

Milton, Queensland

Milton, an inner suburb of Brisbane, has been identi-fied as Queensland’s first transit-oriented developmentunder the Queensland Government’s South East Queens-land Regional Plan. Milton railway station will undergoa multi-million dollar revamp as part of the developmentof The Milton Residences to promote and encourage res-idents to embrace rail travel. This will include a newticketing office, new public amenities, increased visibil-ity across platforms and new and improved access pointsoff Milton Road and Railway Terrace.[27]

Melbourne, Victoria

Main article: Melbourne 2030

Melbourne, Victoria is expected to reach a population of5 million by 2030 with the overwhelming majority of itsresidents relying on private automobiles. Since the turnof the century, sporadic efforts have been made by var-ious levels of government to implement transit-orienteddevelopment principles. However, a lack of commit-ment to funding public transport infrastructure, resultingto overcrowding and amending zoning laws has dramati-cally slowed progress toward sustainable development forthe city.

20.2.4 Europe

Karen Blixen Park, Ørestad (Copenhagen), Denmark

The term transit-oriented development, as a US-bornconcept, is rarely used in Europe, although many of themeasures advocated in transit-oriented development arealso stressed here. Many European cities have long beenbuilt around transit systems and there has thus often beenlittle or no need to differentiate this type of developmentwith a special term as has been the case in the US. Anexample of this is Copenhagen’s Finger Plan from 1947,which embodied many transit-oriented development as-pects and is still used as an overall planning framework

today. Recently, scholars and technicians have taken in-terest in the concept, however.[28]

Paris, France

Whereas the city of Paris has a centuries-long history, itsmain frame dates to this 19th century. The subway net-work was made to solve both linkage between the fivemain train stations and local transportation assets for cit-izens. The whole area of Paris City is closer than 500metres from the next subway station. Recent bicycle andcar rental systems (Velib and Autolib) also ease travel, inthe very same way that TOD emphasizes.So do the newtrams linking suburbs close to Paris proper, and tramline3 around the edge of the city of Paris.

Stedenbaan, The Netherlands

In the Southern part of the Randstad will be built a neigh-bourhood according to the principles of TOD.[29]

20.3 Equity and housing cost con-cerns

One criticism of transit-oriented development is that ithas the potential to spur gentrification in low-income ar-eas. In some cases, TOD can raise the housing costsof formerly affordable neighborhoods, pushing low- andmoderate-income residents farther away from jobs andtransit. When this happens, TOD projects can disruptlow-income neighborhoods.[30]

When executed with equity in mind, however, TOD hasthe potential to benefit low- and moderate-income (LMI)communities: it can link workers to employment cen-ters, create construction and maintenance jobs, and hasthe potential to encourage investment in areas that havesuffered neglect and economic depression.[31] Moreover,it is well recognized that neighborhood development re-strictions, while potentially in the immediate neighbor-hood’s best interest, contribute to regional undersupplyof housing and drive up the cost of housing in generalacross a region. TOD development reduces the overallcost of housing in a region by contributing to the hous-ing supply, and therefore generally improves equitabilityin the housing market. TOD also reduces transportationcosts, which can have a greater impact on LMI house-holds since they spend a larger share of their income ontransportation relative to higher-income households. Thisfrees up household income that can be used on food, edu-cation, or other necessary expenses. Low-income peopleare also less likely to own personal vehicles and thereforemore likely to depend exclusively on public transporta-tion to get to and from work, making reliable access totransit a necessity for their economic success.[32] Another

116 CHAPTER 20. TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

criticism aims the marginal percentage of people actuallyusing public transportation.[33]

20.4 See also

• Americas Energy and Climate Symposium

• Auto-oriented development

• Principles of Intelligent Urbanism

• Smart growth

• Streetcar suburb

• Transit-proximate development

• Transit village

• Urban consolidation

• Value capture

20.5 References[1] Erick Guerra and Robert Cervero (Spring 2013). “Is a

Half-Mile Circle the Right Standard for TODs?". AC-CESS, University of California, Berkeley (42). Retrieved2013-06-07.

[2]

[3] Moore, Adrian.T.; Staley, Samuel.R.; Poole, Robert.W.(2010). “The role of VMT reduction in meet-ing climate change policy goals”. Transportation Re-search Part A: Policy and Practice 44 (8): 565–574.doi:10.1016/j.tra.2010.03.012.

[4] Winkelman, S.; Bishins, A. (2010). “Planning for eco-nomic and environmental resiliance”. Transportation Re-search Part A: Policy and Practice 44 (8): 575–586.doi:10.1016/j.tra.2010.03.011.

[5] Levine, Jonathan (2006). Markets and Choices in Trans-portation and Metropolitan Land Use. Washington: Re-sources for the Future. ISBN 978-1933115153.

[6] Boarnet, Marlon (Summer 2011). “A Broader Con-text for Land Use and Travel Behavior, and a ResearchAgenda”. Journal of the American Planning Association77 (3): 197–213. doi:10.1080/01944363.2011.593483.Retrieved 16 November 2014.

[7] ":::... Plan de Ordenamiento Territorial - Tú eres la Ciu-dad, Municipalidad de Guatemala, cumple ...:::" (in Span-ish). Pot.muniguate.com. Retrieved 2009-07-08.

[8] “Citizine Information, Zoning and Land Use in Curitiba(Ingles)". January 2006. Retrieved 2008.

[9] “Smart Growth : PlanningDivision : Arlington, Virginia”.Arlingtonva.us. 2011-03-07. Retrieved 2011-11-04.

[10] http://www.arlingtonva.us/departments/CPHD/planning/powerpoint/rbpresentation/rbpresentation_060107.pdf

[11] “Arlington County, Virginia – National Award for SmartGrowth Achievement – 2002 Winners Presentation”.Epa.gov. 2006-06-28. Retrieved 2011-11-04.

[12] Matt Martinez (20 September 2010). “Washington, D.C.,launches the nation’s largest bike share program”. Grist(magazine). Retrieved 14 April 2011.

[13] J. David Goodman (20 September 2010). “Bike SharingExpands in Washington”. New York Times. Retrieved 14April 2011.

[14] “Arlington Joins DC in Bike-Sharing Program”. My-FoxDC.com. 20 September 2010. Retrieved 14 April2011.

[15] “Arlington votes (sort of) to expand CaBi; more placeslikely to follow”. TheWashCycle. Retrieved 17 October2011.

[16] San Francisco Bay Area Vision Project. Bayareavi-sion.org. Retrieved on 2013-12-06.

[17] Projections 2009. Abag.ca.gov (2008-05-15). Retrievedon 2013-12-06.

[18] Michael Bernick, Robert Cervero (1996). Transit Villagesin the 21st Century. University of California, Berkeley:McGraw Hill.

[19] “FAQ”. Transit Village Initiative. NJDOT. February 25,2009. Retrieved 2012-08-08.

[20] http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/about/press/2014/032814.shtm

[21] “Old Town Fort Road Redevelopment”. City of Edmon-ton. Retrieved 2010-10-21.

[22] “Stadium Station Transit Oriented Development”. City ofEdmonton. Retrieved 2010-10-21.

[23] “Transportation Master Plan”. Retrieved 27 July 2014.

[24] Un premier plan d’aménagement durable pour le GrandMontréal | Voir vert - Le portail du bâtiment durable auQuébec. Voirvert.ca. Retrieved on 2013-12-06.

[25] Missing Page or Old Bookmark @. Auroragov.org. Re-trieved on 2013-12-06.

[26] Examples of Codes That Support Smart Growth Devel-opment | Smart Growth | US EPA. Epa.gov. Retrieved on2013-12-06.

[27] Transit Oriented Development, Sustainable City LivingThe Milton. Retrieved on 2013-11-20.

[28] https://www.colloquium.fr/ei/cm.esp?id=565&pageid=_3ET0UVLVD

[29] http://www.thinkdeep.nl/documents/Papers/Hoeven.pdf

[30] “Equitable Development Toolkit: Transit Oriented Devel-opment”. 2008.

20.6. EXTERNAL LINKS 117

[31] Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (2010).“Community Investments: Transit-Oriented Develop-ment”.

[32] Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (2010).“Equipping Communities to Achieve Equitable Transit-Oriented Development”.

[33] Not “The Great Transit Oriented Development Swindle?".Fog City Journal (2009-02-05). Retrieved on 2013-12-06.

20.6 External links• Transit-Oriented Development

• Transit Oriented Development

• Transit Oriented Development in Calgary, Alberta,Canada

• Transit oriented development growing in USA (inFinnish)

• TOD Standard: Version 2.0, Institute for Trans-portation and Development Policy (ITDP), Novem-ber 2013.

• Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco CommunityInvestments: Special Issue on TOD

• American Planning Association: From Intentions toConsequences: San Diego TOD Design Guidelinesand Rio Vista West Project: by Aseem Inam

• Effect of Smart Growth Policies on Travel Demand,Transportation Research Board, SHRP 2 Report S2-C16-RR-1, 2014.

• Multiple Factors Influence Extent of Transit-Oriented Development, U.S. Government Account-ability Office, November 2014

118 CHAPTER 20. TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

20.7 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

20.7.1 Text• Central place theory Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central%20place%20theory?oldid=643486006 Contributors: Scipius, Davi-

dLevinson, Michael Hardy, Komencanto, Discospinster, LindsayH, EurekaLott, Icundell, Hoary, Dhartung, AndreasPraefcke, HenkvD,Blaxthos, Woohookitty, Tabletop, Triddle, Jclemens, Chobot, YurikBot, RussBot, ScottMainwaring, Davben, Welsh, Neum, BOT-Superzerocool, Guppywon, AlexD, SmackBot, Ex1st, Compay, Gilliam, Oatmeal batman, Neo139, Zvar, SundarBot, Salt Yeung,NapoleonB, Kyuss-Apollo, SashatoBot, IronGargoyle, Pondle, Agathoclea, Iridescent, GeoW, Ken Gallager, Cydebot, Faigl.ladislav, Head-bomb, A.J.Chesswas, Nick Number, X96lee15, PlatonicIdeas, SincereGuy, Eadlam, DuncanHill, Hut 8.5, Singularity, Ibn Battuta, Dorgan-Bot, Morgath, Teledildonix314, WOSlinker, Ann Stouter, Beyond silence, Insanity Incarnate, SieBot, Ponysexy, ClueBot, Franamax, SunCreator, Dark Mage, Addbot, Twistedrainbow, Download, Pietrow, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Xqbot, D'ohBot, Robo Cop, ZéroBot, Tommygim,Furries, EricWesBrown, ClueBot NG, Calànch, MelbourneStar, Snotbot, Margotsmith, Sonar0712, Makecat-bot, Madhur.dev, Teron146,Blessedsisyphus, MargotWSmith, Princek94 and Anonymous: 89

• Unified settlement planning Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified%20settlement%20planning?oldid=636520180 Contributors:Bearcat, Chris the speller, Yobot, Omnipaedista, Haeinous, , Pavan gupta112233, Sonar0712, Sangeeta a62, Garadams, Monkbot andAnonymous: 5

• Circular economy Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular%20economy?oldid=643652955 Contributors: Edward, Bearcat, Drag-onflySixtyseven, Arthur Rubin, Gilliam, Derek R Bullamore, Robofish, Lestari, Dockingman, Widefox, Magioladitis, Katharineamy,Yintan, Addbot, Polainm, Dr. Günter Bechly, Materialscientist, Haeinous, Anna Comnena, John Cline, Jonpatterns, ClueBot NG,Josephiles, Skra31, BattyBot, YFdyh-bot, Professionalpassionates, Blindspotting, Jjunecobb, Jocousinsmouse, Sabine Oberhuber, AL-tBdDe, Erikderuijter, HBFS, Evelien Nijeboer and Anonymous: 23

• Regenerative design Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regenerative%20design?oldid=632579005 Contributors: Michael Hardy, Jrc,Onco p53, Rjwilmsi, ErikHaugen, Wavelength, Mkbnett, Tony1, SmackBot, Bdiscoe, Robofish, Alaibot, Nick Number, Misterhappa,Mårten Berglund, Carolfrog, DASonnenfeld, Piperh, Afrothetics, KathrynLybarger, GorillaWarfare, Crzer07, Ericezechieli, J03K64, Reg-Communities, Swalesf, Phah, Ymblanter, Northamerica1000, Khazar2, Tentinator, Muppetlabs, RichardHof, Mkandlikar and Anonymous:20

• Systems ecology Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems%20ecology?oldid=610357650 Contributors: XJaM, Michael Hardy, Ronz,Marshman, Alan Liefting, Karol Langner, CanisRufus, Guettarda, Viriditas, Mdd, Songthen, Ringbang, BadLeprechaun, Smithfarm,Wave-length, RussBot, Mccready, Jpbowen, Epipelagic, SmackBot, Cazort, JFHJr, Red star, Sholto Maud, OrphanBot, Allan McInnes, TimRoss, Byelf2007, Levineps, Neelix, Mailseth, Dsp13, Bongwarrior, Dekimasu, R'n'B, Erkan Yilmaz, DASonnenfeld, Squids and Chips,Funandtrvl, Fences and windows, Jimmaths, Dggreen, Cassbeth, IPSOS, Andrewaskew, Skipsievert, JohnnyMrNinja, Crowsnest, Addbot,Palamabron, WebsterRiver, The Wiki ghost, FrescoBot, Wendy Red Red Robin, EdoBot, Helpful Pixie Bot, PhnomPencil, Lugia2453,Redddbaron and Anonymous: 14

• The Blue Economy Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The%20Blue%20Economy?oldid=635039742 Contributors: Wavelength, John,Danrok, GrahamHardy, Boing! said Zebedee, PixelBot, Samer.hc, XLinkBot, Addbot, Polainm, EmausBot, Nima1024, Ethdhelwen, Billwilliam compton, Anne1234567, Wikifreak2000, Helpful Pixie Bot, BattyBot, Makecat-bot, Mayainnanajah and Anonymous: 3

• Permaculture Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permaculture?oldid=642299916 Contributors: Marj Tiefert, Tarquin, Rmhermen,PierreAbbat, Anthere, Tzartzam, BryceHarrington, Quercusrobur, Jose Icaza, DennisDaniels, Infrogmation, Michael Hardy, Dmd,Matthewmayer, Cyde, Skysmith, Mac, BigFatBuddha, Scott, Ghewgill, Jengod, Ww, Populus, Jose Ramos, Mignon, Vespristiano, Al-tenmann, Chopchopwhitey, Flauto Dolce, Sunray, Sheridan, Alan Liefting, Timpo, Mboverload, JRR Trollkien, Golbez, Geoffspear,Gadfium, Pgan002, Onco p53, Phil Sandifer, Neffk, Zfr, Nickptar, Burschik, Kathar, NathanHurst, Chris j wood, Rich Farmbrough,Guanabot, Vsmith, Dyl, Bender235, Eadmund, Erauch, Nigelj, Cmdrjameson, Vortexrealm, Oop, Ziggurat, Timl, Giraffedata, Jkh.gr,Pearle, Mdd, Shafaki, Bmeacham, Paleorthid, Davenbelle, Linmhall, Stillnotelf, Velella, Tony Sidaway, Talkie tim, Blaxthos, Rzel-nik, RyanGerbil10, Kevin Hayes, FrancisTyers, Cyclotronwiki, Poppafuze, Mindmatrix, RHaworth, Polyparadigm, SP-KP, Jeff3000,Jwanders, Bluemoose, Raines, Palica, Behun, Mandarax, Elvey, Rjwilmsi, Salix alba, Schlüggell, Smithfarm, DoubleBlue, Jeffmcneill,MikeJ9919, FlaBot, SchuminWeb, Freddydesouza, Jrtayloriv, Monkofthetrueschool, Vmenkov, Roboto de Ajvol, YurikBot, Wavelength,NTBot, Waitak, RussBot, TheMoot, Diliff, Pigman, David Woodward, Shell Kinney, Pseudomonas, Mkbnett, Nirvana2013, Kiaparow-its, Thesloth, PeterBirkett, Irishguy, Epipelagic, TastyCakes, CQ, Meika, Arthur Rubin, Tevildo, Chriswaterguy, Naught101, Mdwyer,Meegs, That Guy, From That Show!, SmackBot, Eclipsenow.org, Sanman nor, Lord Matt, Jtneill, KVDP, Scottlondon, Cacuija, JFHJr,Gilliam, OrionK, Afa86, Schmiteye, Chris the speller, Te24409nsp, Thumperward, Jon513, Salvor, Uthbrian, Colonies Chris, Chendy,Peter Campbell, Sholto Maud, Willow4, Brimba, Neo139, Josh64, JonasRH, Nihilo 01, Djcmackay, Ggpauly, Gurdjieff, Hank chapot,Joli Rouge, Byelf2007, Archimerged, Valfontis, Khazar, SilkTork, Sociotard, Danny Beaudoin, Ckatz, Rkmlai, Beetstra, LuYiSi, Way-naQhapaq, Johnmc, RichardF, Libertyblues, Christian Roess, Nehrams2020, HisSpaceResearch, Iridescent, Ted11, CoulterTM, Mul-der416sBot, RookZERO, Ayanoa, IronChris, Grayson wyatt, RiotGearEpsilon, CmdrObot, Tanthalas39, Drinibot, Tahirs, Unclejedd,Paul Millsom, Macropneuma, Daniel J. Leivick, Teratornis, Kozuch, Richhoncho, Trueblood, Thijs!bot, Epbr123, Homohabilis, Daniel,Trevyn, Itsmejudith, Angusscown, Amberckerr, Blathnaid, Kanejamison, Nom DeGuerre, Brian Boyd, Gioto, Luna Santin, Wengero,Tenzicut, Julia Rossi, Adam Chlipala, Papipaul, Lfstevens, Ingolfson, Aquaponics, JAnDbot, Krishvanth, Tomintaz, Barek, Freddy011,Struthious Bandersnatch, Rjholmer, Bdpermie, Roidroid, VoABot II, Appraiser, Steve@sector39.co.uk, APB-CMX, Sustainableyes, Der-Hexer, Edward321, TimidGuy, MartinBot, 4492tues12, Cbuddenhagen, Andre.holzner, Dan arndt, VirtualDelight, UrthBound, GomerM-cFlarp, Tgeairn, J.delanoy, Keithkml, MatheoDJ, TaylorAshton, Charlesjustice, Skier Dude, Belovedfreak, Cjstanonis, Madbishop, Jor-fer, AprilSKelly, Woodsguy, Scott Roy Atwood, Agerry, Jamesofur, Gracoo2, Inwind, DASonnenfeld, Chrlaney, Dominoconsultant,VolkovBot, Dlesjack, Jwitch, Aesopos, Philip Trueman, TXiKiBoT, Jackovacs, Noformation, Ilyushka88, Mooreds, Woodlandcreek, Cy-mon Fjell, Mexeno1, Red58bill, Logan, Richardtelford, Terriemiller, SieBot, Zelchenko, Flyer22, Permacultura, Skipsievert, Yone Fer-nandes, Zentomologist, Lightmouse, Seedbot, Chrisrus, Bodhi.peace, Wetwarexpert, SlackerMom, Sfan00 IMG, ClueBot, Allthingsgreen,Fyyer, The Thing That Should Not Be, LMFernandes, Xavexgoem, Isaebellaspuppetshow, PMDrive1061, 718 Bot, Mynameisnotpj, IceCold Beer, Ceilican, Bridgetsgirl, Ecureuil espagnol, Fishnut, PermaculturePlanet, Dana boomer, DumZiBoT, XLinkBot, WikHead, Silvo-nenBot, Skyeriquelme, Guydavies, Zodon, Luminaia, Ghost accounty, Hunchenfest, Addbot, Wikepermie, TomorrowsDream, ClaireofK-LARITY, Some jerk on the Internet, MrOllie, Download, Favonian, SpBot, Granitethighs, 5 albert square, Bluenijin, Ajkoen, Tide rolls,

20.7. TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES 119

Jarble, Legobot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, WikiDan61, Themfromspace, Fraggle81, Santryl, Isotelesis, Suvicaya, AnomieBOT, BrettScott, Ma-terialscientist, Elmmapleoakpine, Citation bot, NinetyNineFennelSeeds, ArthurBot, Xqbot, Miltonics, Apothecia, Kng442, Anna Frode-siak, NathanielGallion, J04n, Katsteele, Kyng, Peaksurfer, Sceloporus, Brambleshire, Rickproser, Ciclotan, FrescoBot, Legion23, Ele-ment deck, Augustart, Pentref, Questionthedominantparadigm, Dogposter, Corpuscollosium, Luke831, Lothar von Richthofen, Johnwhol,Zaricki811, Koleszar, DanTheSeeker, Tutor65, Enloop, BoundaryRider, Quesauth, LAlexanderson, Jan Permaculture, Gelatinouscube42,Mikal42, Gardenlily, Nattydreader, Pat604, Viellashipley, Pinethicket, LittleWink, Smuckola, Yogi tom, H4stings, Kirstendirksen, Darko-head, Steinpal, Lvec-jayson, Permapower, Teatimetrvaelller, Ecoescuela, SweetAspect, Mcalison, Jonkerz, Hauntu2, Permaculture institute,AbeColey, PleaseStand, Tbhotch, TheMesquito, DARTH SIDIOUS 2, Obsidian Soul, RjwilmsiBot, Mukogodo, Stephen.J.Arnold, Grifen2,User2112, Pinqpanther, Logical Cowboy, Look2See1, AbbaIkea2010, Dewritech, Steko, ZéroBot, Elefectoborde, DerekG99, Jeanpetr,Joshfinnie, Southofsouth, Wiooiw, Wayne Slam, Tiago Penedo, Seidos, Yogazeal, Popok75, Nld.rnsm, Rr.nz, Sequoia D, Minuoh, Clue-Bot NG, Wisdawn, River road permasite, Omair00, Eniodros, Krshwunk, Greenman2011, Mesoderm, Widr, Helpful Pixie Bot, ?oygul,Sax66, Charles Gran, Gob Lofa, MKar, Iamharb, Ostrichfern, Northamerica1000, Panchito62, Rowan Adams, Thepidding, Madboy23,BattyBot, Fairtheewell, Sinique, ChrisGualtieri, TheJJJunk, Vckidd, Soransoran, Sminthopsis84, Ghsqueiroz, Permbuddy, Aymankamel-wiki, Ngulevski, KcamKcim, Jimkio12, Oioidoug, Jeffersonfranklin, HaroldTheHat, BrooklynAve, Perma2, Mueller felix, Redddbaron,Geoffmen, Presi1980, Suavicm, EricEnfermeroMobile, Permaculture design, Mpathfinder, James Kern, Ephemeralcas, Trackteur, Perma-cultureOne, Enzo at Permaculture Education, Jbanegas, Motoindustries, Steveburns888 and Anonymous: 473

• Green economy Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green%20economy?oldid=639988428 Contributors: Twilsonb, Edward, Nurg, Pi-otrus, Neutrality, Vsmith, Mdd, John Quiggin, Garrisonroo, Dennis Bratland, Tabletop, Ground Zero, Bgwhite, Wavelength, RussBot,Arthur Rubin, SmackBot, Lawrencekhoo, Chris the speller, Nils Simon, Mion, Byelf2007, Dariusz Szwed, JohnCD, Karenjc, Jac16888,Cydebot, Gogo Dodo, Dr.enh, Nick Number, Rivertorch, Beagel, JaGa, DGG, KylieTastic, Scott Illini, Idioma-bot, Johnfos, Darth-Gator, Philip Trueman, Flyte35, Devgowri, Chimin 07, Jojalozzo, Nopetro, Bruceanthro, Aprock, XLinkBot, Ecolabs, Addbot, Gran-itethighs, Polainm, Luckas-bot, Yobot, AnomieBOT, Dwayne, LilHelpa, JimVC3, Paul Safonov, Mkevlar, FrescoBot, NSH002, Pjywiki,Pinethicket, Mendo23, TjBot, EmausBot, Dewritech, ΓιάννηςΚαραμήτρος, TuHan-Bot, K6ka, Jonpatterns, Financestudent, Estelle yoyo,Unepetb, Abigailholbert, ClueBot NG, Green4liberty, Gareth Griffith-Jones, Nfbertrand, Kasirbot, Anne1234567, MerlIwBot, HelpfulPixie Bot, Arabblogger2011, BG19bot, Luchame, MusikAnimal, Nameyxe, Erna2411, YFdyh-bot, Callachulpa, Localmocal11, Maharathi,Althusser11, Makecat-bot, Sauman, Jamesx12345, Claireclear, ChemTerm, Thinksome, Coaklep1, ReconditeRodent, GreenEthicalShel,Crow, GSDPhilip, Apenuta, Jlewis144, Schesank, Jodielavery and Anonymous: 65

• Passive solar building design Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive%20solar%20building%20design?oldid=638473184 Contrib-utors: AxelBoldt, -- April, Alex.tan, Ray Van De Walker, Heron, Jaknouse, Olivier, Edward, Gbleem, Darkwind, Rl, Lommer, DavidLatapie, Lumos3, Eugene Kelly, RedWolf, Buster2058, Ich, Leonard G., Mboverload, Bobblewik, OldakQuill, Pgan002, NathanHurst,Rich Farmbrough, NrDg, Freestylefrappe, LeeHunter, Joel Russ, Miscreant, Smalljim, Wordie, David Gale, RussBlau, QuantumEleven,Paleorthid, Echuck215, Wtshymanski, TVBZ28, Gene Nygaard, Jefflundberg, Woohookitty, Mindmatrix, RHaworth, Barrylb, Riumplus,Zingi, Pdn, SCEhardt, Scm83x, Cartman02au, Behun, Mandarax, Kbdank71, Rjwilmsi, FlaBot, Srleffler, Bgwhite, YurikBot, Wavelength,RussBot, Gaius Cornelius, Welsh, Biopresto, Gregzeng, Reyk, Chriswaterguy, Naught101, ChemGardener, Chris Chittleborough, Smack-Bot, McGeddon, Lawrencekhoo, Anastrophe, Commander Keane bot, Hmains, Kurykh, JackyR, EdgeOfEpsilon, Ecgossett, Antonrojo,Worrydream, COMPFUNK2, Rbean, Dogears, Freewol, Jim Derby, Robofish, Zzzzzzzzzzz, Ckatz, Optimale, Doczilla, JdH, Erosphil,JoeBot, Casper Gutman, IanOfNorwich, JForget, Ralph Purtcher, Mcginnly, MessedRobot, Ibadibam, N2e, MaxEnt, AndrewHowse, Cy-debot, Kozuch, After Midnight, Gralo, Smile a While, Tspearing, AntiVandalBot, Gioto, Alphachimpbot, MER-C, Txomin, Skyemoor,Hamiltonstone, Sustainableyes, Kayau, R'n'B, Exergetic, J.delanoy, Shawn in Montreal, Skier Dude, WebHamster, Einsteincode, Jorfer,Vbuh1, Pdcook, Inwind, H1voltage, Squids and Chips, Burlywood, Johnfos, Philip Trueman, Feroshki, Drunkenmonkey, LeaveSleaves,RJaguar3, Yintan, Nopetro, Stanleycr1, Babakathy, Sfan00 IMG, ClueBot, Parvazbato59, Meisterkoch, Aiden898, Greenbuilders, Dy-monite, Mild Bill Hiccup, Boing! said Zebedee, Auntof6, Excirial, Sun Creator, SchreiberBike, Vegetator, Aitias, Chasecarter, DumZi-BoT, Escientist, XLinkBot, Sunposition, Gutt2007, Kbdankbot, Anticipation of a New Lover’s Arrival, The, Muffinon, Addbot, Some jerkon the Internet, MrOllie, Tdenzer, Teles, Hartz, Yobot, GGByte, Fraggle81, Darx9url, Becky Sayles, Evaders99, IW.HG, Rogerspeed23,AnomieBOT, Citation bot, GB fan, The Banner, Capricorn42, Nasnema, Borys bond, Crzer07, Wisterea, Mark Schierbecker, Rickproser,Changeclimate, Rorrim9, FrescoBot, Tintenfischlein, Pinethicket, Spidey104, Ehaugsjaa, Elekhh, Andrewglaser, John of Reading, Gfoley4,Look2See1, GoingBatty, Darkside99990, Phileros, H3llBot, Ocaasi, Rob1155, Sonicyouth86, ClueBot NG,MelbourneStar, Coastwise, Es-thdam, Widr, MaTa-UK, Mmarre, Drafting-guy, HMSSolent, Thatinksta7, BG19bot, Hydroone, Northamerica1000, MusikAnimal, YourHome Australia, Tfr000, Latashabg, Lugia2453, Pattagumpas, Epicgenius, Dbooknut, YiFeiBot, Ach8, Spanachan, OptimalWebmaster,Dutchydylan10, WikiPhileros and Anonymous: 197

• Agroforestry Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agroforestry?oldid=642562327 Contributors: DavidLevinson, Robbot, Ddstretch,Alan Liefting, Bobblewik, Beland, Karol Langner, Rich Farmbrough, Vsmith, CanisRufus, Smalljim, Eric Kvaalen, Paleorthid, Howre-alisreal, Velella, Bobrayner, Tabletop, Firien, Bluemoose, Sphinxie, Mud4t, BD2412, Bruce1ee, Salix alba, Bedrupsbaneman, Sceptre,Pigman, Son of Paddy’s Ego, Nirvana2013, VIGNERON, Brandon, Marcelo-Silva, LeonardoRob0t, SmackBot, EncycloPetey, Pushpam,Bluebot, Hibernian, Brimba, Ggpauly, Salamurai, Byelf2007, Dmwilliams, SilkTork, Gobonobo, Rkmlai, Optimale, Caiaffa, Hu12, TheGiant Puffin, AbsolutDan, Tahirs, Yaris678, A876, Crowish, Shirulashem, Wawny, ThisIsAce, Liquid-aim-bot, Smartse, PhJ, Lfstevens,Ecoconservant, Zanzor, Gorav, Engineman, Pawl Kennedy, Sustainableyes, Gomm, Jeannie kendrick, Robin S, Keith D, Fincaproject, SkierDude, Grmanners, AntiSpamBot, Entropy, Scott Roy Atwood, Burzmali, DASonnenfeld, TXiKiBoT, Scilit, Doug, HopsonRoad, Baf87,The Thing That Should Not Be, Mookie25, PixelBot, John Nevard, Abrech, Dana boomer, SoxBot III, DumZiBoT, XLinkBot, Rror, Biob-ulletM, K.t.1980, Lu Wunsch-Rolshoven, Addbot, Mgoldmo, CovilleR, MrOllie, Granitethighs, Lightbot, Drpickem, Luckas-bot, Yobot,AnomieBOT, Afagitator, Jim1138, Minnecologies, Citation bot, Sanja565658, RibotBOT, FrescoBot, Questionthedominantparadigm, WNowicki, DrilBot, Pat604, Isiaunia, Manasij, Orenburg1, Trappist the monk, Theo10011, Tcazes, RjwilmsiBot, Look2See1, Zollerriia,Mmeijeri, ZéroBot, Donner60, Wormke-Grutman, 28bot, Petrb, ClueBot NG, Gareth Griffith-Jones, Mesoderm, Aghx, Kerrplunk, Help-ful Pixie Bot, Gob Lofa, Island Monkey, Northamerica1000, Tom Pippens, Parvathisri, Suchthekaitlin, Rowan Adams, C.peterson32,Torontowiki, ChrisGualtieri, Lugia2453, Sidelight12, Laurelie237, Habibibibalani, AnuSingh855, Stamptrader, Olenyash, Luke Smith232,MonzaMan09, QueenFan, Aidendonoghue, Jbanegas, Cailynjhkim and Anonymous: 86

• Agroecology Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agroecology?oldid=640156831Contributors: Anthere, Quercusrobur, Edward, MichaelHardy, Pnm, TakuyaMurata, Mac, BigFatBuddha, Raul654, Pollinator, Nilmerg, Alan Liefting, Joyous!, Discospinster, Rich Farmbrough,Vsmith, Sn0wflake, Bender235, Erauch, Sasha Kopf, Paleorthid, Velella, Woohookitty, BD2412, Waninoco, Jivecat, Gurch, Jrtayloriv,YurikBot, Wavelength, RussBot, Mike Logghe, Gaius Cornelius, Salsb, Dialectric, Grafen, CQ, SmackBot, Gabi bart, Chris the speller,Bluebot, Byelf2007, Bcasterline, Harryboyles, Anlace, Gobonobo, RomanSpa, Joseph Solis in Australia, Basicdesign, Ayanoa, Connec-tion, Covalent, KimDabelsteinPetersen, ThisIsAce, Blathnaid, Gcm, Hydro, TAnthony, Barri, APB-CMX, WhatamIdoing, Sustainableyes,

120 CHAPTER 20. TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

Plasticup, PuercoStar, DASonnenfeld, Funandtrvl, VolkovBot, ABF, TXiKiBoT, Rei-bot, SieBot, Jerryobject, Forest Ash, B1atv, Ice-Unshattered, ImperfectlyInformed, Hysocc, Lichtfouse, Alloquep, Fastily, Truetom, Addbot, Xp54321, Vejvančický, Haruth, MrOllie,Granitethighs, Jarble, Yobot, AnomieBOT, JackieBot, Citation bot, Xqbot, Apothecia, Hysilvinia, Anna Frodesiak, Kkibumba, Vertoch,Realson, Erstats, FrescoBot, Jleer1, DrilBot, Awezel, FoxBot, Chargoggagogg, Look2See1, GoingBatty, ZéroBot, Wabbott9, Abhishek-itmbm, Snotbot, Timflutre, Gob Lofa, Matt.g.bakker, BattyBot, Sminthopsis84, Infonyeleni, Corikeene and Anonymous: 59

• Agroecological restoration Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agroecological%20restoration?oldid=580253681 Contributors: MichaelHardy, Cydebot, JaGa, UnCatBot, Vejvančický, Yobot, Johnberrout, Jonkerz, Look2See1 and Anonymous: 4

• Community-supported agriculture Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community-supported%20agriculture?oldid=643215902 Con-tributors: SimonP, Quercusrobur, Michael Hardy, Jimfbleak, EntmootsOfTrolls, Kat, Robbot, Tsavage, Mshonle, Beland, Neutrality, D6,Pasquale, Deirdre, Andrewferrier, Jwalling, CanisRufus, WorldDownInFire, Velella, Jguk, Gene Nygaard, Bobrayner, Pol098, Kushboy,Vegaswikian, Ligulem, Bgwhite, Wavelength, RussBot, Johann Wolfgang, Peggy Brennan, 2over0, SmackBot, Gruber76, Mccormackter-ence, Chris the speller, Guajero, Thumperward, Uthbrian, KaiserbBot, Rrburke, Richard001, Bejnar, John, Lakinekaki, Scott182, Gob-onobo, Ckatz, HelloAnnyong, Ayanoa, CmdrObot, JohnCD, Ken Gallager, Hebrides, Trueblood, Bobblehead, Universe Man, Rees11,Tclaridge, Nleamy, Hayesgm, JAnDbot, Steven Walling, APB-CMX, Fabrictramp, Sustainableyes, Drm310, Sm8900, DASonnenfeld, JeffG., Anotherfarmer, Rowark, Toddst1, Halcionne, Der Rabe Ralf, EoGuy, John Greenler, Reeloo, Jscix, Muro Bot, AceAceAce, Chaos-druid, Roxy2480, XLinkBot, Truetom, Artaxerxes, Addbot, MrOllie, Flatmartin, Lightbot, Duane verner, Ben Ben, Legobot, Yobot,Ytiugibma, Je12, AnomieBOT, Disagreeableneutrino, TheAMmollusc, Eathealthy, Drilnoth, GrouchoBot, Beautifulcog, FrescoBot, Lu-cienBOT, Ohsosandy, Sarfreem, Charlotte Barry, Recycled.jack, WPSU, Queeste, EmausBot, Look2See1, Captain Screebo, Tripmc-crossin, Сава Чанков, Bob12345612345, ClueBot NG, Iamiyouareyou, Jodi.elizabeth, Kedui, Zzkovacs, Dicul, Helpful Pixie Bot, Nycvol-unteer, Sorelh, Sergiu.florean, Mlnowlan, Ed42311, Freelancerdave, Khazar2, Webclient101, Cerabot, Mmcgrif, GabeIglesia, Mariomaric,Kiraalbiez, Quercus mortus, Locavoracious, Steven P. McFadden, Fafnir1, Yourfoodcoop and Anonymous: 114

• Forest gardening Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest%20gardening?oldid=642299391 Contributors: Ray Van De Walker, An-there, Quercusrobur, Lquilter, Stan Shebs, Artost, Glenn, Marshman, Vardion, Alan Liefting, Everyking, Bobblewik, Serendeva, Pgan002,Mike Rosoft, Chris j wood, Guanabot, Bender235, Eadmund, Erauch, Sumalsn, Anthony Appleyard, Velella, Kazvorpal, Bobrayner,Rtdrury, Benjitz, Salix alba, Gaius Cornelius, Dialectric, Nirvana2013, Kevin, SmackBot, Cacuija, Lotusduck, Chris the speller, Blue-bot, Brimba, Abrahami, Byelf2007, Dandelion1, SilkTork, Gobonobo, Rkmlai, DabMachine, Lograph, Dougweller, Marek69, Ingolfson,Daniel Cordoba-Bahle, Sustainableyes, Skier Dude, Madbishop, Jorfer, Woodsguy, Scott Roy Atwood, DASonnenfeld, Lightmouse, DerGolem, Mild Bill Hiccup, XLinkBot, Edibleforests, Addbot, Granitethighs, Jarble, Luckas-bot, AnomieBOT, Rubinbot, Citation bot, AnnaFrodesiak, Legion23, BoundaryRider, Citation bot 1, Lotje, Vrenator, RjwilmsiBot, Look2See1, EME44, Mmeijeri, Lexandalf, ZéroBot,Popok75, Walter Ralt, ClueBot NG, Helpful Pixie Bot, Philospelunk, Gob Lofa, Lavenderdawn, Northamerica1000, Mr. Joca, RowanAdams, Sminthopsis84, Lisamd, Bleu8, Yackityyack, Ginsuloft and Anonymous: 49

• Food desert Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food%20desert?oldid=637345904 Contributors: Edward, Popageorgio, PBS, Jareha,Discospinster, Deirdre, EurekaLott, Viriditas, BDD, Angr, Woohookitty, Tabletop, SDC, Ashmoo, Rjwilmsi, Ground Zero, Gurch, Jmor-gan, RussBot, Chris Capoccia, SmackBot, Brossow, Chris the speller, Thumperward, Gnp, Sorchah, AThing, Minna Sora no Shita, Del-lenba, Jim856796, Iridescent, Tony Fox, MightyWarrior, Worldbfree, Alaibot, Andyjsmith, Headbomb, Rwscid, WhatamIdoing, Hillshaw,Jerem43, Ariel., Katharineamy, Naniwako, Philip Trueman, Microsqueek, Calliopejen1, Skingski, Dodger67, Plastikspork, Jwihbey, Ad-dbot, TutterMouse, Download, E-DuraMater, MuZemike, AnomieBOT, Citation bot, Thehelpfulbot, Joelzook, FrescoBot, Netrunner452,Pinethicket, Smuckola, BigDwiki, Maybejalissa, RjwilmsiBot, Slon02, Solarra, Wikipelli, ZéroBot, Anir1uph, Donner60, Ego White Tray,ChuispastonBot, Kmesca, ClueBot NG, Rich Smith, Gareth Griffith-Jones, Helpful Pixie Bot, Kankan628, DBigXray, BG19bot, Rober-ticus, Northamerica1000, Pie0003, Ellafb, Danakennedy, ThFSPB, ChrisGualtieri, Katembeck, Amy8423, KforKarla, Vnl250, EruditeManatee, Monkbot, Anita LaMagnifico, Contaminatedesert and Anonymous: 83

• Polyculture Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyculture?oldid=620099440 Contributors: Hyacinth, Alan Liefting, Quadell, Pak21,Erauch, Cmdrjameson, TheParanoidOne, Kazvorpal, Jwanders, Porphyra, Salix alba, Nirvana2013, Calvin08, CmdrObot, Jhml, Nocom-post, R'n'B, Uncle Dick, Squids and Chips, ClueBot, XLinkBot, Addbot, Tassedethe, Tikar aurum, Luckas-bot, Apothecia, Anna Frode-siak, Rickproser, והיחיד ,האחד LucienBOT, JobenCitySchlicka, MarcelB612, LESS Productions, Lopifalko, Look2See1, ClueBot NG,Gob Lofa, Northamerica1000, Redddbaron and Anonymous: 22

• Urban forest Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban%20forest?oldid=615019607 Contributors: Delirium, Altenmann, Steviethe-man, Rich Farmbrough, Gene Nygaard, Kinema, Rjwilmsi, Ricardo Carneiro Pires, MacRusgail, Wavelength, Marketdiamond, Smack-Bot, Slashme, Chris the speller, Colonies Chris, Jeffblackadar, Rosarinagazo, Bry456, Calltech, Drm310, Jim.henderson, Huzzlet thebot, Nadiatalent, DASonnenfeld, VolkovBot, Johnny Au, Lamro, Ferred, Xavier-Lewis, Addbot, Andreykor, Yobot, Anna Frodesiak,Gumruch, GrouchoBot, FrescoBot, Weblpb, Drakenwolf, Rixs, Merlinsorca, WikitanvirBot, Look2See1, Tsuchiya Hikaru, Mmann1988,Mathew105601, Constructedclimates, Helpful Pixie Bot, Jacobkhed, Aleksandar Bulovic', BattyBot, Kylie O'Halloran and Anonymous: 23

• Green roof Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green%20roof?oldid=642370678 Contributors: Tarquin, Jose Icaza, Mathsinger, Greg-gygreggreg, Black bag, Imc, Pigsonthewing, Gidonb, Leonard G., Bobblewik, BruceR, Neffk, Bepp, Neutrality, Jutta, Grstain, Atrian,Rich Farmbrough, Egregius, Vsmith, Notinasnaid, Mwanner, Viriditas, Hooperbloob, Arthena, Glaurung, Burn, Max Naylor, Grenavitar,Gene Nygaard, Kevin Hayes, Mindmatrix, RHaworth, Bkwillwm, BD2412, ConradKilroy, Gilesmorant, SchuminWeb, SiGarb, TeaD-rinker, Ahunt, Mordicai, Vmenkov, Wavelength, Gene.arboit, Lincolnite, Hede2000, Mike411, Bovineone, Istill316, Irishguy, Nucle-usboy, RUL3R, Hlemonick, Plorimer, Arthur Rubin, Esprit15d, Naught101, Curpsbot-unicodify, Paul D. Anderson, SmackBot, Fo-calPoint, Skeezix1000, DWaterson, KVDP, Eskimbot, Timotheus Canens, Ohnoitsjamie, Skizzik, Stuart mcmillen, Chris the speller,Roede, Master of Puppets, Fluri, Deli nk, A. B., Peter Campbell, Trekphiler, MJCdetroit, Aldaron, Hurker, Keyesc, Ohconfucius, An-lace, Euchiasmus, SilkTork, Jim Derby, Rkmlai, PRRfan, TastyPoutine, Hu12, Natronomonas, Igoldste, RekishiEJ, Courcelles, Dlo-hcierekim, Eltharian, JForget, Acabtp, Cydebot, Archytect, Kozuch, Mattisse, Islescape, Vw3a, Bobblehead, Blathnaid, Deipnosophista,Dark Serge, I already forgot, AntiVandalBot, Gioto, KatherineN, I've Got Stripes, AubreyEllenShomo, Ingolfson, Deadbeef, JAnD-bot, Husond, MER-C, Epeefleche, Ccrrccrr, CairoEast, Magioladitis, Bongwarrior, Haku8645, JamesBWatson, Think outside the box,20053130, Organicjack, Mmuroff, Ahmad87, Glen, Bibliophylax, Jörg Breuning, Seba5618, DancingPenguin, Flowanda, Rettetast, Com-monsDelinker, Hasanisawi, AlphaEta, Bogey97, TyrS, Uncle Dick, All Is One, Mokupahu, Sssuuuzzzaaannn, Gobawoo, Bymabear, BobEn-yart, Katalaveno, Phoenix913, Danofweaver, Skier Dude, Jorfer, Sunderland06, MoeGirl4455, Harmonyshenk, Chadsichello, DASonnen-feld, Shaunus4, Idioma-bot, RingtailedFox, Hersfold, MarcusHawksley, Kyle the bot, Philip Trueman, Zidonuke, CindyBlain, Gueneverey,Wikipedantry, Dlae, BotKung, Rmaul, Shvineporoh, Andy Dingley, Kilmer-san, Jadine, Trikiwi, AlleborgoBot, Jmanikel, SieBot, Cal-liopejen1, Tresiden, TLauckBenson, New England, RJaguar3, Triwbe, Yintan, Whiteghost.ink, Nadacevia, Adamsofen, Meathead1962,

20.7. TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES 121

Miztah frawg, Lightmouse, Techman224, SimonTrew, Bodhi.peace, Sfan00 IMG, ClueBot, The Thing That Should Not Be, Agiglio, Haf-spajen, Niceguyedc, No such user, Naerii, -Midorihana-, PixelBot, Greenroof406, Lartoven, Maniago, Ottawa4ever, BotanyForAll, Qwfp,Vanished user uih38riiw4hjlsd, Tdslk, DumZiBoT, XLinkBot, Dthomsen8, Dustygedge, Grassroofcompany, LowImpactLiving, Muffi-non, Addbot, Polinizador, Betterusername, Fieldday-sunday, Fergycool, CanadianLinuxUser, Aramismv, Glane23, Tassedethe, Tide rolls,Lightbot, Luckas-bot, AadaamS, Yobot, B.navez, II MusLiM HyBRiD II, Nefariousopus, Maxí, Matt4287, CleaLauren, AnomieBOT, Bri-tiniport, Hairhorn, Koskim, Adspug, Kcgrant, Piano non troppo, Ulric1313, Materialscientist, LilHelpa, MauritsBot, Xqbot, Renaissancee,Ryno7007, Sionk, GrouchoBot, RibotBOT, Shadowjams, Thehelpfulbot, Укко, FrescoBot, Wikipe-tan, Sky Attacker, Skinnywhiteboy,Jc19951995, Pinethicket, Masteve, CF ROOFING, Avidmosh, A8UDI, Poltrackt, Hem3, Greenroofsrock, Paul Aakerøy, Anpaoliello,Green australia, Elekhh, RogerDodgerJackson, Capt. James T. Kirk, Andrew Michael Clements, IRISZOOM, Chuky172, RjwilmsiBot,DRAGON BOOSTER, Lowestofthekeys12, Pierreuk, KuroiGetsuga, Look2See1, Currysagirl, Legalskeptic, Tribalisles, Solarra, Living-Wall, Trinidade, Cathyqaz, Jasminlives, Kejamu82, H3llBot, H-nerden, Christopher Botham, IGeMiNix, Twatson603, Miguemac, Jan-Butterfly, TJBi, ClueBot NG, B green roof, CMcMahonSYDNEY, Lyla1205, Vacation9, Emacsen, Cntras, Dog Walking Girl, Mmarre,Helpful Pixie Bot, BG19bot, Aurelien.jean, CarloMartinelli, Michael Barera, Bruzaholm, Wikih101, Rk384, Eldonholt1213, Bakennedy2,Jeremy112233, Rbnsql, Vuonthangdung, Embeeshea, Fusiontron, Mohr24, Blueghost0221, Leonfinch, LiamM32, Switchbackforfun, .anti-syphonage., MSkibbles, Ginsuloft, GreenRoofGardener, Lizia7, SwansonGallery, GreenRoofExp, Monkbot, Pjwicker11, Tyron.miller,Wombatress, Gatsby16, Livingroof builder, Riverchandra, Joeecogreen1, Fossil1999, SearchNative and Anonymous: 288

• Earthship Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthship?oldid=643523657 Contributors: Bryan Derksen, William Avery, Ray Van DeWalker, Edward, Michael Hardy, Angela, Cherkash, Merovingian, David Edgar, Andycjp, Discospinster, Deirdre, FusionKnight, Kenwar-ren, Barista, David Schaich, Lbravo, Sbufe, MBisanz, Ebacherdom, Carders, Rosenzweig, Paleorthid, Wtmitchell, ReyBrujo, Roboshed,Mindmatrix, Nanite, Susten.biz, Rjwilmsi, Coemgenus, Vegaswikian, SeanMack, Stormbear, Midgley, Richjkl, Bkil, Gadget850, Bus-terD, DVD R W, SmackBot, PaulWay, McGeddon, Unyoyega, KVDP, Zekkelley, Septegram, Chris the speller, Brob1969, Bluebot,Thumperward, Robocoder, Victorgrigas, Ecgossett, Saejinn, Dogears, Kuru, Gobonobo, Stefan2, Beetstra, Publicus, Gazjo, Hu12, Er-icblazek, JoeBot, CmdrObot, Rafael Archuleta, Procrastinator supreme, Naturalhomes, Sonicdeathmonkey, Wikijimmy, JustAGal, Hm-rox, Merlin Matthews, Tillman, EKindig, Belg4mit, Dmodlin71, Deom, VoABot II, LifeIsArt, Trugster, Beagel, Shawnmackey, Bjbeamish,BlackClouds2462, J.delanoy, Parradoxx, Scalveg, FrummerThanThou, Gebjon, Richard New Forest, Signalhead, TXiKiBoT, Mercury-woodrose, Plasmasun, Jakrandom, AnnieWarmke, Grock123, Etbnc, Perspectoff, Keilana, Nopetro, Salex1093, Fratrep, ClueBot, Scbarry,Wikievil666, Earthship, Torbz, Wysprgr2005, Drmies, Mild Bill Hiccup, Melarish, Sun Creator, MaxSem on AWB wheels, XLinkBot,Dthomsen8, Fred the Oyster, ProfDEH, Addbot, DrJos, Didididit, Debresser, Lightbot, HalFonts, HerculeBot, Yobot, Themfromspace,Otteraustralis, GateKeeper, Stiangutten, AnomieBOT, L3lackEyedAngels, Materialscientist, Tcannata, Angelohori, SassoBot, Sunz600,Catcalledspooky, A little insignificant, Simple Bob, HRoestBot, Skyerise, Dana60Cummins, Ras67, Gazzat5, January, Strong800, BeyondMy Ken, WikitanvirBot, Duke dhunter, Wingman4l7, PeterMcWiki, ClueBot NG, Astatine211, MelbourneStar, Krokofant, Helpful PixieBot, Northamerica1000, JephthahsDaughter, Xarrayne, Willy-ESB, GuitarStv, Cottonflop, Biodiesel33, Blueboxmonkey, ChrisGualtieri,PabloOKWiki, OnHawkspur, Faizan, François Robere, Jellypear, Mueller felix, Ludwig.everson, Anarcham, MsJenniferKremenik, LowCarbon, Paskavittu, Chris Carter68 and Anonymous: 185

• Transit-oriented development Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit-oriented%20development?oldid=636661332 Contributors:Ray Van De Walker, Edward, Patrick, Michael Hardy, Mulad, Peregrine981, Darkcore, Dale Arnett, AlainV, Gidonb, Mushroom, AlanLiefting, Orangemike, JohnM, Jayjg, Dcfleck, ArnoldReinhold, LeeHunter, Thickslab, EurekaLott, Rbirmann, BDD, Lkinkade, Stemoni-tis, Firsfron, Mindmatrix, Rjwilmsi, Cassowary, Bmicomp, YurikBot, FlyingPenguins, Jdmalouff, SmackBot, Verne Equinox, Mairibot,Chris the speller, Bluebot, OrphanBot, Jdfcanada, Thisisbossi, Rrburke, Peterwhy, Mion, Dogears, Thesmothete, Nick carson, KenFehling,TastyPoutine, Hup234, Rockysmile11, Old Guard, Cydebot, Teratornis, Olborne, Wl219, IUfan, KLoBalbo, Nopira, R'n'B, Word2line,McSly, Ktsparkman, Djflem, Johnny Au, Wcrosbie, SieBot, Eyedubya, Nopetro, Jruderman, Mariordo, Cambrasa, Niceguyedc, Secondary-waltz, MickMacNee, Okiefromokla, SchreiberBike, Roxy the dog, SJ Morg, Abe Backman, Addbot, Queenmomcat, Download, Epicadam,Yin612, Twohalls, Yobot, AnomieBOT, Zawer, Kasaalan, Eja2k, Xqbot, Griffinofwales, Emjay john, FrescoBot, Bspitt, Haeinous, Igna,Punk oriley, Steve lafleur, JALittau, Lucy Bloom, Difu Wu, Conorbrady.ie, MarisaRaya, EmausBot, Pingu.dbl96, Nudecline, Chuispas-tonBot, Frbsf, Matthew105, Tyson2kk, Compfreak7, JeromRP, Naagarik, LegacyOfValor, Njaohnt, Rustyrgould, An Errant Knight, Jian-hui67, Jessempalmer, Monkbot, WyattAlex and Anonymous: 52

20.7.2 Images• File:20080708_Chicago_City_Hall_Green_Roof.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/de/20080708_

Chicago_City_Hall_Green_Roof.JPG License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: I created this work entirely by myself. --TonyTheTigerOriginal artist: TonyTheTiger

• File:ATL_HQ.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/de/ATL_HQ.JPG License: GPL Contributors: ? Originalartist: ?

• File:Aegopodium_podagraria1_ies.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bf/Aegopodium_podagraria1_ies.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Frank Vincentz

• File:Agrosylviculture_australie_Clive_Wawn.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Agrosylviculture_australie_Clive_Wawn.jpg License: GFDL Contributors: english wikipedia Original artist: Lamiot, with original pictures made byClive_Wawn

• File:Ambox_globe_content.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Ambox_globe_content.svg License:Public domain Contributors: Own work, using File:Information icon3.svg and File:Earth clip art.svg Original artist: penubag

• File:Ambox_important.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b4/Ambox_important.svg License: Public do-main Contributors: Own work, based off of Image:Ambox scales.svg Original artist: Dsmurat (talk · contribs)

• File:ArlingtonTODimage3.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3d/ArlingtonTODimage3.jpg License: Pub-lic domain Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia; transferred to Commons by User:Sreejithk2000 using CommonsHelper.Original artist: This image was altered by Thesmothete with additional graphical elements to indicate the location of transit stations and theextent of development around them.. Original uploader was Thesmothete at en.wikipedia

• File:Arlington_County_-_Virginia.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Arlington_County_-_Virginia.jpg License: CC BY-SA 2.0 Contributors: http://www.flickr.com/photos/arlingtonva/5221498943/in/photostream/ Original artist:

122 CHAPTER 20. TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

• Arlington County• uploaded and derivative work: <a href='//commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:MrPanyGoff' title='User:

MrPanyGoff'>MrPanyGoff</a>• File:Artocarpus_heterophyllus_fruits_at_tree.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/Artocarpus_

heterophyllus_fruits_at_tree.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Photo taken by User:Ahoerstemeier onJune 28, 2003 in Chaiya, Surat Thani Province, Thailand.

• File:Authentic_Viking_recreation.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/Authentic_Viking_recreation.jpg License: CC BY 2.0 Contributors: Flickr Original artist: Dylan Kereluk from White Rock, Canada

• File:Ballston_TOD.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/Ballston_TOD.jpg License: Public domain Con-tributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia; transferred to Commons by User:Common Good using CommonsHelper. Original artist: Originaluploader was Thesmothete at en.wikipedia

• File:Big_single-family_home_2.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/af/Big_single-family_home_2.jpg Li-cense: Public domain Contributors: Own work Original artist: SanjibLemar

• File:Bill_Mollison_01.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Bill_Mollison_01.jpg License: CC BY 2.0Contributors: http://www.flickr.com/photos/faircompanies/2196171642/ Original artist: Nicolas Boullosa

• File:Bridgeland.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1a/Bridgeland.JPG License: Public domain Contribu-tors: Own work Original artist: Twohalls

• File:CalifAcadSciRoof_0820.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e7/CalifAcadSciRoof_0820.JPG Li-cense: Public domain Contributors: Own work Original artist: Leonard G.

• File:CaliforniaAcademyofSciences.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/CaliforniaAcademyofSciences.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Originally from en.wikipedia; description page is/was here. Original artist: Original uploader wasAdamsofen at en.wikipedia

• File:Christaller’{}s_central_place_theory_animation.gif Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Christaller%27s_central_place_theory_animation.gif License: Public domain Contributors: Own work Original artist: Avenafatua

• File:Christaller_model2.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a9/Christaller_model2.jpg License: Public do-mainContributors: adapted from the bookwritten by Christaller, “Die zentralen Orte in Süddeutschland” (1933)Original artist: Laotseuphilo

• File:Christaller_model_1.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/Christaller_model_1.svg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: File:Christaller model 1.jpg adapted from the book written by Christaller, “Die zentralen Orte in Süddeutschland”(1933) Original artist: User:Laotseuphilo SVG by User: Magasjukur2

• File:Christaller_model_3.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/Christaller_model_3.jpg License: Publicdomain Contributors: adapted from the book written by Christaller, “Die zentralen Orte in Süddeutschland” (1933) Original artist:Laotseuphilo

• File:Church_at_Hof.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/Church_at_Hof.jpg License: CC BY-SA 3.0Contributors: Own work Original artist: Ira Goldstein

• File:Clagett_Farm_CSA_Week_11.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Clagett_Farm_CSA_Week_11.jpg License: CC BY 2.0 Contributors: Clagett Farm CSA Week 11 Original artist: thebittenword.com

• File:Claire_Gregorys_Permaculture_garden.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3d/Claire_Gregorys_Permaculture_garden.jpg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Claire Gregory

• File:Commons-logo.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Commons-logo.svg License: ? Contributors: ? Originalartist: ?

• File:Complex-adaptive-system.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Complex-adaptive-system.jpg Li-cense: Public domain Contributors: Own work by Acadac : Taken from en.wikipedia.org, where Acadac was inspired to create this graphicafter reading: Original artist: Acadac

• File:Convection_banner_1.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/Convection_banner_1.jpg License: CCBY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Amzi Smith

• File:Corn_01.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/Corn_01.JPG License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contribu-tors: Transferred from ml.wikipedia by Sreejith K (<a href='//commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sreejithk2000' title='User talk:Sreejithk2000'>talk</a>) Original artist: Original uploaded by Ashlyak.

• File:Crystal_energy.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Crystal_energy.svg License: LGPL Contributors:Own work conversion of Image:Crystal_128_energy.png Original artist: Dhatfield

• File:Curitiba_04_2006_19_RIT.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Curitiba_04_2006_19_RIT.jpg Li-cense: CC BY 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Mario Roberto Duran Ortiz Mariordo

• File:Curitiba_Panorama_Eixo_e_densidades_02_2006_47.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/Curitiba_Panorama_Eixo_e_densidades_02_2006_47.JPG License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Mariordo(Mario Roberto Durán Ortiz)

• File:Drinking_water.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Drinking_water.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0Contributors: Source: [1] Original artist: Photo taken by de:Benutzer:Alex Anlicker using a Nikon Coolpix 950.

• File:ESF-Gateway-Green-Roof-2014.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/ESF-Gateway-Green-Roof-2014.jpg License: CC BY-SA 4.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: DASonnenfeld

• File:EXTERIOR_OF_AN_EXPERIMENTAL_ALL_ALUMINUM_BEER_AND_SOFT_DRINK_CAN_HOUSE_UNDER_CONSTRUCTION_NEAR_TAOS,_NEW_MEXICO._THIS..._-_NARA_-_556642.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/EXTERIOR_OF_AN_EXPERIMENTAL_ALL_ALUMINUM_BEER_AND_SOFT_DRINK_CAN_HOUSE_UNDER_CONSTRUCTION_NEAR_TAOS%2C_NEW_MEXICO._THIS..._-_NARA_-_556642.jpg License: Public domainContributors: U.S. National Archives and Records Administration Original artist: David Hiser, 1937-, Photographer (NARA record:3651517)

20.7. TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES 123

• File:Earth_Day_Flag.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6a/Earth_Day_Flag.png License: Public domainContributors: File:Earth flag PD.jpg, File:The Earth seen from Apollo 17 with transparent background.png Original artist: NASA (Earthphotograph)SiBr4 (flag image)

• File:Earthship_Brighton_Front.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/Earthship_Brighton_Front.jpg Li-cense: CC BY 2.0 Contributors: Flickr Original artist: Dominic Alves

• File:Earthship_plan_with_vertically_glazed_southern_wall.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Earthship_plan_with_vertically_glazed_southern_wall.svg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Felix Müller

• File:Earthship_water_system.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Earthship_water_system.png Li-cense: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: KVDP

• File:Ecoecolfigure1.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/44/Ecoecolfigure1.jpg License: PD Contributors: ? Origi-nal artist: ?

• File:Edit-clear.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f2/Edit-clear.svg License: Public domain Contributors: TheTango! Desktop Project. Original artist:The people from the Tango! project. And according to the meta-data in the file, specifically: “Andreas Nilsson, and Jakub Steiner (althoughminimally).”

• File:FIRST_EXPERIMENTAL_HOUSE_COMPLETED_NEAR_TAOS,_NEW_MEXICO_USING_EMPTY_STEEL_BEER_AND_SOFT_DRINK_CANS_-_NARA_-_556623.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/FIRST_EXPERIMENTAL_HOUSE_COMPLETED_NEAR_TAOS%2C_NEW_MEXICO_USING_EMPTY_STEEL_BEER_AND_SOFT_DRINK_CANS_-_NARA_-_556623.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: U.S. National Archives and Records AdministrationOriginal artist: David Hiser, 1937-, Photographer (NARA record: 3651517)

• File:Faidherbia_albida.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e8/Faidherbia_albida.JPG License: CC BY-SA 2.5 Contributors: Own work (own foto) Original artist: Marco Schmidt [1]

• File:Farmer_plowing.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e7/Farmer_plowing_in_Fahrenwalde%2C_Mecklenburg-Vorpommern%2C_Germany.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Transferred from the German Wikipedia. Originalfile is/was here. ([#Original_upload_log Original upload log] available below.) Original artist: Ralf Roletschek - Fahrradtechnik auffahrradmonteur.de

• File:Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/48/Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg License: Cc-by-sa-3.0 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?

• File:FoodWeb.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/FoodWeb.jpg License: CC0 Contributors: Own workOriginal artist: Thompsma

• File:Foodlogo2.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/Foodlogo2.svg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors:Original Original artist: Seahen

• File:Forestgarden2.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d5/Forestgarden2.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Con-tributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia; transferred to Commons by User:Sfan00_IMG using CommonsHelper. Original artist: Originaluploader was Quercusrobur at en.wikipedia

• File:Forgard2-003.gif Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/Forgard2-003.gif License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Con-tributors: Diagram by Graham Burnett, if reused elsewhere a credit would be appreciated, thanks! Original artist: Graham Burnett. Originaluploader was Quercusrobur (Graham Burnett) at en.wikipedia

• File:France_Loiret_La_Bussiere_Potager_05.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/France_Loiret_La_Bussiere_Potager_05.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?

• File:G2_Global_model_Earthship_Taos_N.M..JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/G2_Global_model_Earthship_Taos_N.M..JPG License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Biodiesel33

• File:Garden_City_Concept_by_Howard.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3d/Garden_City_Concept_by_Howard.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: originally published in “Garden Cities of tomorrow”, Sonnenschein publishing, 1902;this file was made as a cutout of http://www.oliviapress.co.uk/save0033.jpg (cover of the book “Robert Beevers: The Garden City Utopia:A Critical Biography of Ebenezer Howard, Olivia Press”. Original artist: Ebenezer Howard (1850-1928)

• File:Genomics_GTL_Program_Payoffs.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/Genomics_GTL_Program_Payoffs.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: ? Original artist: ?

• File:Green_City.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/Green_City.jpg License: CC BY 2.0 Contributors:Flickr Original artist: Alyson Hurt from Alexandria, Va., USA

• File:Green_Roof_at_Vendée_Historial,_les_Lucs.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f2/Green_Roof_at_Vend%C3%A9e_Historial%2C_les_Lucs.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: ? Original artist: ?

• File:Heidal.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Heidal.jpg License: CC BY 3.0 Contributors: Own workOriginal artist: Roede

• File:Illust_passive_solar_d1.gif Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Illust_passive_solar_d1.gif License:Public domain Contributors: http://www.eere.energy.gov/de/passive_solar_design.html Original artist: http://www.eere.energy.gov

• File:Intensive_extensive_green_roofs.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dd/Intensive_extensive_green_roofs.png License: CC BY-SA 4.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: KVDP

• File:Juliesvegetables.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/Juliesvegetables.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia; transfer was stated to be made by User:Akhran.Original artist: Hysilvinia (talk). Original uploader was Hysilvinia at en.wikipedia

124 CHAPTER 20. TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

• File:Leaf_1_web.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/Leaf_1_web.jpg License: Public domain Contribu-tors: PdPhoto Original artist: Jon Sullivan

• File:Ljungris_July_2013.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/Ljungris_July_2013.jpg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Arild Vågen

• File:Logo_sociology.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/Logo_sociology.svg License: Public domainContributors: Own work Original artist: Tomeq183

• File:MEC’{}s_green_roof_among_others.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/MEC%27s_green_roof_among_others.jpg License: CC BY 2.0 Contributors: Flickr Original artist: sookie

• File:Mergefrom.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Mergefrom.svg License: Public domain Contributors:? Original artist: ?

• File:Norðragøta,_Faroe_Islands_(2).JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/39/Nor%C3%B0rag%C3%B8ta%2C_Faroe_Islands_%282%29.JPG License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Erik Christensen's own work Original artist: ErikChristensen, Porkeri (Contact at the Danish Wikipedia)

• File:Old_Put_fallen_tree_jeh.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Old_Put_fallen_tree_jeh.JPG Li-cense: Public domain Contributors: Own work Original artist: Jim.henderson

• File:P_parthenon.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/P_parthenon.svg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contrib-utors: ? Original artist: ?

• File:People_icon.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/People_icon.svg License: CC0 Contributors: Open-Clipart Original artist: OpenClipart

• File:Permaculture_Zones.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ad/Permaculture_Zones.svg License: CCBY-SA 4.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Felix Müller

• File:Pine_forest_in_Sweden.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/Pine_forest_in_Sweden.jpg License:CC BY-SA 2.0 Contributors: http://www.flickr.com/photos/tetrapak/5956902891/sizes/m/in/set-72157628342553177/ Original artist:AB Tetra Pak

• File:Portal-puzzle.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fd/Portal-puzzle.svg License: Public domain Contributors: ?Original artist: ?

• File:Question_book-new.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Question_book-new.svg License: Cc-by-sa-3.0Contributors:Created from scratch in Adobe Illustrator. Based on Image:Question book.png created by User:Equazcion Original artist:Tkgd2007

• File:Rainwater_harvesting_system.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/Rainwater_harvesting_system.svg License: Public domain Contributors:

• Rainwater_harvesting_system.JPG Original artist: Rainwater_harvesting_system.JPG: KVDP (talk)• File:RegaderaMetalica.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/04/RegaderaMetalica.jpg License: Public do-

main Contributors: ? Original artist: ?• File:Regional_module_of_Madhya_Pradesh(india).png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/Regional_

module_of_Madhya_Pradesh%28india%29.png License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: REGIONAL PLANNERS OF INDIAPreviously published: www.uspforindia.com Original artist: Sonar0712

• File:Regional_module_of_Rajnandgaon.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Regional_module_of_Rajnandgaon.png License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: developed by plannersPreviously published: uspforindia.com Original artist: Pavan gupta112233

• File:Regional_modules_in_Chhattisgarh_(India).png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/Regional_modules_in_Chhattisgarh_%28India%29.png License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: regional planners of IndiaPreviously published: www.uspforindia.com Original artist: Sonar0712

• File:RegularEarthshipDesign.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/16/RegularEarthshipDesign.svg Li-cense: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: <a href='//commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:RegularEarthshipDesign.JPG' class='image'><imgalt='RegularEarthshipDesign.JPG' src='//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/RegularEarthshipDesign.JPG/100px-RegularEarthshipDesign.JPG' width='100' height='79' srcset='//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/RegularEarthshipDesign.JPG/150px-RegularEarthshipDesign.JPG 1.5x, //upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/RegularEarthshipDesign.JPG/200px-RegularEarthshipDesign.JPG 2x' data-file-width='2548' data-file-height='2008' /></a> Originalartist: RegularEarthshipDesign.JPG: KVDP

• File:Riparian_buffer_on_Bear_Creek_in_Story_County,_Iowa.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Riparian_buffer_on_Bear_Creek_in_Story_County%2C_Iowa.JPG License: Public domain Contributors: USDA http://www.ia.nrcs.usda.gov/news/successstories/successstories.html Original artist: USDA

• File:Robert_Hart_(horticulturist).jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Robert_Hart_%28horticulturist%29.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia; transferred to Commons byUser:Sfan00_IMG using CommonsHelper. Original artist: Photographer and original uploader was Quercusrobur (Graham Burnett) aten.wikipedia

• File:Rose_Amber_Flush_20070601.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/Rose_Amber_Flush_20070601.jpg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Georges Seguin (Okki)

• File:Solar_Umbrella001.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Solar_Umbrella001.jpg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: CalderOliver

• File:Solar_altitude.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/16/Solar_altitude.svg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Con-tributors: Own work Original artist: Hartz

20.7. TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES 125

• File:Summary_of_Relationships.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f7/Summary_of_Relationships.jpgLicense: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: User:Sholto Maud

• File:Sustainable_development.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Sustainable_development.svg Li-cense: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors:

• Inspired from Developpement durable.jpg Original artist:• original: Johann Dréo (talk · contribs)• File:Text_document_with_red_question_mark.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Text_document_

with_red_question_mark.svg License: Public domain Contributors: Created by bdesham with Inkscape; based upon Text-x-generic.svgfrom the Tango project. Original artist: Benjamin D. Esham (bdesham)

• File:The_Earth_seen_from_Apollo_17.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/The_Earth_seen_from_Apollo_17.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/115334main_image_feature_329_ys_full.jpgOriginal artist: NASA/Apollo 17 crew; taken by either Harrison Schmitt or Ron Evans

• File:The_Earth_seen_from_Apollo_17_with_transparent_background.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/The_Earth_seen_from_Apollo_17_with_transparent_background.png License: Public domain Contributors:http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/a17_h_148_22727.html Original artist: NASA

• File:The_Treasury_-_Syntagma.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/The_Treasury_-_Syntagma.jpgLicense: CC BY 3.0 Contributors: Oikosteges Archive Original artist: Andrew Michael Clements

• File:Tongyang_-_downtown_-_apartment_complex_-_CIMG9860.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Tongyang_-_downtown_-_apartment_complex_-_CIMG9860.JPG License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist:User:Vmenkov

• File:Torvtak_2.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/41/Torvtak_2.png License: CC BY-SA 1.0 Contributors:Own work Original artist: Roede

• File:Tree_template.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/Tree_template.svg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Con-tributors:

• File:Tango icon nature.svg• File:Blank_template.svg

Original artist:

• DarKobra• Urutseg• Ain92

• File:Veranotrigo.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4f/Veranotrigo.jpg License: CC BY 2.0 Contributors:http://www.flickr.com/photos/soilscience/2513807337/ Original artist: Soil-Science.info

• File:Wheatfield_in_Ottawa.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Wheatfield_in_Ottawa.jpg License: CCBY 2.0 Contributors: Wheatfield Original artist: cjuneau from Ottawa, CANADA

• File:Wikiversity-logo.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/91/Wikiversity-logo.svg License: CC BY-SA 3.0Contributors: Snorky (optimized and cleaned up by verdy_p) Original artist: Snorky (optimized and cleaned up by verdy_p)

• File:Wiktionary-logo.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ec/Wiktionary-logo.svg License: CC BY-SA 3.0Contributors: ? Original artist: ?

• File:Wind-turbine-icon.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ad/Wind-turbine-icon.svg License: CC BY-SA3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Lukipuk

• File:Yonge-Churchill.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e8/Yonge-Churchill.jpg License: Public domainContributors: Own work Original artist: Troshran

• File:Ørestad_Karen_Blixen_Parc.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/38/%C3%98restad_Karen_Blixen_Parc.jpg License: CC BY 2.0 Contributors: Flickr Original artist: Jonas Smith (Agent Smith) from Copenhagen, Denmark

20.7.3 Content license• Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0