Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - [permaculture] Re: permaculture Digest, Vol 15, Issue 22

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Scott Pittman <pci@permaculture-inst.org>
  • To: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [permaculture] Re: permaculture Digest, Vol 15, Issue 22
  • Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 08:59:32 -0600

At 10:26 PM 4/19/2004, you wrote:
3. Re: zonation (Michael Kramer)

Your comments about "permaculture is bigger than Bill, his texts, his teachings" becomes amusing in the context of the contents of your correspondence where approximately fifty percent of your text is quotes from Bill Mollison.

I think that you misunderstand me when you imply that I don't think that many of the design principals and tools are relevant to the "invisible structures". Quite to the contrary I think that most of them work very well in both realms. I am concerned when we utilize every concept in permaculture as a metaphor to be applied to every situation. I know one could use swaling as a metaphor for financial savings, or wind breaks for creating co-ops etc. but to what purpose if it engenders more confusion than enlightenment?

So all I'm talking about is that some concepts work very well with visible structures and land use while others work better with invisible structures.
A hammer is a very good tool for building, bashing things, and as a paper weight but to apply this tool to social contracts is a bit of a stretch, so why not use something more meaningful and appropriate to the subject one is addressing.

Perhaps I am a bit dense but I don't "get" your example of the Village as zone 0. Since zonation is a form of mapping out areas in regard to frequency of use and availability of resources where on the map would you put "money, governance processes and values (including culture and spirituality)"??
Of course "a site design that did not consider these issues would be incomplete", but it does not follow that zonation is the best methodology for that consideration. Our design "tool box" is not so limited that we have to use each tool for every situation, but I repeat myself.

"Even in a land-based site assessment and zonation plan we consider zoning ordinances, building codes, local planning processes, and right livelihood, all issues that impact but are not necessarily located on the site. But they are part of what impacts how each and every one of us spends our time and energy each day." Your preceding statement is, of course, true but so what? Just because species characteristics is not included in zone mapping but in, another design methodology, analysis of elements does not mean that species characteristics aren't important just that it has more meaning in the context of analysis of elements. I think forcing an element of the system into a design method that does not quite fit shows a lack of imagination in creating new categories and methodologies to account for the unique characteristics of some elements, like money, religion, law, and social structures. They are a very important part of design and therefore deserve there own conceptual tools and means of understanding them within the overall context of the design.

The examples you cite for Zone 1-5 are all part of the overall description of the human situation but I don't see how categorizing them into various zones helps in understanding or design. Perhaps a bubble map would be more edifying, or a Dahlgrin method of description within the context of overall relationships.

I would love to see your map of the flows of time, money, habits, ideas, feelings, and interpersonal relationships drawn out perhaps then I could understand why it is such a profound way of informing the students of the place each of these elements play in their overall design and the understanding of permaculture's relevance to this process.

As for the whinging of others on this list about rigid versus open, your missing the point entirely! It is the very discomfort expressed in the face of disagreement, and striving for understanding that is the first indication of rigidity.

Scott Pittman





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page