permaculture

[Toby Hemenway <toby@patternliteracy.com>]

Via David Holmgren's website I came across an article that is a relatively 
accurate critique of permaculture. It's principal flaw is that the author, 
Peter Harper, seems to view permaculture more as a set of techniques than a 
design system, but in part, that is his critique: that many permaculturists 
too broadly apply nebulous principles without testing whether the methods 
they use are giving good results.

I found his comparison of "smart permaculture" vs "cult permaculture" to be 
accurate in nearly every assessment, with a couple of  misses.

http://www.thelandmagazine.org.uk/sites/default/files/The%20Big%20Rock%20Candy%20Mountain.pdf

A couple of quotes:
"Most people attracted to Permaculture are young, dreamy idealists looking 
for some kind of system to structure their activities and impart meaning. It 
does not matter much whether things ‘work’ because you are not obliged to 
depend on them. It is their symbolic value that counts. I have encountered 
numerous ‘permaculture gardens’ with abysmal levels of productivity that have 
nevertheless persuaded their creators that they are virtually self-sufficient 
in food. A few measurements and numbers would quickly dispel this illusion, 
but Permies just don’t do numbers." 

"The permaculture movement has done us a service in drawing attention to the 
possibilities of perennial plants, tree crops and ‘three-dimensional’ 
horticulture. But it has entirely oversold the idea, claiming to have found 
the Holy Grail of a low-input/high-output system." 

This is why my hat is off to Rafter and others who are out there getting 
numbers. 

Toby
http://patternliteracy.com