Sydney, in the city, we have an analogous situation.
First of all, there's a need in permaculture courses for an understanding of urban
environments and landscapes and their modifications by the process of urbanisation,
such as the heat island effect etc, as well as for an understanding of the landscape
the city is situated in, it's climate and landforms.
Second, stuff about zones three and four, while still important to teach, are of less
value in the city because all that people have in their homes is zones one and,
sometimes, zone two. In Sydney, there are a few remnant market gardens which represent
zone three systems.
Sydney is at present undergoing a building boom in apartment construction, many more
people are opting to live in medium density units, so this means that many will have
no zone one, or that their zone one will be a balcony garden, if their balconies face
sunward (north).
What we say in our courses is that zone one may be some kilometres from zone zero, the
home, if it is an apartment or if, as is often the case, the person is renting and is
not permitted to build a garden in their rented premises. In these circumstances, zone
one becomes the nearest community garden. Now, I'm aware that some folk will say that
there is an energy cost in travelling to a community garden to obtain fresh food, but
that's rather small compared to the energy, road congestion and pollution cost of
railing or trucking the food in from the country.
I wonder how this modification to the permaculture zonal orthodoxy is impacted by our
supposedly having to teach permaculture as per the syllabus provided by the
Permaculture Institute Australia and, as explained in his recent mailing, which is the
intellectual property of Bill Mollison?
There is a valid argument, I believe, for developing an adapted permaculture design
course for urban areas. The fact in Australia, as elsewhere, is that more and more
people are living in cities and, if the cities canot be made sustainable, then it is
questionable that the rest of the country can be made sustainable.
An urban permaculture course content would retain all the ethics and principles as, I
believe, they are universally applicable. However, there would be less focus on rural
material and its replacement by material pertinent to the sustainable development of
cities and on how to adopt sustainable lifestyles in urban areas.
A number of PDC students have told me that the existing course is too rural in outlook
and content and, as they have no intention of moving to the country, more content on
urban living would make the course more relevant.
Skye, this gets to the final statement in your email, above, about 'growing and
evolving'. Yes, I agree - permaculture has to take a clue from nature and grow and
evolve in an analogous way. What we need, maybe, are bioregionally adapted
permaculture coursee (we already have some, I believe) - some for different parts of
the country, some adapted to life in the cities.
What I'm talking about is not wholesale change of the design curse curriculum, but
adaption to local circumstances and needs.
....Russ Grayson
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.