Permaculture principles

Towards the end of the class we played an extended version of charades. Each of us was given one of the principles to act out. I ended up with two. First and simplest to portray was ‘Use and value renewable resources and services (I mimed being a windmill) but the only reason anyone knew the second one was ‘Creatively use and respond to change’ was because someone overheard my partner and I discussing how on earth we were going to portray it.

It was definitely more engaging than just listening to the list. There were some really interesting projects used to illustrate them during discussion. However, I got more of an idea of how they interrelate from the video below.

I find the clock analogy quite helpful. It wasn’t clear to me before that there is a logical order in which to consider each of the principles. Whole systems thinking is quite a big jump in some respects (although not in others) and having a framework to inform ones thinking can be very helpful. It also reminds us that it is an iterative process; there’s little use in creatively using and responding to change without observing to see whether you are still catching and storing energy which enables you to obtain a yield etc etc. You may need to consider the different principles at different rates during the design process. It seems likely that you would need to think about each one frequently during the initial designing, regularly during the first year or so and then gradually less and less frequently as the project becomes established.

I also like the idea of the permaculture principles forming the spokes of a wheel with the ethics as the driving force at the hub. If you’ve ever tried to true a bike wheel, this analogy graphically brings home the need to balance the principles. Whilst you may need to focus one one for a time, this should not be to the exclusion of the others. If things get out of balance the effects could be various, even unethical. One one hand, if you got a bit carried away with edges, then your plot could become chaotic or, perhaps more seriously, if too much emphasis was placed on obtaining a yield you could take more than you needed and overextend the natural resources making it unsustainable (and certainly not permaculture).

I’m still a little confused by the plethora of permaculture principles. Mollison’s seem to be quoted more or less the same everywhere.

• Work with nature rather than against.
• The problem is the solution.
• Make the least change for the greatest possible effect.
• The yield of a system is theoretically unlimited (or only limited by the imagination and information of the designer).
• Everything gardens (or modifies its environment).

Holgrem’s 12 that we discussed in our lecture (and which are shown in the video above) are:
* Observe and interact. “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.”
* Catch and store energy. “Make hay while the sun shines.”
* Obtain a yield. “You can’t work on an empty stomach.”
* Apply self regulation & Accept feedback. “The sins of the fathers are visited on the children unto the seventh generation”
* Use and value renewable resources and services. “ Let nature take its course.”
* Produce no waste. “Waste not, want not. A stitch in time saves nine.”
* Design from patterns to details. “Can’t see the wood for the trees.”
* Integrate rather than segregate. “Many hands make light work.”
* Use small and slow solutions. “The bigger they are, the harder they fall.”
* Use and value diversity. “Don’t put all your eggs in one basket.”
* Use edges and value the marginal. “Don’t think you are on the right track just because it is a well-beaten path.”
* Creatively use and respond to change. “Vision is not seeing things as they are but as they will be.”

What isn’t clear is why there are two sets, or where the variations arise from, or where the various other sets of principles I’ve read about came from.

Advertisement