http://pacific-edge.info/category/sustainability/the-permaulture-papers/

http://pacific-edge.info/the-permaculture-papers-6-reconfiguring-permaculture/.

http://pacific-edge.info/permaculture-papers-the-nineties/

http://pacific-edge.info/the-permaculture-papers-2/

http://pacific-edge.info/the-permaculture-papers-2-the-dawn/

Time to centraliseŠ or not?
Now and again comes the suggestion that Permaculture adopt a centralist structure but this never gains support because of the resistance to centralisation within the system. Such suggestions are usually made in the context of Permaculture playing a more prominent role in current issues, and this is an ongoing conversation in Permaculture. Why, people have asked time and again, does the design systems not play a more prominent role among social ans institutional decision makers?
Permaculture International and, to a lesser extent, the Permaculture Institute and Permaculture Research Institute can be seen as 'big' clusters or major nodes within this Permaculture matrix and there are individuals who play a prominent role in the online converstaion around Permaculture. Neither the Permaculture Institute or David Holmgren are participants in this online conversation, something that might be missed but something that might be seen as their attempting to stay aloof from taking sides, where that happens. Their absence means that they are talked about but that they are seldom heard.
Permaculture in Australia, then, consists of diverse local activities under the banner of Permaculture or within the context of other structures that are linked by the flow of information carried in local newsletters and on Permaculture websites and email discussion lists.
Why reconfigure?
When I did some rewriting of The Permaculture Papers in 2005, I thought that the design system was ready for a restructure and refocusing.
My reasons for this was that I saw Permaculture at that time in these terms:
      *       the decline in the number of participants and the number of community-based associations (this was based on personal observation and discussion; there are no figures)
  *       the lower public profile of the design system since 2000 (above qualification applies)
  *       the need to attract new people and a new leadership
     *       the attrition of long-serving Permaculture activists
    *       the perception that Permaculture is addressing the problems of the past, not the present.

I suggested that, after 26 years, it would be time for any entity - community association, corporation or whatever - to assess its past and make the changes that would lead it into the future. Evaluation, rather than being a time-waster, is a valuable learning tool that can stimulate a change of course to cope successfully with new challenges and new circumstances.

What role for APT?
At the time I suggested that the future of the design system may be determined by the Accredited Permaculture Training (APT), as those promoting and providing the training asserted.

As of 2010, this has not yet come to pass even though valuable work is being done with APT. It seems that it will take much longer than I anticipated for the workplace training to turn out a sufficient number of graduates and for the demand for the qualification to appear among employers.

Perceptions a barrier to Permaculture
The reality is that APT has yet to find a place in the pantheon of workplace qualifications. It has some work to do before it becomes legitamised in professional eyes, though there are increasing signs of progress, such as Randwick City Council stipulating possession of a PDC for applicants applying to become preferred suppliers for architectural and landscape design services and education, and its ready acceptance that Council should include a PIG -  Permaculture Interpretive Garden - in its retrofitting of one of its community centres.

This was designed and constructed by a Permaculture small business - Sydney Organic Gardens, a landscape company led by Permaculture Design Course graduate and landscape architect, Steve Batley. Its design followed consultation with local people and with the local Permaculture association, Permaculture Sydney East.

The 2005/6 iteration of The Permaculture Papers made suggestions for improving the content and practice of Permaculture. We turn to these belowŠ
Adopt a community development approach

The work of people like Robina McCurdy, the experience of permaculturists in community gardening in urban areas, the development of ecovillages and the use of Permaculture in overseas development assistance demonstrate that Permaculture may best be thought of as an innovative and practical approach to community development. This distances it from its popular reputation as a type of organic gardening.
Permaculture's early focus was on horticulture and landscape design, particularly the design of edible landscapes. But people require more than food; they need opportunities for social interaction, learning and conviviality. Consequently, there is a need for the development of interactive people skills in Permaculture education.

A community development approach would take Permaculture practice further towards its definition as a design system for sustainable human settlement. Such an approach would link:
      *       the personal - food, nutritional and health, personal development to improve both domestic and working life, access to affordable shelter
       *       social development - cooperation with neighbours and communities of interest; improving neighbourhood amenity and environmental conditions, the design of venues that encourage conviviality.

Permaculture as an approach to community development would promote elements such as participatory and democratic governance, development of livelihoods, encouragement of personal development and improvements to natural systems.
Improve permaculture education and maintain a two-tier structure

A number of Permaculture teachers have adapted their PDC course content to suit local conditions. The first major training initiative to depart the PDC format was made in the late-1990s by New Zealander, Robina McCurdy.

For her year-long Planet Organic course in Aotearoa New Zealand, Robina developed a curricula that included Permaculture design. The course was the first that attempted to supply graduates with employment-related skills and was a positive development that offered the first systematic, alternative learning structure in Permaculture.
Robina, with UK permaculturist Joanna Tebbitt, had earlier attempted to apply Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) - now often known as Participatory Learning and Action- to Permaculture design. PRA is a technique widely used by development assistance professionals. Had the process developed further, Permaculture could have acquired a useful, template-based assessment and planning tool at the time, but that had to await Robina's manual that she launched at APT9 in Sydney in 2009 - Grounding Vision - Empowering Culture (2008, McCurdy R;Institute of Earthcare Education; Aotearoa).

The development of accredited Permaculture education in 2004 took Permaculture into the fold of the national training system to offer credibility to the design system and an income stream to trainers. Its long term impact on the design system remains speculative and would require an assessment of its impact on existing Permaculture structures.

        *       the size of the potential market - this remains unknown; if there is a lot of interest in the course then a period of growth is likely, however permaculturists know that there are limits to growth; there could be a lot of initial interest in courses, however the level at which the market plateaus out will determine the financial viability of teaching and whether it is worth the investment of setting up as a teacher
      *       the workplace demand for people with accredited course skills - the availability of jobs for graduates, which limits the size of the market; it is natural to ask, when considering a course, 'where are the jobs?'; perhaps students will add the accredited course to another skill as Mollison originally envisioned in regard to the PDC.
The view from 2010 discloses APT and the PDC as coexisting in a linked relationship that stipulates acquiring a PDC as part of the APT qualification. The size of the potential market remains unknown and is reportedly small, and perhaps linked to this and to the costs of acquiring qualifications as an accredited educator, there are few new teachers emerging. The market is dominated by those successful teachers who established their presence through the teaching of the PDC.

A few Permaculture practitioners have commented that vocationally accredited training provides for the acquisition of skills but does not provide much by way of philosophical or background knowledge. This, they say, is the difference between 'training' and 'education'. If they are right, then what does it mean for Permaculture, a system that is based on a philosophy of life, and for APT?

Following are a few proposals to upgrade Permaculture education made in 2005. They are based on experience teaching the Permaculture Design Course and working on Permaculture projects with professionals, many holding PDC qualifications:
    *       maintain a two-tiered structure with the accredited training for those who intend to apply Permaculture design in their vocation and the existing PDC for those who require a more-general knowledge for application in their dwellings or at the community level
       *       introduce a substantial component of project management into Permaculture training; the reason why Permaculture projects have failed to persist is often due to the lack of project management skills such as planning, budgeting, monitoring, evaluating, estimating, the use of time and resources, negotiating, communicating, consulting and coordinating
   *       introduce substantial training in people skills such as communication, shared decision making, problem solving, resolving conflict, cooperation and participation; the lack of such skills in Permaculture (except for some notable examples) has contributed to the failure of projects and organisations; the justification for such skills is Permaculture's second ethic of caring for people.

Address contemporary issues, social and demographic change

        *       a number or research reports and articles in the media have discerned a move towards quality of life, to making more time for family at the expense of higher paying jobs; some city residents have sacrificed salary and career to live in what they see as the more humane environments of coastal towns  - a process, according to the Australia Institute's Clive Hamilton, of 'downshifting'
       *       the social isolation of the increasing number of single person and two person households is paralleled by a search for community; social analyst Hugh Mackay proposes that housing developments reinstate the 'village green' as community territory where people enjoy the company of others.
Learn from the development/ aid industry
Permaculture practitioners could learn much from the intenational development industry. This would save them reinventing what already exists and would improve their work.
Techniques and skills that Permaculture could learn include:
    *       participatory approaches to planning, implementation and evaluation that are in current use by development professionals; these include Participatory Rural Appraisal (aka: Participatory Appraisal/Participatory Learning and Action) and  Participatory Technology Development with farmers
   *       project planning and management including strategic planning, evaluation and improved accountability to partners and clients - a project management approach to its work
        *       Low External Input Sustainable Agriculture (LEISA), a collection of approaches and techniques that include organic farming and that minimise inputs, reduce expenditure, boost local enterprise and innovation and make farming, both subsistence and cash cropping, more regionally self-supporting
    *       a community development approach involving the participation of people with different but complementary skills
  *       humility.

Develop a renewed impetus with new leadership
Permaculture's leadership is diversified and is anchored in local actions. It is mainly Permaculture educators, because of the profile they develop, who achieve wider recognition as a quasi-leadership within the movement. David Holmgren and Bill Mollison are still regarded as leaders because of their roles in inventing the design system.

Leadership in Permaculture is always informal. It is a quality that comes and goes with the changing situation of people in life. Someone now a leader may relinquish that role when they lose public profile through going in other life directions but while still maintaining a role in the movement - such as when they take up parenting, caring for aged parents, move to a rural ecovillage or take on a demanding job.

Leadership is a difficult concept to discuss in Permaculture because permaculturists have always been a somewhat anarchic bunch who do not like being told what to do. Like the skepticism towards political leaders evident in Australian society, this is a healthy trait that should be encouraged as a brake on overambitious leaders.
Likewise, no single organisation has achieved dominance as representative leader. The Permaculture Research Institute did enjoy this status well into the 1990s partly due to its good works and not insignificantly to its capacity for self-publicity. However, there later developed some reticence to its claim to this role. Irrespective of whose doing it might have been, Geoff Lawton was promoted to a sort of spokesman for Permaculture (though this role has decline somewhat in recent years) and to a quasi-hero status to judge from some members of Permaculture associations.

Intergenerational change - time to consider it seriously

When I started writing the first iteration of The Permaculture Papers around 2003/4, I was pessimistic about a new generation emerging to assume leadership and other roles in Permaculture. After the dismal years of 2000 to 2002, during which we lost the Permaculture International Journal and Green Connections and for a while it seemed, our way, Permaculture seemed to founder, to lose direction. All wasn't lost of course, there were creative things going on, especially at the local level, however as a national entity the movement seemed to have stalled.

I wrote a piece about the need for intergenerational change in Permaculture in The Planet (which I edited at the time), the quarterly newsletter of Permaculture International. This provoked a critical response from one or two that demonstrated to me that throwing devil's advocate questions into Permaculture conversations was somewhat dangerous. The capacity for introspection in Permaculture, I realised, was in short supply and the type of critical questioning about organisations (including the one I worked for) that I was used to from my years in the intenational development NGO (non-govenment organisation) industry was not all that welcome in Permaculture.

At the time, the question of intergenerational change was something I felt timely for Permaculture as those of us who had brought the movement from its mid-1980s beginnings (some from before that) to a state akin to the social mainstream were now middle aged. Who would replace us?

Then - hope. For me that came at the 2004 Cultivating Community conference in Bendigo, Victoria - a meeting of people involved in the Australian City Farms & Community Gardens Network. Among those attending were a number of younger people involved both in community gardening and in Permaculture. These, I thought, might form the next generation of leaders and, looking back now from 2010, I believe that I was right. Encouraging was that a number at the meeting agreed with the idea that Permaculture needed to address contemporary concerns rather than those it had traditionally dealt with.

Organisations such as the Seed Savers Network have attempted to address intergenerational change, but the question of who would lead Permaculture into the new century, in the period following the dismal years, remained open.
Some said the 'leadership' could not 'let go' their position and stand aside, that they were holding on perhaps because of their special interests and livelihoods within Permaculture. In one aspect this was true but I think the criticism failed to acknowledge that for those trying to make (an always marginal) living from Permaculture, letting go could not be letting go of the livelihoods that they had struggled to build up over the years.

As of 2010 we have something of a revitalised Permaculture thanks in large part to new people coming in with new ideas and new approaches. This complies, I believe, with Charles Handy's Sigmoid Curve model of organisational evolution which stipulates that if an entity is to set off on a curve of renewal it frequently requires a new leadership with a fresh outlook with new ideas. It must be conversant with contemporary realities and have the ability to address them.

Recreate an interactive, lively networking media
In 2006, I wrote that Permaculture was in need of two types of publication:
     *       a newsletter of magazine to report news, distribute information, publish instructional articles, report issues and opportunities and serve a networking function
        *       a scholarly journal for the lengthier analysis and discussion of ideas and issues; this would create an intellectual space within Permaculture and encourage self-reflection and learning.

The Permaculture-Oceania email discussion list, launched in 2001 after the year 2000 Permaculture gathering at Djanbung Gardens authorised it, was something I started in cooperation with the UNSW Ecoliving Centre. When changes at the university led to the closure of the Centre, PIL took over the dicussion list and contnues to operate it for the benefit of the Permaculure community.

Permaculture-Oceania has proven successful in fostering communication among permaculturists in Australia and a few overseas participants. Traffic is sufficient to maintain a moderate flow of communications, to ask and answer questions, to raise issues, notify events and to follow a discussion string for its duration. The list represents a community of interest, geographically diverse it may be, and was about the only thing tying Permaculture together for those critical years of transformation that opened the century.

Writing again in 2003/4, I said that The Planet, the member's journal of Permaculture International, would never become a scholarly or learned journal although I had hopes for that when I started it following the year 2000 gathering.  I had hoped that it would take a form analogous to an industry journal in which pithy issues could be discussed. Later, after I ceased to edit it, The Planet reverted to a less-frequent organisational newsletter, a victim of the time constraints of the people who took over its publication.
A number of Permaculturists have expressed the desire for a scholarly journal, however the fate of the Permaculture International Journal does not bode well for such a venture. The earlier Permaculture Edge was a publication of this type, however it's publication became erratic and it ceased publication in the 1990s, the last edition appearing at the 1995 International Permaculture Convergence in Perth.

The cessatation of publication left Permaculture with no space for cultivating the intellectual garden, no scholarly journal or website where such material can be published, discussed and argued. An intellectual venue would be of benefit if the movement is to become self-reflective and learn from its experience.
The Worldwide Web fulfils a global networking mission with its multiplicity of Permaculture websites, yet there is no single website that is a first-port-of-call for Permaculture. Despite its name, Permaculture International is not really international because it has no branches in other countries and does not operate on a global basis. Some years ago, a US-based Permaculturists suggested that Permaculture International drop the 'International' as it was not representative of Permaculture anywhere beyond its Australian membership.

In late-2005, correspondents on Permaculture-Oceania were discussing a proposal from the Permaculture convergence of earlier that year that a 'Permaculture Central' website be set up. Though details have yet to be worked out (I wrote in that year) this proposed website would serve as a first-port-of-call for the design system in Australia. There was also the suggestion that the proposed site set up a email discussion list to take over from Permaculture-Oceania, however the rationale of destroying or duplicating something that works well was unclear.

Nothing came of the idea for a Permaculture Central website. It's unfortunate to say that this is somewhat true to the tradition of Permaculture convergences which in many cases have not delivered the goods that those attending them were so enthusiastic about producing at the time. In mid-2010, a telemeeting of PIL resolved to revive its ailing websiteŠ rather, to replace it with one that functions well. That work was started immediately and is progressing as I write.
Whatever networking media are developed in future, they will be online.

It is here that Permaculture sometimes falls short. A lack of interpersonal skills and of effective communication has been a reason behind the short life of some Permaculture projects and, in one or two cases, of community gardens.
Lip service has been paid to both interpersonal and group skills by Permaculture teachers and some teachers, such as Robin Clayfield (Earthcare Education, Queensland), offer courses in relevant techniques.

The Permaculture Design Course has been too short to include training in such skills. When Fiona Campbell and I made the decision to incorporate in our design course two days of training in group decision making and group processes led by Maria McGuire from Unfolding Futures, we had to extend the course to in excess of 105 hours. It was worth it because students went on to use the techniques in their working lives. We felt the extra time to be necessary, having seen the cost of poor communciation and poor group processes.

The defensiveness in the face of questioning that is sometimes found among permaculturists might be a sign that those being defensive hold their own doubts and uncertainty. It is always a good policy to listen to criticism and to try to discern where it is coming from, to "understand before making yourself understood", to quote Steven Covey (1990; The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People; Simon and Schuster, New York). It is useful to try to understand the motivation of the questioner (friendly critic? hostile critic? devil's advocate?) and address their comments in a courteous and logical manner without putting them down or attempting to discredit them.

Learn and stay relevant
Reflection has never had much cachet in Permaculture. Bill Mollison emphasised doing over talking though what he was warning against was becoming bogged down in excessive analysis - the 'paralysis by analysis' blockage. He proposed that things be well considered before acting.

Organisations that do not reflect on their actions fail to learn from their successes and mistakes. This was recognised by NGO analyst and author Alan Fowler (1997; Striking a Balance, Earthscan, UK) who said some NGOs (he was referring to international development NGOs though what he said would apply to other types such as Permaculture organisations) were so focused on 'doing', on action, that they became unbalanced.