# Permaculture

Kevin Morel, François Léger, Rafter Ferguson

► To cite this version:

Kevin Morel, François Léger, Rafter Ferguson. Permaculture. Reference Module in Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences, Elsevier, 2024, 10.1016/B978-0-443-21964-1.00025-2. hal-05094881

HAL Id: hal-05094881

https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-05094881v1

Submitted on 3 Jun 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Permaculture

Corresponding Author:

Kevin Morel

UMR SADAPT, INRAE, AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, France

kevin.morel@inrae.fr

Co-Authors:

François Léger

UMR ESE, AgroParisTech, CNRS, Université Paris-Saclay, France

francois.leger@agroparistech.fr

Rafter Sass Ferguson

Regenerative Design Group, Greenfield, Massachusetts

rafter@regenerativedesigngroup.com

**To cite:** Morel, K., Léger, F., Sass Ferguson, R. 2024. Permaculture. *Reference Module in Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences*. Elsevier. (To be published in Encyclopedia of Ecology, 3rd edition in 2026).
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-21964-1.00025-2

## Abstract

Permaculture is an international grassroots network founded in Australia in the late 1970s that focuses on the sustainable design of human settlement. This decentralized and little institutionalized movement disseminates a distinct worldview, design system, and set of associated practices. Permaculture's central concept is that humanity can reduce or replace energy and pollution-intensive industrial technologies, especially in agriculture, through intensive use of biological resources and thoughtful, holistic, design, patterned after natural ecosystems. To create autonomous, resilient, and equitable living spaces permaculture proposes pragmatic methodological principles informed by scientific ecology, traditional indigenous knowledge, observation, and experimentation. In the design of farming systems, permaculturists promote complex multi-strata polycultures involving perennial plants, crop-animal integration, high levels of habitat diversity, whole-landscape water management, and sustainable on-site energy production. Beyond scientifically-informed ecological design, permaculture encourages practitioners to develop emotional and subjective links with the earth, and develop their imagination and creativity as valuable parts of the design process. The originality and specificity of permaculture are discussed, along with critics, controversies and research perspectives.

## Keywords
Agroecology; Bottom-up approach; Energy; Environmentalism; Farm design; Holistic design; Indigenous knowledge; Organic farming; Self-sufficiency; Social movement; Sustainable agriculture; System thinking; Transition

## Glossary

**Agroecosystem:** the basic unit of study in agroecology that is defined as a spatially and functionally coherent unit of agricultural activity, which includes biophysical (soil, climate, plants, animals) and social components (human practices, values, objectives, organizations) and their interaction.

**Agroforestry:** land use management system in which trees or shrubs are grown around or among crops or pastureland.

**Emergy:** is a methodology which aggregates all different forms of energy and resources (e.g. sunlight, water, fossil fuels, minerals, etc.) used in the work processes that generate a product or service.).

**Food forest:** polyculture mimicking forest ecology with multiple plant layers (annual plants, shrubs, trees, and liana) which produce a diversity of edible produce.

**Holistic:** refers to a global thinking or design approach which aims to integrate all dimensions of a situation (which can involve subjective and objective aspects) rather than analyzing only one aspect.
**Intercropping:** growing different plant species together on the same plot at the same time.

**Modern/pre-modern/post-modern:** “Modern” refers to a philosophical movement developed in Europe since the 17th century relying on the idea that mastering the material world through rational knowledge will guarantee human progress and emancipation from nature, which is perceived as distinct from humans. “Pre-modern” refers to traditional worldviews which were born before modernism and where human beings are often seen as part of the natural world. “Post-modern” refers to a thinking tendency which criticizes the modern beliefs around progress and in which all assumptions are open to question. According to post-modern thinkers, elements from different systems and traditions can be combined without regard for any fixed aesthetic or tradition.

**Sylvopastoralism:** land use management system in which animals graze in habitats where trees are present. Animals can feed partially on these trees (fruit fallen on the ground) and benefit from the microclimate they create (shadow, temperature, protection against wind).

## Key points

* The scope of permaculture has expanded from its original focus on small-scale perennial agriculture to a more comprehensive vision for a socio-ecological, communitarian society.
* While widespread internationally, a paucity of data makes it difficult to estimate the true extent and current (or potential) impact of permaculture.

* Permaculture has received criticism for lack of scientific rigor and for appropriation of indigenous knowledge without proper attribution.

* Despite criticisms, permaculture continues to provide conceptual tools, perspective and inspiration for grassroots efforts toward agroecological and sustainable transitions, across the developed and developing worlds.

## Introduction

Permaculture is an alternative approach to the design of sustainable and resilient socio-ecological systems born in the late 70s which has received a growing but still limited interest by academic research despite a broadly distributed movement. The objective of this chapter is to (i) provide a brief overview of the different dimensions of permaculture (ii) describe its conceptual foundation and dissemination in the world, (iii) characterize its originality and specificity, (iv) detail and reflect on related academic controversies and potential research perspectives.

# 1 Brief overview of permaculture

Permaculture is an international grassroots network focused on the sustainable design of human settlement, both in rural and urban areas although it was initially developed in a rural setting. Permaculture's central concept is that humanity can reduce or replace energy and pollution-intensive industrial technologies, especially in agriculture, through intensive use of biological resources and thoughtful, holistic, design, patterned after natural ecosystems (eco-mimicry). Despite a relatively high public profile and broad international distribution, until recently permaculture has received little scholarly attention.

The definition of permaculture varies among sources and expands over time (Spangler et al., 2021). In the founding text, permaculture's originators define it as "an integrated, evolving system of perennial or self-perpetuating plant and animal species useful to man" (Mollison and Holmgren, 1978). By 2002 Holmgren defined permaculture more broadly, encompassing broader issues of human settlement while maintaining an agricultural focus: "Consciously designed landscapes which mimic the patterns and relationships found in nature, while yielding an abundance of food, fiber and energy for provision of local needs" (Holmgren, 2002). Recent scholarship has identified four levels or components within permaculture presented in Figure 1 (each of which may be referred to by the term): the international movement, the worldview carried by and disseminated by the movement, the design system, and the set of associated practices (Ferguson and Lovell, 2014). We will introduce each in turn.
## 1.1 Worldview

Key elements of the permaculture worldview include a theory about human-environment relations, a populist orientation to practice, and a model of social change. The permaculture literature highlights the positive role of humans in the landscape, as ecosystem managers. This perspective is expressed through a literature-wide insistence on the need for holistic planning and design and an optimistic assessment of what these styles of management can achieve. This perspective on human-environment relations cuts against the grain of the dualistic worldviews of both growth-oriented development and preservation-oriented conservation, each of which describe a fundamental conflict between the needs of society and those of nature. At the core of the permaculture worldview is the idea that—with the application of ecologically informed holistic planning and design—humans can meet their needs while increasing ecosystem health.

## 1.2 Design

The permaculture design system utilizes ecological and systems-thinking principles, and spatial reasoning strategies, which are used to analyze site conditions, select practices, and integrate them with site conditions and land use goals. The most distinctive aspects of the permaculture orientation toward agroecosystem design are its emphases on (1) site specificity, including attention to microclimate; (2) interaction between components at multiple scales, from field-scale polycultures to agroecosystem-scale land use diversity; and (3) spatial configuration as a key driver of multiple functions.

## 1.3 Practice

Land use in permaculture shares much with agroecology, agroforestry, and traditional and indigenous land use. Since the techniques associated with permaculture rarely originate from within the movement itself, the practical stratum is better regarded as a best practices framework than a bundle of techniques. Best practices in permaculture are evaluated by two broad criteria of ecosystem mimicry and system optimization. Ecosystem mimicry regards the structure and function of unmanaged ecosystems as models and attempts to create highly productive systems with analogous structure and function using species that produce yields for human use. System optimization does not refer to a model ecosystem, but seeks to identify strategic points of leverage where minimal intervention may enhance performance of desired functions beyond that of naturally occurring systems. Together, these criteria outline an implicit conceptual framework for the evaluation of practices in the permaculture movement.

## 1.4 Movement

The permaculture movement communicates the worldview and disseminates elements of practice and design through networks of practitioners and small institutes. The growth and dissemination of permaculture is built on two basic patterns: a widely dispersed network of "itinerant teachers" and local/regional organizing based around "bioregional" cultures and the development of alternative
economic and social institutions. The permaculture movement today consists of a loosely affiliated network of individuals and projects, connected through permaculture courses and workshops, online forums, and local projects, as well as through and regional, national, and international convergences. Groups generally display a low level of institutionalization, and projects encompass a wide variety of functions, commonly including community gardens, campus greening initiatives, educational efforts, and less commonly, demonstration and/or research sites, periodicals, and farming-focused education and support efforts.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>Figure 1: Stratified definition of permaculture (Ferguson and Lovell, 2014).</figcaption></figure>

## 2 Conceptual foundation and dissemination

### 2.1 The genesis of permaculture
"To many of us who experienced the ferment of the late 1960s, there seemed to be no positive direction forward, although almost everybody could define those aspects of the global society that they rejected. These included military adventurism, the bomb, ruthless land exploitation, the arrogance of polluters and a general insensitivity to human needs. An unethical world could waste more on killing people than on earthcare or on helping people."

This quotation is from Bill Mollison, creator of permaculture and co-author with David Holmgren of the founding book "Permaculture one" published in 1978. Permaculture is anchored in the multifaceted critical movements that emerged in the late 1960s with the North American counterculture and the birth of human ecology. These movements relied on emerging critiques of the resource-intensive materialism of consumer society, of sexism and racism at home, and militarism, imperialism, and unequal development leaving third world countries behind. In this context, social movements emerged with radical propositions for new ways of organizing society that could act as an alternative to a socio-economic system rooted in overexploitation of natural resources and the exponential growth of energy consumption, consumerist individualism, and the political and moral norms that of the economic elites. While some of these movements engaged in fairly "classical" political struggle, permaculture was among those that spurned conventional movement politics to work directly on concrete interventions, practical solutions for building an "other world," one whose keyword would be self-sufficiency.

The "back to the land" projects that multiplied in the 1970s, and spread from Australia to Europe via California, are part of this latter logic and set the stage for the emergence of permaculture. Faced with the hegemony of the dominant socio-economic model, their bearers sought to "withdraw from the world" by settling in isolated and / or abandoned by industrial development areas, in hopes of using the practice of traditional agriculture to rebuild a pre-modern link with nature. They acknowledged that nature could not entirely be grasped by rationality and that a (re)-developing a subjective and respectful relationship to nature was critical. The romantic or naturalist inspiration (e.g. Thoreau's Walden) of this movement was obvious, as was its apocalyptic dimension: this world, which in its irrepressible greed seemed to want to destroy its natural environment irremediably, would end before long. Those who have built and preserved havens based on the renunciation of a utilitarian and dominating vision of nature, would be the guarantors of the salvation of humanity.

Permaculture's founders and early adopters articulated a set values and principles in parallel with identifiable currents of ecological thought, based on the belief that industrial societies based on fossil fuel threaten the survival of human beings, on the rejection of anthropocentrism, and on a holistic worldview that opposes utilitarian reductionism. These positions were close to James Lovelock's Gaia Hypothesis or Deep Ecology (Naes, 1973). The relationship with deep ecology is particularly evident in Bill Mollison's later remarks (AtKisson, 1991): "Permaculture exhorts a total co-operation with every other and every other thing, animate and inanimate". For the founders of permaculture, this cooperation between humans and nonhumans is the basis of a global transformation of societies respecting three fundamental ethical principles: caring for the Earth; caring for people; and
establishing limits on consumption and redistributing surplus (Mollison and Holmgren, 1978). They believe that this transformation must start from the initiatives of individuals anxious to act by and for themselves, re-building communities as they reconstruct human-environment relationships – gradually and from the bottom up.

This logic of horizontal and bottom-up construction of a new society suggests affinities between permaculture and the non-violent and ecological component of the anarchist movement of the end of the 19th century, of which Elisée Reclus and Peter Kroptokin, are the most prominent figures, and which would be renewed in the USA in the latter decades of the 20th century with activist thinkers like as Murray Bookchin.

Bill Mollison and David Holmgren acknowledge the influence of these major figures. However, they reject any form of power struggle or coercion, which from their point of view are inseparable from political action, even anarchist action, and consider that the multiplication of individual initiatives cooperating with each other can succeed in changing the world (Quinlan, 2016). So, while permaculture claims to be subversive, this subversion is not achieved through political activism, but rather through the gradual dissemination of a belief translated into concrete situated experiences: building a sustainable world requires the reincorporation of humanity into natural ecosystems.

In this diffusionist perspective, training in the ethical principles and conceptual tools that can guide individual action becomes the essential mode of "political action" for the permaculture movement. Conceived as an "aid to ethical decision-making" (Holmgren, 2002), it has been formalized in the "permaculture design course (PDC)". This 72-hour course is generally organized over a 12-day period, in residence at a site demonstrating the principles of permaculture. It aims to be a general introduction to another way of being in the world, rather than the acquisition of established technical knowledge, skills and know-how, imparted on by seasoned experts.

## 2.2 Permaculture, a pragmatic ecology for self-sufficiency

For Bill Mollison and David Holmgren, the fundamental flaw in industrial societies lies in its unquenchable thirst for energy that precludes any long-term sustainability. To break out of this dependency, they postulate that permaculture design must draw inspiration from the structure, functioning and dynamics of natural ecosystems, which they interpret as a process of energy accumulation in which cycles of matter operate increasingly in a "closed loop". This perspective is directly inspired by the work of scientific ecology, in particular that of Eugene Odum, and even more
so by the approach to ecological thermodynamics and environmental energy accounting proposed by
Howard T. Odum (1971, 1995).

The design of self-sufficient human settlements must trigger a process of aggradation that mimicks
the dynamics of ecosystems. This theoretical perspective has concrete implications for the design
process—including but not limited to the following imperatives: Pay close attention to components
that play a key role in the accumulation of energy and matter, soil and trees in particular. Maximize
biodiversity at all levels, and design a landscape that multiplies the interrelationships and synergies
between components. Ensure functional redundancy within the landscaped ecosystem, guaranteeing
its resilience (for example, the supply of high-energy food will be ensured by cereal crops, but also
root vegetables or trees producing starch-rich fruit. Consider the plurality of functions fulfilled by
each element (for example, a legume provides protein and improves soil fertility; a pond stores water
and helps regulate the microclimate).

Inspired by ecosystems, the permaculturist must achieve a viable dynamic organization, guaranteeing
long-term coverage of the needs of non-humans as well as humans. This perspective has been
translated into twelve design principles, set out as early as 1978 in "Permaculture One" (Mollison and
Holmgren,), and developed further by David Holmgren in 2002 in his book "Permaculture: Principles
and Pathways beyond Sustainability". These principles, which should guide a thoughtful design
process that takes into account the singular situation to which it applies, are as follows: (1) observe
and interact, (2) capture and store energy, (3) achieve yield, (4) apply self-regulation and accept
feedback, (5) use and value renewable resources and services, (6) produce no waste, (7) design from
model to detail, (8) integrate rather than separate, (9) use small, slow solutions, (10) use and value
diversity, (11) use edges and value margins, (12) use and respond creatively to change. Each principle
is described and discussed individually in permaculture literature, with concrete illustrations. For
example, principle (6) stresses that waste production should be as low as possible and recycling should
be systematized, as in nature where the concept of waste does not exist since elements are used and
recycled locally. Permaculture books often present simple solutions for applying this principle, such
as raising poultry to transform kitchen waste into eggs, meat and manure.

As early as Permaculture 2, published in 1979, Bill Mollison set out to go beyond the instrumental
vision of design, believing that it should result from a holistic and sensitive apprehension of the place
we propose to inhabit, for which scientific knowledge is only one support among other aesthetic,
spiritual or moral considerations. This holistic reading of space means that permaculture design must
combine an objective perspective, based on empirical and/or scientific knowledge, with a subjective
perspective, reflecting each individual's ability to "feel" the environment they intend to inhabit. To
achieve this difficult synthesis, Bill Mollison drew inspiration from the Australian Aborigines, with
whom he worked for many years during his university career in Tasmania (Mollison, 1988). Aboriginal
thought is organized around the central concept of the Dreamtime, the original cosmological
dimension in which the various spirits and ancestors physically shaped the world, physically imbuing
it with the patterns of organization that underlie the "right order" of things. To understand these
patterns and the relationships between them, observation of nature is central. It calls not only on the
intellect, but also on intuition and the humble, silent perception of the world, called dadirri by the
aborigines. As in aboriginal thought, permaculture calls for both objective and sensitive observation of landscapes, enabling us to identify the patterns and interfaces that structure them and on which the design should be based. The purpose of this design process is not merely utilitarian. It is the conjunction of utilitarian, spiritual, ethical and moral dimensions that will enable us to invent a "living place", inhabited rather than occupied, shared with other living species. In this sense, permaculture design can be described as "mesological design", redefining not only a space that meets needs, but also the designer himself in his relationship to the environment to which he belongs (Chakroune and Linder, 2018).

## 2.3 Presence of permaculture in the world

From the foundational work articulated by Mollison and Holmgren in the late 1970s, permaculture concepts, worldview and practices have been spread through a quickly growing and largely decentralized, informal movement (Ferguson and Lovell, 2015). Given its Australian origin, permaculture first was disseminated in the 1980s in industrialized English speaking countries (mainly Australia, United States and Britain) through the development of generally small-scale projects designed to increase individual, family or community self-sufficiency as a response to the growing environmentalist concerns, especially about peak oil. Most of these initiatives aimed to make people "responsible and productive citizens" instead of being consumers dependent on fossil fuel driven economy and production. Since the 1990s, permaculture was brought to southern countries mainly by northern NGOs and activists as a framework for enhancing the sustainable development and resilience of marginalized communities facing the issues of limited resources, climatic uncertainty, and social inequality.

Permaculture projects are now present on all continents and around 2765 permaculture projects were referenced in 2024 by an international permaculture website (permacultureglobal.org). However, given the decentralized nature and multiple shapes of permaculture networks and initiatives, it is very hazardous to provide robust data at the global level about permaculture projects and number of practitioners. In this regard, the abovementioned figure is likely to be a severe underestimate as even well-known permaculture projects are not referenced on this website. The Permaculture Design Certificate (PDC) is considered by many permaculturists as a mandatory "entrance point" to permaculture. The PDC can be obtained after a collective and participatory training session intended to provide participants with a global view of the permaculture framework and the design tools which would help them to further carry out their own experimentations. The collective dimension of PDC training aims to create strong links between students which can lead to future collaborations, exchanges of know-how, feedbacks on putting permaculture into practice and contributes to the vitality of interactions between practitioners. Given the informal nature of the global permaculture movement, it is impossible to estimate the number of practitioners implementing permaculture
approaches or inspired by permaculture with no certification. This number is likely to be high especially in southern countries where development and humanitarian oriented permaculture training and workshops are organized in rural communities outside the framework of the PDC.

Regionally, permaculture initiatives and projects are sometimes promoted and connected through structured networks and local organizations. In line with its worldview favoring grassroots and small-scale initiatives, permaculture is globally far less institutionalized and organized than other social and environmental movements. Regional and international gatherings, like the International Permaculture Convergence happening every second year in a different country, help creating links between practitioners and maintaining the feeling of collective belonging to the permaculture community.

Itinerant teachers, including Mollison and Holmgren, have played a major role in the rapid dissemination of permaculture, providing PDCs and other training all around the world and writing books. Based on their notable differences in personality and approach (they stopped working together shortly after the publication of *Permaculture One*), they have promulgated their visions of permaculture with different emphases and in different directions, in turn encouraging subsequent generations of permaculturists to develop new and distinct areas of focus. For example, Geoff Lawton (https://www.discoverpermaculture.com/) is well known for having developed design practices related to water conservation and farming in hyper-arid areas, based on his experience of “Greening the desert” in Jordan. Rosemary Morrow (2010) has achieved international recognition for developing and teaching permaculture approaches adapted to poor and post-war countries in Asia, Africa and Eastern Europe. She strongly focuses on non-violence methods and the design of highly nutritional gardens easy to maintain with local resources while providing a high diversity of nutrients and vitamins to prevent diseases linked to extreme poverty conditions. Building on the successful dynamic first developed in the British town Totnes, Rob Hopkins (2008) has promoted collective approaches to design and manage solidary human settlements adapted to a post-petrol society. Such processes are supported by a set of facilitating tools and principles to release the “genius of the community” and find creative alternatives to petrol which often result in rethinking globally various dimensions of human communities such as education, health, food, habitat, transportation, economic exchanges (local money) etc. (Aiken, 2017). Hopkins’ approach inspired from permaculture has given birth in 2006 to the rapidly growing Transition Network. In 2014, the official website of this network (https://transitionnetwork.org) referenced more than 1000 initiatives (the website indicates that this number is underestimated) committed to the post-petrol transition and willing to exchange on their experiences at different scales: neighborhoods, villages, towns, cities and even regions. These local initiatives are sometimes regrouped in Transition Hubs fostering exchanges and learning at the regional or national level (37 were referenced in 2024).
# 3 Specificity and originality of permaculture

## 3.1 Agricultural implementation of permaculture

In the field of agriculture, the practical implementation of permaculture shares many similarities with other alternative farming approaches such as organic farming, biodynamic farming, agroforestry or agroecology. All these movements have historically promoted the development of resource-efficient and pesticide-free agroecosystems favoring local nutrient cycling (e.g. using compost, green or animal manure) and favoring biological regulation by maintaining a high level of biodiversity to keep plants and animals healthy. Permaculture echoes agroecology and agroforestry for the central place given to spatial association of species (combination of trees, animals, crops; intercropping; diversified landscapes). As organic and biodynamic farming, permaculture attaches a great attention to soil fertility. Permaculture has much in common with traditional organic farming, agroecology, and biodynamic farming, in the sense that all these approaches promote a harmonious and respectful integration of human beings in nature. However, historically biodynamic farming stems from spiritual preoccupations (theosophy), organic farming and agroecology are more connected to peasant's movements collectively and politically fighting for their sovereignty, whereas permaculture was born to support individual and community-scale self-sufficiency initiatives.

Compared to other alternative farming approaches, one major specificity of permaculture is the central emphasis on the conscious global design of agroecosystems rather than focusing on specific techniques. In the design process, the different functions expected from the agroecosystem (e.g. "providing food for chickens", "keeping water available in summer", "mitigating the dominant winds", "fertilizing the garden") are listed. Different elements are integrated in the design (e.g. "a vegetables garden", "a pond", "a hedge", "poultry") ensuring that every function is fulfilled by various elements and every element fulfills various functions, thereby mimicking the functional redundancy of natural ecosystems and fostering system resilience. The different elements are combined and spatially organized using a set of design tools (e.g. checklist of principles, mapping of site specificities, chart of interactions) in order to maximize the positive interactions between elements, benefit from the specific opportunities, and to mitigate the constraints of the site. Influenced by the work of H.T Odum, plant and animal species are regarded as distinctive but interchangeable system components which should be selected from a global pool based on functional criteria without regard to their place of origin. The conscious design of permaculture landscapes aims to mimic natural ecosystems and maximize positive interactions within the agroecosystem (e.g. biological regulations, creation of favorable microclimates). This global approach echoes "ecological engineering" by its systemic dimension and the importance given to design to create sustainable ecosystems (Mitsch and Jørgensen, 2003). However, ecological engineering, mainly implemented for the restoration of natural areas, is based on "self-design" (or self-organization) which tends to let ecosystems organize themselves as
naturally as possible. Although permaculture design is flexible, the evolution of the system should be planned to maximize the chances that human goals for the productive ecosystem (food, fiber) will be met. Permaculture considers design as a continuous process, valuing observation of the behavior and evolution of the agroecosystem as feedback, to which practitioners are called to respond creatively over time. In this regard, permaculture design strongly echoes the approach of “adaptive management”.

Permaculturists tend to implement complex multi-strata polycultures, intercropping, agroforestry (e.g. food forests), crop-animal integration (e.g. silvopastoralism), and to promote a high diversity of habitats, integrating landscape features such as ponds and hedges. Soil tillage is often limited and soil is constantly covered by plants or organic mulch to favor the development of soil organisms that will work for humans and structure the soil (e.g. earthworms), store carbon and limit erosion. Trees and perennial plants often play a key role as they are considered energy accumulators (storing carbon and making nutrients available for other species).

Perennial plants and trees are prioritized with the aim of reducing human labor (i.e. annual planting), together with an ergonomic zoning of the site where production areas are spatially organized according to the degree of human intervention they require. Permaculture landscape planning organizes space and elements into five areas with different levels of intensification: from “zone 1” where human intervention is the highest and most frequent (e.g. vegetable garden) to “zone 5” which is a natural area left deliberately unmanaged (Mollison, 1988). Zone 5 is seen both as a reservoir of biodiversity and a place where practitioners can observe “how local nature works”, which can provide inspiration and design ideas for the rest of the site. In this way permaculture design integrates the spatial logics of “land sparing” (separating intensive production zones and natural areas) and “land sharing” (managing areas with reduced intensification to preserve biodiversity in productive areas) (Fischer et al., 2014). However, permaculture goes beyond this distinction as even the most productive areas are designed to maximize biodiversity as a way to maintain resilient and productive ecosystems, echoing the logic of “ecological intensification” (Bommarco et al., 2013).

As the edges between zones are regarded as being spaces of maximal diversity and interaction between species, permaculturists often maximize edge by designing cultivated areas with curved and undulated shapes rather than straight lines. The use of earthworks, dams and swales for water harvesting and control is central, as is the development of renewable sources of energy on the production site (e.g. solar panels, passive solar buildings, wind turbines, biomass and hydroelectric devices).

## 3.2 Rethinking modernity and empowering people beyond optimizing ecosystems

In providing conceptual tools and design methods to observe and mimic patterns from complex natural ecosystems with the goal of designing resource efficient human settlement, permaculture could be seen as a modern, biologically-inspired approach. In this way permaculture could be read as
replicating the rationalist, instrumental relationship with nature that characterizes modernity and the
industrialized world. In industrialized countries, modernity has become politically dominant in the 19th
century and has spread all over the world with western culture and globalization. Permaculture departs
from this tradition in several ways. Inspired by what Holmgren calls “traditional cultures of place” –
pre-modern cultures where human beings have developed through time ecological knowledge and
sensibility adapted to their specific environment – permaculture encourages practitioners to develop
emotional and subjective links with the earth that will foster a feeling of responsibility toward the
places where they live (2002).

Permaculturists also acknowledge that diversified ecosystems are complex, will unlikely ever be fully
understood rationally, and that global environmental crises call for rapid human action despite limited
ecological knowledge available. This is why permaculture encourages practitioners to develop skills
and senses such as imagination and creativity in addition to rational, instrumental skills of observation,
analysis, and system optimization. In this sense, permaculture has sometimes been described as a post-
modern approach where elements from different systems and traditions are hybridized without regard
for any fixed aesthetic or tradition, and where the importance of rational knowledge is consciously
balanced and integrated with more subjective and relational human capacities.

Post-modern or not, it is clear that permaculture questions the modern and industrial world as we
know it. It invites practitioners to become creative “new indigenes” while developing knowledge,
interaction capacity with their local environment and community, and useful skills to become more
self-sufficient in order to move from their status of dependent and demanding consumers to
interdependent and responsible producers (Holmgren, 2002). This empowerment of individuals and
communities is aimed both as a way to decrease the dominance of industrial systems today, and to
prepare and for survival in a future post-industrial era with no access to fossil resources.

# 4 Criticism, controversies and research perspectives

## 4.1 A tendency towards oversimplification and overreaching

Permaculture has a troubled relationship with ecological science. Permaculture has received criticism
for overreaching and oversimplifying claims. This tendency is reflected in a perspective shared by
some prominent permaculturists (though not ubiquitous in permaculture) that humanity already
possesses all the knowledge necessary to replace current land use with permaculture systems, across
all social and ecological contexts, and that the process of redesigning is itself straightforward. In the
absence of reliable data to support these proposals, permaculturists often rely on limited case studies
and sweeping extrapolation from ecological principles. Most permaculture texts do not refer to
contemporary scientific research. Much documentation available is found in grey literature which is
difficult to access or verify. The effects of this isolation include the lack of reference to contemporary
developments in relevant science, the accompanying persistence of idiosyncratic or misleading
terminology, and the potential for influence of pseudo-scientific theories. The permaculture literature
assigns the blame for this isolation on the inability of scientists and institutions to comprehend or
appreciate the radical proposals put forth by permaculture. Permaculture opponents argue that
permaculture practitioners may be reluctant to get involved in systematic scientific research whose
results could challenge or temper their idealistic claims.

One common example of oversimplification is the conflation of net primary production (NPP) with agricultural productivity. One point where this becomes apparent is in permaculture's advocacy for perennial production systems - justifying this proposal, in part, based on the high photosynthetic surface area and correspondingly high primary productivity of these systems. While forest ecosystems are among the highest in NPP, perennial plants allocate a higher percentage of photosynthetic activity to structure than annuals and therefore have a slimmer margin for export as edible tissue, rendering the comparison of potential yields a complex empirical question rather than a simple maxim. Another example is the claim that complex shapes in fields, garden beds, and ponds will increase productivity - what is called the "edge effect." This claim was originally based the ecological characteristics of ecotones and anecdotal reports of edge effects in grain cropping systems. While edge effects are real, their strength, reliability, and practical applicability across widely varying contexts (i.e. from cereal fields to intensive garden beds to pond edges) is not supported by scientific evidence and is likely exaggerated. Increased biological productivity may not translate to increased harvestable yields, and the benefits of an increase in harvestable yields may be swamped by the increased labor required by complex edges.

## 4.2 Political impact and scaling-up

The simple solutions populism of permaculture suggests that the best responses to global crises can be implemented immediately with readily accessible materials and skills. This worldview is reflected in a model of change that mostly spurns systematic engagement with existing institutions in favor of direct intervention into the means of subsistence, reintegrating production and resource management under the stewardship of local individuals and communities. The flat network structure that accompanies this mode of action appears to be a conscious strategy to avoid the twin dangers of co-option and outright suppression to which grassroots efforts are vulnerable. This model has met with some success, as evidenced by its international distribution and positive influence on a diversity of local scale projects especially related to urban land use, horticultural and agricultural practices, educational and community initiatives, ecovillages (Van Schyndel Kasper, 2008; Hawken and Rand, 2014;), back-to-the-land grassroots movement promoting neo-rural lifestyles, revitalization of rural areas and/or self-sufficiency in industrialized countries (Oliveira and Penha-Lopes, 2020; Kolářová, 2023), livelihood improvement of marginalized groups in Southern contexts (Fadaee, 2029).
The evident successes of the permaculture network are balanced by problematic assumptions and implications that evoke the hazards of insularity, exclusivity, particularity, and scale mismatch to which grassroots networks are prone (Ferguson and Lovell, 2015). The permaculture movement displays significantly less organization and institutionalization than other international agroecological movements, e.g., La Via Campesina, Campesino à Campesino, or International Federation of Agricultural Producers. This lack makes the coordination of action beyond the immediate community scale difficult or impossible and thus limits the potential for mobilization of political support for diversified farmers. Low levels of institutionalization may also constrain capacity for program development, systematic tracking of outcomes, and engagement with potential allies. Research suggests that the permaculture network in the UK is vulnerable to insularity, and thereby leads to a lack of capacity to influence relevant institutions and communities (Ingram et al., 2014).

Permaculture's optimistic focus on holistic and positive action, on personal responsibility, and on the simplicity of needed solutions, is empowering for participants and is likely a significant driver of the spread of the movement. However, the portrayal of agroecological transition as something that individuals can contribute to, using simple techniques at home, is a double-edged sword. While prioritizing the perspectives and capacities of land users is important, it may also run the risk of depoliticizing aspects of agroecological transition that are fundamentally political and trivializing the complexity of socioecological processes and struggles.

## 4.3 Permaculture, traditions and neo-colonialism

Permaculture has also received criticism on socio-political grounds. Critics have observed that permaculture was brought to developing countries from “knowing westerners” visiting poor communities in a similar way to humanitarian action and green revolution packages which may be seen as a form of neo-colonialism. However, scientific literature has highlighted that the principles of permaculture teaching based on individual observations and collective learning favored the empowerment of poor communities while not providing ready to use solutions designed by westerners but providing people conceptual and organizational tools to design creatively themselves their own solutions (Conrad, 2014). The little data available on permaculture in international development suggests a mixed record: sometimes implemented in a responsive and accountable fashion, and sometimes with a neo-colonial savior mentality.

The movement has received criticism for a failure to acknowledge the similarity of permaculture's proposals to indigenous cultures of land use and for re-packaging indigenous land management practices as an innovation originating within permaculture (Spangler et al., 2021). The extensive permaculture literature on small scale multi-strata agroforestry uses the terms “food forest” and “edible forest garden” but rarely makes reference to the pan-tropical homegarden traditions that forms the conceptual basis for these practices and provide the vast majority of their existing land user base. Indeed, home gardens in tropical areas — from Javanese homegardens to the Creole gardens in the West Indies — traditionally involve multipurpose trees and shrubs in intimate association with annual,
perennial agricultural crops and livestock, (Fernandes and Nair, 1986). Similarly, the integration of aquaculture in ponds, crops and livestock often practiced by permaculturists is drawn from traditional production systems in Asia (Prein, 2002). The founders of permaculture, Mollison and Holmgren, consider that if these sources are clearly acknowledged and respected, their use in permaculture contributes to the preservation of this rich heritage and to the recognition that westerners seeking to create sustainable human settlements have much to learn from indigenous (Mollison, 1988; Holmgren, 2002). In the same way many permaculturists seek to incorporate plant and animal species according to their functions and not to their origin, Mollison and Holmgren consider that elements of traditional knowledge from the global “indigenous pool” can be detached from their original paradigm and combined to other elements and sources of information such as scientific knowledge “to create new local cultures with hybrid vigor” (Holmgren, 2002). Critical social studies have argued that this process could be considered cultural appropriation of traditional knowledge by “university-educated white males from a wealthy country” (Conrad, 2014). Nevertheless, in many developing countries, poor rural communities have adopted permaculture as a way to reassert the value and authority of indigenous knowledge and reclaim the rights to farm “as their ancestors did” (Conrad, 2014; Millner, 2016). Some “local traditions” have been reimagined and hybridized with useful practices, principles, and scientific concepts coming from other parts of the world. In this regard, some studies have considered that permaculture has been appropriated by poor communities to create new cultural identities adapted to the modern world based on traditional ecological knowledge (Millner, 2016). Permaculture, reinterpreted in the context of peasant and social struggles, is now a source of inspiration recognized and claimed by many movements in developing countries fighting for a “peasant agroecology”. The topic of the use of indigenous knowledge in permaculture, and more generally in ecological engineering, continue and can be a fascinating research field for anthropological and sustainability studies (Veteto and Lockyer, 2008).

## 4.4 A need for research about the agricultural efficiency of permaculture

Despite permaculture's origins within academia, Mollison's and Holmgren's work received very little academic attention when published in the late 1970s and 1980s. Academic reactions were mainly negative because the disciplinary specialization at that time left academics ill-prepared for the holistic approach that permaculture offered (Veteto and Lockyer, 2008). Permaculture embraces many themes and has been given many often very vague definitions, which may have caused confusion and limited systematic discussion. Its idealistic aspects have been perceived as impractical by many scholars (Ferguson and Lovell, 2014). Most private companies do not have financial interest to research and disseminate it. Since the 1980s, permaculture books and articles have mainly been written by practitioners outside academia benefiting from the high interest and enthusiasm that permaculture in civil society. Over the decades following permaculture's emergence, sporadic academic papers have dealt with permaculture in different fields such as social and behavioral sciences, architecture, education.
In the agricultural field, which was permaculture first priority and historic starting point, many papers are mainly descriptive of permaculture principles and applications with little critical analysis. Permaculture claims to provide tools and methods to design resilient, productive resource and labor efficient farming systems based on a high level of biodiversity and beneficial ecological interactions. These assumptions remain little documented and controversial (Ferguson and Lovell 2019; Fiebrig et al., 2020).

Very little scholar work has been carried out on this matter from an ecological or a life science perspective based on robust quantitative data collected on a large number of farms. Some papers show that permaculture principles echo agroecological principles such as fostering crop diversity, integrating perennials, supporting landscape heterogeneity for which literature has brought scientific evidence of positive impact on provisioning and regulation ecosystem services. On the basis that permaculture systems combine those principles, they argue that permaculture systems have the potential to provide a high level of ecosystem services (Krebs and Bach, 2018; Hirschfeld and Van Acker, 2021). A few other papers have shown positive impacts on soil quality and biodiversity on farms managed with permaculture principles but on a very limited sample of case studies (De Tombeur et al., 2018; Reiff et al., 2024; Williamson et al., 2024). For permaculturists, a high level of biodiversity and functional redundancy are supposed to guarantee that agricultural systems will be resilient. The idea that “diversity begets stability” is deeply anchored in the ecological literature since the 1950s, especially in H.T Odum’s work which has inspired permaculture. The “stability-diversity controversy” running in the ecological academic field since the 1970s has however underlined that the link between diversity of species/functions and stability of ecosystems is complex, and that other factors and properties of ecosystems have to be considered. In this regard, permaculture farms could be relevant case-studies to investigate the resilience of highly diversified farming systems in the light of contemporary ecological concepts and methods.

From a socioeconomic perspective, a limited but increasing number of studies have been developed about permaculture farms both in Northern and Southern countries. They have shown that the productivity and economic returns to labor of commercial permaculture farms could benefit from high level of cultivated diversity, crop/animal integration and be economically successful even with low levels of fuel consuming motorization (Morel et al., 2016; Ferguson and Lovell, 2017; Ferguson and Lovell 2019). Nevertheless, the levels of production, inputs, labor, and incomes of farms inspired by permaculture are highly variable and similar in their range to other diversified, organic, low-input, and agroecological farms (Ferguson and Lovell, 2017; Ferguson and Lovell 2019; Morel, 2016; Bastien, 2016; Didarali and Gambiza, 2019; Oliveira and Penha-Lopes, 2020; El Ouali, 2021). In Southern countries, farmers using permaculture can experience health and nutritional benefits in comparison to farmers solely using conventional agriculture, as demonstrated in Malawi by Conrad (2014) and in South Africa and Zimbabwe by Didarali and Gamiza (2019). The share of permaculture farms which succeed in generating an income only based on permaculture is variable across studies and contexts, both in Southern and Northern countries. It is common that permaculture farmers diversify their incomes in a logic of pluriactivity, either while working outside the farm or while developing cultural or training activities building on the strong public interest for permaculture, especially in industrialized countries. This strategy raises strong criticism from permaculture opponents who argue that permaculture profitability only comes from teaching permaculture and not from applying concretely permaculture to build productive systems. The cost of permaculture training or cultural activities
(workshops, demonstration site visits) is another topic of controversy. Critics from within and without the permaculture movement argue that the ways in which these costs limit access to programming contradicts permaculture's principles of equity and sharing. In response, others claim that a fair cost of training has to pay teachers for their time, labor, the depth of their experience, and the value of what they offer. Some permaculture teachers do offer free or limited-cost courses for people who cannot otherwise afford training. Nevertheless, many permaculture farms only focus on production and are not involved in teaching (Ferguson and Lovell, 2017).

Most studies on the profitability of permaculture highlight that the benefits of permaculture at the farm level are limited by the broader dominant agro-food system, constraints on access to resources (e.g. land, skilled labor) and markets, and wider structural, political, and technical context. This mitigates both idealistic views of permaculture activists presenting permaculture as a way to solve all problems and strong critics presenting permaculture as an unrealizable utopia.

As many gaps in academic literature remain, further studies are required to examine the efficiency, resilience, ecological dynamics, and impacts of permaculture farms in different contexts, and to assess the extent to which permaculture could contribute to a large-scale transformation of food systems. Accompanying the growing public awareness of permaculture, recent years have seen a shift in the isolation of the permaculture movement from the scientific community. This bridge is being built from both sides. There is an emerging push for community-based research and partnership with institutionally-based researchers coming from the permaculture movement. For example, the Permaculture International Research Network (PIRN) was formed in 2015, sponsored by the UK Permaculture Association, and aims at highlighting and platforming research projects from different disciplines about permaculture. The increasing appearance of permaculture in peer-reviewed journals suggest that more and more scholars are developing research projects about permaculture which may announce promising perspectives for the future.

# 5 Conclusion

Permaculture is not a science, but a practice that is part of a political project to redefine our relationship with nature and with other human beings. It is in this way that it can challenge the academic world. Controversy aside, permaculture's holistic pragmatic approach to social-ecological systems, which articulates rational thinking, ethics, creativity and sensitivity, deserves the attention of researchers. A dialogue between permaculturists and scientists can help to renew and transform human approaches to their living environment, in order to overcome the limits of conventional analytical views and meet the challenges of the Anthropocene.

# 6 Further reading

Aiken, G.T., 2017. Permaculture and the social design of nature. *Geogr. Ann. Ser. B Hum. Geogr.* 99, 1–20.
AtKisson, A., 1991. Permaculture: Design for Living an interview with Bill Mollison. *In Context* **28**, 50.

Bastien, G., 2016. Permaculture-Inspired Farms in Quebec: An Economic and Social Overview. Harvard University. Master's thesis.

Bommarco, R., Kleijn, D., Potts, S.G. 2013. Ecological intensification: harnessing ecosystem services for food security. *Trends Ecol. Evol.* **28**. 230–238.

Chakroun, L., Linder, D., 2018. Le milieu permaculturel comme foyer d'émergence d'un soi mésologique. La mésologie, un nouveau paradigme pour l'Anthropocène 283-291.

Conrad, A., 2014. We are farmers: agriculture, food security, and adaptive capacity among the permaculture and conventional farmers in central Malawi. Doctoral dissertation. American University. http://pri-kenya.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Conrad-FINAL-Dissertation-We-are-farmers-Copy.pdf

De Tombeur, F., Sohy, V., Chenu, C., Colinet, G., Cornelis, J.-T., 2018. Effects of permaculture practices on soil physicochemical properties and organic matter distribution in aggregates: A case study of the Bec-Hellouin Farm (France). Frontiers in Environmental Science 6, 116.

Didarali, Z., Gambiza, J., 2019. Permaculture: Challenges and benefits in improving rural livelihoods in South Africa and Zimbabwe. Sustainability 11, 2219.

El Ouali, H., 2021. Permaculture, a way to improve small family farmers livelihood in rural areas? Estonian Institute of Life Sciences. Master's thesis

Fadaee, S., 2019. The permaculture movement in India: a social movement with Southern characteristics. Social Movement Studies 18, 720-734. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2019.1628732

Ferguson, R.S., Lovell, S.T., 2014. Permaculture for agroecology: design, movement, practice, and worldview. A review. *Agron. Sustain. Dev.* **34**. 251–274.

Ferguson, R.S., Lovell, S.T., 2015. Grassroots engagement with transition to sustainability: diversity and modes of participation in the international permaculture movement. *Ecol. Soc.* **20**.

Ferguson, R.S., Lovell, S.T., 2017. Livelihoods and production diversity on U.S. permaculture farms. *Agroecol. Sustain. Food Syst.* **41**, 588–613.

Ferguson, R.S., Lovell, S.T., 2019. Diversification and labor productivity on US permaculture farms. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 34, 326–337. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170517000497

Fernandes, E.C.M, Nair, P.K.R., 1986. An Evaluation of Structure and Function of Tropical Homegardens. *Agric. Syst.* **21**. 279–310.

Fiebrig, I., Zikeli, S., Bach, S., Gruber, S., 2020. Perspectives on permaculture for commercial farming: aspirations and realities. Org. Agr. 10, 379–394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13165-020-00281-8

Fischer, J., Abson, D.J., Butsic, V., Chappell, M.J., Ekroos, J., Hanspach, J., Kuemmerle, T., Smith, H.G., von Wehrden, H., 2014. Land Sparing Versus Land Sharing: Moving Forward. *Conserv. Lett.* **7**, 149–157.

Hawken, P., Rand, E., 2014. Sustainable revolution: permaculture in ecovillages, urban farms, and communities worldwide. North Atlantic Books.

Hirschfeld, S., Van Acker, R., 2021. Review: ecosystem services in permaculture systems. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems 45, 794–816. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2021.1881862

Holmgren, D., 2002. Permaculture: Principles and Pathways beyond Sustainability. Holmgren Design Services, Hepburn, Vic, Australia

Hopkins, R., 2008. The Transition Handbook: From Oil Dependency to Local Resilience. Chelsea Green Publishing. White River Junction, Vermont, USA

Ingram, J., Maye, D., Kirwan, J., Curry, N., Kubinakova, K., 2014. Learning in the Permaculture Community of Practice in England: An Analysis of the Relationship between Core Practices and Boundary Processes. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 20, 275-290. https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2014.887756
Kolářová, M., 2023. Permaculture and back-to-the-land migration: Pursuing self-sufficiency in Czech rural areas. Sociologia Ruralis 63, 865–885. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12448

Krebs, J., Bach, S., 2018. Permaculture—Scientific evidence of principles for the agroecological design of farming systems. Sustainability 10, 3218.

Millner, N., 2016. Food sovereignty, permaculture and the post-colonial politics of knowledge in El Salvador. Alternative Food Networks in the Postcolonial World. London: Under contract with Routledge.

Mitsch, W.J., Jørgensen, S.E., 2003. Ecological engineering: A field whose time has come. *Ecol. Eng.*, **20**, 363–377.

Mollison, B., 1988. Permaculture: A Designers' Manual, Édition : 2nd. ed. Tagari Publications, Tyalgum, Australia.

Mollison, B., Holmgren, D., 1978. Permaculture One: A Perennial Agriculture for Human Settlements, Tagari, Tyalgum.

Morel, K., 2016. Viabilité des microfermes maraîchères biologiques. Une étude inductive combinant méthodes qualitatives et modélisation. Doctoral dissertation. University Paris Saclay. https://hal.inrae.fr/tel-02801554

Morel, K., Guégan, C., Léger, F.G., 2016. Can an organic market garden based on holistic thinking be viable without motorization? The case of a permaculture farm. *Acta Hortic.* **1137**, 343–346.

Morrow, R., 2010. Earth User's Guide to Permaculture, 2nd edition. Permanent Publications, East Mean, United Kingdom

Naes, A., 1973. The Shallow and the Deep, Long Ranged Ecology Movement. *Inquiry*. **16.1**, 95-100.

Odum, H.T., 1971. Environment, Power, and Society, 1st edition. ed. John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York, NY.

Odum, H.T., 1995. Environmental Accounting: Emergy and Environmental Decision Making, 1 edition. ed. Wiley, New York.

Oliveira, H., Penha-Lopes, G., 2020. Permaculture in Portugal: Social-Ecological Inventory of a Re-Ruralizing Grassroots Movement. European Countryside 12, 30–52. https://doi.org/10.2478/euco-2020-0002

Prein, M., 2002. Integration of aquaculture into crop-animal systems in Asia. *Agric. Syst.* **71**. 127–146.

Quinlan, F. 2016. David Holmgren On The Social And Political Underpinnings Of Permaculture; Interview with David Holmgren; permaculturenews; 11/26/2016
https://www.perculturenews.org/2016/11/01/david-holmgren-social-political-underpinnings-permaculture/

Reiff, J., Jungkunst, H.F., Mauser, K.M., Kampel, S., Regending, S., Rösch, V., Zaller, J.G., Entling, M.H., 2024. Permaculture enhances carbon stocks, soil quality and biodiversity in Central Europe. Communications Earth & Environment 5, 305.

Spangler, K., McCann, R.B., Ferguson, R.S., 2021. (Re-) defining permaculture: perspectives of permaculture teachers and practitioners across the United States. Sustainability 13, 5413.

Van Schyndel Kasper, D., 2008. Redefining community in the ecovillage. Human Ecology Review 12–24.

Veteto, J.R., Lockyer, J., 2008. Environmental Anthropology Engaging Permaculture: Moving Theory and Practice Toward Sustainability. *Cult. Agric.* **30**, 47–58.

Williamson, R.F., Reay, M., Sgouridis, F., 2024. Permaculture Management of Arable Soil Increases Soil Microbial Abundance, Nutrients, and Carbon Stocks Compared to Conventional Agriculture. Agronomy 14, 1446.