Innovations for a Sustainable EconomSustainable …aceer.uprm.edu/pdfs/SOW_SustainableEconomy.pdfThe ecovillage and co-housing movements are perhaps the best illustrations of the oppor-tunities

T H E W O R L D W AT C H I N S T I T U T ET H E W O R L D W AT C H I N S T I T U T E

STATE OF TH E WOR LDSTATE OF TH E WOR LD2 0 0 82 0 0 8

Innovations for aSustainable EconomyInnovations for aSustainable Economy

2 5 t h A n n i ve r s a r y E d i t i o n2 5 t h A n n i ve r s a r y E d i t i o n

WWW.WORLDWATCH.ORG 151

To the west is Vermont Avenue, one of themost congested traffic corridors in Los Ange-les, tiled with a mosaic of fast-food chains, nailsalons, and dollar stores, all nested in a half-dozen strip malls. To the east lie three autorepair shops, housing, and a giant concretechurch that dominates the street. To thenorth, there are two more auto body shops,three overcrowded schools, and a couple ofcar dealerships. And to the south, just beyondthe Bresee Community and Youth Center, aretwo giant supermarkets with equally giganticparking lots, tailored to be one-stop shoppingfor people commuting along the VermontAvenue corridor.1

In the middle of this car-centric infra-structure—what some might call “sprawl”—lies a little green oasis: the Los AngelesEcovillage (LAEV). This community, twosmall apartment buildings with about 55 res-idents, was started in 1993 as a demonstra-tion project on how a community cantransform its surroundings, helping to createa sustainable society.2

In its 15 years, the LA Ecovillage has had

many impressive victories. Within its grounds,LAEV has facilitated technology and lifestylechanges, such as installing solar panels andcomposting facilities, providing rent reduc-tions for people who live car-free, and trans-forming its courtyard into a 7,000-square-footgarden that produces nine types of fruits andmany more vegetables as well as a lush com-mon area to sit and relax in. LAEV has alsoincubated businesses like the BicycleKitchen—a shop that repairs bikes and thattrains neighborhood children in bicycle main-tenance skills. And perhaps most important,the community has influenced the broaderpolitical process of Los Angeles, from lendingsupport to “green” mayoral candidates toengaging in public planning processes, suchas the restoration of the Los Angeles River,transportation planning, and local redevel-opment—all while continuing to be an afford-able, accessible place to live, located within a10-minute walk of two subway stops and 20bus lines.3

Through its built infrastructure, the socialrelationships it generates, and the way of life

C H A P T E R 1 1

Erik Assadourian

Engaging Communities for a Sustainable World

it promotes, the LA Ecovillage highlights thepowerful contributions that communities canmake in helping to facilitate the transitionto a sustainable society. (See Box 11–1 for thedefinition of community used in this chapter.)4

Community practices and choices aboutland use, technologies, and transportationcan be used to model sustainable living. Theproduction of social capital—the glue thatholds communities together—can be tappedto help community members become leadersin sustainability and can provide the resiliencethat helps communities weather difficulttimes. Communities’ engagement in eco-nomic activities can help localize agricultureand the production of other essential goods.And their unique design can help stimulatenew ways to finance sustainability. Whilenational and global-level initiatives will beessential for building a sustainable world,community-level programs may prove indis-pensable in providing better models and theleadership to drive global-level change.

Modeling SustainabilityPerhaps most concretely, a community man-ifests its values through its physical design.Local gardens, solar panels on rooftops, andwind turbines spinning on a hilltop are typi-cal signs of an ecologically minded commu-nity. Built primarily to reduce ecological andfinancial footprints of communities, thesedesign features also play a strong role in mod-eling a sustainable way of living. Many aresimple enough to be taken on by practicallyany community. No matter the size—whethera small town or a neighborhood block—thereare immediate opportunities to retrofit a com-munity’s design and thereby lower its envi-ronmental impact, save money, and modelsustainability as well.

Often all that is needed to make thesechanges is a bit of social support and peer edu-

cation. This has proved to be the case inLydney, England, where residents set up aCommunity Energy Club to help bringenergy efficiency measures and small-scalerenewable energy projects to the area. Sinceit started in 2001, the club has grown to 115members who together have introducedabout 500 energy efficiency measures. Alto-gether these efforts will save 3,865 tons of car-bon dioxide (CO2) emissions over the life ofthe projects—a significant amount consider-ing that the average U.K. resident producesabout 9 tons of CO2 emissions each year.5

Other times, what is needed is not justsocial support but mobilization of a com-munity’s resources—for example, to invest ina community-owned wind farm. In 2006,Findhorn Ecovillage in Scotland completedinstallation of four wind turbines that have acapacity of 750 kilowatts. Together theseproduce 40 percent more electricity than thecommunity needs, allowing them to generaterevenue by selling some back to the localutility through the broader grid system. Ofcourse, this project took several years to planand construct, but now the wind farm pro-vides the community with both a source ofclean electricity and revenue.6

Opportunities to enhance the sustain-

152 WWW.WORLDWATCH.ORG

STATE OF THE WORLD 2008


Community typically refers to a wide range ofgroupings of people: a church, a city, a politicalparty or other affiliation. But more funda-mentally, a community suggests a group ofgeographically rooted people engaged in rela-tionships with each other (though many ofthe examples of community discussed in thischapter have relevance to broader definitionsof community as well). Through theserelationships, members in a community haveshared responsibilities—as the Latin roots ofthe word suggest: com (with) munis (duties).

Source: See endnote 4.

Box 11–1. What Is a Community?

ability of a community when building or justrenovating are nearly boundless—limitedonly by the energy, commitment, andresources of the community. Unlike at thehousehold level, where design options can belimited, nearly the entire metabolism of acommunity can be adjusted to be more sus-tainable: from where fresh water is obtained,

to how food is produced, to how waste istreated. (See Table 11–1.) Most of thesetake significant time and effort to imple-ment—or financial resources when built bya contractor—but in the end they can helpbring the community together (through theplanning and construction of the project), cutcosts, and reduce ecological impact.7




Sector Project Location Description

Energy Micro Inverie, In 2002, this remote Scottish community on the Knoydarthydroelectric Scotland peninsula finished refurbishing a 280-kilowatt hydro-generator electric generator, which now provides electricity for at

least 65 properties.

Energy Biomass ZEGG, Belzig, The 80 residents of ZEGG obtain their heating from a Germany wood-chip-fired heating plant, with the wood sustainably

harvested from the local area.

Energy Biogas Hammarby In this Stockholm district 1,000 residences obtain their Sjöstad, cooking gas from biogas that is generated from the Stockholm, district’s wastewater.Sweden

Food Permaculture Kibbutz Lotan, Kibbutz Lotan maintains an array of sustainable agriculture Production Arava Valley, features, including organic gardens, composting, trellising,

Israel and community-supported agriculture. It also maintains a migrating bird preserve of five distinct habitats.

Water Rainwater Christie Walk, This 27-unit Adelaide community captures all on-site rain-Catchment harvesting Adelaide, water and uses it to maintain its 870 square meters of

Australia rooftop and surrounding gardens.

Sewage Ecological Berea College This community’s “ecological machine” processes about Treatment machine Ecovillage, 12,700 liters of wastewater each day using a combination

Kentucky, of bacteria, snails, and plants. Some of this water is then United States stored for use on the community’s lawns and garden.

Sewage Constructed Ecoovila, In this 28-family community, sewage is processed in a bio-Treatment wetlands Porto Alegre, logical system that uses reed beds to filter water—water

Brazil that is then used to irrigate the community’s gardens.

Sewage Water reuse Solaire In this luxury apartment building, a water reuse system Apartments, filters wastewater and reuses it for toilet flushing and the NewYork City, building’s cooling tower. In 2006, this system recycled aboutUnited States 73,000 liters per day, reducing total water needs by one third.

Transportation Car sharing BedZED, Forty residents subscribe to a community carsharing London, venture, obtaining access to electric cars that are charged England by solar energy.


Table 11–1. How Selected Communities Model Sustainability

The ecovillage and co-housing movementsare perhaps the best illustrations of the oppor-tunities that exist in designing communitiesto be sustainable through the mobilization ofresident energy and resources. An ecovil-lage, in particular, has the goal of creating “ahuman-scale, full-featured settlement, inwhich human activities can be harmlesslyintegrated into the natural world in a way thatis supportive of healthy human development,and can be successfully continued into theindefinite future.” While none have achievedthis high ideal, many have made great strides.A resident of Findhorn Ecovillage has justhalf the ecological footprint of an averageindividual in the United Kingdom. And inGermany’s Sieben Linden Ecovillage, percapita CO2 emissions are just 28 percent thenational average.8

While co-housing communities are typi-cally more focused on developing a con-nected community than on reducingenvironmental impact, they often incorporatemany ecological designs as well as addinganother important element—namely, clus-tered homes. Instead of spreading out houses,co-housing communities group homestogether, enabling them to preserve moreland as open space or farmland and to facili-tate community connections by having neigh-bors within walking distance. At the center ofthese houses there is also typically a commu-nity house, where meetings, dinners, andother activities are regularly held.9

Ecovillages and co-housing communitiesare not the only communities that can imple-ment these changes. Indeed, with 385 regis-tered ecovillages (though the actual numberis greater if broader village networks areincluded) and about 500 co-housing pro-jects worldwide, these serve more as modelsfor other communities than as solutions them-selves. Many of the projects these communi-ties implement are readily replicable by any

group of like-minded neighbors. Small groupswithin a broader setting can come togetherand start a sustainability project, such as a car-pool, community garden, or weekly potluckdinner of locally grown food.10

People can even convert their neighbor-hood into an ad hoc ecovillage—like resi-dents in the neighborhood of Phinney Ridgein Seattle, Washington, did. Phinney Ecovil-lage members hold regular meetings andgatherings to help neighbors reduce theirecological impact. In spring 2007, the groupstarted a new neighborhood global warmingproject. This venture, partly funded by agrant from the city government specifically forneighborhood-based climate change efforts,is helping to mobilize residents to changetheir behavior to reduce fossil fuel use—everything from switching to a push lawnmower that relies on human power ratherthan fossil fuels to lowering their thermostatsand turning off appliances not in use.11

Cultivating CommunityConnections

Not all capital is tangible. Communities gen-erate an often underappreciated asset calledsocial capital, the relational glue that holdscommunities together, or as political scientistRobert Putnam defines it, “connectionsamong individuals—social networks and thenorms of reciprocity and trustworthiness thatarise from them.” As individuals in a com-munity interact, work together, and tradefavors, a level of trust and feelings of reci-procity form. This is what makes a commu-nity a community rather than just peopleliving near each other.12

In industrial countries, social capital is anincreasingly scarce asset, according to Putnamand other social scientists. Since 1985 theaverage American has lost connection to oneconfidant each—going from three other peo-




ple to confide in to just two. Today, nearly aquarter of Americans do not have anyonelike that in their lives. But where social cap-ital exists, or where there is the will to rebuildit through regenerating relationships, there isgreat opportunity to improve opportunity, lifequality, and sustainability. Communities,regardless of the obstacles they face, can usesocial capital to form sustainable communitydevelopment projects, empowering them-selves as they work together on projects thatincrease their well-being while reducing theirecological impact.13

Social capital yields important dividends.Psychological research demonstrates that thebreadth and depth of a person’s social con-nections is the single best predictor of hap-piness. And social isolation translates directlyinto physical health concerns as well. Morethan a dozen long-term studies in Japan,Scandinavia, and the United States, for exam-ple, show that the chances of dying in a givenyear, no matter the cause, are two to fivetimes greater for people who are socially iso-lated than for people with close family, friends,or community ties.14

Social capital is generated in a variety ofways. Some communities, particularly eco-villages and co-housing groups, do so bysharing resources. Some have a shared caravailable that residents can rent or borrow,thus freeing more of the community to livecar-free. Many have shared major appliances,including washing machines and dryers. Oth-ers have created “tool libraries” for lawnmowers, chain saws, and other implementsthat may only be needed once a week,month, or year. One community tool is oftenmore than enough and saves members sig-nificant cost in purchasing and maintainingthese goods. Many people also barter food orgoods they produce in exchange for whatother residents produce. Along with goods,some communities share services, such as

babysitting and day care, and even elder care.This helps create the ties that bind commu-nities together.15

While an economist would regard theseshared goods or nonmarket exchanges as areduction in economic activity (and thus anegative development), they actually mayincrease community members’ quality of life.A recent study of individuals living in eco-villages and co-housing communities foundthat although they earned significantly lessthan people in Burlington, Vermont (a townwith a similar demographic makeup to thecommunities studied), members expressedlife satisfaction levels equal to Burlingtonians.Indeed, 50 percent of residents had incomesof less than $15,000 a year yet life satisfactionlevels equal to Burlingtonians—the majorityof whom earned over $30,000 a year. Theconclusion of the study was simple: ecovillagemembers successfully substituted social cap-ital for the possessions they own, thus enjoy-ing a similar quality of life with much lessconsumption—and as a result a reduced eco-logical impact as well.16

Sharing within a community also helps toestablish a different cultural norm, one basedin cooperation instead of conspicuous con-sumption and competition. Indeed, this men-tal shift can help channel the urge to “keepup with the Joneses” into a more construc-tive form—namely from one of rivalry overwho has the biggest SUV or McMansion towho has the lowest ecological footprint. (SeeChapter 4.)

Many communities have even institution-




Sharing within a community alsohelps to establish a different culturalnorm, one based in cooperationinstead of conspicuous consumptionand competition.

alized these educational efforts, providingschools for community children that maintainan ecocentric curriculum. For example, theBerea College Ecovillage in Kentucky includesthe Berea Early Learning Center, for the stu-dents’ children in day care (most residents ofthe ecovillage are “nontraditional” studentswho have children). This eco-friendly daycare introduces preschool students to recy-cling, gardening, and composting.17

Beyond the ecovillage, communities aretrying to rebuild community connections ininnovative ways, with one of the most inter-esting being the “third place.” This termwas coined by sociologist Ray Oldenburg todescribe informal public gathering places—the place after home and work (the first andsecond places) that people tend to spendtheir time in. Being informal gathering places,they have many important roles: connectingthe community, integrating newcomers andvisitors, offering staging areas in times oflocal crisis, and providing a set of local storeowners who tend to watch over and helpthe community.18

Over the past several decades, neighbor-hood hangouts have increasingly beenreplaced by soulless franchises that are typi-cally identical in design, lack local flavor, andrarely serve community needs. Today, how-ever, many neighborhoods are starting toconsciously recreate third places and the com-munity ties that they facilitate. And some areeven starting to recognize that these placescan not only serve a central role in cultivat-ing social capital, they can also serve as impor-tant tools in shaping environmental values.

These “sustainable third places” not only

build community ties, they also adopt greenbusiness practices and help educate cus-tomers about living sustainably—using suchtools as periodic lectures, discussion groups,informational guides, and books they sell.Sustainable third places can also synergisti-cally support other sustainable business sec-tors—particularly food production. Localrestaurants, not bound by franchise con-tracts, can order food directly from localfarmers, helping to support local agricul-tural production. And sustainable third placescan encourage their customers to getengaged in sustainability efforts, for examplehelping to set up volunteer groups to workon a local ecological restoration project orenvironmental campaign.

One example of a sustainable third place isthe White Dog Cafe in Philadelphia. JudyWicks founded the cafe in 1983 in a 100-year-old house on Sansom Street, after joiningwith her neighbors to fight to prevent this andother houses from being torn down to makeroom for a new shopping mall. The WhiteDog now fills three adjacent houses, servingup local food, running on wind power, andhosting regular “Table Talks” on a variety ofsocial and environmental topics. Wicks wasone of the first to serve local food in Philadel-phia, a niche she could have attempted tomonopolize. Instead, she started a foundation(and supported it with 20 percent of thecafe’s profits) that worked to expand localfood use in the city, by helping other restau-rants to localize and connecting farmers andbusinesses in the city. And the White Dog isnot alone. There are hundreds of sustainablethird places around the world, each with itsown priorities and projects.19

Cafes, in particular, have great potential toshape people’s values and mobilize commu-nities. Throughout history, teahouses andcoffeehouses have been a central stagingground to discuss revolutionary action, with




Throughout history, teahouses and coffeehouses have been a central stagingground to discuss revolutionary action.

organizers of both the American and FrenchRevolutions discussing plans and organizingactions in coffeehouses. Today, organizationslike the Green Café Network are starting tomobilize cafe owners to use their spaces to“mainstream sustainability”—teaching mil-lions of Americans who visit a cafe each dayhow they can live greener. The Network,started in San Francisco in 2007, helps locallyowned cafes reduce their ecological foot-prints and become certified green businesses.It also aims to change customer consumptionpatterns and promote green lifestyle prac-tices by using partner cafes to teach sustain-ability—through hosting talks, eco-artexhibits, and educational displays and dis-tributing information.20

Localizing EconomicProduction

The dairy at the Cobb Hill Cohousing com-munity in Hartland, Vermont, that producesaward winning cheeses, the bakery in theecovillage of Lakabe near Pamplona, Spain,that bakes bread for 25 stores in surroundingtowns, the herbalist business at the EarthavenEcovillage that makes medicines from herbsfound in the surrounding bioregion—thereare countless local businesses employing peo-ple from the community, providing a sus-tainable living, and helping to relocalize aneconomy that has become increasingly glob-alized and environmentally destructive. Thebenefits of localizing economic activity havebeen well chronicled and can include pro-viding a more stable source of jobs andincome, a reduction in use of fuel for trans-portation, businesses more willing to adapt tostricter environmental regulations (as opposedto closing and rebuilding elsewhere), and alarger percentage of profits circulating withinthe community instead of being concentratedin the hands of far-off investors.21

One key sector of the economy ripe forlocalization (in addition to energy production,discussed earlier) is food production. Farmingtoday depends on massive amounts of petro-leum-based inputs: fuel to run the tractors andship food thousands of kilometers, fertilizersand pesticides, and packaging often derivedfrom petroleum. While oil is cheap and theeffects of climate change appear relativelyminor, this may not seem to be a problem. Butwith ramped-up efforts to regulate green-house gas emissions, potential disruptions ofagricultural production due to climate change,and increasing competition over a finite sup-ply of oil, the cost of far-off food will mostlikely increase, as will its scarcity.

Local farming can address these problems,reducing oil dependency and the ecologicalimpacts of industrial-scale agriculture whileproviding many other benefits, such as health-ier, tastier food, heightened food security,and increased community interactions. Grow-ing food locally reduces the fuel used to shipgoods long distances. From farm to market,fruits and vegetables in the United Statestravel between 2,500 and 4,000 kilometers onaverage—generating 5 to 17 times more CO2emissions than the equivalent amount of localfood. Eating locally produced food can reducean individual’s carbon footprint by about2,000 kilograms per year.22

A study of 200 residents in Philadelphiafound that residents who gardened not onlyhad increased access to healthier foods—eat-ing more fresh vegetables and fewer sweets—but also saved at least $100 a year in foodcosts. Community gardens often help buildsocial capital as well. In a study of 63 com-munity gardens in upstate New York, peoplein 54 of these worked cooperatively—sharingtools, work, or harvest. Moreover, having acommunity garden improved many residents’attitudes about their neighborhoods, reduc-ing problems like littering, while also spurring




broader community revitalization efforts.23

As more local farms and gardens are estab-lished, a growing number of farmers’ marketsand community-supported agriculture (CSA)operations are sprouting up. In the UnitedStates, there are now more than 4,300 farm-ers’ markets and 1,100 CSA farms. These tieconsumers and producers together—educat-ing consumers about the source of their food,giving farms a better source of income, and,with CSAs, providing working capital to farm-ers (because CSA members purchase inadvance a share of a farmers’ annual produc-tion). Being part of a CSA or farmers’ mar-ket can help reconnect consumers directlyto the food cycle, obtaining fresh food straightfrom a farmer. And farmers’ markets helpincrease community interactions: patronsshopping at these markets typically have 10times more social interactions than thoseshopping at grocery stores.24

To cultivate the local food movement,many community groups and nongovern-mental organizations (NGOs) are creatingcommunity gardens and small farms. Someare driven by food security concerns, othersenvironmental worries, and still others sim-ply by the facts that local, organic produceusually tastes better and is healthier than foodproduced in far-off farms or greenhouses andthat local gardens can strengthen communityties and give people an opportunity to exer-cise and reconnect with nature.

In Chicago and Milwaukee, GrowingPower is working to create local sustainablefood systems through a combination of train-ing local farmers, supporting farmers’ markets,setting up local food processing and distrib-ution facilities, and converting the manyunderused spaces in these two cities—likethe 60,000 vacant lots in Chicago—into gar-dens and farms. One impressive innovation isthat the organization is working directly withthe Chicago city government, being paid by

the city to set up community gardens andurban farms in public parks. This not only sus-tains the projects but redirects money thatwould have gone to for-profit landscape busi-nesses toward providing food and job train-ing to underserviced residents. In 2006, oneof these projects—a 1,900-square-meterurban farm in Grant Park—trained 25 youngpeople in farming and produced over $15,000worth of food that was donated to foodpantries and soup kitchens.25

To expand this beyond certain cities orregions, a national grassroots network calledRooted in Community (RIC) is working tohelp young people set up community gar-den, local farms, and other local food projects.Since 1998, at least 75 grassroots groups havebeen engaged with the network, and RIC hasstrengthened the skills of hundreds of com-munity leaders through national trainings.26

But can gardens and local farms actuallysupply more than a small fraction of a com-munity’s food? Cuba—after reducing annualoil imports from 13 million to 6 million tonsin one year because of the collapse of theSoviet Union and the U.S. embargo—provedthat the answer to this question is yes. Atthat time, Cuba had the most industrializedagricultural system in all of Latin Americaand even used more than twice as much fer-tilizer per hectare as U.S. farmers did. But theSoviet collapse and subsequent lack of oil,chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and otherindustrial agricultural inputs forced Cuba tolocalize agricultural production rapidly. Today,after considerable innovation, the countrynow delivers much of its agricultural pro-duce from small urban farms and communitygardens. In Havana alone, there are morethan 26,000 food gardens, spreading across2,400 hectares of land and producing 25,000tons of food.27

Americans typically have ample space todevote to food gardens. During World War




II, Americans set up 20 million home andcommunity gardens—Victory Gardens—thatprovided 40 percent of civilians’ fresh veg-etables, allowing farms to concentrate onproviding for the troops. Today, in contrast,Americans maintain 10 million hectares oflawns, often with assistance from toxic pesti-cides and fertilizers. These lawns could read-ily be replaced with gardens, producing anew source of local food and reducing toxicchemical usage. The key to this transitionwill ideally stem from increased support by

community groups, NGOs, and governmentagencies. Realistically, however, a major dis-ruption in food production, like the oneCuba experienced, will also trigger a returnto local farming. Future ecological disruptionsmay also speed the transition to a new model.(See Box 11–2.)28

Beyond food production, efforts to local-ize the economy are taking some novel forms.NGOs are taking a lead in reducing depen-dence on the globalized economy. One—The Relocalization Network—is helping to




On the outskirts of Barcelona, a former lepercolony now houses a new community. In 2001,a group of 30 squatters took over this propertythat had lain vacant since the 1950s and createdan eco-squatter community, Can Masdeu. Whilesquatters typically are viewed as a problem, thisgroup has taken unused land and is now a modelsustainable community—maintaining a compost-ing toilet, a constructed wetlands for processinggray water, homemade solar thermal panels,even a “bici-lavadora” (bicycle-powered washingmachine). Moreover, the community provides 28 community garden plots to neighborhoodresidents, maintains a regular meeting space for a variety of social activist groups, and sets up a sustainable third place on Sunday nights: theRurbar, selling food and beer that the com-munity produces.

Can Masdeu also offers another benefit: itshows that life can go on in a climate of uncer-tainty, where community members have no rightsto ownership, where police have attempted toexpel them by force, and where financial capitalto invest is scarce. The leper colony, founded inthe seventeenth century, functioned withoutelectricity, obtained its water from mountainsprings, and grew its own food. While Can Mas-deu has electricity today, its water and sewagetreatment and much of its food production arenot dependent on it. The community—in pared-down form—could function even if the globaleconomy seized up and died tomorrow.

Communities can play a significant role inhelping reduce ecological problems that currentlythreaten the future of human civilization. But dueto a lack of leadership by the worst polluters andpositive feedback cycles like thawing permafrostand the melting Arctic ice cap, it may be too lateto prevent the worst effects of climate change—such as a sea level rise of 15 meters that themelting of Greenland and western Antarcticawould trigger. Add to this growing social disrup-tions from increased competition over petroleumsupplies and the possible breakdown of globalgovernance as new resource rivalries form, andthe picture looks bleak indeed. If this scenario—“the long emergency,” as author James HowardKunstler calls it—becomes the new reality, thencommunities will once again become central inproviding for themselves. Local food provision,local energy production, and the basic technolo-gies needed to maintain a water supply andprocess sewage safely may mean the differencebetween a high quality of life and abject poverty.

If humanity cannot mobilize to prevent anecological collapse, any effort by communities toincrease their self-sufficiency and reduce depen-dence on far-off goods that will become scarce asthe global economic system falters will help themsurvive in a less stable future, much as the resi-dents of Can Masdeu are doing now.


Box 11–2. Preparing for the Long Emergency

coordinate 166 groups in 13 countries, pro-viding an online learning and networkingforum for communities working to lowertheir reliance on a fragile, globalized eco-nomic system. Efforts of these many groupsare impressive—ranging from local commu-nity education projects to town and city res-olutions to reduce dependence on oil.29

Networks like BALLE—the BusinessAlliance for Living Local Economies—arealso helping to drive localization forward.BALLE, consisting of more than 15,000businesses, has 51 networks spread over 26regions in North America (states and Cana-dian provinces). These networks help con-nect local businesses, with the goal ofstrengthening exchange of goods locallywhile helping to enact public policies tosupport decentralized ownership of busi-nesses, fair wages, and good stewardship ofthe environment.30

Some towns and cities are also lookingholistically at how they can localize theireconomies. For example, in Willits, Califor-nia, the WELL (Willits Economic LocaLiza-tion) initiative is educating town residentsabout the benefits of and opportunities tolocalize the economy. So far WELL hasfocused on assessing current resource use inWillits—such as the amount of energyimported and the CO2 emissions producedper capita—and it is now turning to figuringout how best to reduce the town’s ecologi-cal impacts and reduce dependence on theglobal economic system. In the United King-dom, there are also 21 Transition Towns—towns, neighborhoods, villages, and citiesthat are setting up “transition initiatives” inwhich they try to move toward localization,reduce oil dependence, and lower the eco-logical impact of their economies.31

With growing disparities between rich andpoor worldwide and the global growth ofslums, there is a strong need to merge the

empowerment of communities like those justdescribed with efforts to meet people’s basicneeds independently and sustainably. Com-munity-driven development (CDD) is onestrategy to address poverty in this way. WithCDD, poor communities are the lead actorsin development efforts, not passive recipi-ents of aid, and are empowered to focus onthe priorities they choose—whether that behealth, education, sanitation, or other press-ing issues—and given the assistance they needto succeed.

Sometimes CDD efforts are initiateddirectly by communities, but many are sup-ported by either NGOs or international agen-cies that can provide financial or technicalassistance. For example, a Zambian NGO, theNorth Luangwa Wildlife Conservation andCommunity Development Programme, hasworked to reduce poaching in the NorthLuangwa National Park by empowering com-munities to make a living through farmingand other more sustainable enterprises, whilealso setting up local clinics and educationprograms. Started in 1994, this program nowreaches more than 35,000 people.32

The United Nations and other interna-tional agencies are also increasingly usingCDD. The COMPACT program (Commu-nity Management of Protected Areas Con-servation), for instance, is a joint project of theU.N. Development Programme and theGlobal Environment Facility that providesgrants of less than $50,000 to communitiesin World Heritage Sites to help establish pro-jects that improve community well-beingwhile reducing people’s impact on the sur-rounding ecosystems. Around Mount Kenya,where deforestation is a significant concern,COMPACT has worked with villages to setup a microhydro generator and sustainablefood projects like beekeeping and trout farm-ing, and it has worked with schools to providemore efficient cookstoves—all of which help




reduce community dependence on firewoodwhile offering new economic opportunities.(For more on CDD in developing countries,see Chapter 12.)33

Financing Sustainable Communities

Underlying local economic enterprise thereneeds to be sustainable community finance,which can mobilize community funds toinvest in local green endeavors—an essentialelement if businesses like local farms and sus-tainable third places are to thrive. Tradition-ally, community development financialinstitutions (CDFIs)—including develop-ment banks, credit unions, loan funds, andventure capital funds—finance projects thatbuild affordable housing, create livable-wagejobs, or provide essential services such ashealth care. (See also Chapter 13.) Althoughthese investments are comparatively small—at just $20 billion in the United States—theeffects of community investing are impressive.A survey of 496 U.S. CDFIs found that in2005 these institutions financed 9,074 busi-nesses that established or sustained 39,151jobs, and they facilitated the building or ren-ovation of 55,242 units of affordable hous-ing and 613 community facilities ineconomically disadvantaged communities.34

While interest in CDFIs has grown sig-nificantly over the past years—with totalinvestments quintupling between 1997 and2005—few of these investments are targetedtoward sustainable community development.If they were, they could have not just an eco-nomic impact but an ecological one as well.Some ecovillages have small banks that do justthis. In Italy, the community of Damanhurmaintains a co-operative that invests members’savings in existing community businesses aswell as giving loans and business advice tocommunity members trying to start new sus-

tainable businesses.35

On a larger scale, ShoreBank Pacific inWashington State sees itself as a sustainablecommunity development bank. This bank,with assets of $113 million, lends to com-munity businesses while also proactively help-ing clients in a variety of industries to useenergy efficiently, reduce waste, conserveresources, and shift production toward agreener model. This starts with a review of thebusiness by a staff scientist and continueswith consultations throughout the course ofthe loan, offering strategic advice on how tobecome sustainable.36

Instead of creating banks, some commu-nities are actually creating their own curren-cies. These can take many forms. Some, likeIthaca Hours, are pegged against an hour oflabor, thus valuing all work equally. Others arepegged to a national currency. The Berk-Share is one of these. In Great Barrington,Massachusetts, there are about $760,000worth of BerkShares circulating; they areaccepted by some 300 local businesses—fromcoffeeshops to grocery stores. A local bank iseven considering creating a credit card basedin BerkShares. And Great Barrington is notalone. There are over 4,000 community cur-rencies around the world.37

While the true economic impact of thesecurrencies is relatively minor, they do pro-vide many benefits to communities that usethem. Because franchises typically do nottrade in community currencies, these systemshelp create support—and loyal customerbases—for local businesses. They also helpbuild community support networks. Accord-ing to a U.K. study, local currencies helpmany users develop a network of peoplethey could call on for help, as well as help-ing people cope with unemployment. Andlocal currencies can help address specificsocial needs in a community. In Japan, manyareas use fureai kippu (caring relationship




tickets): helping the sick and elderly withdaily living will earn the helper some tickets,which can then be exchanged for help whenthat person is sick or can be given to sick orelderly relations to use. This has enabledmore elderly people to continue living intheir homes and communities rather thanmoving to convalescent homes.38

Another innovative way to finance sus-tainable communities involves harnessing theprofits of a new breed of business called“social enterprise.” This term refers to busi-nesses that achieve their social missionsthrough their earned income strategies. Forexample, Greyston Bakery in New York Citywas founded in 1982 to provide jobs for thechronically unemployed. Today, the profits ofthis $6.5-million business provide fundingfor health clinics, day care centers, afford-able housing, and other social services thathelp address poverty in New York City. Andin Thailand, the resort and restaurant Cab-bages and Condoms uses its five restaurantsand two resorts to promote safe sex and AIDSprevention while generating revenue for thePopulation and Community DevelopmentAssociation, an NGO that works on ruraldevelopment, AIDS education, populationgrowth, and environmental protection.39

Although few social enterprises currentlyfocus on sustainable poverty alleviation, whenthey do they can make an important contri-bution to redesigning the economy to servethe needs of communities in an ecologicallyresponsible manner.

Communities Mobilizing Society

Beyond design and helping to rebuild localeconomies, communities can use members’energy and resources to help green societymore broadly—restoring local ecosystems,educating the broader public, or engaging in

efforts to reform local or even national polit-ical agendas.

One way communities are readily engag-ing in this effort is helping with ecologicalrestoration projects in their area. The LosAngeles Ecovillage was instrumental in help-ing the Bresee Center design The BiminiSlough Ecology Park at the end of LAEV’sstreet. Now the runoff from two neighbor-ing streets drains into a small stream in thepark. Here the water is cleaned by streamplants on its way back to the watertableinstead of moving directly to the ocean, withall of its pollutants, via the storm drain.40

An example of a much broader-rangingrestoration project comes from the commu-nity of Las Gaviotas in Colombia. This villagewas established on degraded savanna andmade it a point to replant 8,000 hectares ofsurrounding land with forest—an area largerthan Manhattan. Along with providing thecommunity with food and tradable forestproducts, this land now absorbs 144,000tons of carbon a year and will continue to doso while the forest grows. Gaviotas’ efforts areimpressive, but the village’s decades-longplan is even more ambitious: Gaviotas hopesto replant another 3 million hectares withthe help of other villages and towns; that’senough to absorb a quarter of Colombia’sannual carbon emissions.41

Some communities—in particular ecovil-lages—are reaching out globally to local lead-ers to help spread the knowledge needed tomake towns and larger regions sustainable.Many ecovillages have regular trainingcourses. At The Farm, an ecovillage in Sum-mertown, Tennessee, the Ecovillage TrainingCenter hosts dozens of training workshops—from how to install solar panels to how to cul-tivate and build with bamboo. Ecovillageslike The Farm also host longer apprenticeshipsfor people wanting to learn about the manyaspects of community sustainability. In 2003




many ecovillage and other community sus-tainability leaders founded Gaia University,which offers accredited bachelors and mastersdegrees in Integrative Ecosocial Design, inwhich students learn how to design societal,community, and personal behaviors that arein line with ecological principles.42

Communities are also increasingly gettinginvolved in local political efforts. Today inthe United States, many of the 300,000 home-owners associations (HOAs) ban their mem-bers from hanging clothes outside to drybecause of the perception that clotheslineslook unsightly and thus reduce property value.Yet if Americans dried just half of their clothesoutside instead of in dryers that were poweredby coal-fired power plants, they could saveenough electricity to shut down eight suchplants and reduce CO2 emissions by 23 mil-lion tons. Communities and community

groups are approaching HOAs to get this andother sustainability measures implemented.Project Laundry List is an organization thathelps homeowners appeal to their HOAs andthat is coordinating broader efforts to changestate laws to uphold “the right to dry.”43

At the town and city level, there are evenmore opportunities to foster local-level sus-tainability through policy changes. A keystrategy is to push for “smart growth,” shift-ing urban planning away from car-depen-dent low-density housing to one of walkableneighborhoods with a mix of commercialand residential space. Smart growth is essen-tial for reducing car dependency and for mak-ing towns and cities more sustainable. Somecommunities are joining broader coalitionsworking on campaigns as varied as increasingpublic transit, organizing to make cities bicy-cle-friendly, and lobbying to strengthen urban




Until recently, the 15-acre Dockside Lands parcelin Victoria, British Columbia—the province’s cap-ital on Vancouver Island—was the epitome of anunderused property. Purchased by the city for asingle dollar in 1989, this prime real estate laylargely ignored for years, crippled by an industriallegacy that left the soil saturated with petro-chemicals and toxic heavy metals. Now the site is poised to become the greenest neighborhoodin Victoria, thanks to collaboration between thecity and two developers,Windmill DevelopmentGroup and VanCity Enterprises. The first of threedistinct neighborhoods, Dockside Wharf, is setfor completion in 2009 and will include 268 resi-dential units of varying sizes. By the time it iscompleted around 2018, the development willaccommodate approximately 2,500 people.

The developers have promised to deliver 26LEED platinum-rated buildings in addition to animpressive green infrastructure and have evenpledged to pay penalties up to CDN$1 million if certification goals are not met. One hundredpercent on-site sewage treatment is projected to

save CDN$81,000 a year in city fees. On-siteenergy generation, including solar panels and abiomass gasification system fueled by wastewood, will further reduce pressure on Victoria’sinfrastructure. Preliminary studies indicate thatDockside Green’s goal of carbon neutrality mayeven produce excess energy that can be soldback to the city. Residents can stroll down a cen-tral greenway irrigated only with recycledrainwater, ride mini-transit vehicles that run onbiodiesel, and check their personal energy con-sumption via monitors in each home.

Walkable, dense neighborhoods with a varietyof housing units, lively public areas, and commer-cial space will help foster a sense of community.Planners have also been careful to integrateexisting industry, interspersing light industrialspace among the housing units, thus preservingDockside Green’s distinctive harbor industryheritage.

—Meghan Bogaerts


Box 11–3. Dockside Green: Developers Taking the Lead

growth boundaries. Another innovative strategy is to educate

developers about the importance of smartgrowth. Some developers are starting to rec-ognize the profitability of building develop-ments along these lines, tapping into thegrowing demand for environmentally friendlycommunities and the many governmentincentives that subsidize such projects. (SeeBox 11–3.)44

But the key will be making smart growththe norm for developers. One impressive effortis being led by the U.S. Green Building Coun-cil (USGBC). This organization’s LEED pro-gram (Leadership in Energy andEnvironmental Design) has helped providegreen certification schemes for all type ofbuildings: commercial, residential, and others.

USGBC is now working on a new“LEED for Neighborhood Development”certification system. This standard, currentlyin its pilot phase, will provide a grade forplanned neighborhood developments, givingpoints for designs that connect communities,reduce vehicle use, and create local jobs. Italso includes prerequisites such that anydevelopment that compromises wetlands oragricultural lands, is located in a flood zone,or is built “60 miles from anything” (as Pro-gram Manager Jennifer Henry puts it) can-not be certified. For well-plannedneighborhoods, developers can receive ahigh grade (platinum or gold), which mayhelp expedite permission from local planningboards and make developers eligible for taxbreaks or other incentives.45

Currently 238 projects are involved in thepilot phase of the LEED for NeighborhoodDevelopment, ranging from sustainable com-munities like the Los Angeles Ecovillage tolarge urban projects. In 2009 the USGBC willfinalize the program once the pilot phaseconcludes and public comments are received.Once finished, new communities that areforming can use these standards, and existingcommunities can lobby local governmentsto ensure that these standards are used whennew developments are planned.46

Another innovative idea that has started tospread around the world is that of the “eco-municipality.” In essence, eco-municipalitiesare efforts by coalitions of community mem-bers, local NGOs, and town officials to cre-ate long-term comprehensive sustainabilityplans for their towns, villages, or cities. Over-torneå, Sweden, became the first eco-munic-ipality in 1983. Since then, more than 60municipalities in Sweden, ranging from vil-lages to cities of 500,000, have followedsuit—as have 20 Estonian municipalities andmunicipalities in 10 other countries.47

Because communities are by their naturesmall, their ability to address global environ-mental problems is often overlooked bynational governments. But with proper sup-port, they can have a dramatic impact. Thekey will be getting governments to recognizecommunities’ potential and tap into it. TheUnited Kingdom may be the first country toproactively do so. Parliament is close to pass-ing the Sustainable Communities Act, whichwould provide local councils with direct accessto the office of the Secretary of State andfund local sustainability projects—includingthose that support local businesses, protect thelocal environment, and build communityconnections and political activity.48

When national policy is changed in theright way, the effects can be impressive. Whilesmall-scale wind and other major projects are




Eco-municipalities are efforts bycommunity members, local NGOs,and town officials to create long-term comprehensive sustainability plans for towns, villages, or cities.

often difficult to implement because of zon-ing restrictions, in some countries govern-ments have actually facilitated them. Sincethe 1970s, Denmark has allowed communi-ties, co-operatives, small companies, andtowns to establish small renewable projectsand obtain a set price for the electricity theyprovide to the grid. Today, over 80 percentof wind turbines are owned by co-operatives,local companies, or individuals. Along withtriggering a major investment in wind energy(over 20 percent of Denmark’s electricitycomes from wind), local ownership and theresulting local profits have led to broad pub-lic acceptance.49

National policy changes have great poten-tial and could take many forms. Imagine the

impact of initiatives like California’s MillionSolar Roofs, which provides financial incen-tives and other support to individual home-owners to put solar panels on their roofs.Similar efforts could mobilize communitiesaround the world: a 10,000 Town Wind Co-op Project; a 100,000 Neighborhood EnergyClub Initiative; a Million Community Gar-den Program; or a $10 Billion SustainableCommunity Investment Initiative could alldrive community sustainability efforts to thenext level. The key will be mobilizing com-munities around the world to educatenational policymakers on the benefits localefforts can bring—and to challenge them tomake these happen.50




Climate Change with Taxes and Green Tape,”Guardian (London), 14 September 2007; Han-nah Fairfield, “When Carbon Is Currency,” NewYork Times, 6 May 2007; Scott Allen and BethDaley, “Patrick to OK Fees for Power Plants,”Boston Globe, 18 January 2007.

44. Churchill quote from Willis Mason West,The Story of World Progress (Boston: Allyn andBacon, 1922), p. 530.

45. Robert V. Andelson, ed., Land Value Taxa-tion Around the World (Malden, MA: BlackwellPublishing, 2001); Tom Condon, “Filling in theBlanks to Aid Comeback,” Hartford Courant, 3September 2006; Walter Rybeck, “Transit-InducedLand Values: Development and Revenue Impli-cations,” Commentary (Council on Urban Eco-nomic Development}, 24 October 1981.

46. Alan Thein Durning and Yoram Bauman,Tax Shift: How to Help the Economy, Improve theEnvironment, and Get the Tax Man off Our Backs(Seattle, WA: Northwest Environment Watch,1998), pp. 62–63.

Chapter 11. Engaging Communities for a Sustainable World

1. Visit to Los Angeles Ecovillage, 16–18 May2007; Lois Arkin, co-founder of Los AngelesEcovillage, discussion with author, 17 May 2007;Los Angeles Eco-Village Overview (Los Angeles:CRSP Institute for Urban Ecovillages, 2003).

2. Arkin, op. cit. note 1; Los Angeles Eco-VillageOverview, op. cit. note 1.

3. Visit to Los Angeles Ecovillage, op. cit. note1; Arkin, op. cit. note 1; Los Angeles Eco-VillageOverview, op. cit. note 1.

4. Box 11–1 from Graham Meltzer, SustainableCommunities: Learning from the Cohousing Model(Victoria, BC: Trafford, 2005), pp.1–3.

5. Community Renewables Initiative, LydneyLocal Power: A Market Town Energy Project Gen-erating Benefits for the Whole Community (Glouces-

tershire, U.K.: Severn Wye Energy Agency(SWEA): June 2006); Kierson Wise, project man-ager, SWEA, e-mail to Joy Chen, WorldwatchInstitute, 12 September 2007; nine tons fromDepartment for Environment, Food, and RuralAffairs, Experimental Statistics on Carbon DioxideEmissions at Local Authority and Regional Level(London: October 2005).

6. “The Findhorn Ecovillage: RenewableEnergy Systems,” at www.ecovillagefindhorn.com,viewed 3 October 2007; 40 percent from JonathanDawson, president of the Global Ecovillage Net-work and resident of Findhorn Ecovillage, e-mailto author, 27 September 2007.

7. Table 11–1 from the following: Inverie fromAngela Williams, Development Manager, KnoydartFoundation, e-mail to Joy Chen, WorldwatchInstitute, 6 August 2007, and from “KnoydartRenewables,” at www.knoydart-foundation.com,viewed 3 October 2007; ZEGG (Center for Exper-imental Culture Design) at www.zegg.de, viewed3 October 2007; Hammarby Sjöstad from Timo-thy Beatley, “Circular Urban Metabolism in Stock-holm,” in Worldwatch Institute, State of the World2007 (New York: W. W. Norton & Company,2007), p. 19; Kibbutz Lotan from www.kibbut-zlotan.com, viewed 3 October 2007; ChristieWalk from Douglas Farr, Sustainable Urbanism:Urban Design With Nature (Hoboken, NJ: JohnWiley & Sons, in press); Berea College Ecovillagefrom visit, 29 January 2007, from Richard Olson,director of Berea College Sustainable and Envi-ronmental Studies, discussion with author, 29January 2007, and from Meghan Bihn, “BereaCollege’s Ecovillage Provides Educational Oppor-tunities and Green Housing for Students,” Spire,February 2006; Ecoovila from Jonathan Dawson,Ecovillages: New Frontiers for Sustainability (Bris-tol, U.K.: The Schumacher Society, 2006), pp.32–33; The Solaire from Edward A. Clerico, “TheSolaire—A Case Study in Urban Water Reuse,” inBusiness Sustainability: Planning for a ResponsibleFuture, Conference Proceedings (Philadelphia,PA: Temple University, February 2007), p. 6;BedZED from Jonathan Dawson, “BedZED andFindhorn: How Do They Compare?” Permacul-ture Magazine, No. 49, pp. 48–52; Farr, op. cit.this note.



Notes

8. Quote from Robert and Diane Gilman, Ecov-illages and Sustainable Communities (Holte, Den-mark: Gaia Trust, 1990); Stephen Tinsley andHeather George, Ecological Footprint of the Find-horn Foundation and Community (Forres, U.K.:Sustainable Development Research Centre, August2006); Dawson, Ecovillages, op. cit. note 7, p.29.

9. Meltzer, op. cit. note 4.

10. Number of ecovillages from Global Ecovil-lage Network, at gen.ecovillage.org/index.html,viewed 11 October 2007; number of co-housingcommunities from The Cohousing Association ofthe United States, “US Cohousing Communi-ties,” at directory.cohousing.org, viewed 4 April2007, from Canadian Cohousing Network, “Com-munity Summary,” at cohousing.ca/summary.htm,viewed 4 April 2007, from Greg Bamford, “‘Liv-ing Together on One’s Own’: Cohousing forOlder People, A New Housing Type in Denmarkand the Netherlands,” conference paper, 2004,from UK Co-housing Network, at www.cohous-ing.org.uk, viewed 4 April 2007, and from DickUrban Vestbro, Chair of National Association ofCollective Housing Units, Kollektivhus NU, Swe-den, e-mail to author, 9 March 2007 (note: thenumber of co-housing communities includes thosethat are still under construction or being planned).

11. Phinney Ecovillage from Alex Fryer, “Neigh-borhoods Battle Global Warming on a SmallScale,” Seattle Times, 15 May 2007, and fromWeb site, at www.phinneyecovillage.net, viewed 3October 2007.

12. Robert D. Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Col-lapse and Revival of American Community (NewYork: Simon & Schuster, 2000), p. 19.

13. Ibid.; Miller McPherson, Lynn Smith-Lovin,and Matthew E. Brashears, “Social Isolation inAmerica: Changes in Core Discussion Networksover Two Decades,” American Sociological Review,June 2006, pp. 353–75.

14. Putnam, op. cit. note 12, pp. 327–32.

15. Meltzer, op. cit. note 4, pp. 137–45.

16. Kenneth Mulder, Robert Costanza, and JonErickson, “The Contribution of Built, Human,Social and Natural Capital to Quality of Life inIntentional and Unintentional Communities,”Ecological Economics, August 2006, pp. 13–23.

17. Olson, op. cit. note 7; “Green Steps: BereaCollege’s Movement Toward Sustainability,” infor-mational flyer (Berea, KY: Berea College, 21 Octo-ber 2004).

18. Ray Oldenburg, The Great Good Place (NewYork: Marlowe & Company, 1999), pp. xvii–xix.

19. Judy Wicks, “In Business For Life,” Yes!winter 2007, pp. 46–49; Justin Martin, “JudyWicks, Owner: White Dog Cafe, Philadelphia,”Fortune Small Business, June 2003, p. 87; AnnKarlen, White Dog Community Enterprises, dis-cussion with author, 8 February 2007; White DogCommunity Enterprises, at www.whitedogcafe-foundation.org, viewed 4 October 2007.

20. History from William H. Ukers, All aboutCoffee (New York: The Tea and Coffee TradeJournal Company, 1922), pp. 18, 102, 110–11;millions from National Coffee Association ofU.S.A. Inc., National Coffee Drinking Trends2007 (New York: 2007), p. 33, and “Coffee: TheStandard Breakfast Drink Grows Up,” Nation’sRestaurant News, 19 August 2002; Green CaféNetwork, at www.greencafenetwork.org, viewed 3October 2007; Kirstin Henninger, founding direc-tor, Green Café Network, discussion with author,7 September 2007.

21. Edie Farwell, resident at Cobb Hill, discus-sion with author, 1 October 2007; Cobb HillCheese Web site, at cobbhill.org/cheese, viewed1 October 2007; visit to Lakabe, 17–18 Septem-ber 2007; Mabel Cañada, co-founder of Lakabe,discussion with author, 17 September 2007; visitto Earthaven Ecovillage, March 2007; Diana LeafeChristian, Earthaven Ecovillage, discussion withauthor, 15 March 2007; Earthaven Web site, atwww.earthaven.org/agriculture/Red_Moon_Herbs.php, viewed 1 October 2007; localization bene-fits from Michael H. Shuman, The Small-MartRevolution: How Local Businesses Are Beating theGlobal Competition (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler



Notes

Publishers, Inc., 2006).

22. Matthew Hora and Judy Tick, From Farm toTable: Making the Connection in the Mid-AtlanticFood System (Washington, DC: Capital Area FoodBank, 2001); Rich Pirog et al., Food, Fuel and Free-ways: An Iowa Perspective on How Far Food Trav-els, Fuel Usage, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions(Ames, IA: Leopold Center for Sustainable Agri-culture, June 2001); David S. Reay, “Costing Cli-mate Change,” Philosophical Transactions:Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences,15 December 2002, pp. 2947–61.

23. Dorothy Blair, Carol C. Giesecke, and San-dra Sherman, “A Dietary, Social and EconomicEvaluation of the Philadelphia Urban GardeningProject,” Journal of Nutrition Education, vol. 23,no. 4 (1991), pp. 161–67; Donna Armstrong,“A Survey of Community Gardens in UpstateNew York: Implications for Health Promotionand Community Development,” Health and Place,December 2000, pp. 319–27.

24. Farmers’ markets from Agricultural Market-ing Service, “USDA Releases New Farmers Mar-ket Statistics,” press release (Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Agriculture, 5 December2006); community-supported agriculture fromRobyn Van En Center, online database, at www.wilson.edu/wilson/asp/content.asp?id=1645,viewed 4 October 2007; Brian Halweil andDanielle Nierenberg, “Farming the Cities,” inWorldwatch Institute, op. cit. note 7, p. 53.

25. Growing Power, at www.growingpower.org,viewed 5 October 2007; Erika Allen (GrowingPower) and Anthony Flaccavento, “Funding YourCommunity Food Projects with Social Enter-prises,” presented at Southern Sustainable Agri-culture Working Group: Practical Tools andSolutions for Sustaining Family Farms Confer-ence, 27 January 2007.

26. Rooted in Community, at www.rootedincommunity.org, viewed 5 October 2007.

27. Peter Rosset and Medea Benjamin, Two StepsBackward, One Step Forward: Cuba’s NationwideExperiment with Organic Agriculture (San Fran-

cisco: Global Exchange, 1993); The CommunitySolution, The Power of Community: How CubaSurvived Peak Oil (Yellow Springs, OH: 2006);Mario Gonzalez Novo and Catherine Murphy,“Urban Agriculture in the City of Havana: A Pop-ular Response to a Crisis,” Growing Cities Grow-ing Food: Urban Agriculture on the Policy Agenda:A Reader on Urban Agriculture (Resource Cen-tres on Urban Agriculture & Food Security, 2001)pp. 329–47.

28. Erik Assadourian, “Cultivating the ButterflyEffect,” World Watch Magazine, January/Febru-ary 2003, pp. 28–35. Box 11–2 from the follow-ing: visit to Can Masdeu, 15 September 2007;Luke Cordingley, “Can Masdeu: Rise of the Rur-bano Revolution,” in Brett Bloom and AvaBromberg, eds., Making Their Own Plan(Chicago, IL: White Walls, Inc. 2004); JamesHoward Kunstler, The Long Emergency: Survivingthe Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-FirstCentury (New York: Atlantic Monthly Press,2005).

29. Relocalization Network, 2006 Relocaliza-tion Network Report (Sebastopol, CA: Post CarbonInstitute, 2007); Relocalization Network, “Alpha-betical List of Groups,” at www.relocalize.net,viewed 5 October 2007.

30. Business Alliance for Living Local Economies,at www.livingeconomies.org, viewed 9 October2007.

31. Willits Economic LocaLization, “WELLOverview,” at www.willitseconomiclocalization.org,viewed 9 October 2007; Transition Towns wiki,at transitiontowns.org, viewed 9 October 2007.

32. Stuart Gillespie, “Scaling Up CommunityDriven Development: A Synthesis of Experience,”Food Consumption and Nutrition Division Dis-cussion Paper No. 181 (Washington, DC: Interna-tional Food Policy Research Institute, June 2004);The Goldman Environmental Prize, “Hammer-skjoeld Simwinga: Transforming Communitiesthrough Sustainable Development,” at www.goldmanprize.org, viewed 9 October 2007.

33. Hilary French, “Sacred Mountain,” World



Notes

Watch Magazine, May/June 2004, pp. 18–25;Nancy Chege, Kenyan National Coordinator ofCOMPACT, discussion with author, March 2006.

34. Social Investment Forum (SIF), 2005 Reporton Socially Responsible Investing Trends in theUnited States (Washington, DC: January 2006); p. 28; CDP Publication Committee, ProvidingCapital, Building Communities, Creating Impact(San Francisco: National Community Capital Asso-ciation, undated), p. 4.

35. SIF, op. cit. note 34; Dawson, Ecovillages, op.cit. note 7, p. 48.

36. ShoreBank Pacific, at www.eco-bank.com/services/commercial/lending.html, viewed 9October 2007; David C. E. Williams, CEO ofShoreBank Pacific, Letter to Stakeholders of Shore-Bank Pacific, 30 June 2006.

37. Scott Malone, “New Age Town in U.S.Embraces Dollar Alternative,” Reuters, 19 June2007; 4,000 from Ravi Dykema, “ComplementaryCurrencies for $ocial Change: An Interview withBernard Lietaer,” Nexus, July/August 2003.

38. Colin C. Williams et al., “Local Exchange andTrading Schemes (LETS): A Tool for CommunityRenewal?” Community, Work & Family, Decem-ber 2001, pp. 355–61; fureai kippu from Dykema,op. cit. note 37.

39. “Greyston Bakery: Let ‘Em Eat Cake,” 60Minutes, CBS, broadcast 11 January 2004;Greyston Bakery, at www.greystonbakery.com,viewed 9 October 2007; Population and Com-munity Development Association, www.pda.or.th/eng, viewed 9 October 2007; Birds & Bees Resort,at www.cabbagesandcondoms.co.th, viewed 9October 2007; Kit Snedaker, “A Restaurant witha Mission: Cabbages and Condoms, Bangkok,”GoNOMAD.com, 2007, at www.gonomad.com/features/0011/snedaker_cabbages.html, viewed 9October 2007.

40. Visit to Los Angeles Ecovillage, op. cit. note1; Arkin, op. cit. note 1.

41. Richard E. White and Gloria Eugenia

González Mariño, “Las Gaviotas: Sustainabilityin the Tropics,” World Watch Magazine, May/June2007, pp. 18–23.

42. The Ecovillage Training Center, at www.thefarm.org, viewed 5 October 2007; Gaia Univer-sity at www.gaiauniversity.org, viewed 5 October2007.

43. Homeowners associations from Caitlin Car-penter, “As an Energy-saver, the Clothesline Makesa Comeback,” Christian Science Monitor, 24August 2007; carbon dioxide (CO2) emissionsare a Worldwatch calculation based on EnergyInformation Administration, End-Use Consump-tion of Electricity, 2001 (Washington, DC: U.S.Department of Energy, May 2005) (assuming500-megawatt coal-fired power plants running at90 percent capacity and 0.703 kilograms of CO2emissions per kilowatt-hour generated); Right toDry Campaign from Project Laundry List, atwww.laundrylist.org, viewed 5 October 2007.

44. Box 11–3 from the following: price of orig-inal purchase from Chris Ling, Katherine Thomas,and Jim Hamilton, “Triple Bottom Line in Prac-tice: From Dockside to Dockside Green,” Com-munity Research Connections, undated;contamination history from Hans Tammemagi,“Victoria Project Goes from Brown to Green,”Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce, 26 October2006; timeline for completion from ThomasinaBarnes, “Green Credentials Take Center Stage,”(Toronto) Globe and Mail, 13 July 2007; numberof units, excess energy, and green technology sum-mary from Dockside Green, Annual SustainableReport 2006 (Vancouver, BC: 2006), pp. 4, 7,30–31; penalty pledge and harbor industry heritagefrom Dockside Green, at www.docksidegreen.com,viewed 2 August 2007; sewage treatment savingsfrom Chris Wood, “Global Warming’s Threat toBC: Seeking Solutions,” The Tyee, 31 August2006.

45. LEED for Neighborhood Development, atwww.usgbc.org, viewed 5 October 2007; JenniferHenry, program manager, LEED for Neighbor-hood Development, U. S.Green Building Coun-cil, discussion with author, 21 June 2007.



Notes

46. Database of LEED projects available atwww.usgbc.org, viewed 5 October 2007; LEEDfor Neighborhood Development, op. cit. note45; Henry, op. cit. note 45.

47. Sarah James and Torbjorn Lahti, The Nat-ural Step for Communities: How Cities and TownsCan Change to Sustainable Practices (GabriolaIsland, BC: New Society Publishers, 2004); Sus-tain Dane, “Eco-municipalities,” at www.sustaindane.org, viewed 5 October 2007.

48. Local Works, “Campaign for the SustainableCommunities Bill,” at www.localworks.org, viewed9 October 2007; “The Sustainable CommunitiesBill,” at www.neweconomics.org/gen, viewed 9October 2007.

49. Bill McKibben, Deep Economy: The Wealth ofCommunities and the Durable Future (New York:Times Books, 2007), p. 149; Bernhard Poetter,“People Power, Danish-style,” OnEarth, summer2007, p. 20.

50. “Million Solar Roofs Bill (SB 1) Signed intoLaw,” press release (Los Angeles: EnvironmentCalifornia, 21 August 2006).

Chapter 12. Mobilizing Human Energy

1. U.S. Agency for International Developmentand Comité Inter-Etate pour la Lutte contre laSécheresse au Sahel, Investing in Tomorrow’sForests: Toward an Action Agenda for RevitalizingForests in West Africa (Washington, DC: 2002);Lydia Polgreen, “In Niger, Trees and Crops TurnBack the Desert,” New York Times, 11 February2007.

2. Figure 12–1 from Institut GéographiqueNational du Niger (1975) and Center for EROS,U.S. Geological Survey (2003); Mike McGahuey,Chris Reij, Tony Rinaudo, George Taylor, andBob Winterbottom, e-mails to author, 9 Septem-ber to 1 October 2007.

3. Polgreen, op. cit. note 1; McGahuey et al.,op. cit. note 2; data on estimated tree coveragefrom G. Gray Tappan, geographer, SAIC, Center

for EROS, U.S. Geological Survey, e-mail toauthor, 11 October 2007.

4. McGahuey et al., op. cit. note 2.

5. Yamba Boubacar et al., Sahel Study: NigerPilot Study Report (Washington, DC: Interna-tional Resource Group, 2005); Chris Reij, “MoreSuccess Stories in Africa’s Drylands Than OftenAssumed,” in Forum sur la Souveraineté Alimen-taire (Niamey, Niger: Resau des OrganisationsPaysannes et de Producteurs Agricoles de L’Afriquede L’Ouest, 2006).

6. Deepa Narayan et al., eds., Voices of the Poor:Crying Out for Change (New York: Oxford Uni-versity Press, 2000).

7. Polarized positions from Jeffrey D. Sachs,The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for OurTime (New York: Penguin Press, 2005), and fromWilliam Easterly, White Man’s Burden: Why theWest’s Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So MuchIll and So Little Good (London: Penguin Books,2006).

8. Poor record of western-inspired develop-ment plans from William Easterly, The ElusiveQuest for Growth (Cambridge, MA: The MITPress, 2002); quote from World Bank, EconomicGrowth in the 1990s: Learning from a Decade ofReform (Washington, DC: 2005). Box 12–1 fromthe following: donors becoming selective fromDollar and Levin (2004), as cited in Carol Lan-caster, Foreign Aid: Diplomacy, Development,Domestic Politics (Chicago: University of ChicagoPress, 2007), p. 53; on reform of developmentassistance, see, for example, The Carter Center,Development Cooperation Forum: Achieving MoreEquitable Globalization (Atlanta, GA: 2007), DavidGouldsbrough, Does the IMF Constrain HealthSpending in Poor Countries? (Washington, DC:Center for Global Development, 2007), andOxfam International, Oxfam International Sub-mission to the World Bank/IMF 2005 PRS Review(Oxford, U.K.: June 2005); data on decline inabsolute poverty from World Bank, World Devel-opment Indicators 2004 (Washington, DC: 2004);varying progress of nations from Dani Rodrik,ed., In Search of Prosperity: Analytic Narratives on



Notes

Documents

Innovations for a Sustainable EconomSustainable …aceer.uprm.edu/pdfs/SOW_SustainableEconomy.pdfThe ecovillage and co-housing movements are perhaps the best illustrations of the oppor-tunities