EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
Popular content
Today's Top News
Living Buildings, Living Economies, and a Living Future
What we can learn from two of the most exciting emerging movements of our time.
At a recent conference, I saw the potential for blending two of the most exciting emerging movements of our time—the living building and the living economies movements. A vision of the combination of these two movements energized me with renewed hope that we humans can end our isolation from one another and from nature—that we can move forward to achieve a prosperous, secure, and creative human future for all.
In Brooklyn, a rooftop vegetable garden overlooks the Manhattan skyline. The living economies movement stands to benefit from the living building movement’s conceptual grounding in ecological systems thinking. The living buildings movement stands to benefit from the living economies movement’s skills in linking local businesses into mutually supportive networks of business relationships.(Photo by Evan Long)
The Living Building Challenge
The conference I attended was led by Jason McLennan of the Cascadia Green Building Council and the International Living Future Institute. Ambitiously titled “Living Future 2011,” the conference focused on the “Living Building Challenge,” which takes Green Building standards to a new level. As I listened to the conference presenters, I heard some of the brightest and most tech-savvy minds in architecture, construction, and urban planning spell out the practical possibilities for creating built spaces around integrated energy, water, and nutrition (food) systems. Some of the ideas are still theoretical. Most, however, are already in application or being incorporated into physical structures now under construction.
These innovative proposals eliminate waste, feature natural lighting, and provide for onsite capture of rainwater, energy (wind, solar, and thermal), and organic matter (food scraps and human waste) for recycling and reuse, including for urban gardens (edible roofs and walls and built in green houses).
Water is used in the first cycle for drinking, dish washing, and showering; recycled for laundry and micro-flush composting toilets; and directed from there to onsite gardens from which it filters into the aquifer. Hot water, cooking, and space heating are integrated to optimize overall energy efficiency.
Integrating multi-purpose buildings into a larger multi-building neighborhood or district system adds opportunities to develop public green spaces, community gardens, edible landscaping, and small-scale poultry and livestock production, as well as natural wetlands and living machine water purification to continuously recycle nutrients, water, and energy.
Integrative projects also create opportunities to balance the utility loads of businesses, which generally have greater energy needs during the day, and residences, which have greater needs during nonbusiness hours. Bringing residences, employment, shopping, and recreation together in close proximity minimizes transportation requirements and facilitates the sharing of autos, bicycles, appliances, and tools, and community connections to mass transit, bike trails, and other transportation alternatives.
The Living Economies Connection
The living building framework focuses attention on shelter and nutrition as the basic essentials of a human livelihood. It seeks to remedy the dysfunctions of current infrastructure designs that isolate us from one another and operate in opposition to the biosphere’s natural generative processes. The living economies framework focuses on networks of living enterprises and seeks to remedy the dysfunctions of an economic system that contributes to this same isolation and disconnect.
Both movements seek to bring the way we live into alignment with the structure and dynamics of Earth’s biosphere, which self-organizes locally everywhere to optimize the sustainable utilization of energy, water, and nutrients in support of life.
The corporate ruled global economy isolates people and communities from the sources of their food, energy, water, materials, and manufactured goods, leaving them dependent on corporate controlled global supply chains that are wasteful, unstable, unaccountable, and environmentally and social destructive. The underlying system structure and dynamics are in most every respect mirror opposites of those of the biosphere.
Working in opposition to the biosphere, the global economy is maintained only by unsustainable dependence on a non-renewable fossil fuels subsidy. It is already failing and its ultimate collapse is only a matter of time.
The living economies movement seeks to displace this failed economic system with a planetary system of resilient, self-reliant local economies comprised of human-scale, locally-owned enterprises that use local resources to meet local needs in cooperative alignment with the structure and dynamics of local ecosystems.
Up to this point in time, the living economies movement has focused on the enterprise as the primary unit of production. The living buildings movement brings in a focus on restoring the household as a unit of food, energy, and water production. Each is an essential contributor to household and community livelihoods in a living future, and each creates opportunities for the other.
Implementing the Living Building Challenge creates many opportunities for local businesses to supply and install locally sourced building materials and technologies for the construction of new buildings and for retrofitting existing ones.
While home production will reduce demand for conventional food, water, and energy services, it will create new opportunities for local businesses to provide relevant expertise and inputs. There will be needs for local food processing and market facilities, as well as for businesses that specialize in creating and maintaining edible walls, roofs, and backyard gardens for households that lack the skills or inclination to do their own planting and maintenance.
Many of these activities require financing from community banks, mutual savings and loans, and credit unions that understand and support the unconventional technologies and ownership arrangements involved. Rebuilding community financial institutions that support all elements of the local living economy is a top priority of the living economies movement.
A Natural Alliance
The leaders of the living economies movement are predominantly entrepreneurs who view the world through the lens of marketing, finance, supply chains, and business value propositions. They are natural doers and risk takers eager to test new ideas, disinclined to spend a lot of time on planning, and impatient with drawn-out conceptual conversations.
The leaders of the living building movement are predominantly architects, with a sprinkling of urban planners, developers, engineers, and contractors. The architects and urban planners view the world through the lens of design and structure, think in terms of systems, and are drawn to conceptual frameworks that deepen understanding of what is required to bring the human species into alignment with the structure and dynamics of Earth’s biosphere.
The living economies movement stands to benefit from the living building movement’s conceptual grounding in ecological systems thinking. The living buildings movement stands to benefit from the living economies movement’s skills in linking local businesses into mutually supportive networks of business relationships. The living building developers and contractors mix easily with the living economy entrepreneurs and are a natural bridge between the two movements. Both movements stand to reap significant benefit from this natural alliance.
The Connected Life
We humans, in a fit of adolescent hubris, have sought to liberate ourselves from the responsibilities of life in community. We are in denial of our fundamental nature as living beings—forgetting that because of the way life manages energy, living beings exist only in active relationships to other living beings.
We have so confused individual autonomy with personal liberty that we have created economies that reduce caring human relationships to soulless financial exchange and structured our physical space around buildings and auto-dependent transportation systems that wall us off from one another and nature. In isolation from nature we have sought to dominate and control rather than work with nature’s natural generative processes. We have paid a terrible price.
As we restructure our physical and economic relationships to achieve true economic efficiency and reduce the human burden on the biosphere, we will see even more clearly our interdependence with one another and the place we live. We will know where our food, water, and energy come from. We will know where our wastes go. And most of all we will be constantly reminded of the extent to which our happiness and well-being depend on our active engagement with the generative living community of which we are a part.
The challenges we face in making the transition are enormous. But so too is the opportunity to create and secure a living future for ourselves and our children for generations to come.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


8 Comments so far
Show AllI think that is exactly what the author is saying, with the added caveat that if we don't slay the capitalist Rhinoceros and replace it with a sustainable economy, then Mother Nature will do it for us.
Wizard/Architect Michael Reynolds has been building EARTHSHIP houses for forty years using these same principles, although in rural areas.
There's a documentary about his work called GARBAGE WARRIOR and info at the website here: http://www.earthship.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=710&Itemid=2
Very inspiring stuff. Check it out.
(ps. I'm selling my house in the fall and building my own Earthship next year. Exciting!)
David Korten is one of those who not only shows what's wrong with capitalism, but is actively working on an alternative model. I think people really need to get down to the details that are not always that sexy, details that would involve numbers, and that would be important if people are serious about sustainable living.
I have thought a lot about the need to re-design our daily lives so that we are not in freefall when the Empire collapses. I mean reassessing our entire concept of what a worthy life goal is and what a worthy life looks like. Most people don't even know. They would say that money and acquisition are not worthy, but will spend their entire lives acting as if it is a race to see who can use up the most resources, leaving many without, and therefore able to declare success to whatever degree you are above others in the race to use resources.
I think David Blume is on the right track. Make biofuels out of non-food plants and waste. Since ethanol is not easily transported, it makes sense to manufacture it and use it in the same community. If we move away from the cross-country movement of goods and build sort of closed-system communities with the help of modern communications and other necessary inputs.
What will happen when people do this will Starve the Rhino. We just disengage until all that is left of the Empire is a few declining and decadent old guys who think they own the world. Meanwhile, we carry on without them. This will require some upheaval, and I know I have over-simplified things. But I think "disengage" in large numbers is the best strategy.
I think they saw "disengage, in large numbers" coming, which is why they felt it necessary to take over the government and have their stooges legislate things like preemptive war and mandatory insurance.
I agree we need to disengage economically, but I don't think we can afford to disengage politically, FWIW, IMO.
Yes that is definitely true. We have a responsibility to work on that front. Thanks for pointing it out.
Lots of people see technology as powerful, justice as weak, and thus think a way out lies in a (re)design revolution (as Bucky Fuller said), not in "liberty and justice for all." Certainly, much good does come from techno-progress (or regress, in case of dusting off good old ideas); but harm, too. Suppose you put all the green ways in place and make your locale more livable, more attractive -- you'd push up the location values. Higher land values mean more debt and a wider gulf between rich and poor, unless you bother to recover and share them as some small jurisdictions do.
Presently, your property tax means building greenly adds to your tax burden. Many owners won't bother. You could exempt green building, but then you must define it, and expand bureaucracy and rules, and needlessly empower the already over-empowered. Instead, you could replace the property tax with land dues and use the land rent for a resident's dividend. Where it's been tried, it has worked -- showing fair policy is not so impotent after all.