sustainability facilitating community created …towards local cultures of sustainability:...

TOWARDS LOCAL CULTURES OF SUSTAINABILITY: FACILITATING

COMMUNITY CREATED ENVIRONMENT

EDUCATION CENTRES THROUGH DESIGN

Erwin Weber BArch Sc, BArch (Hons)

Supervisors: Dr Gillian Lawson, Professor Janis Birkeland & Peter Hedley

Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Applied Science (Research)

Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering

Queensland University of Technology

2012

2

Keywords

Action Research, Community Development, Community Economic Transition, Ecological Footprint, Ecologically Sustainable Development, Environmental Education, Environment Education Centre Exemplar, Learning Community, Eco-Positive Development, Ecologically Sustainable Design, Local Economy, Transformative Learning.

3

Abstract

“The key is developing systems and patterns of settlement which make it easy

for us to live well without the need to consume much” . . . “The key to a sustainable

world order must be the development of many small, highly self-sufficient

settlements”.

~Ted Trainer (2012, 12,57)

Ecological sustainability has been proposed to address the problem of human

impacts increasingly degrading planetary resources and ecosystems, threatening

biodiversity, eco-services and human survival. Ecological sustainability is an

imperative, with Australia having one of the highest eco-footprints per person

worldwide. While significant progress has been made via implementation of

ecologically sustainable design in urban communities, relatively little has been

undertaken in small, disparate regional communities in Australia. Regional

communities are disadvantaged by rural economic decline associated with structural

change and inequities of resource transfer. The ecologically sustainable solution is

holistic, so all settlements need to be globally wise, richly biodiverse yet locally

specific.

As a regional solution to this global problem, this research offers the practical

means by which a small regional community can contribute. It focuses on the design

and implementation of a community centre and the fostering of transformative

community learning through an integrated ‘learning community’ awareness of

ecologically sustainable best practice. Lessons learned are documented by the

participant researcher who as a designer, facilitator, local resident and social narrator

has been deeply connected with the Tweed-Caldera region over a period since 1980.

The collective action of the local community of Chillingham has been diligently

recorded over a decade of design and development. Over this period, several

positive elements emerged in terms of improvements to the natural and built

environment, greater social cohesion and co-operative learning along with a shift

towards a greener local economy. Behavioural changes in the community were noted

as residents strived to embrace ecological ideals and reduce fossil fuel dependency.

They found attractive local solutions to sourcing of food and using local employment

opportunities to up skill their residents via transformative learning as a community in

4

transition. Finally, the catalytic impact of external partnering has also been

documented. How well the region as a whole has achieved its ecologically

sustainable objectives is measured in terms of the delivered success of private and

public partnering with the community, the creation of a community centre cum

environment education centre, the restoration of local heritage buildings, the repair of

riparian forests and improved water conditions in local river systems, better roads and

road safety, local skills and knowledge transfer, support of local food and

local/regional growers markets to attract tourists via the integrated trails network. In

aggregate, each and every element contributes to a measure of eco-positive

development for the built environment, its social organisation and its economy that

has guided the local community to find its own pathway to sustainability.

Within the Tweed-Caldera bioregion in northern New South Wales, there has

been a lack of strategic planning, ecologically sustainable knowledge and facilities in

isolated communities that could support the development of a local sustained green

economy, provide a hub for socio-cultural activities and ecology based education.

The first challenge in this research was to model a whole systems approach to eco-

positive development in Chillingham, NSW, a small community where Nature and

humanity know no specific boundary. The net result was the creation of a community

environment education centre featuring best-affordable ecological practice and

regionally distinctive, educational building form from a disused heritage building (cow

bale). This development, implemented over a decade, resonated with the later

regional wide programs that were linked in the Caldera region by the common

purpose of extending the reach of local and state government assistance to regional

NSW in economic transition coupled with sustainability. The lessons learned from

these linked projects reveal that subsequent programs have been significantly easier

to initiate, manage, develop and deliver results. In particular, pursuing collaborative

networks with all levels of government and external private partners has been

economically effective. Each community’s uniqueness has been celebrated and

through drawing out these distinctions, has highlighted local vision, strategic planning,

sense of belonging and connection of people with place. This step has significantly

reduced the level of friction between communities that comes from natural competition

for the finite pool of funds. Following the pilot Tweed-Caldera study, several other

NSW regional communities are now undertaking a Community Economic Transition

Program based on the processes, trials and positive experiences witnessed in the

Tweed-Caldera region where it has been demonstrated that regional community

transition programs can provide an opportunity to plan and implement effective long

5

term strategies for sustainability, empowering communities to participate in eco-

governance. This thesis includes the design and development of a framework for

community created environment education centres to provide an equal access place

for community to participate to meet their essential needs locally. An environment

centre that facilitates community transition based on easily accessible environmental

education, skills and infrastructure is necessary to develop local cultures of

sustainability.

This research draws upon the literatures of ecologically sustainable

development, environmental education and community development in the context of

regional community transition towards ‘strong sustainability’. The research approach

adapted is best described as a four stage collaborative action research cycle where

the participant researcher (me) has a significant involvement in the process to foster

local cultures of sustainability by empowering its citizens to act locally and in doing so,

become more self reliant and socially resilient. This research also draws upon the

many fine working exemplars, such as the resilience of the Cuban people, the

transition town initiative in Totnes, U.K. and the models of Australian Community

Gardens, such as CERES (Melbourne) and Northey Street (Brisbane). The objectives

of this study are to research and evaluate exemplars of ecologically sustainable

environment education centres, to facilitate the design and development of an

environment education centre created by a small regional community as an

ecologically sustainable learning environment; to facilitate a framework for community

transition based on environmental education, skills and infrastructure necessary to

develop local cultures of sustainability.

The research was undertaken as action research in the Tweed Caldera in

Northern NSW. This involved the author as participant researcher, designer and

volunteer in two interconnected initiatives: the Chillingham Community Centre

development and the Caldera Economic Transition Program (CETP). Both initiatives

involved a series of design-led participatory community workshops that were

externally facilitated with the support of government agency partnerships, steering

committees and local volunteers.

Together the Caldera research programs involved communities participating in

developing their own strategic planning process and outcomes. The Chillingham

Community Centre was developed as a sustainable community centre/hub using a

participatory design process. The Caldera Economic Transition Program (CETP)

6

prioritised Caldera region projects: the Caldera farmer’s market; community gardens

and community kitchens; community renewable energy systems and an integrated

trails network.

The significant findings were: the CETP projects were capable of moving

towards an eco-positive design benchmark through transformative learning.

Community transition to sustainability programs need to be underpinned by

sustainability and environmental education based frameworks and practical on ground

experience in local needs based projects through transformative learning. The

actioned projects were successfully undertaken through community participation and

teamwork. Ecological footprint surveys were undertaken to guide and assess the

ongoing community transition process, however the paucity of responses needs to be

revisited.

The concept of ecologically sustainable development has been adopted

internationally, however existing design and planning strategies do not assure future

generations continued access to healthy natural life support systems. Sustainable

design research has usually been urban focussed, with little attention paid to regional

communities. This study seeks to redress this paucity through the design of

ecologically sustainable (deep green) learning environments for small regional

communities. Through a design-led process of environmental education, this study

investigates how regional communities can be facilitated to model the principles of

eco-positive development to support transition to local cultures of sustainability.

This research shows how community transition processes and projects can

incorporate sustainable community development as transformative learning through

design. Regional community transition programs can provide an opportunity to plan

long term strategies for sustainability, empowering people to participate in eco-

governance. A framework is developed for a community created environment

education centre to provide an equal access place for the local community to

participate in implementing ways to meet their essential needs locally. A community

environment education centre that facilitates community transition based on holistic

environmental education, skills and infrastructure is necessary to develop local

cultures of sustainability.

7

Table of Contents

Keywords ............................................................................................................................. 2

Abstract ................................................................................................................................ 3

Table of Contents ................................................................................................................ 7

List of Figures .................................................................................................................... 10

List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... 12

List of Abbreviations .......................................................................................................... 13

Statement of Original Authorship....................................................................................... 14

Acknowledgment ............................................................................................................... 15

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 17

1.1 Aims, Objectives and Research Questions ............................................................. 21

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................ 23

2.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 23

2.2 Ecologically Sustainable Development ................................................................... 24

2.3 The Global Environmental Movement ..................................................................... 28 2.3.1 Eco-Efficient Design and Eco-Positive Development ................................... 33

2.4 Design-led and Community Created Sustainability ................................................. 34

2.5 Environmental Education ........................................................................................ 37 2.5.1 Learning Communities .................................................................................. 41 2.5.2 Ecological Footprint....................................................................................... 42

2.6 Community Development: The Bottom-up Model ................................................... 43 2.6.1 Regional/Urban Inequity ............................................................................... 46 2.6.2 Transformation .............................................................................................. 47 2.6.3 Resilience and Self Reliance ........................................................................ 48 2.6.4 Community-Public-Private Partnerships ....................................................... 50 2.6.5 Social Change Volunteering ......................................................................... 51 2.6.6 Community Transition to Sustainability ......................................................... 52 2.6.7 Community Economic Development ............................................................. 55

2.7 Cultures of Sustainability ......................................................................................... 56 2.7.1 Community Sense of Place ........................................................................... 59 2.7.2 Caring For Our Country and People ............................................................. 61

2.8 Chapter Overview .................................................................................................... 61

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY AND METHODS .............................................. 63

3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 63

3.2 Eco-positive Development ...................................................................................... 63

3.3 Collaborative Action Research ................................................................................ 70

3.4 Participatory Design Process .................................................................................. 72

3.5 Transformative Learning ......................................................................................... 75

3.6 Chapter Overview .................................................................................................... 77

CHAPTER 4: TWEED-CALDERA BIOREGION ................................................. 79

8

4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 79

4.2 Significance of the Tweed-Caldera Region ............................................................ 79 4.2.1 Collapse of Local Agriculture and Local Economy 1973-1990’s .................. 85 4.2.2 Concerns over Environmental Degradation and Socio-Economic

Decline since 1970’s ..................................................................................... 87 4.2.3 Formation of Citizen Action Groups 1979-now ............................................. 89

4.3 Participant Researcher ........................................................................................... 92

4.4 Role of Community and Partners ............................................................................ 96 4.4.1 Role of Community Representatives and Participants ................................. 96 4.4.2 Role of Public-Private Partners .................................................................... 98

4.5 Chapter Overview ................................................................................................. 101

CHAPTER 5: CHILLINGHAM COMMUNITY CENTRE .................................... 103

5.1 Chillingham and its Community ............................................................................ 103

5.2 Research Design for Chillingham ......................................................................... 106

5.3 Evaluation of Types of Existing Centres ............................................................... 109 5.3.1 Community Centres .................................................................................... 111 5.3.2 Environment Education Centres (EEC) ...................................................... 113 5.3.3 Community Environment Education Centre (CEEC) .................................. 115 5.3.4 Summary of table 5.1 evaluation ................................................................ 118

5.4 Chillingham Community Centre Workshops: Community Visioning ..................... 119

5.5 Chillingham Community Centre Action Research Process .................................. 122

5.6 Outcomes: Chillingham Community Centre Design and Development: ............... 124

5.7 Chillingham Community Centre: Discussion and Reflections .............................. 144 5.7.1 Environmental Education ............................................................................ 146 5.7.2 Community Development ........................................................................... 153 5.7.3 Local Economy ........................................................................................... 154

5.8 Community Environment Education Centre Framework ...................................... 155


CHAPTER 6: CALDERA ECONOMIC TRANSITION PROGRAM (CETP) ...... 159

6.1 Background ........................................................................................................... 159

6.2 Selection and Role of the Steering Committee ..................................................... 161

6.3 The Caldera Economic Transition Program: Research Design ............................ 162 6.3.1 Caldera Community Workshops ................................................................. 164 6.3.2 Eco- Footprint Surveys ............................................................................... 165

6.4 Caldera Economic Transition Program: Action Research Outcomes ................... 165 6.4.1 Community Workshop Outcomes ............................................................... 165 6.4.2 Caldera Projects Outcomes ........................................................................ 166

6.5 Caldera Discussion: Observations and Reflections .............................................. 173 6.5.1 Environment Education .............................................................................. 174 6.5.2 Community Development ........................................................................... 174 6.5.3 Local Economy ........................................................................................... 176

6.6 CETP Evidence of Outcomes ............................................................................... 179

6.7 Local Cultures of Sustainability Framework ......................................................... 183


CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION ............................................................................ 187

REFERENCES .................................................................................................. 195

9

APPENDIX A: SUSTAINABLE BUILDING MATERIALS .................................. 207

APPENDIX B: CHILLINGHAM COMMUNITY WORKSHOP ACTION RESEARCH ................................................................................ 222

APPENDIX C: SWOT ANALYSIS ...................................................................... 224

APPENDIX D: EXEMPLARS .............................................................................. 238

10

List of Figures

Figure 2.1 Integrating the core concepts ........................................................................ 23

Figure 4.3 Tweed rural North West district: environmental remediation to high

biodiversity in built and natural environment ............................................................. 82

Figure 4.4 Caldera wildlife corridors from NSW Department of Environment and

Conservation (Scotts 2001) ....................................................................................... 83

Figure 5.1 A map of the village of Chillingham and its environs .................................. 104

Figure 5.2 Elements of a Social Theory of Learning from Wenger (1998, 5) .............. 107

Figure 5.3 Chillingham Community Centre stage 1 retrofit 2002 by Erwin Weber ..... 125

Figure 5.4 The author’s master plan of Chillingham community environment

education centre, 2002 ............................................................................................ 126

Figure 5.5 Chillingham Community Centre design sketch plans (2002) ..................... 127

Figure 5.6. The CEEC Framework ............................................................................... 128

Figure 5.7 Timeline for the Chillingham Community Centre development .................. 130

Figure 5.8 Chillingham Community Centre aerial photo November 2011

(www.nearmap.com). ............................................................................................... 131

Figure 5.9 Regenerated Rainforest, Aerial Photo November 2011

(www.nearmap.com). ............................................................................................... 132

Figure 5.10 Outdoor chessboard and bandstand ........................................................ 133

Figure 5.11 Outdoor seating area at the Chillingham Community Centre .................. 133

Figure 5.12 Butterfly habitat linked to adjacent rainforest regeneration ...................... 134

Figure 5.13 Interpretive butterfly lifecycle sign photo Terry Wright. ............................. 134

Figure 5.14 Chillingham community garden volunteers ............................................... 135

Figure 5.15 Chillingham community garden nursery ................................................... 135

Figure 5.16 From cow bales to sustainable community centre ................................... 136

Figure 5.17 Chillingham 2007 youth festival: butterfly theme ...................................... 136

Figure 5.18 Chillingham 2007 youth festival: Bundjalung welcome to country ........... 137

Figure 5.19 TURSA program to build the shaded verandah ....................................... 138

Figure 5.20 Verandah in use as an external classroom ............................................... 138

Figure 5.21 Equal access - universal design ................................................................ 139

Figure 5.22 Chillingham markets .................................................................................. 140

Figure 5.23 2010 Chillingham market: supporting local economy (photograph

supplied by John Commerford) ............................................................................... 140

Figure 5.24 Rous River: restoration of healthy riparian systems ................................. 141

Figure 5.25 Active/passive solar installation ................................................................. 142

Figure 5.26 Community toilet: before landscaping ....................................................... 142

11

Figure 5.27 Community toilet: on-site autonomous eco-water management .............. 142

Figure 5.28 Beantree Crossing ..................................................................................... 150

Figure 5.29 Handcrafted security screen with local beantree symbol ......................... 151

Figure 5.30 Community Environment Education Centre Framework .......................... 156

Figure 6.1 CETP Timeline ............................................................................................. 160

Figure 6.2 CETP plan .................................................................................................... 163

Figure 6.3 Banora Point - before CETP project ............................................................ 169

Figure 6.4 Banora Point Community Garden ............................................................... 169

Figure 6.5 Burringbar kitchen - before CETP project ................................................... 169

Figure 6.6 Burringbar community kitchen ..................................................................... 169

Figure 6.7 Caldera Farmers' Market ............................................................................. 170

Figure 6.8 Caldera Farmers' Market ............................................................................. 170

Figure 6.9 Community hall at Crystal Creek with renewable energy and water

systems in place ....................................................................................................... 171

Figure 7.1 Transition to a Culture of Sustainability – concluding framework ............... 190

12

List of Tables

Table 3.1 .A comparative table listing eco-positive design services with current

aspirations of sustainable design (Birkeland 2009a). ............................................... 66

Table 3.2 Action Research Cycle: a 4 stage process .................................................... 71

Table 3.3 Action research steps summarised from (Wooltorton and Debra 2007) ....... 72

Table 3.4. Design Model adapted from P. Hedley Architect 1995, page 155. ............. 73

Table 5.1 Evaluation of types of existing centres ......................................................... 110

Table 5.2 Collaborative Action Research Process for Chillingham Community

Centre (CCC). .......................................................................................................... 123

Table 6.1 Caldera Economic Transition Program action research .............................. 178

Table 6.2 Caldera Economic Transition Program (CETP): Evidence of Outcomes ... 179

Table C.1. Chillingham Community Centre SWOT analysis results, Chillingham

district strategic plan, 2002, Chillingham naturally .................................................. 224

Table C.2. Key Focus Areas and Proposed Projects of the Caldera Community

Economic Transition Plan (CCETP), 2009) ............................................................ 235

13

List of Abbreviations

CCA Chillingham Community Association

CCC Chillingham Community Centre

CD Community Development

CERES Centre for Education and Research in Environmental Studies

CEEC Community Environment Education Centre

CET Community Economic Transition

CETP Caldera Economic Transition Program

CISCD Caldera Institute for Sustainable Community Development

CSU Charles Sturt University

DSRD Department of Regional and State Development

DECCW Department of Environment Climate Change and Water

EE Environmental Education

ESD Ecologically Sustainable Development

GU Griffith University

IPPC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

NGO Non Government Organisation

NSW I&I NSW Department of Industry and Investment

NSW T&I NSW Department of Trade and Investment

PV Photovoltaic

QUT Queensland University of Technology

RMI Rocky Mountain Institute

SCU Southern Cross University

TAFE Technical and Further Education

TSC Tweed Shire Council

UKIRA Uki Residents Association

U of N University of Newcastle

UN United Nations

UNDP United Nations Development Program

UNEP United Nations Education Program

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation

YECC York Environment Community Centre

14

Statement of Original Authorship

The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted to meet

requirements for an award at this or any other higher education institution. To the

best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously published

or written by another person except where due reference is made.

Signature: _________________________

Date: _________________________

15

Acknowledgment

I would like to thank the following people for their wonderful care and support: My wife,

Adrienne, son Lui, and daughter Estelle, for their love and extreme patience.

Supervisors Gillian Lawson, Janis Birkeland, Peter Hedley and QUT Librarian Helen

Woodman for their positive support.

The community members of: Chillingham, Crystal Creek, Uki and Tyalgum. The staff

of Tweed Shire Council and Industry and Investment NSW as fellow action research

participants. The CCA executive steering committee during the period 2001-2010:

John Gillieatt (honorary patron) Penny Townley, James Townley, Claire Masters,

Jenny Spragg, Robin Spragg, Elizabeth Harmon, Brian Harmon, Christine McKinnon,

Sonia Groves, Wendy Sandercock, Peter Liston, Wendy Liston, Sally Jacka,

Adrienne Weber, Erwin Weber.

The Caldera Economic Transition Program (CETP) steering committee members

were: Pieter Verasdonck North Coast regional manager NSW Department of Industry

and Investment (I & I NSW), formerly NSW Department of State and Regional

Development (DSRD).

Julia Hancock representing Uki District auspiced by Uki Ratepayer’s Association

(UKIRA)

Jenny Spragg, April Margieson, Adrienne Weber, Erwin Weber representing North-

West Region auspiced by Tweed Climate Action Now (Tweed CAN)

Anne Duke, Verdandi Worldtree, representing Tyalgum District auspiced by Tyalgum

District Community Association (TDCA)

Jenny Funari, Community Development Officer, Dan Walton Sustainability Officer,

representing Tweed Shire Council (TSC)

Robert Rosen, Community Development Consultant

Samantha Muller, Workshop Facilitator and Community Development Consultant

Stuart Reid, Rural North West coordinator

Eddie Roberts Uki district coordinator

Tudor Crystals Tyalgum district coordinator

Caldera Institute for Sustainable Community Development (CISCD)

Anne Duke, Jenny Spragg, Adrienne Weber, CISCD directors

Caldera Sustainable Communities 2010 Project, Anne Duke Project Coordinator

16

Many thanks to Li-Anne Woo and David Perry, Charles Rottier, Jenni Funari, John

Ahern, Patricia Kelly and Ian Lowe

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION 17

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

The Earth’s natural capital is being depleted at highly unsustainable rates.

Humanity in 2010 used 140% of the planet’s renewable resources such as fish and

timber (New South Wales Government 2010; Tweed Shire Council 2012b) and the

rate of use of non-renewable resources such as fossil fuels and metals is quantifiably

higher (Kitchen Garden Foundation 2012). Australian use of resources and emission

of greenhouse gases is amongst the highest in the world per capita (Australian

Bureau of Statistics 2010) as detailed in the National Greenhouse Accounts 1

presenting a significant opportunity for Australian communities to act in a more

sustainable and globally responsible way. Despite the substantial scientific literature

on anthropogenic effects, there is a paucity of grassroots information about practical

strategies for achieving sustainability at the community and individual level.

In the built environment literature, the theoretical principles of ecologically

sustainable development are well documented. However, there is little evidence on

the practical application of ecological sustainability examples of built environment

design in regional communities. This research bridges the knowledge gap by

considering how sustainability practice can be modelled in the context of regional built

environment design. It also contributes to practice as the design is actualised by

networking with the community and funding partners to make the conceptual model a

reality. A sequence of staged design and implementation cycles are undertaken.

The process of infusing ecologically sustainable ideas and practice within a

regional community is tripartite. It is a built environment, socio-cultural and economic

story. Environmental education and community development are the vehicles by

which community awareness of ecologically sustainable living is delivered. From a

socio-cultural perspective, a shared sense of place and belonging is essential to any

community. A central site designed to demonstrate eco-positive initiatives can

function as a community ‘commons’ as well as a place where people can learn about

their environment within their local area. In a practical sense, the lesson learned from

this thesis is that a community centre is more than bricks and mortar. It embodies the

heart of a community where ecologically sustainable practice is experienced first-

1 See http://www.climatechange.gov.au/en/climate-change/emissions.aspx

18 Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

hand, via the retrofit of a heritage building shaped by the community, from its visible

renewable energy and water systems through to the interpretative signs.

The focus of community learning that underpins a ‘community of sustainable

practice’ is led by front loading environmentally responsible practice through

collaborative design. Positive improvements to the ecological and social base of the

community are achieved in accordance with Birkeland’s eco-positive development

concept where a deep-green project design is initiated with an imperative to design for

Nature. In implementing this research project, the level of engagement between

community members has increased substantially. By allowing the fullest participation,

members of the community of all ages and dispositions can work towards a mutual

sense of achievement and collective empowerment. Consensus decision making

from within rather than led by government, is key to the success of community

infrastructure development projects.

Economic decline, the shift in population from regional areas to cities,

structural industrial change and the disequilibrium in skills in the labour market have

had a deleterious impact on regional communities and have created negative social

issues. Regional community infrastructure and facilities are often in disrepair and are

in need of urgent and costly remediation. Regional communities are less likely than

their urban counterparts to experience and have access to community education

initiatives on ecological sustainability. These isolated communities are also less likely

to be capable of meeting needs locally or cheaply due to local economic disadvantage

and higher transportation costs with rising fuel prices. Recent government programs

have been influenced by local Agenda 21 and a reversal in public policy thinking is

one of cooperation and shared decision making with recognition of the legitimacy of a

common local community voice. Further, centralised government decision making

processes, until recently, have been highly top-down and have been locally and

socially disempowering. A well formed community strategic vision has healed

community division and has sharpened goals and directions. Such clarity has had the

effect of pulling in greater external sources of funds to resolve the lack of infrastructure

and public service support in regional areas.

The research design adopted is nested in the context of real community

experiences incorporating the core concepts for this study: ecologically sustainability,

environmental education and community development. The literature review in

Chapter 2 intertwines a multidisciplinary approach. Given the use of eco-positive


development adopted as a benchmark, it is imperative that the literature examining

ecologically sustainable development is considered first. Furthermore, the literature

examining environmental education and community development that is most suited

to enable community organisations to transition to sustainability is reviewed. These

core concepts were from their inception supported by the United Nations (UN) and

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as

globally significant initiatives towards sustainable outcomes. Under each core

concept, the related literature and associated concepts are discussed with the

understanding that sustainability principles and practice are central to and underpin

this thesis.

Chapter 3 provides a review of research methods deployed in this thesis.

Eco-positive development is adopted as a positive benchmark for community led (or

participatory) design which fuses built environment, social and biophysical

considerations together. It involves a project oriented program of public facilities

upgrade in the form of a whole integrated systems approach to built environment

retrofitting and natural environment regeneration. Design-led collaborative action

research encourages the fullest community participation in seeking change through

ecological design for the future. For sustainability to be understood and practiced by

whole communities, learning that is personally and collectively transformative is

essential. For this reason, the concept of transformative learning in community is

included as the benchmark for environmental education methodology. The creation of

a culture of sustainability requires a broad spectrum of change from within community

groups. For this reason, the participant researcher has engaged with local community

groups to action transition to sustainability via first hand experiences through

charrettes (design workshops) and working bees. This research incorporates state of

the art knowledge and thinking into the community development and environmental

education processes via collaborative ‘action research’. This bottom-up approach has

resulted in the granting of considerable autonomy and freedom to the people to

decide how they must be organised, what should be prioritised and how the projects

could be funded in their own local community.

Outcomes for the Caldera study demonstrate that community participants are

valued and recognized through their active involvement in projects. There is now a

passionate ground swell of enthusiasm within the Tweed-Caldera region to undertake

community transition programs. Significant strategic planning has taken place within

this research that involves and empowers people to positively develop their local


assets in partnership with government and other external private parties. The results

of which increase the community’s local economy, reduce consumption of fossil fuels,

non-local goods / services and transportation costs while enhancing self reliance and

social resilience.

This research examines the green transition responses in three Caldera

communities of Uki, Tyalgum and the Rural North-West (including Chillingham/Crystal

Creek). The Tweed-Caldera bioregion of New South Wales abuts several significant

World Heritage listed areas. These communities offer a unique setting to

environmental research as there is little separation between the boundaries of

civilisation and major wildlife corridors which means that humanity and nature share

common spaces. In the case of Chillingham, the wildlife corridor transects the village

centre. The protection of these local World Heritage assets, including the rare and

endangered flora and fauna, is addressed within each of the community’s strategic

plans. The objective of these localised plans seeks ecologically sustainable ways

through restoration of local resources while simultaneously securing local socio-

economic advantage. The research setting for this thesis is discussed in greater

detail in Chapter 4. The manner in which communities organised themselves and the

roles taken by myself as participant researcher, ecologically sustainable designer,

facilitator and resident are also outlined.

The first stage of this research documents a rural heritage building (cow bale)

retrofitted as a community centre and adopted as an ecologically sustainable

environment education centre in Chillingham, NSW over the period 2001 to 2011.

The Chillingham Community Centre development intended from the start to be a

working demonstration of active-passive solar design and renewable technologies,

capable of providing food production, outdoor connectivity and be used as an

emergency headquarters in times of crisis. Details of the four stages of action

research - the plan, the actions, the post-implementation observations and

subsequent reflections of the Chillingham experience are discussed in Chapter 5.

The Chillingham development was undertaken well before the formation of a wider

regional initiative of local communities working in partnership with the NSW state and

local governments. The Chillingham development and neighbouring experiences of

Uki and Tyalgum provided some significant practical insight and experiences that

made Tweed-Caldera regional transition studies easier and faster.


The second stage of this research, the Caldera Economic Transition Program

(CETP) implemented from 2008 to 2009, is an inter-community educational, economic

transition program that has been planned with future sustainable outcomes in mind.

The program has been funded by the NSW Department of Industry and Investment

Community Economic Development funding with further assistance from the Tweed

Shire Council and in-kind community contribution via donations and volunteer labour

input. The first step undertaken by the CETP steering committee was to develop a

strong sustainability based framework. The second step to action CETP was

undertaken by Caldera Institute for Sustainable Development (CISCD) and Caldera

Sustainable Communities 2010 Project. The CETP was chosen as the first in NSW to

further the idea of communities using a sustainability based framework for community

economic transition towards a diverse local green economy through community led

planning and design. Following the format in Chapter 5, the four stages of action

research for the CETP are discussed in Chapter 6.

1.1 Aims, Objectives and Research Questions

This research co-joins environmental education and community development

concepts in the context of ecologically sustainable principles to realise local cultures of

sustainability in communities in the Tweed-Caldera bioregion. It develops a better

understanding of how regional communities can use design to foster local cultures of

sustainability by empowering citizens to act locally to become more resilient and self

reliant. This research has both an intellectual and a practical component to it.

The overarching research objective explores how local communities create

and support environmental education and community development to transition to

ecological sustainability. In particular, the research investigates (1) how small

communities can design and develop an environment education centre as an

exemplar that models an ecologically based learning environment and (2) how

communities organise themselves to adopt strong ecologically sustainable practices.

The success of any regional implementation for small communities often involves

facilitation, external funding and networking. To this end, successful strategies rely on

networking and cooperation of the community with all levels of government and

external partners. By implementing the strategic plans and finding finance to

undertake the proposals, the participant researcher can answer the question of (3)

how a process of intra-community and inter-community networking and cooperation

assists regional communities to ‘green’ their local economies and work together to


create a regional culture of sustainability. Finally, this research seeks to identify the

key characteristics which indicate that local communities have developed a culture of

sustainability.

The strong practical element to this thesis extends beyond a literature survey.

An integrated framework is developed, implemented, tested and evaluated. The

process of actualising this work at the single community and inter-community levels

represent over a decade of reflective thinking, design-redesign and physical labour.

The practical objectives of this thesis can be stated thus:

To undertake the design and development an environment education centre,

created by a small regional community as an ecologically sustainable learning

environment.

To create a program for community transition based on environmental

education, skills and infrastructure necessary to develop local cultures of

sustainability.

A literature review of ecological sustainability, environmental education and

community development research proceeds in the next chapter and a review of the

antecedent research methods in Chapter 3 inform community led initiatives - at a

single community level (Chillingham) and an inter-community level (Caldera-region) –

These support local cultures of sustainability in the Tweed-Caldera region.

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 23

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

We live in a global village where there is an imperative to ensure that global

sustainability initiatives are made accessible to everyone and that all levels of society

be part of a cohesive, strategic approach to address ecological sustainability2. To

date, the majority of implemented sustainable projects are urban in location and have

consequently by-passed small regional communities. Further, models of eco-positive

design and environment education centres remain generally inaccessible to regional

areas. A primary focus of this research concentrates on access to environmental

education centres for regional communities that support a culture of sustainability.

This chapter identifies the three core

concepts of ecologically sustainable

development (ESD), environmental education

(EE) and community development (CD) as

most suited to develop a framework for

community organisations to transition to

sustainability. These core concepts were

developed as (new paradigm) initiatives

which were from their inception supported by

the United Nations (UN) and United Nations

Educational, Scientific and Cultural

Organization (UNESCO). Relevant global sustainability initiatives from the

international, national and local levels are also reviewed.

Figure 2.1 reveals the relationship between these three core concepts.

Ecological Sustainability is a whole of field overarching concept. There is an

imperative understanding that principles of sustainability underpin, inform, guide and

are prioritised within such a framework. Incorporated within ESD are nested the two

other core concepts of environmental education (which forms the delivery

2 The positive acts toward reducing environmental impacts from both top down global initiatives and bottom up local action still fall short of what will be required to ensure quality of all life for future generations (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007 ).

Figure 2.1 Integrating the core concepts

24 Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

mechanism) and community development (a grassroots, bottom–up concept). These

latter concepts are interconnected to create a central locus where communities can

develop and implement transition to sustainability. By co-joining ecologically

sustainable principles within a community structure that is central to its people and

transformative in terms of group learning/decision making we promote improved and

positive environmentally conscious behaviour.

For each core concept, the related literature and associated concepts are

reviewed, starting with emergent concepts associated with ecological sustainability in

section 2.2; environmental education in section 2.3 and community development in

section 2.4. The chapter ends with a discussion of the term ‘cultures of sustainability’

which epitomises the highest possible expectations of everyday sustainable decision

making, the performance of which is benchmarked as eco-positive.

2.2 Ecologically Sustainable Development

The term ‘ecologically sustainable development’ or ESD has been refined over

time. In 1969, the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural

Resources (IUCN) mandate referred to the need for:

“the perpetuation and enhancement of the living world – man’s

natural environment – and the natural resources on which all living

things depend’, involving management of ‘air, water, soils,

minerals and living species including man, so as to achieve the

highest sustainable quality of life”.

This Framework for Environmental Action became the main theme of the

United Nations Conference in Stockholm in 1972 (United Nations Education

Programme (United Nations Environment Programme 1972 ). Sustainable

development was first described as a concept in Our Common Future (the Brundtland

report), (World Commission on Environment and Development 1987) which it defined

as:

“development that meets the needs of the present without

compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own

needs”


In Australia, from 1992 a working definition of ESD was: “development that

improves the total quality of life, both now and in the future, in a way that maintains the

ecological processes on which life depends”. The National Strategy for Ecologically

Sustainable Development (NSESD) definition speaks about development that not only

meets human needs but improves total quality of life and makes the critical connection

between ecology and life’s dependency upon it. We inhabit a living biosphere, the

body of science on sustainability is now in consensus that there is an urgent

imperative for development to consider all possible ways to positively support

ecological systems and biodiversity (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

2007 ).

The concept of sustainability is elusive. It can mean different things to different

people. It may be viewed as a continuum from weak to strong. Weak sustainability

offers little, given twenty first century socio-ecological crises, as it is primarily based on

short term economic thinking. Long term sustainability involves a whole systems

approach to design and planning. Birkeland describes the transition of ‘pale green’

design (i.e. very weak sustainability) to ’deep green’ (i.e. strong sustainability) or eco-

positive development as a ‘win-win-win’ outcome. That is to say, the individual wins,

humanity wins and eco-systems/nature win. Deep green design principles do offer

healthy, natural non-polluting alternatives to conventional mainstream modern design.

In practice, green design has become a contentious issue and requires the

development of commonly agreed standards to avoid an acceptance of what is known

as ‘greenwash’3 (Birkeland 2008).

Environmental Sceptics such as Bjorn Lomborg argue that economic

investment to sustain a prosperous free market economy is more likely to benefit

environment as a trickledown effect of affluence than investing directly in environment

or climate change strategies (Lomborg 2001). Jacques, Dunlap and Freeman

analysed 141 books by environmental sceptics and found that more than 90% were

associated with conservative think tanks and so are likely to be biased towards the

views of these conservative organisations (Jacques, Dunlap and Freeman 2008).

These weaker views place loss of species and their habitat being far less important

than sustaining economic growth.

3 The concept of ‘weak sustainability’ by depleting ecosystems and replacing them with monetary capital does not meet the basic definition of ecological sustainability and therefore is unsustainable or ‘greenwash’ (Harding 2006; Brunton 1999).


The debate on the causes of global warming and climate change continued

beyond the start of the 21st century. In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change (IPCC) reported that it was at least 90% likely that human activities are

principally responsible for the warming of the planet since 1950. This supported the

IPCC’s urgent call for a global agreement by governments to act decisively towards

securing a sustainable future by setting strong targets to reduce global environmental

impacts. Even though the panel has conservatively concluded their findings as having

a ninety percent certainty (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007 ) there

is still ongoing widespread scepticism from literature that has not been peer reviewed

by the scientific community. In the Skeptical Environmentalist, it is believed that the

world’s environmental and social problems could be solved by increasing economic

growth and affluence and that the depletion of fossil fuel reserves and acceleration of

climate change by humans are overstated (Lomborg 2001).

Strong sustainability emphasizes that we will not be able to persist in using

resources wastefully. There will need to be a significant change of view for society

from our business as usual approach in use of finite resources (Brunton 1999). It

prioritises an alternate view from traditional industry and technology. Examples

include design oriented concepts such as ‘eco-positive development’ and ‘cradle to

cradle’ which are whole systems design approaches based on integrated natural

cycles with no wastage. Strong sustainability, as understood from these concepts,

includes and accounts for eco-systems which are an irreplaceable source of wealth

and prosperity. Strong sustainability emphasizes that there can be no prosperity or

survival without healthy, diverse natural systems. Birkeland argues that design based

on ‘impact reduction’ and ‘zero impact’ concepts is seriously flawed because they do

not include remediation to improve total onsite and offsite impacts to ecosystems.

Design tools need to be designed for natural systems not just as a facsimile of nature,

but in ways that ensure design of built environment does not relace nature. Designing

like Nature still displaces Nature from the built environment (Birkeland 2008, 2009a).

At the other end of the continuum, weak sustainability assumes the global

environment is infinitely resilient and stable regardless of human impacts4 . The

current situation is that the planet’s eco-systems have been and continue to be

depleted and now require action that more than accounts for past damage. This will

4 In strong sustainability there is the understanding that eco systems are non linear and may be depleted and fragmented to a point where that resilience margin may be lost (Berkes, Johan and Folke 2003; Folke et al. 2002).


require restoring resilience and strengthening the ability of ecosystems in order to

support human social and economic systems (Folke et al. 2002).

The Worldwatch Institute couched the last chance for humankind to move

away from its ecologically destructive path in the 1990s. Scientists warned of climate

change impacts being damaging to life and property and expensive if we continue to

act as we have. During the Earth Summit 1992 in Rio De Janeiro sustainable

development “was the rallying cry, and politicians and business leaders promised to

take a new path, they said, the environment would be weighed in every political, social

and economic decision” (Suzuki and Dressel 2004 102). The real situation was that

most institutions continued to either genuinely struggle with or openly comply with the

demands of powerful vested interests. The latter continued to treat ESD as

inconvenient motherhood statements and so supported planning trade-offs that

resulted in very weak sustainability while the intent of the Earth Summit was to

support a stronger level of sustainability (Suzuki and Dressel 2004 ). What was

needed was top down support for action at the regional and community level. In 1992

the United Nations released the action plan developed at the Rio De Janeiro

conference, to address sustainability for the 21st century (United Nations Conference

on Environment and Development 1992).

Agenda 21, a key global initiative, emphasized the need for public and

private institutions to work with and support local communities in transitioning to

sustainability and was intended to be the link between global initiatives and local

action (United Nations Conference on Environment and Development 1992). It

“recognizes that most environmental challenges have their roots in local activities and

therefore encourages local governments to promote environmental, economic and

social sustainability by translating the principles of sustainable development into

strategies that are meaningful to local communities” (Cotter and Hannan 1999, 5). in

1997 the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives drafted Local

Agenda 21. Each state in Australia has set up their own independent partnerships of

state, regional and local governments to work with representative community bodies.

The Newcastle Declaration in 1997 set in motion the involvement of the local councils

with cities and towns to put agenda 21 into action (Cotter and Hannan 1999; United

Nations Conference on Environment and Development 1992).

In the state of New South Wales, local government bodies were provided with

Our Community Our Future: A Guide to Local Agenda 21 as a comprehensive


voluntary framework for stronger partnerships between community and local

government to develop and implement community based strategic plans (Cotter and

Hannan 1999). In terms of the small regional communities considered in this

research, although the governing authority Tweed Shire Council adopted Agenda 21

in 1997 and it has been subsequently refined (Tweed Shire Council 2011b), there is a

gap in uptake of Agenda 21 at the small community due to a lack of funding and

community partnering with local government.

2.3 The Global Environmental Movement

Post world war environmentalism evolved from the pioneering work of a few

exceptionally aware and passionate individuals. Key writings on environmental and

socially critical issues had a valuable impact on a considerable proportion of the public

by the 1970’s (Teaching Heritage NSW 2010; Environmental Defender's Office 2011).

During those few formative years, environmental concern and the green movement

expanded from radical activism to involve, at a similar time, both grassroots action and

global non government organisations. In 1962, Carson documented the effects of

toxic chemicals on eco-systems and made acute observations on the

interconnectedness of all living systems. The book Silent Spring brought to public

attention the connection between unsustainable human development, environmental

impacts and the vulnerability of natural systems. This profound writing was

considered by many scientists to have been instrumental in the founding of the

environment movement.

Other concerned scientists compiled evidence on anthropological impacts on

the environment. Thirty research scientists from Massachusetts Institute of

Technology compiled their findings and published the formative text, The Limits to

Growth (Meadows et al. 1972). They concluded that with exponential population

growth and depletion rates of natural resources by an industrialised world without

limits to growth would reach a stage where insurmountable problems would become

highly unsustainable. The findings in The Limits to Growth questioned the dominant

paradigm as to the advantage of a global market with unlimited growth. Lowe (2006)

in analysis of this writing showed the Limits To Growth predictions were amazingly

close. The global body of scientists is now in consensus on the imperative for all

nations to address global climate change and become ecologically sustainable.


The English-village ‘commons’, an area of land that could be used by all

members of the village, was examined by Hardin (1968). He reported that

overgrazing was rife when control of grazing rights was unregulated. The tragedy of

the commons reveals how, if the use of a finite resource is unprotected and

unregulated, the resource becomes severely depleted (Hardin 1994). This draws a

distinctive parallel between the common and natural capital. Current oversight

regarding reduced ecosystems health is related to the tyranny of the accumulated

effects of many small scale decisions. The Tragedy of the Commons makes evident

the significant loss of vital public assets held in common for the long term amenity and

services management by regional cultures and local communities. Prime examples of

natural commons are the overfishing of oceans or logging of old growth rainforests.

The commons notion can also be extended to the built and natural environment (such

as a community centre). Hardin's work brings an acute awareness to the central role

of natural and community infrastructure.

Our current capitalist economic system places zero value on the ‘global’

commons such as breathable air, potable water and a safe habitable climate.

Ecological economics seeks to remedy this by limiting environmental degradation and

placing an implicit value on environmental externalities (for example, waste

management levies and carbon taxes). The estimated net annual value of ecosystem

services has been estimated in the trillions of dollars, exceeding the entire global

economy (Hawken, Amory Lovins and Hunter Lovins 1999; Hawken, Lovins and

Lovins 2000). Climate change and the current extinction crisis is the result of a

market that does not consciously price pollution or ecosystem destruction and terms

them externalities (Hawken, Lovins and Lovins 2000).

Small is Beautiful (Schumacher 1972) and Permaculture a Designers’ Manual

(Mollison 1988) are two fine examples of local ecological solutions. These writings

outlined practical and achievable ways to move towards simpler, less materialistic

lifestyles. Both independently provided ideas about building resilient local

communities with a self sufficient local economy, local food production and self-built

homes as a sustainable alternative to ‘business as usual’. These writings were

formative in establishing mainstream public awareness of deleterious human impacts

upon the environment and provided alternative ways of maintaining a positive lifestyle

that is conscious and is respectful of the natural eco-system. The 1970s saw a

burgeoning in well-organised agencies that focused on environmental activism, such

as Greenpeace joining the ranks of “mainstream ... global nongovernment


organisations” (Gilding 2011, 17). Over a similar time frame, non-government

institutions such as the UN and UNESCO began a series of global initiatives that

encouraged and supported education and policy on ecologically sustainable

development to include and benefit all levels of society (Wright 2002).

The 1969 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural

Resources (IUCN) mandate referred to the need for “the perpetuation and

enhancement of the living world – man’s natural environment – and the natural

resources on which all living things depend’, involving management of ‘air, water,

soils, minerals and living species including man, so as to achieve the highest

sustainable quality of life” (International Union for Conservation of Nature and National

Resources 1980). This framework for environmental action became the main theme

of the United Nations conference in Stockholm (United Nations Environment

Programme 1972 ).

The world conservation strategy by the International Union for Conservation of

Nature and Natural Resources advanced the understanding of sustainable

development by emphasising the imperative for conservation of diverse ecological

systems (which we refer to as biodiversity) to support long term sustainability for all life

(International Union for Conservation of Nature and National Resources 1980). The

Brundtland report (World Commission on Environment and Development 1987) was

by comparison a retrograde step. Trade-offs were included to protect growth based

industry and national economies. This was done on the understanding that smart

engineering and technology could compensate for ecological damage. The ongoing

effect has resulted in the weakening of planning and design frameworks to allow

industrial growth with reduced environmental impacts to continue as acceptable

practice (Birkeland 2008).

ESD principles have been agreed internationally by many governments and

non government organisations (NGO). Birkeland argues that the Brundtland report

and many international sustainability frameworks fall short of the mark by

marginalizing ecology to a resource based means of production. Maintaining

industrial growth as the dominant bottom line consideration for sustainable

development, exponential growth based economies are by simple mathematics,

limited to supporting short term prosperity. Ecologically sustainable solutions

essentially involve planning and management for long term prosperity and this can

only be achieved, according to Birkeland, through development that remediates and


restores local eco-systems-services, both on site and beyond development site, to a

surplus level. Birkeland argues that most existing planning strategies and

development policies include serious trade-offs.

Australia’s National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development

(NSESD) adopted the term ecologically sustainable development (ESD) as: “using,

conserving and enhancing the community's resources so that ecological processes,

on which life depends, are maintained, and the total quality of life, now and in the

future, can be increased” and, it also describes development as "improving total

quality of life and makes the critical connection between ecology and life’s

dependency upon it" (Ecologically Sustainable Development Steering Committee

1992). We inhabit a living biosphere, the body of science on sustainability is now in

consensus that there is an urgent imperative for development to consider all possible

ways to positively support ecological systems and biodiversity (Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change 2007 ).

The world conference on the human environment had as its key theme the

investigation of possibilities for achieving economic growth and industrialization

without environmental damage. (United Nations Environment Programme 1972 ).

During the ensuing decades mainstream thinking on sustainability was progressively

developed. The global body of science is saying that continued levels of economic

growth are at odds with the imperative to reduce ecological impacts

(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007 ). The ground-breaking body of

work Our Common Future (the Brundtland report), despite its bias towards economic

growth for sustainable development, had other positive outcomes. It sought the

integration of economics and environmental management and the promotion of equity

between societies and inter-generational equity (World Commission on Environment

and Development 1987). The title Our Common Future indicates the intent to

holistically integrate future strategies in environmental, social and economic

considerations. By bringing together key representative from all parts of the globe this

initiative sought to gain an international consensus on future strategies to deliver a

more equitable and humanitarian approach for investment and development. Key

priorities in the report were improved management of environment and local

community and indigenous access to resources.

The World Commission on Environment and Development identified that

“...inequality is the planet’s main ‘environmental’ problem; it is also its main


‘development’ problem” (1987, 55). Localisation of resource management to redress

issues related to socio/economic poverty was seen as fundamental to the concept of

sustainable development. Increasingly the global body of science and some

governments view local sourcing of essential goods and services as fundamental to

developing a strong culture of sustainability. Despite the perceived benefits of

globalised trade to material quality of life and wealth, there are long term benefits of

creating sustainable local economy and resilient communities. It was noted that better

access to education would be needed to guide sustainable land management. The

Brundtland report argues that the inequities between affluent and poor societies are

the drivers of environmental degradation and that economic growth by affluent

societies should not diminish quality of environment or the welfare of poorer societies

(World Commission on Environment and Development 1987).

Environmental activism, despite the lack of support by media and government,

helps to bring attention to otherwise unnoticed local and regional issues of concern

(Gilding 2011). In the Tweed Caldera bioregion, environmental activism became

prominent in 1979 in the local media though Australia’s first protests to save rainforest

at Terania Creek. This case is now recorded as the first of many actions to bring

attention to and conserve high biodiversity rainforests in eastern Australia and one of

the first forest protests globally (Teaching Heritage NSW 2010; Environmental

Defender's Office 2011). More recently large areas of the Tweed Caldera have been

conserved as national parks and World Heritage ‘Gondwana’ rainforest biodiversity

hotspot. Nature based eco-tourism is now seen as a significant potential economy for

local communities impacted by rural industry decline (Bock and Brunckhorst 2006).

The Architecture profession has recognised that environment and social

context exist at the core of architecture practice and the profession has a responsibility

to facilitate and encourage ecologically sustainable built environment design. The

1993 International Union of Architects (Union Internationale des Architectes) and

American Institute of Architects (UIA/AIA) world congress in Chicago presented a

thorough account of what elements were required for the practice of strong

sustainability through Eco-design. These ideas are indeed similar to community-led

eco-design principles for sustainable practice for international (UIA) and Australian

(RAIA) best practice:

The Precautionary Principle

No irreversible damage


Protect the needs and rights of present and future generations

Restore and improve biodiversity and global eco-systems

Nontoxic, renewable materials

Biodegradable [natural] materials

Efficient energy including solar and other renewable sources

Promote community health and the health of the biosphere

User participation in design, construct and management of built

environment

(International Union of Architects and Americal Institute of Architects 1993)

The Royal Australian Institute of Architects (RAIA) in the same year also

adopted the declaration of interdependence for a sustainable future (The Royal

Australian Institute of Architects 1993).

2.3.1 Eco-Efficient Design and Eco-Positive Development

The failure to factor in front loaded design criteria for long term sustainability

has been seen as the major limitation to better solutions for ecological sustainability.

Consequently, natural systems world-wide have been further degraded (Millennium

Ecosystem Assessment 2005 ). Ecologists now understand that the amenity and

value of natural eco-systems cannot be compensated or replaced by manufactured

industrial systems or sealed and enclosed, ‘greenhouse’ spaces. Biosphere 2 was a

prominent example of a scientific research attempt to test an engineered ecosystem

sealed space as a total life support system. This closed system experiment failed and

the critics concluded that engineered systems cannot mimic natural systems (Luke

1997) .

Eco efficient design, regenerative design and green design literature is

focused on environment impact reduction with zero impacts or zero carbon emissions

as the optimum benchmark (Birkeland 2009a). “Eco-efficiency gains are not likely to

enhance the conditions for whole system sustainability ... Most ‘green buildings are

under-designed for passive solar energy. Consequentially, such buildings need back

up equipment, which makes green design seem more expensive” (Birkeland 2008,

98-100). Birkeland states that eco-efficient design, green and regenerative principles

are biased towards economic growth. Design for less impacts or zero sum impacts is

not good enough. Negative impacts will need to be more than compensated for by


positive sum of increasing eco-systems-services capacity to address past, present

and future impacts (Birkeland 2008).

Eco-positive development goes beyond current eco-design and eco-

restorative thinking, in that social and economic development has to be rethought and

involves setting a higher sustainable benchmark for planning and design for future

development which is an improvement on pre-industrialised levels (Birkeland 2009a).

Birkeland argues for the adoption of stronger sustainability principles based on 'whole

systems integration' of living systems as ‘design for Nature’. These principles when

applied to built environment design go beyond impact reduction or zero sum

eradication of negative impacts.

2.4 Design-led and Community Created Sustainability

Sarkissian developed inclusive workshops processes for communities that

choose to become engaged in developing their local strategic plan for sustainable

futures. These workshops include design oriented learning processes and link to

ways that empower community to participate in community development projects that

represent strong sustainability (Sarkissian et al. 2009 ). There is a lack of access to

practical visible evidence of sustainability for most regional communities. To facilitate

the idea of communities participating in the design of programs and projects that

prioritise sustainability, citizens require better access to a local environment education

centre. To make community design workshops effective and meaningful they must

involve ecologically sustainable principles demonstrated in the context of designing for

local climate and associated natural ecosystems.

Creating sustainable communities requires an understanding of the language

of Nature: the organisational principles by which ecosystems sustain the web of life

(Capra inStone and Barlow 2005 ). These principles are: the web of life, cycles of

Nature and energy from the sun. The community is pivotal and needs to become

actively involved in creating solutions to local and global critical futures. Planning and

design that includes the input of community requires that community attain a critical

mass of design project participants that are ecologically literate (Sarkissian et al.

2009). An ecologically literate person or community has a comprehension of how to

solve problems by designing for ecology, human ecology and the concepts of

sustainability (Orr 1992).


Such ideas mirror principles included in a traditional knowledge base. There

are many traditional communities that utilise whole communities, have the traditional

intergenerational knowledge handed down and localised custom-based skills to create

their own built environment and agrarian systems. More importantly, these traditional

sustainable communities are maintained within the limit of that region’s natural capital.

The concept of 'deep ecology' draws on indigenous wisdom and tribal spirit of place

as being key aspects of those societies that actively supported the conservation of

natural resources over many generations (Devall and Sessions 1985 ). Being

capable of sustaining communities over many hundreds of years is testimony to the

community's ability to base built environment design ideas on very sound and local

ecological principles. A resilient culture has a capacity to adapt and recover to be fully

functional (Hopkins 2009). This characteristic is a meaningful example of long term

cultures of sustainability (Diamond 2005; Ly, Janis and Nur 2010; Alexander, Ishikawa

and Silverstein 1977).

In recent years, a number of eco-communities within Australia have a

developed their own sustainable design policy to guide built environment projects.

The Eco-village at Currumbin located in south-east Queensland, north of the Tweed

Caldera, adopted its own Architectural and Landscape Code to guide built

environment design. The 99 page document begins with a vision statement that

anticipates a "world leading, ecologically sustainable and conscious community where

people and nature flourish in beauty, harmony and integrity" where ecologically

sustainable aspects are deeply interconnected and given equivalent standing

(Landmatters Currumbin Valley Pty Ltd 2006, 3).

It is essential for the majority of regional community not only to be ecologically

literate to self-drive the transition to sustainability but also to have the practical skills

and knowledge based on experience of local natural systems over many seasonal

cycles. Hopkins argues that most regional communities have within their collective

story much of the knowledge and skill base to become self reliant and that any plan

should transition as a series of stages (Hopkins 2009). Birkeland estimates that

transitioning is fairly quick, expecting that eco-systems services are positive within a

single generation (Birkeland 2008). Regional communities with adequate guidance

and training have the capacity to participate in the design and construction stages of

their community centre built environment as a community created project.


The architect William McDonough advocates that designing in terms of

ecological thinking and sustainability must become part of everyday life as basic

knowledge within community (McDonough and Braungart 2002). At the heart of the

ecological solution is creativity. Suzuki and McConnell (Suzuki and McConnell 1997,

226) coined the phrase that “everybody has to be a designer". In a regional

community context, the process by which individuals can have an impact on

community design can be facilitated through workshops that focus upon ecological

consciousness (Sarkissian et al. 2009)5. Consistent with principles of community

inclusion, passive solar design exercises can empower prospective buyers to

maximize seasonal advantage of their residence through an understanding the

principles of solar orientation. Design workshops and adult education courses can

convey this knowledge and the outcome is a greener community. Such community

involvement that encourages active participation in the design process is an ‘owned'

community-built environment (Sarkissian et al. 2009; Sarkissian, Cook and Walsh

1997). This does not mean that local professional builders, tradespersons and

designers are sidelined. On the contrary, it allows local community to collaborate with

local members of the building industry to create a community environment that reflects

their unique and collective vision and collective needs. A community created vision to

sustainability is inclusive, not exclusive of any part of that community.

Ecological design principles are actively being practised at a deep green or

strong sustainability standard in community at the grassroots level. David Holmgren

co-founder of Permaculture principles is an educator who focuses on empowering

citizens and communities with practical knowledge and skills to become designers

and practitioners of sustainable eco-systems that enhance local resilience and self

reliance. Holmgren’s text, Retrofitting our Towns and Suburbs for Energy Descent

includes case studies of integrated ecosystems design illustrating passive and active

solar design methods that are owner built and funded on a low budget (Holmgren

2010). Permaculture design principles emphasise water harvesting and recycling

together with organically grown, locally distributed food, herb and cellulose systems as

essential to socially and ecologically sustainable communities that are well adapted to

local microclimate conditions (Holmgren 2010).

5 Later chapters of this thesis have identified and extended this idea, that to be successful in project implementations guided by sustainability principles at the sociological level, a shift in personal and collective thinking and behaviour is required which is informed by sustainability principles and is transformative.


2.5 Environmental Education

We now focus upon key global initiatives together with environmental

education literature that is community oriented and has potential to support the

process of community transition to sustainability. The global literature is convincing

and relevant to all sectors of society, however there is a current lack of access to

sustainability facilitating community created …towards local cultures of sustainability:...

Documents