I’ve been a permaculturist all along

A recent scientific paper helped me understand this mysterious practice – and it sounds an awful lot like gardening

Some time ago now, I wrote an article that was mildly critical of permaculture. In fact, not so much critical as puzzled, because in truth, I couldn’t figure out what permaculture was supposed to be.

In the end, I got the impression that forest gardening and permaculture were at least distant cousins, so I contented myself with observing that forest gardening may have many virtues, but a sensible way of growing food isn’t one of them.

But it continued to bother me that I still didn’t understand what permaculture was all about. I carefully read one blogger’s attempt to enlighten me. I even went so far as to read a book on permaculture. None of this helped; permaculture remained a curious mixture of the prosaic and the wacky, with no obvious unifying principles (at least, not obvious to me).

But, reading a scientific paper the other day, I had an epiphany. The paper, in the journal Acta Horticulturae, has three French authors – two academics and a farmer. It asks an interesting question: is it possible for a single market gardener, “inspired by permaculture principles”, to make an acceptable income from a small acreage, cultivated without powered machinery?

The answer to that question isn’t strictly part of our story, but it’s worth reporting. Basically, yes. A single market gardener, working 43 hours per week, could make a living from six hectares of land, selling produce direct to consumers and restaurants. But there were two important caveats. First, 40 per cent of the cultivated area was under glass, but that generated 64 per cent of the income; in other words, a large area under glass is essential. Second, a decent income relied mainly on short-cycle crops, such as leafy vegetables and fruit with a high added value. Potatoes take up too much space, for too long; if customers wanted potatoes, they had to be imported from a local organic farmer who did use machinery.

But back to the main story. What are the principles inspired by permaculture? Helpfully, the paper lists them:

1. Growing more per unit area: making best use of the microclimate, high crop density, continuous rotation of short-cycle crops, relay-cropping, high level of care given to crops, extending growing season under glass.

2. Limiting material inputs: no expensive powered machinery, recycling nutrients inside the site

(i.e. composting), use of local organic waste.

3. Reducing workload: less weeding through high crop density and multicropping, limiting soil tillage and using efficient manual tools.

Now, I don’t know about you, but my first thought on looking at that list was: “that looks a lot like gardening”. Or at any rate, even if I don’t always succeed, the way I try to garden the “productive” part of my garden. Or to put it very simply: permaculture is gardening. Which isn’t surprising when you consider that permaculture started out as an enlightened approach to farming – essentially trying to get farmers to behave a bit more like gardeners.

As many people have pointed out, gardening is inherently both more sustainable and more productive than farming. So as long as you’re a careful, thoughtful sort of gardener – composting all your waste, trying to make sure every bit of ground always has something growing in it, and going easy on wasteful and expensive machinery and chemicals – then you’re probably doing most of what permaculture involves already.

On the other hand, if you can’t imagine gardening without neonicotinoids, glyphosate and the internal combustion engine, then maybe permaculture isn’t for you.

Ken Thompson is a plant biologist with a keen interest in the science of gardening. He writes and lectures extensively; his latest book is Darwin’s Most Wonderful Plants. Visit books.telegraph.co.uk

MARKET GROWTHA study said a gardener using permaculture principles would need a large area under glass, below