Community Ecological Enterprise Hub: Developing Healthy Eco-Cultural Systems

Community Ecological Enterprise Hub: Developing Healthy Eco-Cultural Systems

Stephen Mann

June 14, 2015

Abstract: People throughout the world are seeking ways to increase the well being of their communities, neighborhoods and families. The harmful effects of environmental degradation are having a disproportionate effect on the poor and marginalized families and communities. There are opportunities for the application of agroforestry, agroecological science and permaculture design to restore and enhance the living matrix of urban neighborhoods and at the same time develop community capacity and resiliency. The synthesis of these approaches form a framework for the work of Regenerative Ecological Enterprises that can be productive community development tools at the ecosystem/neighborhood level by restoring and enhancing ecosystems services. Community Ecological Enterprises are local regenerative businesses that have ecological and social goals as part of their core business mission. Community Ecological Enterprises look for and respond to opportunities to be of service to the community while meeting the economic needs of the business, its employees and partners.

Keywords: Ecosystems Services, Agroecology, Agroforestry, Permaculture, Regenerative Enterprises, Ecological Enterprises

Introduction “[We are] persuaded to spend money we don’t have on things we don’t need to create impressions that won’t last on people we don’t care about.” Tim Jackson

In today’s world our ecological goals are shifting from a growth paradigm based on resource extraction and consumerism to a sustainable future for all. In communities all across the world the loss of ecosystems services caused by our extractive economy are beginning to affect human well being. We are living through what Charles Eisenstein (2012) calls The Crisis of Civilization. He sees this as the commoditization of everything: “Today, the impasse in our ability to convert nature into commodities and relationships into services is not temporary. There is little more we can convert.” Eisenstein sees a way out of these crises by changing the way we look at the economy and money. He believes that humans must realize their gifts’ and turn them to restoring our environment and our communities. Our communities, our environment and the ecosystems that our lives depend upon are in serious trouble. The 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) found that humans are depleting Earth’s living capital by using natural resources unsustainably, decreasing biodiversity and degrading ecosystem services thus putting the wellbeing of current and future generations at risk (MA 2005).

1

Ecosystem services are the benefits derived from ecosystems. These benefits help increase and maintain the well being of people, families and their neighborhoods by providing vital services such as reducing traffic noise, provide shade and moderating temperature extremes, filtering odors, pollutants and dust from the air and slowing and storing runoff from rain events. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, MA (2005) divided ecosystem services into four broad categories: •

Provisioning resources, such as of food and water;

•

Regulating, such as the control of water, climate and disease;

•

Supporting, such as nutrient cycles and crop pollination;

•

Cultural, such as spiritual, aesthetic and recreational benefits.

Since the 1990’s many authors have noted the effects of urbanization, especially land cover changes on the degradation of biodiversity, hydrological systems and nutrient cycling in the urban ecosystem (Grove and Burch 1997; Bolund and Hunhammar 1999; Alberti 2005; Raudsepp-Hearne et al. 2010). Some characteristics of urban ecosystem degradation are: •

Highly disturbed systems

•

Rapid changes in soil and plant cover

•

Large swings in temperature and water availability

•

Largely impenetrable covering of the soil

•

Degraded soil life 2

•

Non native plantings, lawns and pioneer plants

•

Environmental stress on plants and animal

There is a need to remediate these environmental issues and their effect on ecosystem health and the well-being of urban dwellers (Alberti 2005). People in Kansas City, like many cities throughout the world, are seeking ways to increase the well being of their communities, neighborhoods and families. They are feeling the effects of deteriorating economies and local environmental issues are starting to have a deleterious effect on their health and well being. The harmful effects of the degradation of ecosystem services are having a disproportionate effect on poor families and communities worldwide (figure 1). A local example of continuing decline in our communities is the more that 3000 abandoned properties now owned by the Kansas City Missouri Land Bank. Many are in the urban core of East Kansas City and any structures are usually demolished. There are another 3000 plus on the rolls of the Unified Government Land Bank in Kansas City, Kansas. Most these empty lots were places where people lived and raised their families. The residents are now displaced and their loss cuts deep into the fabric of the neighborhood.

3

Figure 1 Connection between poverty and environmental issues Source: Ruck (2006) There is substantial environmental health risks associated with particulate matter and pollutants such as ozone in outdoor air. Sources of these pollutants can be coal fired power plants, grain elevators, vehicles, factories, tilled fields and unpaved roads. These are risks both in urban and rural communities especially of those that have low socioeconomic status, the poor who live disproportionately closer to pollution sources such as highways and factories (Bell and Ebisu 2012). Breathing air pollutants, including ozone and particulates, can exacerbate chronic respiratory conditions such as asthma, and is associated with the onset of cardiovascular events and possibly strokes (Pezzino and LaClair 2004).

The current industrial agricultural paradigm converts natural ecosystems into agroecosystems with a dramatic loss of species diversity, soil health, water purity and availability. Farms are converted into crop production factories that rely upon external non renewable resources such as oil, gas, agro-chemicals and fertilizer. This conversion 4

is destructive to both the agroecosystem and the humans that are a part of the ecosystem. On the Urban fringe these already distressed agroecosystems are converted into another highway leading to another strip mall and another housing development with their swaths of monoculture lawns where no songbirds can be found. In the Urban core of Kansas City there are blocks after blocks of empty lots and abandoned homes surrounded by the rank growth of regenerative life some call weeds. You see neighborhood shopping districts boarded up and crumbling with trees growing out of their clogged gutters. The wellbeing of the people mirrors the wellbeing of the ecosystem where they live, their Landbase. A Landbase is the biophysical landscape, the place that traditionally was the hunting and gathering range of most humans throughout history. With the advent of settlements and cities humans seek to impose a cultural understanding and order upon the more than human world. The order we impose upon the urban ecosystem produce a footprint, a disturbance. Our Landbase can no longer support our livelihood.

The human ecological footprint is the area of productive land needed to sustain a defined population indefinitely in their location. Using ecological footprint analysis, we see that a city requires a resource base of non-urban land hundreds of times larger than its own area (Rees and Wackernagel 1996). I believe that through protecting, restoring and enhancing of their Landbase, their place on earth will help people create, build, and sustain their community. 5

Permaculture design ethics and principles provide us with a set of tools grounded in science, elders wisdom and Ecological Wisdom that stands on a bedrock of universally applicable ethics; Earth Care, People Care and Fair Share. Much can be done at the landscape level to increase ecosystems services and wellbeing. The landscape in the neighborhood is a place to grow trees, food and restore soil, store rainfall and provide for recreational and spiritual opportunities. Parks, gardens and greenways are places to gather and enjoy nature and be with family, friends and neighbors. There are opportunities for the application of agroforestry and agroecology science and permaculture design to restore and enhance the living matrix of urban neighborhoods. The synthesis of these approaches form a framework for the work of Regenerative Ecological Enterprises that can be productive community development tools at the ecosystem/neighborhood level.

In the remainder of this paper I will define Permaculture, Agroecology, Agroforestrey and Regenerative Ecological Enterprises. I will then develop the concept of a Community Ecological Enterprise Hub for community development.

Permaculture Permaculture is an eco-cultural ethical design system codified by Australians Bill Mollison and David Holmgrem in their book Permaculture 1 (Mollison and Holmgrem 1978). Permaculture is about creative adaption to ecological realities guided by ethics 6

and actionable knowledge. Holmgrem (2002) went on to develop twelve principles to guide permaculture designers: •

Observe and interact

•

Capture & store energy

•

Get a yield

•

Apply self-regulation & accept feedback

•

Use & value renewable resources & services

•

Produce no waste

•

Design from patterns to details

•

Integrate rather than segregate

•

Use small and slow solutions

•

Use and value diversity

•

Use edges and value the marginal

•

Creatively use and respond to change

McManus (2010) offers an integral Permaculture approach that can be used to help communities rebuild from the ruins of post modernity: “Science and technology alone is insufficient to navigate our way through this crisis. Although valuable, it may only address some of the symptoms and provide some of the answers. What is required is a combination of science and technology, wisdom, morality and the courage to open our minds to a more integrated approach to working with nature and not against it.” Integral permaculture seeks to integrate our subjective (interior) experience and worldview with our objective (exterior) behaviors and actions. By developing ourselves, 7

our inner work, we are developing the ability to see the ‘big picture’ and how we can be of service to the community of life around us. The Integral Permaculture perspective empowers designers with a deeper and wider pallet of emergent possibilities to develop holistic solutions for community development projects. By cultivating the emergent properties arising from the dialectical tension of thesis and antithesis we discover a synthesis: Something more Be Coming from something less (McIntosh 2007).

Agroecology Agroecology is the application of ecological concepts and principles to the design and management of sustainable agroecosystems (Gliessman 1998). Agroecology is also an environmental social movement supporting sustainability and rural and urban development, using an ethical, science based approach (Wezel et al. 2011). The production of food crops in city gardens is an age old practice with increasing relevance for today’s food security concerns. There is a rapid growth of urban agriculture utilizing formerly vacant land of varying scales of production from single lot community gardens to urban farms of many acres (Grewal and Grewal 2012). Production of food in urban neighborhoods can help address growing concerns of hunger and obesity, which are exacerbated by the lack of access to healthy food options. Policy makers at both the state and local level are addressing these concerns 8

and opportunities by adopting policies allowing production of crops, as well as allowing the keeping of fowl and bees for production of honey and eggs in cities (Grewal and Grewal 2012). The state of Missouri and the city of Kansas City recently adopted laws that recognize urban agriculture zones and provide among other things, property tax abatement in blighted areas and wholesale water rates for urban growers (Ruess 2013).

Agroforestry Agroforestry is an intensive land-base management practice consisting of the integration of trees and woody perennials with agricultural crops and/or livestock. This practice is intentionally managed to optimize the beneficial interaction of the components on a biological, physical and ecological level while providing for the economic needs of the farmer and his community (Lassoie et al. 2009). Agroforestry is also an integrated land use management strategy that has the objectives of being sustainable, stable and equitable (Lassoie et al. 2009). The inclusion of trees and woody perennials adds greatly to the diversity of agroecosystems and can provide soil conservation services, point source pollution mitigation, habitat and a wide array of agronomic products including organic crops in a sustainable manner (Gold et al. 2009). The inclusion of agroforestry practices in urban areas can consist of riparian and forest buffers, windbreaks and food forests which use tropical multistrata home gardens as a template. Riparian forest buffers are an agroforestry practice that can be of immense value in an urban setting. These buffer systems adjacent to streams contain trees and shrubs 9

along with warm season native grasses and forbs. They act to filter sediment and landscape agrochemical runoff. They can also provide added ecosystem service such as food production from tree crops, noise and odor reduction, air pollution filtering and enhancement of biodiversity. Nowak et al. (2013) estimated the tree cover in the Kansas City region removed almost 26,000 tons/year of five major pollutants (Table 1).

Source: Nowak et al. (2013)

Hedgerows, shelterbelts and windbreaks consisting of single or multiple rows of trees or woody perennials planted around fields and structures for protection from winds. These diverse vegetative structures not only protect fields from wind erosion but increase agroecosystem species diversity and provide microclimates that benefit both crops and natural enemies of pests (Andow 1991). In their study of Kansas City Forest cover Nowak et al. (2013) found that trees reduced building energy costs by $14.0 million per year (Table 1).

10

In urban settings hedgerows can be used to increase diversity by acting as ecological compensation areas (ECAs). ECAs are mosaics of non crop vegetation in landscapes useful for enhancing biodiversity and conservation of species (Burgio et al. 2004). The term Urban Food Forest (UFF) was coined by Swedish researchers, Clark and Nicholas in a 2013 paper to describe a set of practices based on home gardens, community orchards and perennial urban agriculture. They found many examples of temperate Urban Food Forests in many urban areas worldwide. Clark and Nicholas (2013) defined urban food forestry as ‘‘the intentional and strategic use of woody perennial food producing species in urban edible landscapes to improve the sustainability and resilience of urban communities.” Integrating design principles and science from agroecology, agroforestry, orchard science, and plant breeding into urban forestry resents a promising approach to improving urban landscape productivity (Clark and Nicholas 2013). Food Forests are a common permaculture practice that has been undertaken in many communities worldwide for their multiple benefits. A wide array of ecosystems services can be provided and enhanced by UFF’s such as nutrient cycling, soil biotic diversity, food provisioning, water filtering and retention. Food Forests also have a special spiritual and aesthetic significance to many practitioners who call them Paradise Gardens.

11

Regenerative Enterprise A regenerative enterprise increases the four nurturing capitals, the commons from which living systems spring: social, cultural, spiritual, and living capital (Roland and G. Landua 2012). Ecological enterprises are regenerative enterprises that give particular attention to the living capitals of its Landbase. “The ecological enterprise does not harvest the root of the tree of production, only its fruit. They gather the unique place-based goods and services that are emergent properties of the [regenerated] urban ecosystems, while simultaneously nurturing the system’s ability to thrive. The regenerative enterprise helps to grow the roots deeper and wider.” (Roland and Landua 2010)

A Community Ecological Enterprise (CEE) is a local regenerative business that has ecological and social goals as part of its core business definition and mission. CEE’s look for and respond to opportunities to be of service to the community while meeting the economic needs of the business, its employees and partners.

Business model for Community Ecological Enterprise A L3C business is a socially beneficial, for-profit venture with a core mission of performing socially beneficial programs, not in maximizing income. It is a hybrid 12

structure that combines the legal and tax flexibility of a traditional LLC, the social benefits of a nonprofit organization, and the branding and market positioning advantages of a social enterprise (Lang and Minnigh 2010). L3C’s can receive investments from tax-exempt Foundations through Program Related Investments (PRIs). Foundations are required to spend at least five percent of their assets in a given fiscal year in order to maintain their tax-exempt status and can use PRI’s for this purpose (Witkin 2009). I believe that a L3C business structure would be best for a CEE. The L3C gives flexibility in structuring the company ownership to meet the needs of each partner and has the potential to attract investments from nonprofit foundations (Witkin 2009). The ability of L3C’s to embrace the triple bottom line with action, not with green-washing which makes them effective change agents to empower environmental justice and community development at the neighborhood grassroots level. Community Ecological Enterprise Hub Octopus, a British network of multi-purpose community centers defines a Community Hub as follows: “Community Hubs provide a focal point and facilities to foster greater local community activity and bring residents, the local business community, and smaller organizations together to improve the quality of life in their areas.” We share this vision for our ecological enterprise.

13

The goal of the Community Ecological Enterprise Hub (CEEH) is to increase the four nurture capitals by catalyzing neighborhoods in the restoration and protection of their ecosystems and to help create and nurture viable small business ventures to engage in the work. The CEEH would begin as a virtual ‘Hub’ using social media and the Internet to attract, organize, train, empower and increase the capacity of people to build regenerative enterprises. Some of the activities these businesses could engage in are: •

Edible Landscaping

•

Permaculture Design

•

Food Forestry

•

Neighborhood composting

•

Edible perennial plant and medicinal herbs propagation

•

Mushroom cultivation on logs harvested from Urban Forests

•

Native plant and tree propagation

•

Urban Forestry/Agroforestry and biomass harvesting

Opportunities for Ecological Enterprises in Kansas City Metro Area Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) in their 2005 Natural Resources Inventory report on green infrastructure suggested using their resource inventory to identify locations suitable for effective agroforestry practices. In urbanized areas agroforestry practices can be used to protect urban streams, manage stormwater runoff, create wildlife habitat, provide recreational opportunities, grow food crops and reduce noise and dust (MARC 2005). 14

Another Urban Forestry opportunity arises from the need to replace and increase tree cover in the Kansas City Region. Nowak et al. (2013) in their study of Kansas City Forest Cover predict that between 2.9 million and 9.2 million trees will need to be replaced, depending on forest cover goals in the next decade (Table 2.). Someone will need to grow and plant these trees, a perfect opportunity for local ecological enterprises.

Source: Nowak et al. (2013)

The Kansas City Land Bank

(1)

has a no fee Lease a Lot program that allows

qualified residents and organizations to lease properties for 2-5 year with the option to purchase the lot during the time of the lease. This is an ideal opportunity for a start up ecological enterprise to use these degraded urban lots for growing native plants and trees for use in the replanting efforts and local environmental restoration projects such as the Blue River Watershed Project and Missouri River flood plain restoration projects. Growing native restoration plants and seeds on leased land bank land can be the starting point for enabling the creation of micro-ecological enterprises.

1. http://www.kcmolandbank.org/vancant-lots-and-land.html

15

A long range goal (2-4 years) would be the creation of a native plant nursery and greenhouse (Figure 2.) for production of local ecotype plants, shrubs and trees. This greenhouse would become the ‘brick and mortar’ of the CEEH.

Figure 2. Energy Efficient Greenhouse Design Source: Christopher Richards (2013)

Working with neighborhood associations, government agencies, institutions and other community development organizations is essential to increase the accessibility 16

and capacity of the project. Partnerships with local educational institutions, science classes and environmental studies departments to offer internships and fellowships for students to get hands on experience in ecological restoration/community development will increase community capacity and lead to job opportunities for participants.

Inclusiveness and Measuring Success Eco-centric leadership is working with people and the environment in a more inclusive way (Davis 2010). I see this as an embodiment of practicing the permaculture principals of ‘Use and value diversity’, ‘Use edges and value the marginal’ (Holmgren 2002). The social space of a regenerative enterprise embodying Eco-centric leadership thrives on diversity and inclusion that contributes to the elimination of discrimination. These enterprises embrace the concept that the abundance of a community is seen in the gifts the members share, that we all have something to ‘Give’ to the community (McKnight and Block 2010). For the CEEH to be effective and improve it has to evaluate and document its performance. We need to look at outcomes; did we actually change behaviors? Did the participants and staff grow; increase their capacity to make a difference? What long term impacts did we expect? Did the outcome we expected actually happened? Did we create public value by benefiting those who did not participate? Did the business make

17

a profit? Table 3 lists some performance indicators that were suggested by Octopus (2015) for evaluating their Community hubs and have been modified for use with CEE’s. It is also important to celebrate and acknowledge the contributions of everyone involved in our development process. Telling our story of a bright future for everyone connects us to the hopes and aspirations of our community.

Table 3. Performance indicators for CEE’s suggested by Octopus (2015) •

Develop and deliver services that support the core mission of environmental restoration and community development.

•

Develop a robust Business Plan to sustain the organization.

•

Develop ongoing opportunities to foster startup ecological enterprises. Through networking and training through institutional and government programs (Extention, Economic Development Corporation of Kansas City, etc).

•

Increase the number of resident’s involvement in the organization’s services and develop new ways of promoting the organization’s activities.

•

Increase the number and variety of volunteering opportunities for residents within the organization.

•

Achieve a recognized organizational quality mark – ‘VISIBLE’ or equivalent.

•

Supportive links with small frontline groups in the area and help them to develop their capacity and reach (Food Not Lawns).

•

Demonstrate effective joint working with volunteers, community associations, and public and private sector partners (Center City Neighborhood Assn.).

•

Support the development of the local partnerships. 18

Conclusions McKnight, 1995 says this about people: “Care is the consenting commitment of citizens to one another. Care cannot be produced, managed, organized, administered or commoditized. Care is the only thing a system cannot produce.” I believe that same principle applies to the ecosystems and places those people inhabit. You cannot outsource the Landbase’s care to outsiders and expect them to make the best decisions for the being that live there. Simple steps such as planting a seed, nurturing the new life and harvesting the crop can break the collective paralysis (Scharmer and Kaufer 2013) that grips many people in our culture especially in urban communities. Reconnecting to the cycle of life, being present in the transformative emergent power of a seed, we too are transformed from Ego to Eco. In the future ecosystem services preservation, enhancement and restoration along with sustainable food production will be our Great Work.

19

References: Alberti, M. 2005. The effects of urban patterns on ecosystem function. International regional science review. 28 (2):168-192. Andow, D. A. 1991. Vegetational Diversity and Arthropod Population Response. Annual Review of Entomology. 36:561-586. Bell, M.L. and Ebisu, K. 2012 Environmental inequality in exposures to airborne particulate matter components in the United States. Environmental health perspectives, 120 (2), 1699-1704. Bolund, P. and S. Hunhammar 1999. Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological Economics. 29 (2):293-301. Burgio G., R. Ferrari, M. Pozzati and L. Boriani 2004. The role of ecological compensation areas on predator populations: an analysis on biodiversity and phenology of Coccinellidae (Coleoptera) on non-crop plants within hedgerows in Northern Italy. Bulletin of Insectology. 57(1):1-10 Clark, K.H. and Nicholas, K.A. 2013. Introducing urban food forestry: a multifunctional approach to increase food security and provide ecosystem services. Landscape Ecology. 28 (9):1649-1669. Davis, H. 2010. Other-centredness as a leadership attribute: From ego to eco centricity. Journal of Spirituality, Leadership and Management, 4 (1), 43-52. Eisenstein, C. 2011. Sacred economics: Money, gift, and society in the age of transition. North Atlantic Books. Gliessman, S.R. 1998. Agroecology: ecological processes in sustainable agriculture. CRC Press. Grewal, S.S. and P. S. Grewal 2012. Can cities become self-reliant in food? Cities. 29 (1): 1-11.

20

Grove, J.M. and Burch Jr, W.R. 1997. A social ecology approach and applications of urban ecosystem and landscape analyses: a case study of Baltimore, Maryland. Urban Ecosystems, 1 (4), 259-275. Gold, M. A., H.E. Garrett 2009. Agroforestry Nomenclature, Concepts, and Practices. Chapter 3 in: Garrett, H.E., (ed.). 2009. North American Agroforestry: An Integrated Science and Practice, 2nd edition, American Society of Agronomy, 677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI. Holmgren, D. 2002. Permaculture: Principles & Pathways beyond Sustanability. Holmgren Design Services, Australia. Lang, R. and Minnigh, E.C. 2010 L3C, History, Basic Construct, and Legal Framework, The. Vt. L. Rev., 35, 15. Lassoie, J. P., L. E. Buck, and D. Current 2009. The Development of Agroforestry as an Integrated land Use Management Strategy Chapter 1 in Garrett, H.E., (ed.). 2009. North American Agroforestry: An Integrated Science and Practice, 2nd edition, American Society of Agronomy, 677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI. McIntosh, S. 2007 Integral consciousness and the future of evolution. St. Paul, MN: Paragon. McKnight, J. 1995. The careless society: Community and its counterfeits. Basic Books. McKnight, J. and Block, P. 2010 The Abundant Community: Awakening the Power of Families and Neighborhoods. Berrett-Koehler Publisher Inc. San Francisco CA USA. MA Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment. Island Press. MARC Mid-America Regional Council 2005. Green Infrastructure: Designing With Nature. Available online at: http://www.marc.org/Environment/Natural-Resources/NaturalResources-Inventory/NRI-Resources ; last accessed May 12, 2015. McManus, B. 2010. An integral framework for permaculture. Journal of Sustainable Development, 3 (3), p162. Mollison, B. and Holmgren, D. 1978. Permaculture 1: A perennial agriculture system for human settlements. Hobart: University of Tasmania. 21

Nowak, D.J., Bodine, A.R., Hoehn III, R.E., Crane, D.E., Ellis, A., Endreny, T.A. et al. 2013. Assessing urban forest effects and values: the greater Kansas City region. Resource Bulletin, NRS-75, Newtown Square, PA, USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 72. Octopus 2015. What is a Community Hub? Available Online from:http://www.octopuscommunities.org.uk/our-projects/community-hubs/what-is-acommunity-hub/ last accessed May 4, 2015. Pezzino, G. and LaClair, B.J. 2004. Environmental Health Issues in Kansas: An Overview. Kansas Health Institute. Raudsepp-Hearne, C., G. D. Peterson, M. Tengö, E. M. Bennett, T. Holland, K Benessaiah, G. MacDonald, and L. Pfeifer 2010. Untangling the environmentalist's paradox: Why is human well-being increasing as ecosystem services degrade? BioScienc. 60 (8): 576-589. Rees, W. and M. Wackernagel 1996. Urban ecological footprints: why cities cannot be sustainable—and why they are a key to sustainability. Environmental impact assessment review. 16(4):223-248. Richards, C. 2013. Open Source Energy Efficient Greenhouse Design. Personal correspondence with designer. Roland, E. C. and G. Landua 2012. Regenerative Enterprise: Optimizing for Multi-Capital Abundance Ruck, B. 2006. Poverty and Environment. WorldVision New Zealand. Available Online at: https://www.worldvision.org.nz/media/72319/poverty_and_the_environment.pdf; last accessed June 4, 2014. Ruess, B. 2013. Urban Agriculture Act takes effect, begins implementation. Missouri Times. Available online at http://themissouritimes.com/7366/urban-agriculture-acttakes-effect-begins-implementation/; last accessed May 10, 2014. Scharmer, C.O. and Kaufer, K. 2013. Leading from the emerging future: From egosystem to eco-system economies. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Wezel, A., S. Bellon, T. Doré, C. Francis, D. Vallod and C. David 2011. Agroecology as a science, a movement and a practice. In Sustainable Agriculture Volume 2, Springer. pp. 27-43. 22

Witkin, J. 2009. The L3C: A More Creative Capitalism. Triple Pundit. Available online at: http://www.triplepundit.com/2009/01/the-l3c-a-more-creative-capitalism/ ; last accesses June 10, 2015.

23

Appendix A. CEEH Vision v1.6

24