Consider the necessary changes in practice and attitude towards the land/environment implied by the philosophy of one Holistic Science

General Principles of GAIA

The Gaia hypothesis proposed by James Lovelock considers the Earth as a planet sized entity with properties that could not be predicted from the sum of its parts.

The reasons for this as stated in [1] are:

"Life first appeared on Earth about 3,500 million years ago. From that time until now, the presence of fossils shows that the earth’s climate has changed very little. Yet the output of heat from the Sun, the surface properties of the Earth, and the composition of the atmosphere have almost certainly varied greatly over the same period.

The chemical composition of the atmosphere bears no relation to the expectations of steady-state chemical equilibrium. The presence of methane, nitrous oxide, and even nitrogen in our present oxidising atmosphere represents violation of the rules of chemistry to be measured in tens of orders of magnitude. Disequilibria on this scale suggest that the atmosphere is not merely a biological product, but more probably a biological construction: not living, but like a cat’s fur, a bird’s feathers, or the paper of a wasp’s nest, an extension of a living system designed to maintain a chosen environment. (my italics) Thus the atmospheric concentration of gases such as oxygen and ammonia is found to be kept at an optimum value from which even small departures could have disastrous consequences for life.

The climate and chemical properties of the Earth now and throughout its history seem always to have been optimal for life…"

Gaia is a holistic science in that it considers the whole of the planet as an interconnected system and not just the individual components separately.

It could be argued that to be truly holistic it should also include the sun and moon and the rest of the universe and for all time. Certainly planet Earth and its life is greatly affected by the radiation and gravity from the sun and the moon, plus chemicals and matter being exchanged with space, eg gain of meteors and loss of hydrogen. Many of the chemicals on which life depends must have come from another earlier star that provided the heavier elements such as iron and uranium. Eventually the sun will swallow up the earth, and hence its atoms and molecules re-distributed around the universe. Thus the universe obeys the 2^nd Law of thermodynamics and increases the level of entropy.

Gaia, however, shows a reduction or reversal of entropy, and can therefore be called alive. This zone of low entropy ends at the edge of the atmosphere this sets the outer boundary to Gaia. A similar inner boundary may be set at the Earth’s core, which is cooling in accordance with the 2^nd law of thermodynamics, and the gravitational, or tidal, forces from the sun and moon. Raymond Siever suggests where this boundary might be in an article on Continental Drift and Plate Tectonics [14].

Gaia is also bounded in time to the period of life on Earth. This starts 3,500 million years ago and will end when external changes exceed the ability of control mechanisms to mitigate such effects in favour of life.

Within these boundaries Gaia considers the inter-relationship of all parts acting as a whole, or single superorganism, it is holistic.

Background to GAIA theory (Source References)

James Lovelock first put forward the Gaia hypothesis at a meeting about the origins of life on earth in Princeton, New Jersey, in 1969. His earliest article was in Atmospheric Environment (1972) titled "Gaia as seen through the Atmosphere".

Although James Lovelock arrived at the Gaia hypothesis as a result of his own studies, in particular working with NASA on the search for life on Mars, there were many others who advanced similar theories before him. James Hutton in a lecture in Edinburgh in 1785 considered the Earth as a "superorganism". Arthur Redfield hypothesised, in the American Scientist 1958, that the chemical composition of the atmosphere and oceans was controlled biologically.

In 1982 James Lovelock simplified the Gaia hypothesis to provide a theory that could be modelled. This model, produced with Andrew Watson, was called "Daisyworld"; it was published in Tellus in 1983. This demonstrated the positive and negative feedback mechanisms that life could use to modify its environment to its own benefit, and that this could come about through natural selection. Therefore as proposed in [2] "The tightly coupled system of life and its environment, Gaia, includes:

Living organisms that grow vigorously, exploiting any environmental opportunities that open.

Organisms that are subject to the rules of Darwinian natural selection: the species of organisms that leave the most progeny survive.

Organisms that affect their physical and chemical environment…

The existence of constraints or bounds that establish the limits of life."

Implications upon the practices and attitudes of the land based section

Politicians and governmental agencies demand fully supported scientific evidence to establish Gaia as fact on which to base judgements and actions (although the link from science to judgement may be based on an expedient interpretation). Therefore the Gaia theory is based on scientific evidence and provides predictions that can be tested by scientific method.

The use of an identity, especially a female one, appeals to a wider audience who can add anthropomorphic attributes in much the same way a sailor might do to his or her ship. In this way it can help individuals to come into a relationship with the planet and to foster the poetry and emotion that can enthuse people to care about the issues that the "dry" scientific facts are presenting for our consideration.

To quote from James Lovelock[1] "It is an alternative to a pessimistic view that sees nature as a force to be subdued and conquered. It is also an alternative to that equally depressing picture of our planet as a demented spaceship, forever travelling, driverless and purposeless, around an inner circle of the sun."

This can change how we see ourselves and our place in the universe, our "purpose" etc. This theory doesn’t change the real world, just as the theory that the earth goes around the sun causes, or stops, the sun "rising" each day; yet it can have a profound influence on how we as humans relate to the world (no longer "our" world).

There seem to be many parallels between the Gaia philosophy and Taoist writings. The Tao Te Ching by Lao Tsu [5] verse 51 for example says:

All things arise from Tao.
They are nourished by Virtue.
They are formed from matter.
They are shaped by the environment.
Thus all the ten thousand things all respect the Tao and honour Virtue.
Respect of Tao and honour of Virtue are not demanded,
But they are in the nature of things.
Therefore all things arise from Tao.

By Virtue they are nourished,
Developed, cared for,
Sheltered, comforted,
Grown, and protected.
Creating without claiming,
Doing without taking credit,
Guiding without interfering,
This is Primal Virtue.

 

James Lovelock says in [2] "Gaia theory provokes a view of the Earth where

Life is a planetary-scale phenomenon. On this scale it is near immortal and has no need to reproduce.

There can be no partial occupation of a planet by living organisms. It would be as impermanent as half an animal. The presence of sufficient living organisms on a planet is needed for the regulation of the environment…

…Gaia draws attention to the fallibility of the concept of adaptation. It is no longer sufficient to say that "organisms better adapted than others are more likely to leave offspring." It is necessary to add that the growth of an organism affects its physical and chemical environment; the evolution of the species and the evolution of the rocks, therefore, are tightly coupled as a single, indivisible process.

Theoretical ecology is enlarged. By tacking the species and their physical environment together as a single system, we can …, build ecological models that are mathematically stable and yet include large numbers of competing species..."

Back to Contents

Approaches

A holistic approach may be characterised by considering a complete system, and not symptoms or effects exhibited by any of its parts individually. A mechanistic approach considers that components are self-contained with clear boundaries and that they can be considered to act in a pre-determined way in response to their environment independently of other pieces. The approaches are similar, the difference is in the level of reduction or complexity applied to enable the system(s) to be comprehended.

Large scale changes in land use in one region will affect the whole world. Yet even the most complete models currently available cannot predict what these effects will be, or what level of change can be tolerated by the system. A holistic theory requires further investigation into how stable the current system is, what will perturb it and what might result from that. It is unlikely that a holistic approach will give a yes/no answer. Instead chaos theory needs to be used to assess possible outcomes and define "strange attractors".

A limited mechanistic theory does not have the scope to consider all the variables, it will be broken down into small, possibly very detailed, chunks whose response to changes of input can be definitely predicted. The problem is in how to put all these pieces together to complete the jigsaw.

A holistic theory can provide an idea of the finished picture and so enable all the pieces to be fitted in their correct place. Gaia, for example, has provided some edges, or boundaries, to the puzzle that can be easily recognised and used as a reference when looking to place a single piece in the whole picture. A holistic picture will also give clues as to what processes link the pieces, and highlight possible gaps in current knowledge.

Gaia theory is not asking us to find out how to "fix" Gaia; Gaia is not broken, it just might go off in a direction that most life presently couldn’t follow. A Gaian approach to land use might be called self-interest, it is concerned with how we can use this knowledge to survive and prosper. This is the difference between an impartial scientific theory, and a political tool used to determine human actions.

Holistic Agriculture

Masanobu Fukuoka gives an example of using a holistic approach to agriculture for self-interest in [3]. He advocates "do-nothing" farming, he does not plough, uses no machines and no chemicals, yet he obtains yields that compare favourably with other Japanese farms. Do-nothing farming he says is farming as simply as possible within and in co-operation with the natural environment, rather than the modern approach of applying increasingly complex techniques to re-make nature entirely for the benefit of human beings.

Mr Fukuoka has had many scientists come to inquire into his methods and success, yet they looked at only their individual specialism and not at how the whole worked together. So when they tried to repeat the results under controlled conditions they would alter something that they thought would make it better, eg. Mr Fukuoka leaves the straw on the field after harvest, the scientists tried this but they chopped up the straw into small pieces to make a "better" mulch, but this did not allow spaces for beneficial insects and spiders.

Modern farming methods are based on how quickly a job can be performed, it is rarely asked, as Mr Fukuoka asks, what would happen if this were not done? Although as he points out the transition from conventional to holistic farming is not instant success.

The Henry Doubleday Research Association currently have a project on "Conversion to Organic Field Vegetable Production" [3] which studies the financial and economic aspects of conversion. This is focused and not holistic as it is working within constraints of government funding. Similarly MAFF [18] ran a Organic weeds and diseases. These are testing parts in isolation and holistic science would say they are unreliable predictors of how the integrated system will behave.

In the same MAFF paper [18] "In search of more sustainable policies" explained that

researchers at SAC have developed a method to evaluate measures to improve water quality. The aim is to inform policies seeking the best possible balance between different environmental considerations to achieve more sustainable agriculture. This sounds holistic, yet in practice the case study focussed on a single variable, phosphorus, and how it could be controlled by various techniques. It did score the techniques for their ability to affect (either positively or negatively) a number of low-level indicators such as erosion or bird habitat. So this study represents a step towards considering the whole system, what SAC termed "a type of multi-objective decision-making known as composite programming".

Permaculture is a name given by Bill Mollison to Permanent Agriculture [15].

Permaculture brings together many existing ideas but places an emphasis on copying natural ecosystems that have evolved with their surroundings and the planet to be sustainable. What is important are the connections between all the parts of the system, and how to include humans in this web. Permaculture is a way of looking at the whole system. Our approach is a key factor in creating a sustainable system, this is recognised by giving it a "space" in the design, zone00, within ourselves (zone 0 is the house, or centre of human activity; zone 5 is unmanaged land or wilderness). There is no definitive method of permaculture, it is a set of guidelines to be applied locally and individually. A good introduction is [13].

Political Approaches

Most politicians seem to believe that all we need is growth and trade, and technology or financial instruments will fix any environmental problems. A holistic approach considers the boundaries to the system, and the processes that keep life operating within these boundaries is not, and perhaps cannot be, fully understood.

Outside the Western farming tradition there are many examples of organisations with an emphasis on sustainable agriculture. Food security is a much bigger issue in the developing world and areas prone to environmental risks like flood, drought, and hurricanes.

An example is COSECHA (the Association of Consultants for Sustainable, Ecological and People-Centres Agriculture) reported in [6], helps where traditional farming has left soil too poor to produce a living. COSECHA’s director Richard Brunch is quoted as saying, "most farmers simply don’t believe that soil can be improved while they’re farming it". What they realised is to build up the soil they mimic nature and supply nutrients from a litter, or mulch, layer. Also, as in nature, they leave almost no soil visible by using green manure. It also encouraged farmers to be innovative and to take over when the development agencies leave.

To be precise about what is sustainable is impossible and flexibility to meet rapidly changing conditions must be encouraged, it cannot be an imposed package.

The International Institute of Environment and Development has a Sustainable Agricultural and Rural Livelihoods Programme looked at 23 projects in Africa, Asia, Australia and Latin America; and 86 projects in East and Southern Africa [7], supported by the Swedish International Development Co-operation Agency.

This provided a 10-point plan for policy change:

1. Establish national policies that support sustainable agriculture, such as re-directing subsidies and grants …

2. Reform agricultural teaching establishments to encourage the formal adoption of participatory approaches.

3. Develop farmer-centred research and extension by supporting farmer-to-farmer exchanges and schemes for farmer training in their own communities.

4. Create policies which encourage the retention of economic surpluses in rural areas gained from the production and marketing of agricultural products.

5. Enhance non-agricultural incomes and off-farm employment in rural areas.

6. Decentralise and devolve authority from governments and aid agencies, while developing the capacity of local organisations to demand the resources and services they need.

7. Support rural women as producers and innovators by increasing their access to productive resources, savings and credit, agricultural information and formal education and training.

8. Secure property rights for peasant producers, especially through communal tenure systems, by protecting local access to and control of land and other productive resources.

9. Form or strengthen farmers’ organisations to encourage persistent co-operative action in agricultural production and resource management.

10. Increase local access to capital for investment in agriculture and resource management by avoiding land-tied credit and supporting establishment of local savings and credit schemes.

These policies could be applied equally in Britain, but most policies and practices seem to be the exact opposites. The following list tries to apply the above 10-point plan to the current British situation:

1. Many "western" farmers do not have much choice in their farming methods and crops they can grow. These are controlled to a large extent using financial instruments like loans or grants, futures markets and pre-selling of crops to producers, wholesalers and big retailers. Although some banks are now offering loans specifically for organic farms [9]. Patrick Whitefield in an article in Permaculture Magazine [10] said "Cropping plans are often more influenced by which crop is in current favour with the EU than by sound husbandry." Planning anything long term, he argues, takes away the ability to follow the twists and terms of short-term policies. Traditional farming is also subsidised more than organic farming, through taxation, at a rate around £25 per week per family [3], consumers also need to pay to clean up the pollution.

2. The new European Union Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) [8] aims to grant aid to farmers for the introduction or maintenance of production techniques which encourage the protection of the environment, the landscape and natural resources.

3. Farmer-to-farmer exchange has been reduced by the loss of local markets, which provided a source of regular informal meetings, and replaced by direct selling to corporate buyers.

4. There are a few Farmers markets, but the vast majority of British food production goes directly to big buyers. Local Exchange Schemes operate in rural environments but do not noticeably include farmers.

5. ,

6. & 7 The Rural Development Agency (RDA) and Action with Communities in Rural England (ACRE) [17] address rural employment issues and provide finance for training and developing local organisations. There is also support for Agenda21 drawn up at the Earth Summit at Rio de Janeiro in 1992.

7. Farmers are often only tenants or rent their fields, so they have no long-term investment in the land they farm. The new CAP[8] intends to encourage farmers to retire at age 55; currently 50% of EU farmers are over 55. This will reduce the continuity of working the land still further.

8. EC regulations restricting the sale of vegetable seeds to varieties on the National List and the copyrighting of genetic material are restricting farmers access to productive resources. The HDRA [4] has set up a Heritage Seed Library to give access to a wide range of plant material, but these cannot be sold, only shared and conserved. Further inspiration of the range of crops that can be grown is given in [16].

9. Farmers’ organisations can often be landowners associations with traditional rather than sustainable agendas. There is scope for non-farming specific forums; a recent meeting of Trees, Hedges and Ponds in Peasenhall and Sibton (THAPISAP) brought local farmers and environmental campaigners together as residents of a small area with shared interests.

10. There is an encouragement for credit unions at the moment. The current emphasis seems to be on cities, but they can be set-up by any group defined by occupation or location.

Many of these actions need to be taken on by farmers, or other land users, themselves, indeed the emphasis should be away from government to self-management.

Back to Contents

Other Land Use

Agriculture is not the only use of the land. Masanobu Fukuoka’s or the permaculture approach is that growing food is only a part of life, and not even the most important part. There must be time and space to enjoy the fruits of labour, to write poetry and make love. In holistic agriculture this aspect is not separate, but it is outside the scope of traditional farming, and poets have to go to art school.

Built-up areas and transport networks are also part of the whole and could be designed to "fit" sustainably into the whole system, but are normally considered in separation.

Wilderness is considered as a feature in permaculture design. This helps in many ways to sustain the environment, and provides people with a good example to follow, and a place to enjoy for its own sake and beauty. This is recognised in the traditional system and considered as tourism. Both holistic and mechanistic approaches consider how a wilderness area can be managed to sustain it. The difference is in why it is seen as important to protect such spaces.

Back to Contents

Beyond the scope of Government?

Most farming and environmental issues are no-respecters of national borders. Product prices are largely set on international markets and support subsidies are being withdrawn following GATT agreements [8]. Climatic changes that affect all agriculture, either positively or negatively, cannot be planned for or managed at a national level.

The CAP[8] is intending to encourage the development of farm forestry with the objectives of:

Protecting the environment and maintaining the countryside;

Contribute to the economic development of the countryside

Enhance and market forestry products.

None of these objectives address the impact that afforestation can have on the planetary system, eg. changes of local rainfall, the acidity or nutrient levels of rivers, wildlife habitat or if it is to be managed by big logging companies and potentially polluting processing plants. It does not seem to address food producing trees or coppiced woodland that currently get no grant, yet are an important part of sustainable agriculture, eg the Forest Garden [11,12].

Government grants and legislation also ignore the contribution of private gardens or allotments. Patrick Whitefield [13] asks "Do we need farms?" He points out that a domestic vegetable plot may be 3.5 times more productive per square metre than an average farm. The Henry Doubleday Research Association (HDRA) launched a "Grow your Own Organic Fruit & Vegetables Campaign" [4], this is an education campaign to get people taking responsibility to do "their bit" for sustainability, the HDRA compare it with the World War II "dig for victory" campaign. This is not likely to quickly change the habits of most British people who find supermarket shopping very affordable, convenient, and provides a large choice of safe food throughout the year.

As a final note it would seem that the best holistic approach is to empower and motivate individuals to care for the whole system, GAIA or Tao, and the web that links us all to it.

Back to Contents

1. Gaia – A new look at life on earth. James Lovelock 1995 version
2. The Ages of Gaia – A biography of our living Earth. James Lovelock 1988
3. The One Straw Revolution – An introduction to natural farming. Masanobu Fukuoka
4. Henry Doubleday Research Association Annual Report 1997 Ryton Organic Gardens, Coventry. http://www.hdra.org.uk
5. Tao Te Ching. Lao Tsu, translated by Gia-Fu Feng & Jane English
6. Mimicking/ nature to grow more. Charlie Pye-Smith People & the Planet Vol. 7 No.1
7. Sustaining the harvest. John Thompson & Fiona Hinchcliffe. People & the Planet Vol. 7 No.1
8. European Union new Common Agricultural Policy http://europa.eu.int/pol/agr/info_en.htm
9. Tridos bank NV Brunel House, Bristol
10. Permaculture Magazine Issue No.15
11. How to Make a Forest Garden. Patrick Whitefield
12. Forest Gardening. Robert Hart 1991
13. Permaculture in a Nutshell. Patrick Whitefield
14. Environmental Evolution – effects of the origin and evolution of life on planet Earth. Edited by Lynn Margulis and Lorraine Olendzenski. ISBN 0-262-13273-7
15. Introduction to Permaculture. Bill Mollison & Reny Mia Slay. 1991
16. Plants for a future – edible & useful plants for a healthier world. Ken Fern. 1997
17. Action with Communities in Rural England http://www.acreciro.demon.co.uk/partner.htm
18. MAFF Jan 1998 Environment protection R&D Newsletter Vol 3

more pages:

Copyright © 2000 webNB   webnb@BTInternet.com
Last modified: November 30, 1998