Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: bioregionalism, ecological footprint, green design, local, permaculture, sustainability, transitional communities, urbanism
Bioregional urbanism is the idea that regional communities need to live within the limits of ecosystems. Just like an individual or a business has to learn to live on a budget, our communities need to learn to live on available resource budgets.
Why regions? According to many ecologists are the scale at which sustainability can be achieved. As individual regions become more self sustaining, we will collectively come closer to living within the production capacity of the planet.
Many people are already doing things that are ‘regionally self sustaining’. A few examples include the slow food movement, the ‘buy local’ movement, permaculture, biodynamic agriculture, transitional communities, green regional design, to name a few. All of these efforts are taking us closer to living within our resource budgets.
So if people are already doing things that work, why bioregional urbanism? Scientists are now able to track the health of our planet, and understand how much resources the ecosystems can actually produce. Bioregional urbanism is a method that applies this science to the design of cities and economies, and the production of goods that we consume. As a society, we now have the information and capability, and now we have to start testing ways of applying this knowledge to our daily production and consumption decisions.
What can you do?
- Start simple. Learn about where your food and clothing comes from. Then, as much as possible:
- Grow/make your own food
- Buy recycled and reused clothing and furniture
- Buy locally grown, produced, and manufactured food and goods as much as possible
- When you buy imported goods, try to buy goods that are sustainably produced by the regions from which they come (eg the region receives enough rainwater to support the production of the raw goods of the product).
For further exploration:
http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/footprint_basics_overview/
http://www.diggers.org/freecitynews/_disc1/00000017.htm
http://wp.bioregionalcongress.net/
Filed under: Uncategorized
Interested in understanding the impact of owning 7 pairs of jeans? This excerpt from our upcoming book provides some insight into the affect of the consumption of jeans on regional self sufficiency.
“Jeans don’t drink, but about 2,900 gallons (11,000 liters) of water is used in the creation of a pair of jeans. In today’s world trade, the makings of jeans may travel three times around the world from origin to owner—from growth of cotton, to processing in a different place, to weaving cloth in yet another place, to a place of sewing and manufacture, to a place of sale, to an owner. And, if not sold, there is even more travel for discounting, remanufacture into cotton-batt insulation, or other products. Going on 15 million New Englanders, times 7 pairs of jeans, times 2,900 gallons… That works out to 304.5 billion gallons of “virtual water” in our jeans! This is equivalent to about 5% of the annual rainfall on all of New England—in turn that amount equals about 100% of our annual fresh water supply for humans.
“So what? As a net importer of clothing and food, New England is saving water at the expense of other bioregions that are short of water for their people—not to mention all the other species in their web of life. If the virtual water content of just our New England jeans could be cut in half, enough fresh water to support over 7 million people for a year would become available. And jeans don’t eat. Half of our New England virtual water from jeans could become:185,250 tons of eggs or …” —Phil Loheed
We just invite you to think about this when you add another pair of jeans to your collection.
For further explanation:
http://www.virtual-water.org/
http://friedmansprout.com/2011/11/30/understanding-virtual-water-for-a-sustainable-future/
Filed under: Uncategorized
Bioregional Urbanism is about improving the probability of success for everyone… If the twentieth century was about how to maximize the use of nonrenewable resources in an effort to stabilize, modernize, and develop nations, then the twenty first century is about how communities must find better ways to live within the limitations of ecosystems.
According to the Global Footprint Network (2009), the last time human beings consumed less resources than the planet could produce was 1975. Currently, people are using resources at a rate 1.5 times greater than (the rate at which) the earth can produce them. This book invites us all to think about how we can incrementally return to living at a rate of less than 1.0 on this planet again. The book proposes ways to help us do that, as practitioners, citizens, and researchers.
Individuals, organizations, and even state governments have to operate within budgets. As a society we need to learn how to operate within natural resource budgets. We need to acknowledge these limitations structurally and institutionally in our business plans, our production and manufacturing techniques, our government planning, and our agricultural practices.
Until we recognize the material and resource limits of our world, we will not be able to imagine and innovate solutions that will allow us to live in balance with the planet. We all know the age-old term “scarcity is the mother of invention.” The problem with this statement is that it implies waiting until scarcity forces us to invent. Instead, we must acknowledge scarcity before it becomes so acute that the ecosystems can no longer support humans. We have the knowledge and we have the tools, but we may lack the will, the desire, the political strength, or the heart to commit.
Accelerating climate change, rising ocean levels, decline of fossil oil and water reserves are all forcing us to rethink urban areas—new solutions and collaborations are needed to adapt or re-create cities in response to these challenges. Only in the last decade through new technology have scientists become able to calculate and map the global resource base and communicate those findings to an increasingly networked world. We carefully track how much renewable water falls on a region, or how much solar electricity a neighborhood could generate. People all over the globe are calculating these numbers daily. How do we start to translate them more intentionally into design practice? How do we do this in ways that are more just and equitable? How do we do this without being autocratic?
“Bioregional urbanism” offers decision making frameworks and practice methods linking the science of sustainability with those who are making design decisions about the built environment, including policy planners, urban designers, architects and community organizations among others. It is a methodology for helping bioregions and their human populations become more self sufficient within the global context. The methodology includes a process of 1) establishing bioregional boundaries 2) calculating available renewable resources for each region 3) determining minimum resource use per capita for well-being 5) creating a regional self sufficiency index for each region 4) understanding resource flows between regions, including how to optimize advantageous trade with other regions 5) processes for collaborations between communities and practitioners to innovate new solutions based on regional self sufficiency 6) iterative updating techniques to reflect changing metabolic realities and 7) creating an iterative regional self sufficiency index for each region. Bioregional urbanism builds on the base of bioregional inquiry and methods, just sustainability (Agyeman 2003) and environmental metrics such as the ecological footprint and environmental space.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: regional resilience, regional self sufficiency, sustainability, sustainable urbanism
Did you know that we’re consuming 1.51 planets worth of stuff (footprintnetwork.org), and yet we only have one planet. The last time we used 1.0 planets was 1975. No matter what our political views, we all want to be able to give the next generation a better quality of life. So how can we make sure of this? There are many efforts to make our world more sustainable as urban agriculture, public transportation, hybrid cars, recycling, and changing our light bulbs. Many individuals, families, and companies have even made significant investments in greening homes, investing in green companies, and green infrastructure. These efforts, however, are piecemeal and often disconnected. How do we know that what we’re doing is actually moving us towards consuming 1.0 planets? Basically it is just about numbers. Scientists can help us to understand if we’re going in the right direction by quantifying the amount of renewable resources available in each region for human use, and how close or far each region is to living within the limits.
The idea of regional self sufficiency is about understanding what resources are available to us in our own regions, and how much can be renewably sustained by the ecosystems. We’re not claiming that we should live only on renewable regional resources, but rather we begin to understand what regions can sustain for the long term. By understanding the regional resource base, we can begin to understand how much we are currently importing from other regions to sustain our current lifestyles. We can also better understand where we are getting these resources, and from what regions we are taking, and how it might be affecting those regions. This is not a utopian idea. We are not suggesting an ideal, but rather that we as a society begin to look realistically at what our ecosystems can maintain. The way we are living as society today–ie. consuming 1.51 planets of stuff–is unrealistic and unjust. We have the capacity and the knowledge and as a society to live differently, and it starts with knowledge and the desire.
Filed under: Visions
This paper explores the idea of “Urban Incubator” programs, and their implications for community building, economic development and the evolution of “the new sustainable economy.”
As the process of cultural evolution continues into the 21st century, the role of innovation and creativity, combined with scientific inquiry, has particular importance. Exponential population growth has made humanity a force of nature that is having profound effects on the planet and its lifestyles. Increasingly pressing social justice, poverty, education, and empowerment issues require solutions. We are learning how outmoded financial systems and business models have lost relevance to the “real (and even the virtual) world” and must be updated.
The thesis here is this: Urban Incubator programs, properly conceived and organized, can be used to mobilize creativity, new economy initiatives, and successful new lifestyles in existing cities. They can provide continuous introduction of opportunities for artists, young entrepreneurs, and others to bring passion, new products, and excitement into the ongoing evolution of urban life. Such programs can also result in significant profitability for participants, investors, other businesses and the community at large. Section 1 outlines and defines the vision for Urban Incubators. Section 2 discusses intended outcomes. Section 3 looks into location and form of spaces for Incubators. Section 4 explores possible business structures. Finally, Section 5 reviews the potential success of Incubators through the experiences of the author over the last forty years.
1 Introduction to Urban Incubators
1.1 Creativity in the Place Making Process
It is well past time to eliminate market land value as the primary determinant of use patterns in our cities. A host of beneficial social relationships, created at a time when all classes of people and activities were close together in neighborhoods, have been sacrificed to ‘market forces,’ class segregation and car-driven sprawl. Urban design over the last several decades, has become a matter of promoting bigger and bigger projects that tend to perform poorly—to very poorly—when compared to organically grown neighborhoods composed at “human scale.” The notion of “affordability”—actively resisted by the development community—needs to be replaced with the concepts and principles of the “incubator.”
Financial considerations, often flawed by ‘actuarial’ decision making, have seriously compromised the livability, and profitability, of most of our cities. Even our most successful places tend to have the vitality and uniqueness slowly squeezed out of them. Such ‘bankable’ decision trees lead to increasingly exclusive, and conspicuously less successful places. In retail centers, for example, the ‘maintenance leasing’ process results in a ‘homogenized’ character, lacking in uniqueness, passion, and frequently ‘real life’ quality. It is rare in that process to search for uniqueness, passion and creativity—thus none is forthcoming.
1.2 The Vision for Incubators
Artists, Young Professionals, Agriculturalists, Naturalists, Teachers, Students, Public Servants , Scientists and other creative social groups—including children and senior citizens—are critical to maintaining vibrancy and competitiveness in our cities. These groups also tend to live modestly and to place high values on many aspects of life other than competing for high-value real estate. When cost of living increases, these groups typically leave neighborhoods that they have enriched and made vibrant. The result is a gradual, sometimes hard to measure, erosion in the quality of life. There is also a loss of economic productivity and profitability that often leads into a downward spiral from high value to neglect, crime, and finally abandonment. Although this may lead eventually to a rebirth as creatives respond to low land values after the decline, very few would label this (boom and bust) cycle a desirable process.
To combat the boom and bust effect, most economic zones in the city should incorporate “incubator” programs. These may include subsidies, tax incentives and credits, transferable development rights, set asides in housing and cooperatives, scholarships, and similar techniques consciously applied to the spatial arrangement of uses in the community. As prosperity in the neighborhood increases, so should the proportion of incubator inclusions and programs. This reflects the fact that the most mature and “successful” neighborhoods are at the greatest risk of losing momentum and competitiveness through reduced creativity, and talent. City places and neighborhoods that are well balanced and socially diverse, are also frequently the most productive economically.
1.3 Spatial Aspects of Incubator Programs
In retail merchandising of shopping centers, a great deal of thought and professionalism goes into arranging uses relative to one another. This is done to optimize synergy and appeal to patrons—through design of patterns of use. Business Incentive Districts (BIDs), pioneered in New York at Bryant Park and the Grand Central Partnership, have extended similar principles to district level for commercial areas. Similar professionalism can, and should, be applied to mixed-use and live-work neighborhoods. Many examples and prototypes have evolved in historic contexts such as Boston’s Newbury Street, and parts of San Francisco, Amsterdam, and other cities. Today these areas—precisely because of their high land values—are in need of fresh thinking to improve their function in the sustainable economy and to improve social justice. Strategically placed urban incubator spaces can provide enhanced vitality, richness and improved revenues in proportion to their quality and uniqueness.
2 Intended Outcomes for incubator programs
2.1 Restoring Diversity and Resilience to Communities
Segregation of uses and people, enabled by the reliance on automobiles, has turned out very badly in the twentieth century. In America, many cities have become uncompetitive through their inability to adapt to changes in creative ways. This loss of resiliency is a direct result of segregated life styles:
- populations cannot or do not act together to set new agendas;
- segregated social groups contain only a fraction of needed skill sets and talents;
- systems of prejudice and hatred evolve in isolation and can lead to violence; and
- economic vigor is rarely sustainable within single class communities.
To restore healthy balance and competitiveness in our settlements, many negative effects of segregation can be mitigated by intelligent, comprehensive management of urban incubator programs. Celebration of ethnic diversity in language, music, food, entertainment, and education measurably enhances urban life wherever discrimination and prejudice do not hold sway. Age and occupational diversity are also highly desirable and manageable in similar ways.
2.2 Improving Revenues in Commercial Activities
The success of urban specialty markets and place-making evolved by BTA+Architects, the evolution of pioneering business incentive district (BID) projects in Manhattan, and the synergy established between cultural attractions (museums, monuments, special venues such as Chicago’s Millennium Park) in enhancing the general health of urban centers has established beyond doubt the efficacy of urban incubators. These, usually public, places possess special attractiveness to very broad classes of people. Not only are they successful in their own right, but they also enhance many of the activities and private spaces that form the context for them.
2.3 Improving Neighborhood Function
Complex activity that takes place at all hours of the day and night provides surveillance of urban spaces, resulting in both the appearance and fact of safety. Such complexity also satisfies daily needs in compact areas, reduces transportation costs and trips, accommodates the elderly and handicapped, improves maintenance and environmental quality, and uses energy resources efficiently. “Walkable” neighborhoods are increasingly in demand as commuting using private vehicles becomes less and less desirable and affordable. All of these factors and patterns can be evolved as goals for the management of urban incubators.
2.4 Innovation: Evolving the Sustainable Economy and Environmental Restoration
Urban design strategies that encourage development of new products in the “sustainable economy,” that enable bioremediation and defend biodiversity within the city, can have dramatically positive effects. Healthy communities are not possible in sick landscapes. Many aspects of natural systems require significantly larger, and continuously connected, habitats to thrive. All urban conglomerates worldwide are seriously polluted and unhealthy for humans and all other life forms. Agriculture, so far from being a long-term triumph of civilization, turns out to be seriously destructive and increasingly unsustainable as fresh water (fossil) resources are rapidly depleted worldwide.
The above are just a few of the reasons our cities need optimum creativity and “toolboxes of talent.” High tech urban agriculture, slow food, restoration of biodiversity, the sustainable green jobs and products of the economy of “natural capitalism” (Hawken, 1999) and “cradle to cradle,” (McDonough, 2002) are but a few of the evolving innovations that deal with them. The effects of climate change and rising sea levels introduce yet another series of demands for creative responses.
3 Spaces and Forms for Incubators
3.1 Urban Specialty Centers (Typically Downtown)
In a number of urban market places, the incubator concept has been used in a specialized manner to add unusual merchandising elements. Railway floats, movable fixtures, push carts, kiosks , café spaces, restaurants, and smaller inline stores have all been used to accommodate new business ideas and innovative merchants. Often, patrons will have no idea of the incubator aspect of the program, and many successful companies have started in this context. Management of incubator programs in this environment will usually be by the private management company operating the center (often on behalf of public partners).
3.2 Mixed Commercial Districts (Transit Oriented)
Public Market buildings, especially when well managed, can provide numerous opportunities for incubator tenants. Occasionally, private market buildings and coops operate some, or a majority, of their space as incubator opportunities. In office and institutional mixed-use districts, numerous spaces, often ground level, can be made available for incubator programs, due to project economics that are based upon the dominant (office, multi-family, research, academic, etc.) uses of the buildings. Business Incentive District (BID) organizations, or similar management entities created by associations of landlords, can manage incubator programs for significant areas of city downtown and neighborhood commercial zones.
3.3 Live-Work Density Zones (Transit Oriented)
In live-work zones, relatively new to many cities, rather complex ordinances dealing with noise, traffic, toxic substances, staff parking, operating hours, and many other concerns are typical. This creates the need for a specialized series of incubator programs that move into all aspects of residential needs and requirements. In turn, associations, coops, and similar entities can provide management and oversight for incubators. The range of incubator activities may be very broad in this context, including retail, office, studio, light manufacturing, professional office, and institutional uses (both interior and exterior).
3.4 New Enterprise and Re-Naturalization Zones
As proposed here, these are parts of existing city fabric that are relatively distant from transit lines, that contain important natural systems corridors, and where land values are relatively modest. In this context incubator programs will tend to be oriented to maintaining, or introducing urban food production, developing “sustainable economy” businesses, and restoration/remediation of environmental habitats and biodiversity. This implies that urban density would be managed to eliminate sprawl, and to incorporate naturalized environments in sufficiently large areas to allow modern water, food and energy management systems to function in support of increased density along transit corridors.
4 business structures for incubators
4.1 Commercial Incubators
Business arrangements for incubator tenants in this context revolve around the simplest possible deal: No or month-to-month leases. Very modest or no base rents. Percentage rent when times are good. Accounting for sales and reporting kept simple. In addition, incubator tenants should be counseled on best practices, promoted as part of the overall project, shielded from CAM, security, landlord taxes, and other complexities they will learn as they become successful. Incubator tenants can be, and often are, a critical ingredient in creating a sense of uniqueness and local spirit that can be very significant to the overall profitability and success of the place.
4.2 Mixed Commercial Districts
Although managed by a different (BID like?) entity, business aspects of incubator programs in transit-oriented neighborhoods—where projects depend on primary uses for their operating income—can be similar to those of the Commercial Incubators discussed in ¶4.1. In such districts, a special program to solicit and review proposed businesses will be necessary, replacing professional leasing/merchandising specialists. In addition, careful attention will need to be focused on the full range of needs in each neighborhood to include non-profits, educational and other non commercial users.
4.3 Live-Work Synergy
Neighborhoods of this type will have a complex pattern of owner-occupied and rental spaces. This makes necessary a relatively broad range of incubator programs. Educational and research activities will play a larger role. Because this form of neighborhood tends to be newly enabled through public ordinances and building codes, management of incubator programs will need to be addressed in the creation of such instruments. These characteristics make coordination of uses for optimum synergy a matter of special overview by public agencies, or possibly some sort of “authority.” Unfortunately, public entities tend to be incapable of the ongoing creativity required, due to the short time a given administration may exist, and other political and public funding issues. There is a need for careful study of these realities to evolve a successful management strategy for incubators in this context, and for the proposed new enterprise zones as well.
4.4 New Enterprise Zones
New enterprise zones are a sort of “overlay” of various incentives to encourage, and enable property owners to dramatically alter the uses of their lands. To achieve a gradual introduction of sustainable food and energy production, sustainable water management, and new sustainable businesses, combined with restoration of natural systems and biodiversity, will require a broad array of urban design and planning techniques: Transferrable development rights, tax credits, energy rebates, grants, and many other tools will have roles to play. Several environmental, educational, and research organizations such as watershed associations, archeologists, geologists, biologists, and others (Biorangers-see the glossary?) will set much of the agenda for these new zones.
5 Incubators and success…
5.1 The Experience with Urban Markets
Faneuil Hall Marketplace in Boston is properly considered the granddaddy of modern place making. It pioneered the use of the public-private partnership concept, used to preserve a major public element of the city, to restate its life as Boston’s marketplace, and to inhabit it with unique local people and products. Its “bull-market” and special recruitment efforts involved several, then untried, incubator programs devised by Ben Thompson and his company (now BTA+Architects). The result was spectacularly successful in character, spirit—and sales. It became a worldwide model as a business partnership, and as modernist urbanism with preservation. Unfortunately, many seem to have forgotten its role as an incubator, partly because some businesses that started there are now national and international companies.
Harborplace in Baltimore, also a BTA+ project, was the first to apply the experience of Faneuil Hall Marketplace to a newly built project rather than a historic ‘place.’ Similar incubator strategies and recruitment efforts were used in establishing its initial tenant mix. In particular, its two-sided food tenants in the Light Street Pavilion were designed to allow each tenant to sell retail food on one frontage, while offering prepared food on a second. Several incubator deals were also made for cafés and restaurants in the project. Again the project was very successful. However, attempts to replicate it in other cities worldwide were spotty and sometimes unsuccessful—due to failure of the copyists to realize the importance of the incubator aspects of what might be called the ‘localization’ process.
In Union Station’s redevelopment in Washington, numerous incubator programs were utilized, together with overall modest base rent (supplemented with percentage rent). These were instrumental, with the approach to public hospitality, in generating the remarkably strong ‘spirit’ among the tenants. The result was one of the most successful and consistent revenue streams of any retail/mixed use project in the country.
5.2 Artists: Urban Pioneers
Consider art movements and traditions: Finnish, Swedish, Irish, Italian, Spanish, Egyptian, Haitian, Japanese, African, South American, Northwest Coast, Eskimo, Aborigine, Native American, and so many others. Remember that each of these traditions is valued and treasured everywhere. Painting, sculpture, drawing, music, food, color, pattern, language, drama, literature, film, dance—the creative toolbox is multi-cultural and incredibly deep. Which part should we live without in our cities? Should we continue to undervalue the contribution all these arts make to our lifestyle, and consign the artists to a semi-nomadic lifestyle searching for cheap space in perpetuity?
5.3 The Elderly: A Great Resource to Partner with the Young
Change in our time has been incredibly rapid, and we have no reason to believe its rate will moderate anytime soon. Each generation has a distinctly different skill-set and experience base. This creates a dynamic and critical need for collaboration. Remember the adage: Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Multigenerational partnering is a new way of life that makes the concept of retirement obsolete—to be replaced with periodic ‘reinvention.’ It is very difficult to accomplish such collaboration in the segregated straightjacket of the 20th century city.
5.4 Going to the “State of the Art…”
The “incubator” idea is used here to represent many aspects of human creativity and to personalize our search for universal social justice and peace. I have argued that it should replace the idea of “affordability.” While it is true that a system of financial adjustments and subsidies are suggested that deal with money, these should be thought of as techniques to recognize the true value of, and critical function of, innovation, creativity and social justice in our evolving cultural system. This is very comparable to the value of “natural capital” which although critical to our survival on this planet, is generally unvalued in monetary terms. We are in the midst of various attempts to restructure our global monetary system in the attempt to restore its relevance to measuring values in real world terms. Until such time as we have done that, we will have to consider money irrelevant to programming and design of our settlement patterns, and the way they coexist with the rest of the web of life on the Earth.
“To the children
To all the children
To the children who swim beneath
The waves of the sea, to those who live in
The soils of the Earth, to the children of the flowers
In the meadows and the trees in the forest, to
All those children who roam over the land
And the winged ones who fly with the winds,
To the human children too, that all the children
May go together into the future in the full
Diversity of their regional communities.”
—Thomas Berry
GLOSSARY (Words in quotes are expressions of the author.):
“Biorangers”—are a proposed social class dedicated to preservation and restoration of healthy ecosystems planet-wide. Scientists presently constitute the majority of biorangers, but the class is rapidly evolving into a modern version of naturalized hunter-gatherers.
Bioregions—are defined through physical and environmental features, including watershed boundaries, geology, and other ecosystem characteristics. “Bioregionalism” stresses that the determination of a bioregion is also a cultural phenomenon, and emphasizes local populations, knowledge, and existing conditions. (Alexander, D., 1996.)
“BRSS”—BioRegional Resource Self-Sufficiency is the ability of a region to operate within its locally available resources, combined with only advantageous global virtual resources (AGVR) from trade relationships.
“BCE”—Budgeted Consumption Economy is a proposed concept of the ‘new economy’ which is based upon ‘doing much more with only those renewable resources allocated to human use. It achieves “economic growth” through increased efficiency rather than increased physical consumption. The BCE is composed of groups of self-sufficient bioregions encompassing all human settlements on the Earth.
Place Making and Social Justice—A planet at war or filled with injustice is not a sustainable place. It is like a baseball team with injured players—not able to win or even to play reliably. The place-making process assists significantly in advancing global urban culture and the spread of social justice. We are committed to maintaining and renewing ethnic diversity, with full empowerment, for all people.
Settlement Patterns—are patterns of use by human cultures and communities. These may include cities, towns, villages, farming patterns, resource extraction activities, related infrastructure and transportation systems. The term also implies a spatial relationship between human and non-human natural systems.
Sustainability—means living in harmony with the natural systems of our planet, while ensuring quality of life for all its people.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Berry, T., 1999. The Great Work, Our Way into the Future, Three Rivers Press, New York.
Brown, L.R., 2008. Plan B 4.0, Mobilizing to Save Civilization, W. W. Norton, New York, London.
Capra, F., 2004. The Hidden Connections, a Science for Sustainable Living, Anchor Books.
Capra, F., 1996. The Web of Life, A New Scientific Understanding of Living Systems, Anchor Books, New York.
Fuller, R.B., 1981. Critical Path, Saint Martins Press, New York
Hawkin, P., Lovins, A., Lovins, L.H., 1999. Natural Capitalism, Little Brown.
McDonough, W., Braungart, M., 2002. Cradle to Cradle, Remaking the Way We Make Things,
North Point Press, New York.
Rogers, P., 2008. Facing the Fresh Water Crisis, Scientific American, 8:46-53.
Sen, A., 1999. Development as Freedom, Anchor Books.
White, L.A., 1969. The Science of Culture: A Study of Man and Civilization, Second Edition, reprinted by Percheron Press, New York, 2005.
Yunus, M., 2007. Creating a World Without Poverty: Social Business and the Future of Capitalism,
PublicAffairs™.