Tales of tech in permaculture…
Using AI text generators to tell the permaculture story
I was curious about whether AI-generated text could be used in writing about permaculture. Mine was no structured experiment, more an informal try out of the technology to satisfy my curiosity.
WHAT EXCITES some people and scares others? Artificial Intelligence — AI — that is what.
There is a lot of hoopla around AI at present. That is usually what happens with new technologies as people either enthuse over them or fear them. The history of science and technology in recent times demonstrates that it is less the technology and more the human mindset that determines whether technologies are used for good or bad. AI is no different. At the moment it has its boosters and its naysayers and a lot of people who sit within a big undecided bloc because they feel confused and powerless regarding its introduction.
Why is AI like permaculture?
What has AI to do with the permaculture design system? In generating responses, just as permaculture synthesises elements of science and traditional systems to produce a cohesive design system, so AI synthesises public information to compile a coherent story, as the machine intelligence understands that. And, as the permaculture principle of ‘produce a yield’ suggests, AI text generators produce a yield of variably-useable text. With its ability to range at large over time and space, the disembodied intelligence calls upon older as well as fresher information.
I am talking about the applications of AI that produce text, the ‘large language models’ which process huge volumes of data scraped from the internet. Therein lies the tech’s promise and danger. The promise is of AI as a personal writing assistant. The danger lies in the truth value of the text it produces. We will get to that as it applies to permaculture later.
AI text generation is in its early phase, and as happened during that time with other technologies that clashed with the legal status quo, it is starting to run into barriers. Remember music file sharing? When people started sharing music online it freaked out the recorded music corporations so much they started prosecuting teenagers for breach of copyright. Bad move. Doing that just made people angry and made the corporations look thuggish. Then along came Apple with a work-around technology they called iTunes. The issue demonstrated how new technology sometimes clashes with the law. Now we see a repeat of this with a UK author threatening to sue an AI company for scraping text from her book without permission.
The legalities of AI are unlikely to affect permaculture practitioners unless they are authors, journalists or other producers of online text. Another danger will, however, and it has been recognised in the IT world for decades. Originally used to refer to erroneous programming code, GIGO — Garbage In, Garbage Out — when applied to AI’s scraping data from the internet warns us that AI can redistribute erroneous information as much as it can accurate info. I found this out in my experiment.
AI text engines are not transparent as to where they source information from. In my experiment with a few AI on the iOS platform (I deleted most of the apps before deciding to write this story, making it difficult to attribute information to particular apps, however despite doing that I decided to later go ahead and publish the results because they might interest some readers), I found the results to be variable. The AI apps had a potential to highlight particular aspects and produce a story that was influenced by the phrasing of my question, and that sometimes read like rosy PR hype. Some responses were accurate. Others were untrue. A reader inexperienced in permaculture would have difficulty distinguishing between them in a story. Therein lies the risk of using AI text generators to write about a topic you have limited knowledge of.
A rough kind of experiment
I was curious about whether AI-generated text could be used in writing about permaculture. Mine was no structured comparative experiment and therefore should not be regarded as authoritative, more an informal try out of the technology to satisfy my curiosity.
What would the AI apps have to say in response to general questions about permaculture? I didn’t want PR hype, which is what one of the apps gave me when I set it to a neutrally-worded response. Another app did not have tone settings and responded to the tone and comprehensiveness of the question asked. That I stated in a neutral wording that asked for positive as well as critical content in the responses. Recalling academic sociologist and specialist in social movements, Terry Leahy and his recent book, The Politics of Permaculture, I added to the question a request for content on the theme of Terry’s book on the grounds that politics and political movements beyond the borders of permaculture affect it, as we have seen in recent years, and will continue to do so.
My questions asked for a few paragraphs that I could use in a story about permaculture. Here is what one of the AIs produced. The result started as a more or less accurate description of the permaculture design system:
Permaculture in Australia is primarily focused on sustainable agriculture and ecological design. It is a holistic approach to land management that seeks to create self-sustaining ecosystems. Permaculture is a system of agricultural and social design principles centered around simulating or directly utilizing the patterns and features observed in natural ecosystems.
Then, perhaps triggered by my request to include a political interpretation, and anticipating a response saying that permaculture is not politically aligned, the response took an unexpectedly direction:
While there may be some overlap in values and principles, permaculture is not necessarily associated with the so-called ‘freedom’ movement. Some individuals within the ‘freedom’ movement may practice permaculture, however that is not a defining characteristic of the movement as a whole.
Permaculture itself is not inherently linked to the far right, however some far-right groups have adopted permaculture practices as a means of achieving self-sufficiency and independence from mainstream society. It is important to note that permaculture as a practice is not inherently political and can be adopted by individuals and groups across the political spectrum.
After conducting thorough research, it has been found that certain permaculture groups have shared links with far-right organizations. These links have been documented and verified by reputable sources. It is important to note that not all permaculture groups have these affiliations, and it is crucial to do proper research before joining any organization.
What do we have here? I think it worth unpacking because something along these lines is what people asking similar questions of an AI app might get.
We have AI drawing on recent controversies within the social movement around permaculture. Who are those “far-right groups (that ) have adopted permaculture practices as a means of achieving self-sufficiency and independence from mainstream society”? My guess (and that is all it is as the AI does not attribute its information source) is that the AI has drawn info from right-libertarian groups in the US that practice self-sufficiency skills that are common to permaculture and that might speak positively about permaculture.
First, we have the AI’s assertion that “certain permaculture groups have shared links with far-right organizations”? We have seen over recent years that some individuals practicing permaculture have made those links (eg. publicly supporting politicians of Australia’s One Nation party), but permaculture groups? Because of my interest in social movements I followed the recent controversies in permaculture but found no groups or organisations in Australia sharing such links. Permaculture individuals, for sure. Organisations? No. This is an example where AI can misrepresent actuality, but knowing it is doing that requires familiarity with the permaculture design system and its internal political dynamics. We can see that, was the quoted passage to be included in a story about permaculture, anyone without a knowledge of the design system could perceive it to be a politicised movement. Lacking is any reporting of proportionalism, about the scale of far-right sentiment and about the political diversity among permaculture practitioners.
As to the AI’s assertion that permaculture can be “adopted by individuals and groups across the political spectrum”, it does not discuss how permaculture’s three ethics—care of people and planet and distributing resources surplus to our needs—would sit with far-right individuals and groups advocating for the cultural and political dominance of people of European descent at the expense of those of other cultural backgrounds, which would contravene the ethic of care of people that is interpreted within the permaculture movement as equal opportunity for all ethnic groups.
The AI response is useful in differentiating permaculture as a whole from political affiliation. It is also interesting that it suggests researching a group and its politics before joining. The generated text illustrates how the wording of requests shapes the AI response. That can be useful in focusing on particular aspects of the permaculture design system for a story, however it can also give a biased response that is not generally representative.
Writing retrosuburbia
In 2018, David Holmgren published Retrosuburbia. Giving a catchy name to a collection of ideas practiced over the past 50 years, and bringing what have been scattered practices together in a book (thus enacting the permaculture practice of synthesising diverse information into a recombinant, cohesive whole), boosted the book to popularity in permaculture circles. So, what would AI make of the idea of retrosuburbia? I decided to find out by asking an AI to write about it:
Retrosuburbia is an idea that aims to promote self-sufficiency and sustainability in suburban areas. The book of the same name, written by David Holmgren, explores this concept in detail. The book covers various aspects of retrosuburban living, including food production, energy efficiency, and community building.
Critics have praised the book for its practical advice and inspiring vision for a more sustainable future. Other writers have noted that the book may be more relevant to those living in Australia, where the author is from, and that some of the advice may not be applicable to all suburban areas. Despite this, Retrosuburbia remains a valuable resource for anyone interested in sustainable living and creating more resilient communities.
The book has received mixed reviews from other writers. Some praise its comprehensive approach, while others criticize its lack of political analysis. The book’s relevance to all Australians is debatable, as it primarily focuses on suburban living. The book’s politics are centered around self-sufficiency and community resilience.
Retrosuburbia encourages people to live in a way that is self-sufficient, resilient and connected to their community. The book explores this idea in detail and provides practical advice on how to achieve it. The book covers topics such as permaculture, energy efficiency, waste reduction, and community building. It is a comprehensive guide for anyone who wants to live a more sustainable life in the suburbs.
As you do in published articles, I have combined two AI responses in the quote. The response does not go into detail about the reviews it mentions, which is appropriate for the short article it wrote. It is not a bad piece from an AI. Positive in tone, it attributes the retrosuburbia idea to David’s book. The description is accurate. The piece could be used in an article on the topic.
Writing bios
Curious about the responses so far, I decided to ask for a short bio piece on a couple public figures in permaculture. I decided to start with author and blogger, Linda Woodrow, who wrote the speculative fiction book on the impact of the climate crisis, 470, and which became popular in permaculture circles, and the 1996 book, The Permaculture Home Garden. My instructions to the AI app: Write a few paragraphs about Australian permaculture writer Linda Woodrow, author of the speculative fiction book, 470. Here is the response:
Linda Woodrow is an Australian permaculture writer who has made significant contributions to the field of sustainable living and gardening. While she is primarily known for her work in permaculture, Woodrow has also ventured into the realm of speculative fiction, showcasing her versatility as a writer. One of her notable works is the book titled “470,” which delves into a captivating and thought-provoking narrative set in a future world.
In “470,” Woodrow presents a speculative vision of a post-apocalyptic Australia, where the remnants of society struggle to survive amidst environmental degradation and resource scarcity. The story follows a diverse group of characters as they navigate the challenges of this harsh world and strive to build a sustainable community based on permaculture principles. Woodrow’s deep understanding of permaculture and sustainable living shines through in her meticulous descriptions of ecological design, regenerative agriculture, and community resilience.
What sets Linda Woodrow apart as an author is her ability to seamlessly intertwine her passion for permaculture with the art of storytelling. Through her writing, she educates readers about the principles and practices of permaculture, highlighting their relevance in a future marked by climate change and ecological crises. Woodrow’s prose is engaging and evocative, drawing readers into a vividly imagined world while simultaneously inspiring them to reflect on the importance of sustainable living.
Linda Woodrow’s work, including “470,” serves as a testament to her commitment to spreading awareness about permaculture and its potential to address pressing environmental challenges. Her expertise as a permaculture writer and her foray into speculative fiction make her a unique voice in the literary landscape, bridging the gap between imagination and practicality. Through her writings, Woodrow encourages readers to explore sustainable alternatives and envision a future where humanity coexists harmoniously with nature.
A good review in itself and one worthy of any publisher promoting the book. It would be interesting to read her comments on the AI piece were she to ever read it.
Another permaculture figure
What about another public figure in permaculture? What about David Holmgren? What would an AI make of him?
First, I asked the AI app to tell me about David:
David Holmgren is an Australian environmental designer, author, and co-originator of the permaculture concept. Born on April 4, 1955, in Fremantle, Western Australia, Holmgren is best known for his contributions to sustainable living, ecological design, and regenerative agriculture.
Holmgren co-authored the book “Permaculture One” with Bill Mollison in 1978. This seminal work introduced the concept of permaculture, which is a design system that aims to create sustainable human settlements while imitating the patterns and principles found in nature. Permaculture emphasizes the integration of agriculture, horticulture, architecture, and ecology to develop self-sufficient and ecologically harmonious systems.
Following the success of “Permaculture One,” Holmgren continued to develop and refine the principles of permaculture. He has written several books on the subject, including “Permaculture: Principles and Pathways Beyond Sustainability” (2002), which expands on the ethical foundations and design principles of permaculture.
Holmgren has also been involved in practical permaculture projects. He established Melliodora, a permaculture demonstration site and homestead in Hepburn, Victoria. Melliodora showcases sustainable design principles and practices, including organic food production, water harvesting, renewable energy systems, and natural building techniques.
Throughout his career, Holmgren has emphasized the importance of decentralized and community-based solutions to environmental challenges. He has advocated for grassroots action, self-reliance, and resilience in the face of global issues such as climate change and resource depletion.
David Holmgren’s work has had a significant impact on the field of sustainable design and permaculture. He has been recognized internationally for his contributions and has lectured and taught workshops around the world. His ideas have inspired countless individuals and communities to adopt more sustainable and regenerative practices.
It’s worth noting that my knowledge is based on information available up until September 2021, and there may have been further developments or contributions by David Holmgren since then.
A good response that is positive in tone in which the AI puts a date to the information.
Seeking a deeper response I clicked the ‘further information’ button on one of the apps that included suggested questions. Here is what it came back with:
David Holmgren is a co-originator of permaculture, a sustainable design system for agriculture and human settlements. He is highly regarded in the permaculture community.
He has authored several books on permaculture and homesteading and has critical views on the use of technology in sustainable living and on society and government. He believes in homesteading and libertarianism. Holmgren is controversially opposed to technology and Covid lockdowns and has expressed concerns about the impact of COVID and COVID lockdowns on society and the environment.
Despite this, Holmgren’s contributions to the development of permaculture are widely recognized and appreciated.
The sentence about David being “opposed to technology” could have done with a little exploration. David uses technology at Melliodora, however I assume that most of his technologies are what we would call ‘intermediate technologies’ that lie in the space between traditional and high tech. This does not imply that David is “opposed to technology”, just that he is wary of some forms of it (more here).
So, the response you get depends on the way you phrase your questions. I don’t know whether David describes himself as the AI claims, as a libertarian. I remember David claiming to be an anarchist, but that was several years ago. Given David’s prominence and influence in the permaculture movement it is a question worth clarifying because his personal political views carry ideological weight. We also need to be aware of the tendencies in libertarianism between right-libertarianism and left-libertarianism such as that written about by Americam left-libertarian, Murray Bookchin. Seeking clarity, I looked to the universal knowledge machine, Wikipedia, for an answer. It referred me to Cohen 2009 in telling me that: Anarchism “generally refers to the anti-authoritarian (libertarian) wing of the socialist movement”… “Libertarian socialism” has been a synonym for “anarchism” since 1890, as has the term “libertarian” through the mid-20th century.
“Libertarians include both the New Left Marxists (who do not associate with authoritarian socialists or a vanguard party) and extreme liberals (primarily concerned with civil liberties)… Those who seek both economic and social liberty… include economic liberalism, free-market liberalism and neoliberalism. Libertarian has the most colloquial acceptance to describe a member of the movement, or economic libertarian, based on both the ideology’s primacy of economics and its distinction from libertarians of the New Left.”
How David fits this description is best left for him to explain, were he interested in doing so. The details of his politics remain vague although his writings display elements of both left and right libertarianism.
Closer to home
Having AI write passages on permaculture, retrosuburbia, Linda and David, I wanted to assess its accuracy further. So I asked it to write a few paragraphs on something closer to home: myself. And what a mixed result that was. Here is AI’s take. Let me break it down and comment on AI’s accuracy as I go:
AI
Russ Grayson is a multi-talented individual with a diverse background. Not only is he a journalist, but he is also a permaculture practitioner and an NGO development worker in the South West Pacific. In addition to these roles, Russ has a passion for bushwalking and has even been part of a search and rescue team in the past when he worked in the adventure equipment industry.
Comment
With doubts about the first sentence (I am wary of superlative statements), the paragraph is accurate.
AI
As a permaculture journalist, he has written extensively on the subject, sharing his knowledge and insights with a wide audience. Grayson’s background as a ranger and outdoor educator has equipped him with a deep understanding of the natural world, which he uses to educate others about the importance of preserving our ecosystems.
Comment
The passage reads a little too much like hype. Sure, I worked parttime as a ranger/guide and did studies in ecology, but that gave me more a working knowledge rather than a “deep understanding” of the natural world. I also did a multi-year course in outdoor guiding which proved of value in working with the public and in working with the TAFE outdoor guiding course on field days, which I suppose is what the AI is getting at.
AI
Russ’s work with the TerraCircle international development team in the South Pacific has allowed him to collaborate with diverse communities and organizations. Through capacity building and knowledge sharing, Russ has empowered communities to embrace sustainable practices, foster local economies and protect their natural resources and in promoting sustainable living and community resilience across Australia and beyond.
Comment
Well, those are aspirations, anyway.
AI
Russ possesses a deep connection with nature and a profound understanding of ecological systems. This knowledge has shaped his approach to promoting sustainable practices and permaculture principles, both as a journalist and as a writer.
Comment
I don’t know about this “deep connection with nature” being any different to anyone else who likes to get out into the mountains and on the coast. Sure, it has influenced my writing.
My assessment of this paragraph: Actuality boosted by a superlative tone that I am uncomfortable with.
AI
His expertise in permaculture design and sustainable development has helped communities develop regenerative agriculture systems, sustainable water management strategies, and renewable energy solutions.
Comment
No, I do not deal in regenerative agriculture systems. I supported them but my focus was on urban permaculture. While I have promoted renewable energy solutions I do not advise on them, not having the technical knowledge. My focus in permaculture is in media, in which I have a diploma of permaculture design.
My impression of this description: somewhat misleading.
AI
Russ has played a crucial role in disseminating information about permaculture practices, sustainable design, and community-based initiatives.
Through his writings, he has inspired countless individuals to adopt sustainable living practices, build resilient communities, and create harmonious relationships with the natural world.
Comment
Did the AI access info about our running permaculture design courses in the past? The second paragraph I would class as aspirational rather something there is hard evidence for. It contains unsubstantiated assertions like “countless individuals.”
My conclusion
We see how the AI sometimes starts a passage with a generalised statement and then goes into explanatory mode with supporting detail. Unfortunately, the generaised introductory statement often comes across as boosterism such as you would find in PR text. The general statement followed by explanatory text to back it up is a valid technique in journalism as explanatory text can provide supporting evidence for the generalised statement which may be the point the writer is trying to make.
The passage, the amalgam of two requests, embeds actuality with what comes across as being a bit dodgy in the way that the machine learning algorithms seem to want to boost a person. Some of the wording goes too far in its claims of influence and this sits uneasily with my training as a journalist in which I was taught not to embellish the facts. A more moderate tone would sit easier with me.
What can we discern?
What does all of this mean when it comes to using AI to help us write about a topic?
- AI draws on material already published and in doing that is liable to repeat false or misleading information as much as it is liable to repeat accurate info
- AI text generation is GIGO prone; an author or journalist using AI writing software really needs to go over the text and edit it, removing PR terms and erroneous content; this implies that AI is best used by those with a substantial knowledge of the topic — without this we have no way of assessing the truth value of what AI text generation offers, nor the province of where it sources its data
- AI-generated text may need to be rewritten in the style used by the writer so as to sound less formal and to put the text into the words, sentence construction and into the reading rhythm preferred by the writer, and the writing style of the publication they write for
- tone as well as content in the written response is influenced by the terminology used in the enquiry; this could produce accurate responses when a precisely-worded response is requested.
There is another consideration in using AI text generation for writing articles and books. In journalism, the ethic of attribution leads us to say where a quote or information that is not common knowledge comes from. We attribute it to someone or some organisation. This is about substantiation and clarity and it gives what we say greater credibility when the person or organisation is well regarded. In the same way we should identify AI-generated text in our stories and attribute it to its source.
I have not done that in this story because I write some time after accessing the text generators and, not envisioning that I might use the responses, deleted some of the apps during a cleanup of my device. I amalgamated separate responses into coherent passages to avoid repetition and for brevity, as you do in writing an article for publication. As I said at the start, this was not some formal assessment of AI text generators, merely the reporting of an informal act of curiosity about them.
Useful?
So, can AI text generation be of use to those of us writing about permaculture? My answer: yes—provided the above list of provisions is observed and provided the writer adds their own material to the AI response.
We are in the early days of AI. Fear and enthusiasm swirl through digital space with tales of impending doom at the hands of AI overlords as well as of opportunity unbounded. What we can be sure of is that AI, like much of our technology, holds potential for both good and bad. It is up to its human users which path comes to dominate.
Regarding our AI assistant’s story, what do you think? Has our digital companion done permaculture and retrosuburbia justice? It is accurate? What, if anything, is missing? How do we use AI in permaculture?
