ecological community essay

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

44.1C: Community Ecology and Ecosystem Ecology

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 14149

Community ecology studies interactions between different species; abiotic and biotic factors affect these on an ecosystem level.

Learning Objectives

• Distinguish between community ecology and ecosystem ecology
• Community ecology focuses on the processes driving interactions between differing species and their overall consequences.
• Ecosystem ecology studies all organismal, population, and community components of an area, as well as the non-living counterparts.
• The mutualistic relationship between the Karner blue butterfly and ants are of interest to community ecology studies since both species interact within an area and affect each other’s survival rate; in turn, they are both affected by nutrient -poor soils, which are part of the ecosystem ecology.
• community : a group of interdependent organisms inhabiting the same region and interacting with each other
• conspecific : an organism belonging to the same species as another
• heterospecific : an organism belonging to a different species to another

Community Ecology

A biological community consists of the different species within an area, typically a three-dimensional space, and the interactions within and among these species. Community ecologists are interested in the processes driving these interactions and their consequences. Questions about conspecific interactions often focus on competition among members of the same species for a limited resource. Ecologists also study interactions among various species; members of different species are called heterospecifics. Examples of heterospecific interactions include predation, parasitism, herbivory, competition, and pollination. These interactions can have regulating effects on population sizes and can impact ecological and evolutionary processes affecting diversity.

For example, the larvae of the Karner blue butterfly form mutualistic relationships with ants. Mutualism is a form of a long-term relationship that has coevolved between two species and from which each species benefits. For mutualism to exist between individual organisms, each species must receive some benefit from the other as a consequence of the relationship. Researchers have shown that there is an increase in the probability of survival when Karner blue butterfly larvae (caterpillars) are tended by ants. This might be because the larvae spend less time in each life stage when tended by ants, which provides an advantage for the larvae. Meanwhile, the Karner blue butterfly larvae secrete a carbohydrate-rich substance that is an important energy source for the ants. Both the Karner blue larvae and the ants benefit from their interaction.

Ecosystem Ecology

Ecosystem ecology is an extension of organismal, population, and community ecology. The ecosystem is composed of all the biotic components (living things) in an area along with that area’s abiotic components (non-living things). Some of the abiotic components include air, water, and soil. Ecosystem biologists ask questions about how nutrients and energy are stored, along with how they move among organisms and the surrounding atmosphere, soil, and water.

The Karner blue butterflies and the wild lupine live in an oak-pine barren habitat. This habitat is characterized by natural disturbance and nutrient-poor soils that are low in nitrogen. The availability of nutrients is an important factor in the distribution of the plants that live in this habitat. Researchers interested in ecosystem ecology could ask questions about the importance of limited resources and the movement of resources, such as nutrients, though the biotic and abiotic portions of the ecosystem.

Contributions and Attributions

• ecophysiology. Provided by : Wiktionary. Located at : en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ecophysiology . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• OpenStax College, Biology. October 17, 2013. Provided by : OpenStax CNX. Located at : http://cnx.org/content/m44856/latest...ol11448/latest . License : CC BY: Attribution
• OpenStax College, Biology. October 23, 2013. Provided by : OpenStax CNX. Located at : http://cnx.org/content/m44853/latest...ol11448/latest . License : CC BY: Attribution
• Ecology/Introduction. Provided by : Wikibooks. Located at : en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ecology/Introduction . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Ecology. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecology . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• ecosystem. Provided by : Wiktionary. Located at : en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ecosystem . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• ecology. Provided by : Wiktionary. Located at : en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ecology . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• OpenStax College, The Scope of Ecology. October 17, 2013. Provided by : OpenStax CNX. Located at : http://cnx.org/content/m44856/latest...e_44_01_01.jpg . License : CC BY: Attribution
• OpenStax College, Biology. October 23, 2013. Provided by : OpenStax CNX. Located at : http://cnx.org/content/m44856/latest...ol11448/latest . License : CC BY: Attribution
• oviposit. Provided by : Wiktionary. Located at : en.wiktionary.org/wiki/oviposit . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• population. Provided by : Wiktionary. Located at : en.wiktionary.org/wiki/population . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• conspecific. Provided by : Wiktionary. Located at : en.wiktionary.org/wiki/conspecific . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• OpenStax College, The Scope of Ecology. October 17, 2013. Provided by : OpenStax CNX. Located at : http://cnx.org/content/m44856/latest...e_44_01_02.jpg . License : CC BY: Attribution
• OpenStax College, The Scope of Ecology. October 17, 2013. Provided by : OpenStax CNX. Located at : http://cnx.org/content/m44856/latest...e_44_01_03.jpg . License : CC BY: Attribution
• community. Provided by : Wiktionary. Located at : en.wiktionary.org/wiki/community . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• heterospecific. Provided by : Wiktionary. Located at : en.wiktionary.org/wiki/heterospecific . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Karner blue butterfly, U, back, Indiana 2013-04-23-14.20.59 ZS PMax. Provided by : Wikimedia. Located at : commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...59_ZS_PMax.jpg . License : CC BY: Attribution

Ecological Literacy: Teaching the Next Generation About Sustainable Development

Bioneers Environmental Education Article

As societies search for ways to become more sustainable, Fritjof Capra suggests incorporating the same principles on which nature’s ecosystems operate. In his essay, “Speaking Nature’s Language: Principles for Sustainability” from the book Ecological Literacy , he leaves a blueprint for building a more resilient world on the foundation of natural concepts, such as interdependence and diversity. This essay advocates a shift in thinking to a more holistic view of living systems: taking into account the collective interactions between the parts of the whole, instead of just the parts themselves.

Following is an excerpt from  Ecological Literacy by Fritjof Capra, David Orr, Michael Stone and Zenobia Barlow, including an introduction and Capra’s essay.

If anyone has learned to speak nature’s language, it is Fritjof Capra. A founding director of the Center for Ecoliteracy and currently chair of its board, he has distinguished himself over the past forty years as a scientist, systems theorist, and explorer of the philosophical and social ramifications of contemporary science.

Introducing him to an overflow audience at a Bioneers Conference plenary, Kenny Ausubel said, “One of Fritjof Capra’s greatest gifts is his ability to digest enormous amounts of information from highly complex, wide-ranging fields of inquiry. Not only does he explain them elegantly and clearly, but he distills their essence and sees their implications. Because he’s a credentialed scientist who did his time with particle accelerators all over Europe and the United States, Fritjof never overstates his case or lapses into wishful thinking.”

After receiving his Ph.D. in theoretical physics from the University of Vienna in 1966, Capra did research in particle physics at the University of Paris, the University of California at Santa Cruz, the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Imperial College of the University of London, and the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory at the University of California. He also taught at UC Santa Cruz, UC Berkeley, and San Francisco State University.

He is the author of five international bestsellers: The Tao of Physics (1975), The Turning Point (1982), Uncommon Wisdom (1988), The Web of Life (1996), and The Hidden Connections (2002). He coauthored Green Politics (1984), Belonging to the Universe (1991), and EcoManagement (1993), and coedited Steering Business Toward Sustainability (1995).

He is on the faculty of Schumacher College, an international center for ecological studies in England, frequently gives management seminars for top executives, and lectures widely to lay and professional audiences in Europe, Asia, and North and South America. He is an enormously popular speaker, addressing audiences of thousands, switching easily between German, French, English, Italian, and Spanish. The Center for Ecoliteracy’s single greatest source of inquiries is people from as far away as Brazil and India who find the CEL website by linking from Capra’s.

This essay distills thinking that has inspired the Center for Ecoliteracy and served as its intellectual touchstone for a decade.

AS I DISCUSSED IN THE PREFACE to this book, we can design sustainable societies by modeling them after nature’s ecosystems. To understand ecosystems’ principles of organization, which have evolved over billions of years, we need to learn the basic principles of ecology—the language of nature, if you will. The most useful framework for understanding ecology today is the theory of living systems, which is still emerging and whose roots include organismic biology, gestalt psychology, general system theory, and complexity theory (or nonlinear dynamics). For more discussion of the theory of living systems and its implications, please see my book The Hidden Connections .

What is a living system? When we walk out into nature, living systems are what we see. First, every living organism , from the smallest bacterium to all the varieties of plants and animals, including humans, is a living system. Second, the parts of living systems are themselves living systems. A leaf is a living system. A muscle is a living system. Every cell in our bodies is a living system. Third, communities of organisms , including both ecosystems and human social systems such as families, schools, and other human communities, are living systems.

Thinking in terms of complex systems is now at the very forefront of science. It is also very like the ancient thinking that enabled traditional peoples to sustain themselves for thousands of years. But although the modern version of this intellectual tradition is almost a hundred years old, it has still not taken hold in our mainstream culture. I’ve thought quite a lot about why people find systems thinking so difficult and have concluded that there are two main reasons. One is that living systems are nonlinear—they’re networks—while our whole scientific tradition is based on linear thinking—chains of cause and effect.

In linear thinking, when something works, more of the same will always be better. For instance, a “healthy” economy will show strong, indefinite economic growth. But successful living systems are highly nonlinear. They don’t maximize their variables; they optimize them. When something is good, more of the same will not necessarily be better, because things go in cycles, not along straight lines. The point is not to be efficient, but to be sustainable. Quality, not quantity, counts.

We also find systems thinking difficult because we live in a culture that is materialist in both its values and its fundamental worldview. For example, most biologists will tell you that the essence of life lies in the macromolecules— the DNA, proteins, enzymes, and other material structures in living cells. Systems theory tells us that knowledge of these molecules is, of course, very important, but the essence of life does not lie in the molecules. It lies in the patterns and processes through which those molecules interact. You can’t take a photograph of the web of life because it is nonmaterial—a network of relationships.

Perceptual Shifts

Because living systems are nonlinear and rooted in patterns of relationships, understanding the principles of ecology requires a new way of seeing the world and of thinking—in terms of relationships, connectedness, and context —that goes against the grain of traditional Western science and education. Such “contextual” or “systemic” thinking involves several shifts of perception:

From the parts to the whole. Living systems are integrated wholes whose properties cannot be reduced to those of their smaller parts. Their “systemic” properties are properties of the whole that none of the parts has.

From objects to relationships. An ecosystem is not just a collection of species, but is a community. Communities, whether ecosystems or human systems, are characterized by sets, or networks, of relationships. In the systems view, the “objects” of study are networks of relationships, embedded in larger networks. In practice, organizations designed according to this ecological principle are more likely than other organizations to feature relationship-based processes such as cooperation and decision-making by consensus.

From objective knowledge to contextual knowledge. The shift of focus from the parts to the whole implies a shift from analytical thinking to contextual thinking. The properties of the parts are not intrinsic, but can be understood only within the context of the whole. Since explaining things in terms of their contexts means explaining them in terms of their environments, all systems thinking is environmental thinking.

From quantity to quality. Understanding relationships is not easy, especially for those of us educated within a scientific framework, because Western science has always maintained that only the things that can be measured and quantified can be expressed in scientific models. It’s often been implied that phenomena that can be measured and quantified are more important—and maybe even that what cannot be measured and quantified doesn’t exist at all. Relationships and context, however, cannot be put on a scale or measured with a ruler.

From structure to process. Systems develop and evolve. Thus the understanding of living structures is inextricably linked to understanding renewal, change, and transformation.

From contents to patterns. When we draw maps of relationships, we discover certain configurations of relationships that appear again and again. We call these configurations “patterns.” Instead of focusing on what a living system is made of, we study its patterns.

Here we discover a tension between two approaches to the study of nature that has characterized Western science and philosophy throughout the ages. One approach begins with the question: What is it made of? Traditionally, this has been called the study of matter. The other approach begins with the question: What is the pattern? And this, since Greek times, has been called the study of form.

In the West, most of the time, the study of matter has dominated in science. But late in the twentieth century, the study of form came to the fore again, with the emergence of systems thinking. Chaos and complexity theory are essentially theories of patterns. The so-called strange attractors of chaos theory are visual patterns that represent the dynamics of a certain chaotic system. The fractals of fractal geometry are visual patterns. In fact, the whole new mathematics of complexity is essentially the mathematics of patterns.

Some Implications for Education

Because the study of patterns requires visualizing and mapping, every time that the study of pattern has been in the forefront, artists have contributed significantly to the advancement of science. In Western science the two most famous examples are Leonardo da Vinci, whose whole scientific work during the Renaissance could be seen as a study of patterns, and the eighteenth-century German poet Goethe, who made significant contributions to biology through his study of patterns.

This opens the door for educators’ integrating the arts into the curriculum. Whether we talk about literature and poetry, the visual arts, music, or the performing arts, there’s hardly anything more effective than art for developing and refining a child’s natural ability to recognize and express patterns.

Because all living systems share sets of common properties and principles of organization, systems thinking can be applied to integrate heretofore fragmented academic disciplines. Biologists, psychologists, economists, anthropologists, and other specialists all deal with living systems. Because they share a set of common principles, these disciplines can share a common framework.

We can also apply the shifts to human communities, where these principles could be called principles of community. Of course there are many differences between ecosystems and human communities. Not everything we need to teach can be learned from ecosystems. Ecosystems do not manifest the level of human consciousness and culture that emerged with language among primates and then came to flourish in evolution with the human species.

Sustainability in the Language of Nature

By applying systems thinking to the multiple relationships interlinking the members of the earth household, we can identify core concepts that describe the patterns and processes by which nature sustains life. These concepts, the starting point for designing sustainable communities, may be called principles of ecology, principles of sustainability, principles of community, or even the basic facts of life. We need curricula that teach our children these fundamental facts of life.

These closely related concepts are different aspects of a single fundamental pattern of organization: nature sustains life by creating and nurturing communities. Among the most important of these concepts, recognized from observing hundreds of ecosystems, are “networks,” “nested systems,” “interdependence,” “diversity,” “cycles,” “flows,” “development,” and “dynamic balance.”

Because members of an ecological community derive their essential properties, and in fact their very existence, from their relationships, sustainability is not an individual property, but a property of an entire network.

At the Center for Ecoliteracy, we understand that solving problems in an enduring way requires bringing the people addressing parts of the problem together in networks of support and conversation. Our watershed restoration work, for example (see “‘It Changed Everything We Thought We Could Do’” in Part III), began with one class of fourth-graders concerned about an endangered species of shrimp, but the work continues today because it evolved into a network that includes students, teachers, parents, funders, ranchers, design and construction professionals, NGOs, and government bodies. Each part of the network makes its own contribution to the project, the efforts of each are enhanced by the work of all, and the network has the resilience to keep the project alive even when individual members leave or move on.

Nested Systems

At all scales of nature, we find living systems nesting within other living systems—networks within networks. Although the same basic principles of organization operate at each scale, the different systems represent levels of differing complexity.

Students working on the Shrimp Project, for example, discovered that the shrimp inhabit pools that are part of a creek within a larger watershed. The creek flows into an estuary that is part of a national marine sanctuary, which is included in a larger bioregion. Events at one level of the system affect the sustainability of the systems embedded in the other levels.

Within social systems such as schools, the individual child’s learning experiences are shaped by what happens in the classroom, which is nested within the school, which is embedded in the school district and then in the surrounding school systems, ecosystems, and political systems. At each level phenomena exhibit properties that do not exist at lower levels. Choosing strategies to affect those systems requires simultaneously addressing the multiple levels and recognizing which strategies are appropriate for different levels. For instance (see “Sustainability—A New Item on the Lunch Menu” in Part IV), the Center recognized that changing schools’ food systems required moving from working with individual schools to working at the district level and then to the larger educational and economic systems in which districts are nested.

Interdependence

The sustainability of individual populations and the sustainability of the entire ecosystem are interdependent. No individual organism can exist in isolation. Animals depend on the photosynthesis of plants for their energy needs; plants depend on the carbon dioxide produced by animals and on the nitrogen fixed by bacteria at their roots. Together, plants, animals, and microorganisms regulate the entire biosphere and maintain the conditions conducive to life.

Sustainability always involves a whole community. This is the profound lesson we need to learn from nature. The exchanges of energy and resources in an ecosystem are sustained by pervasive cooperation. Life did not take over the planet by combat but by cooperation, partnership, and networking. The Center for Ecoliteracy has supported schools such as Mary E. Silveira (see “Leadership and the Learning Community” in Part III) that recognize and celebrate interdependence.

The role of diversity is closely connected with systems’ network structures. A diverse ecosystem will be resilient because it contains many species with overlapping ecological functions that can partially replace one another. When a particular species is destroyed by a severe disturbance so that a link in the network is broken, a diverse community will be able to survive and reorganize itself because other links can at least partially fulfill the function of the destroyed species. The more complex the network’s patterns of interconnections are, the more resilient it will be.

On the other hand, in communities lacking diversity, such as monocrop agriculture devoted to a single species of corn or wheat, a pest to which that species is vulnerable can threaten the entire ecosystem.

In human communities ethnic and cultural diversity may play the same role as does biodiversity in an ecosystem. Diversity means many different relationships, many different approaches to the same problem. At the Center for Ecoliteracy, we have discovered that there is no “one-size-fits-all” sustainability curriculum. We encourage and support multiple approaches to any issue, with different people in different places adapting the teaching of principles of ecology to differing and changing situations.

Matter cycles continually through the web of life. Water, the oxygen in the air, and all the nutrients are continually recycled. Communities of organisms have evolved over billions of years, using and recycling the same molecules of minerals, water, and air. Mutual dependence is much more existential in ecosystems than in social systems because the members of an ecosystem actually eat one another. Ecologists recognized this from the very beginning of ecology. They focused on feeding relations and discovered the concept of the food chain that we still use today. But then they realized that those are not linear chains but cycles, because the bigger organisms are eaten eventually by the decomposer organisms, the insects and bacteria, and so matter cycles through an ecosystem. An ecosystem generates no waste. One species’ waste becomes another species’ food. As I noted in the preface, one reason for the Center’s enthusiasm for school gardens is the opportunity that gardens afford for even very young children to experience nature’s cycles.

The lesson for human communities is obvious. A conflict between economics and ecology arises because nature is cyclical, while industrial processes are linear. Businesses transform resources into products plus waste, and sell the products to consumers, who discard more waste after consuming the products. The ecological principle “waste equals food” means that— if an industrial system is to be sustainable—all manufactured products and materials, as well as the wastes generated in the manufacturing processes, must eventually provide nourishment for something new. In such a sustainable industrial system, the total outflow of each organization—its products and wastes—would be perceived and treated as resources cycling through the system.

All living systems, from organisms through ecosystems, are open systems. Solar energy, transformed into chemical energy by the photosynthesis of green plants, drives most ecological cycles, but energy itself does not cycle. As it is converted from one form of energy to another (for instance, as the chemical energy stored in petroleum is converted into mechanical energy to drive the pistons of an automobile), some of it—often much of it—inevitably flows out and is dispersed as heat. We are therefore dependent on a constant inflow of energy.

A sustainable society would use only as much energy as it could capture from the sun—by reducing its energy demands, using energy more efficiently, and capturing the flow of solar energy more effectively through solar heating, photovoltaic electricity, wind, hydropower, biomass, and other forms of energy that are renewable, efficient, and environmentally benign. Among the complex reasons that the Center for Ecoliteracy promotes farm-to-school food programs (see “Rethinking School Lunch” in Part IV) is that buying food grown close by reduces the unrenewable energy that is required to ship tons of food over thousands of miles to supply school lunches.

Development

All living systems develop, and all development invokes learning. During its development, an ecosystem passes through a series of successive stages, from a rapidly growing, changing, and expanding pioneer community to slower ecological cycles and a more stable fully exploited ecosystem. Each stage in this ecological succession represents a distinctive community in its own right.

At the species level, development and learning are manifested as the creative unfolding of life through evolution. In an ecosystem, evolution is not limited to the gradual adaptation of organisms to their environment, because the environment is itself a network of living organisms capable of adaptation and creativity.

Individuals and environment adapt to one another—they coevolve in an ongoing dance. Because development and coevolution are nonlinear, we can never fully predict or control how the processes that we start will turn out. Small changes can have profound effects. For instance, growing their own food in a school garden can open students to the delight of tasting fresh healthy food, which can create an opportunity to change school menus, which can create a systemwide market for fresh food, which can help sustain local family farms.

On the other hand, nonlinear processes can lead to unanticipated disasters, as occurred with DDT and the development of “superorganisms” resistant to antibiotics, and as some scientists fear could happen with genetic modification of organisms. A sustainable society will exercise caution about committing itself to practices with unknown outcomes. In “The Slow School” (in Part I), Maurice Holt describes the unforeseen consequences of schools’ wholesale commitment to standards-measurement techniques derived from manufacturing and industry.

Dynamic Balance

All ecological cycles act as feedback loops, so that the ecological community continually regulates and organizes itself. When one link in an ecological cycle is disturbed, the entire cycle brings the situation back into balance, and since environmental changes and disturbances happen all the time, ecological cycles continually fluctuate.

These ecological fluctuations take place between tolerance limits, so there is always the danger that the whole system will collapse when a fluctuation goes beyond those limits and the system can no longer compensate for it. The same is true of human communities. Lack of flexibility manifests itself as stress. Temporary stress is essential to life, but prolonged stress is harmful and destructive to the system. These considerations lead to the important realization that managing a social system—a company, a city, or an economy—means finding the optimal values for the system’s variables. Trying to maximize any single variable instead of optimizing it will invariably lead to the destruction of the system as a whole.

Every living system also occasionally encounters points of instability (in human terms, points of crisis or of confusion), out of which new structures, forms, and patterns spontaneously emerge. This spontaneous emergence of order is one of life’s hallmarks and is where we see that creativity is inherent in life at all levels.

One of the most valuable skills for utilizing ecological understanding is the ability to recognize when the time is right for the emergence of new forms and patterns. For example, out of frustration with the failure of piecemeal hunger intervention to have much long-term impact, “community food security” programs are emerging across the country. This movement addresses the overall systems—from energy and transportation to government commodities purchasing to the effect of media on children’s food preferences—that permit communities to meet (or prevent them from meeting) their needs for nutritious, safe, acceptable food.

It is no exaggeration to say that the survival of humanity will depend on our ability in the coming decades to understand these principles of ecology and to live accordingly. Nature demonstrates that sustainable systems are possible. The best of modern science is teaching us to recognize the processes by which these systems maintain themselves. It is up to us to learn to apply these principles and to create systems of education through which coming generations can learn the principles and learn to design societies that honor and complement them.

Excerpted from Ecological Literacy by Fritjof Capra, David Orr, Michael Stone and Zenobia Barlow.

Learn more from Fritjof Capra here. Explore more Bioneers content on environmental education here.

• What Can I Do About the Climate Emergency?
• The Complex Landscape of Education in 2023
• The World Is Drowning in Plastic. Here’s How It All Started

Keep Your Finger on the Pulse

Our bi-weekly newsletter provides insights into the people, projects, and organizations creating lasting change in the world.

• Privacy Overview
• 3rd Party Cookies
• Bioneers Privacy Policy

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognizing you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

This website uses Google Analytics and Meta (Facebook) Pixel to collect anonymous information such as the number of visitors to the site, and the most popular pages.

Keeping this cookie enabled helps us to improve our website.

Please enable Strictly Necessary Cookies first so that we can save your preferences!

More information about our Privacy Policy can be found here.

When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

• PLOS Biology
• PLOS Climate
• PLOS Complex Systems
• PLOS Computational Biology
• PLOS Digital Health
• PLOS Genetics
• PLOS Global Public Health
• PLOS Medicine
• PLOS Mental Health
• PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
• PLOS Pathogens
• PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
• PLOS Collections
• About This Blog
• Official PLOS Blog
• EveryONE Blog
• Speaking of Medicine
• PLOS Biologue
• Absolutely Maybe
• DNA Science
• PLOS ECR Community
• All Models Are Wrong
• About PLOS Blogs

525,600 minutes, 365 papers, and 100 articles every ecologist should read

Last month, Nature Ecology & Evolution published Courchamp and Bradshaw’s ‘ 100 articles every ecologist should read .’ Here, Courchamp and Bradshaw attempt to compile a list of seminal papers as a foundational reading list for ecology students. To this end, they enlist the help of editorial members of a selection of ecology journals to nominate and rank papers that “each postgraduate student in ecology—regardless of their particular topic—should read by the time they finish their dissertation… [and] any ecologist should also probably read.”

Ultimately, Courchamp and Bradshaw created a list that skews heavily male through a methodology that seems designed to avoid engaging in deep reflection on unconscious bias. Many ecologists have voiced their disappointment with the list; on twitter Kelly Ramirez and Terry McGlynn started collecting nominations of favorite female-authored papers for an inclusive list of 100 articles every ecologist should read .

Four of the best papers that I read in 2017 were responses to Courchamp and Bradshaw:

Bruna’s “ Editorial board members are a non-random sample of ecological experts ”

Editors are indeed experts, but very few of the world’s experts are editors. Until Courchamp & Bradshaw’s survey is repeated with demographically and geographically distinct populations of qualified scientists, the extent to which the list of must-read papers they report reflects the consensus of the ecological community remains an open question.

Baum & Martin’s “ It is time to overcome unconscious bias in ecology ”

  Rather than developing a representative and inspiring list of papers for young ecologists, Courchamp & Bradshaw have presented a highly gender and racially biased list in which 97 of 100 selected articles are first-authored by white men.

Gilbert’s “ Can 100 must-read papers also reflect ‘who’ is ecology? ”

  Robert May (ten papers), Robert MacArthur (eight) and David Tilman (eight) each had more articles in the list than all female ecologists combined.

Rameriz et al.’s “ The future of ecology is collaborative, inclusive and deconstructs biases ”

The list continues a long-standing tradition of highlighting almost exclusively work from male scientists and perpetuates a false perception that women, people of colour and people from the Global South are new to the field of ecology. In addition, the list is restrictive in classifying what ecology is, and is not.

These four letters to the editor at Nature Ecology & Evolution capture and articulate the most important critiques of Courchamp and Bradshaw’s list. But, I think that this one paper and its list of one hundred papers that every ecologist should read begs one more question: What does it mean to read a paper?

Courchamp and Bradshaw note that we are reading more papers than before (supposedly 468 papers per year for the average science faculty member in 2012), and more efficiently (average time spent reading has decreased by one-third). They explain that we are able to keep up with this Seussian treadmill of reading more faster through strategies like ‘flick-bouncing.’ But, somehow, despite all their best flick-bouncing, the journal editorial members that voted on the 100 seminal papers ranked articles that they had not read: they marked each paper as ‘“Read it”, “Know it” or “Don’t know it”. The result: “the ranked list of articles differed substantially depending on the stringent criterion of the respondents having actually read them. Overall, only 23% of the 100 top-ranked papers in the all-article list were also in the top 100 of the read-only list. A remarkable example is the top-ranked paper in the all-article list, which is entirely absent in the read-only top 100 (in fact, it was in 325th place in the latter ranking).”

So, what does it mean to read a paper? Is it sufficient to flick-bounce these 100 must-read papers? (Apparently it’s sufficient to not read them at all, if we go by the voters’ recommendations.)

I argue for slow reading — not Courchamp and Bradshaw’s list necessarily, but in general and across a more diverse reading list. Slow reading has become one of my favorite academic activities, and a practice I will forever associate with new parenthood. As I was preparing to return to my dissertation research at the end of my maternity leave, I stumbled on a series of blog posts about #365papers . It was late December 2015, and many of my academic heroes were reflecting on a year in which they had challenged themselves to read a paper a day. In 2015 I was decidedly not on top of the literature: that year I had navigated committee meetings & pregnant fieldwork, presented my research at 35 weeks pregnant and with an eight-week-old baby, I had learned how to install a carseat, but I had not kept up with reading papers. But, I was inspired by the lists, the #365papers hashtag, and the honesty in the recaps. Anne Jefferson’s post especially resonated with me: she wrote of her experience reading with a newborn  and I thought I could do that .  Meghan Duffy at Dynamic Ecology wrote about how she defined a #365papers paper:

Overall, I read 181 “papers” – though what to count was not always clear. I counted only papers that I read thoroughly and completely – say, at the level that I read something for a lab meeting. This meant that a lot of things that I read didn’t get counted, because I didn’t read the whole thing or only skimmed parts of it. I decided to count manuscripts and grant proposals that I was reviewing, as well as individual chapters of books and dissertations.

The thorough and complete requirement intrigued me — I had spent my first few years in graduate school perfecting the art of the skim. I often read an abstract, the opening paragraphs of the introduction or discussion, and some figure captions, and then considered myself prepared for class discussion. I didn’t really do deep dives, especially in papers that weren’t directly related to my research. But I liked the idea, as Josh Drew wrote, that this resolution would give “me an excuse to read papers that were outside of my field.”

So, I began #365papers in 2016. In those early exhausting months of parenthood, I could at the very least read one paper each day and feel like I had accomplished something academic. I may have spilled every ounce of milk I pumped, I may have fallen asleep at my desk at office hours, I may have posted the wrong grading rubric for my class, or applied for a field permit for the wrong GPS coordinates, but I was reading!

Reading slowly in 2016, I worked my way through the literature behind four chapters of my dissertation and two sets of revisions on my first paper. I re-read the papers that were the cornerstones of my fieldwork methods, I set up google scholar alerts on my field site, I pulled out my copy of Foundations of Ecology , I collected recommendations from folks on twitter, I identified which journals I consistently turned to and started systematically scouring their tables of contents. I came out of the experience with a deeper appreciation for good writing. My reviewing and writing skills improved as I gained confidence in my expertise in both ecology and syntax. In 2016, I averaged a paper a day for eleven months — I took a break in October — and I loved it. I’ve been less consistent in 2017, but I jumped back into #365papers this October and I’m ending the year on a solid three-month streak.

I still skim abstracts (though often those papers end up in my To-Read list for #365papers) and I engage in my share of flick-bouncing. But the papers that shape my thinking — the ones that spark new ideas & stick in my brain for weeks — are slow reads. As a freshly-minted ecology PhD, I’m not convinced that we need a single list of ‘must-read’ papers. I think instead we need to learn how to read slowly, to build our own systems for collecting pdfs and organizing our stacks of papers, to practice carving out time in our busy days to dig into the literature and think deeply.

My favorite slow reads of the year:

• The four letters to the editor in response to Courchamp & Bradshaw.
• Kueppers et al. 2017. Warming and provenance limit tree recruitment across and beyond the elevation range of subalpine forest. Global Change Biology.
• Hudson et al. 2017. Phenoseasonal subcanopy light dynamics & the effects of light on the physiological ecology of common understory shrub, L benzoin. PLOS ONE.
• Frederickson, ME. 2017. Mutualism are not on the verge of breakdown. Trends in Ecology & Evolution.
• Ogilvie, et al. 2017. Interannual bumble bee abundance is driven by indirect climate effects on floral resource phenology. Ecology Letters.
• Toomey, Knight & Barlow. 2017. Navigating the space between research and implementation in conservation. Conservation Letters.
• Nelson et al. 2017. Signaling Safety: Characterizing Fieldwork Experiences and Their Implications for Career Trajectories. American Anthropologist.
• Rabinowitz D. 1981. Seven forms of rarity. In The Biological Aspects of Rare Plants Conservation.
• Graae et al. 2017. Stay or go — how topographic complexity influences alpine plant population and community responses to climate change. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics.

And one more recommendation — it’s not related to scientific literature at all, but I titled this blog post so I could link to David Rakoff’s radio essay on Rent . He   felt as salty about Rent as I feel about ‘100 articles every ecologist should read’.

Here’s to the 525,600 minutes awaiting us in 2018 — to daylights, sunsets, midnights, cups of coffee and 365 papers next year.

Yeast Communities of the Moscow City Soils

• Experimental Articles
• Published: 02 June 2018
• Volume 87 , pages 407–415, ( 2018 )

Cite this article

• A. N. Tepeeva 1 ,
• A. M. Glushakova 1 &
• A. V. Kachalkin 1  

110 Accesses

19 Citations

Explore all metrics

Yeast abundance and diversity were studied in the soils (topsoil) of Moscow city: urban soils under lawn vegetation and close to the areas of household waste disposal, as well as in zonal soddy-podzolic soils (retisols) in parks (Losiny Ostrov and Izmailovo). The numbers of soil yeasts were similar in all studied urban biocenoses (on average ~3.5 × 10 3 CFU/g). From all studied soils, 54 yeast species were isolated. The highest yeast diversity was found in the soils adjacent to the areas of household waste storage. Soils from different urban sites were found to have different ratios of ascomycetous and basidiomycetous yeasts: basidiomycetes predominated in urban soils under lawn vegetation, while in the areas close to the waste disposal sites their share was considerably lower. The differences between the studied urban soils were also found in the structure of soil yeast complexes. In urban soils with high anthropogenic impact, the isolation frequency of clinically important yeast species ( Candida parapsilosis , C. tropicalis , Diutina catenulata , and Pichia kudriavzevii ) was as high as 35% of all studied samples, while its share in the community was 17%. The factors responsible for development of specific features of yeast communities in various urban soils are discussed in the paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Yeast complexes in urban soils of some southern cities of russia (krasnodar, maykop, simferopol, and sochi).

A. M. Glushakova, A. V. Kachalkin, … I. A. Maksimova

Distribution of yeast complexes in the profiles of different soil types

A. M. Glushakova, A. V. Kachalkin, … I. Yu. Chernov

Yeast population of the Kindo Peninsula lichens

A. V. Kachalkin, A. M. Glushakova & T. A. Pankratov

Artamonova, V.S., Mikrobiologicheskie osobennosti antropogenno-preobrazovannykh pochv Zapadnoi Sibiri (Microbiological Properties of Anthropogenically Transformed Western Siberian Soils), Novosibirsk: SO RAN, 2002.

Google Scholar  

Botha, A., Yeasts in soil, in Biodiversity and Ecophysiology of Yeasts, The Yeast Handbook , Rosa, C.A. and Peter, G., Eds., Springer, 2006, pp. 221–241.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Caputo, C. and Barneix, A.J., The relationship between sugar and amino acid export to the phloem in young wheat plants, Ann. Bot. , 1999, vol. 84, no. 1, pp. 33–38.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Chernov, I.Yu, Glushakova, A.M., and Kachalkin, A.V., Annotated list of yeast species of the Moscow region, Mikol. Fitopatol. , 2013, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 103–115.

Chernov, I.Yu., Drozhzhi v prirode (Yeasts in Nature), Moscow: KMK, 2013.

Coelho, M.A., Almeida, J.M., Martins, I.M., da Silva, A.J., and Sampaio, J.P., The dynamics of the yeast community of the Tagus river estuary: testing the hypothesis of the multiple origins of estuarine yeasts, Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek , 2010, vol. 98, pp. 331–342.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Dabakhov, M.V. and Chesnokova, E.V., Heavy metals in urban park soils, Ekologiya Urbanizirovannykh Territorii , 2007, no. 3, pp. 41–46.

Dobrovol’skii, G.V. and Chernov, I.Yu., Eds., Rol’ pochvy v formirovanii i sokhranenii biologicheskogo raznoobraziya (Role of Soil in Formation and Preservation of Biodiversity), Moscow: KMK, 2011.

Dobrovol’skaya, T.G., Zvyagintsev, D.G., Chernov, I.Yu, Golovchenko, A.V., Zenova, G.M., Lysak, L.V., Manucharova, N.A., Marfenina, O.E., Polyanskaya, L.M., Stepanov, A.L., and Umarov M.M., The role of microorganisms in the ecological functions of soils, Euras. Soil Sci. , 2015, vol. 48, pp. 959–967.

Article   Google Scholar  

Fonseca, A. and Inacio, J., Phylloplane yeasts, in Biodiversity and Ecophysiology of Yeasts , The Yeast Handbook, Rosa, C.A. and Peter, G., Eds., Springer, 2006, pp. 263–303.

Gerasimova, M.I., Stroganova, M.I., Mozharova, M.N, and Prokof’eva, T.V., Antropogennye pochvy: genezis, geografiya, rekul’tivatsiya (Antropogenic Soils: Genesis, Geography, and Recultivation), Smolensk: Oikumena, 2003.

Glushakova, A.M., Kachalkin, A.V., and Akhapkina, I.G., The monitoring of sensitivity of natural strains and clinical isolates of yeast fungus to antimycotics, Klin. Labor. Diagnostika , 2017, vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 296–300.

Glushakova, A.M., Kachalkin, A.V., and Chernov, I.Yu., Effect of invasive herb species on the structure of soil yeast complexes in mixed forests exemplified by Impatiens parviflora DC, Microbiology (Moscow) , 2015a, vol. 84, no. 5, pp. 717–721.

Glushakova, A.M., Kachalkin, A.V., and Chernov, I.Yu., Soil yeast communities under the aggressive invasion of Sosnowsky’s hogweed (Heracleum sosnowskyi), Euras. Soil Sci. , 2015b, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 201–207.

Glushakova, A.M., Kachalkin, A.V., and Chernov, I.Yu., Yeasts in the flowers of entomophilic plants of the Moscow region, Microbiology (Moscow) , 2014, vol. 83, nos. 1–2, pp. 125–134.

Glushakova, A.M., Kachalkin, A.V., Maksimova, I.A., and Chernov, I.Yu., Yeasts in Hevea brasiliensis latex, Microbiology (Moscow) , 2016, vol. 85, no. 4, pp. 488–492.

Hagler, A.N., Yeasts as indicators of environmental quality, in Biodiversity and Ecophysiology of Yeasts , The Yeast Handbook, Rosa, C.A. and Peter, G., Eds., Springer, 2006, pp. 515–532.

Ilyushkina, L.N., Biological activity of urban landscape soils in Rostov-na-Donu and Azov cities, Extended Abstract Cand. Sci (Biol.) Dissertation , Rostov-na-Donu: Kopitsentr, 2004.

Kachalkin, A.V., Glushakova, A.M., Yurkov, A.M., and Chernov, I.Yu., Characterization of yeast groupings in the phyllosphere of sphagnum mosses, Microbiology (Moscow) , 2008, vol. 77, no. 4, pp. 474–481.

Kapralova, O.A., Effect of urbanization of the ecological and biological properties of Rostov-na-Donu soils, Inzh. Vestn. Dona , 2011, vol. 18, no. 4. http://www.ivdon.ru/magazine/archive/n4y2011/594.

Kolesnikov, S.I., Kazeev, K.Sh., and Val’kov, V.F., Ecological functions of soils and the effect of contamination with heavy metals, Euras. Soil Sci. , 2002, vol. 35, no. 12, pp. 1335–1340.

Kurkina, M.V., Dedkov, V.P., Klimova, N.B., Lukina, A.I., Krupnova, M.A., and Kusainova, Zh.T., New data on some microbial groups in Kaliningrad City soils, Vestn. Balt. Fed. Univ. im. I. Kanta , 2009, no. 7, pp. 90–98.

Kurtzman, C.P., Fell, J.W., and Boekhout, T., Eds., The Yeasts, a Taxonomic Study , 5th ed., New York: Elsevier, 2011.

Larina, G.E. and Obukhov, A.I., Heavy metal pollution of lawn soils in the Lenin district of Moscow, Euras. Soil Sci. , 1996, no. 11, pp. 1309–1313.

Maksimova, I.A. and Chernov, I.Yu., Community structure of yeast fungi in forest biogeocenoses, Microbiology (Moscow) , 2004, vol. 73, no. 4, pp. 558–566.

Mar’ina-Chermnykh, O.G., Mar’in, G.S., and Apaeva, N.N., Effect of intense anthropogenic impact on formation of micromycete communities and soil phytotoxicity, Vestn. Altai. Gos. Agr. Univ. , 2012, no. 10 (96), pp. 72–77.

Marfenina, O.E., Antropogennaya ekologiya pochvennykh gribov (Anthropogenic Ecology of Soil Fungi), Moscow: Meditsina dlya Vsekh, 2005.

Marfenina, O.E., Ivanova, A.E., and Zvyagintsev, D.G., Reaction of the microscopic fungal soil community to the recreational impact in forest biogeotsenoses, in Statsionarnye issledovaniya vliyaniya rekreatsii uf lesnye biogeotsenosy (Stationary Research on Effect of Recreation on Forest Biogeocenoses), Inst. Forestry, Russ. Acad. Sci., Tula: Grif, 2008, pp. 303–335.

Marfenina, O.E., Kul’ko, A.B., Ivanova, A.E., and Sogonov, M.V., Microscopic fungi in urban environment, Mikol. Fitopatol. , 2002, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 22–32.

Nikolaeva, V.V., Cellulolytic fungi in urban soils, Cand. Sci. (Biol.) Dissertation , Moscow, 2015.

Ovchinnikova, T.A. and Pankratov, T.A., Some microbiological features of Novokuibyshevsk City soil cover during the autumn season, Samar. Luka , 2008, vol. 17, no. 2 (24), pp. 373–383.

Pfaller, M.A. and Diekema, D.J., Epidemiology of invasive candidiasis: a persistent public health problem, Clin. Microbiol. Rev. , 2007, vol. 20, pp. 133–163.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   CAS   Google Scholar  

Pietikainen, J., Pettersson, M., and Baath, E., Comparison of temperature effects on soil respiration and bacterial and fungal growth rates, FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. , 2005, vol. 52, pp. 49–58.

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Prokofyeva, T.V., Martynenko, I.A., anf Ivannikov, F.A., Classification of Moscow soils and parent materials and its possible inclusion in the classification system of Russian soils, Euras. Soil Sci. , 2011, no. 5, pp. 561–571.

Smagin, A.V., Azovtseva, N.A., Smagina, M.V., Stepanov, A.L., and Myagkova, A.D., Criteria and methods to assess the ecological status of soils in relation to the landscaping of urban territories, Euras. Soil Sci. , 2006, no. 5, pp. 539–551.

Stroganova, M.N., Agarkova, M.G., Zheveleva, E.M., and Yakovlev, A.S., Ecological state of soil cover of urbanized territories (exemplified by Moscow and Pushchino), in Ekologicheskie issledovaniya Moskvy i Moskovskoi oblasti (Ecological Investigation of Moscow and Moscow Area) , Moscow, 1990, pp. 127–147.

Stroganova, M.N., Myagkova, A.D., Prokof’eva, T.V., and Skvortsova, I.N., Pochvy Moskvy i ekologiya goroda (Moscow Soils and Urban Ecology), Moscow: PAIMS, 1998.

Vadkertiová, R., Dudášová, H., and Balaščáková, M., Yeasts in agricultural and managed soils, in Yeasts in Natural Ecosystems: Diversity , Buzzini, P., Lachance, M.A., and Yurkov, A., Eds., Springer, 2017, pp. 117–144.

Vodyanitskii, Yu.N., Contamination of soils with heavy metals and metalloids and its ecological hazard (analytic review), Euras. Soil Sci. , 2013, no. 7, pp. 793–801.

Wójcik, A., Kurnatowski, P., and Błaszkowska, J., Potentially pathogenic yeasts from soil of children’s recreational areas in the city of Łódz (Poland), Int. J. Occupat. Med. Environ. Health , 2013, vol. 26, pp. 477–487.

Yurkov, A., Inácio, J., Chernov, I.Y., and Fonseca, A., Yeast biogeography and the effects of species recognition approaches: the case study of widespread basidiomycetous species from birch forests in Russia, Curr. Microbiol. , 2015, no. 70, pp. 587–601.

Yurkov, A., Yeasts in forest soils, in Yeasts in Natural Ecosystems: Diversity , Buzzini, P., Lachance, M.A., and Yurkov, A., Eds., Springer, 2017, pp. 87–116.

Yurkov, A.M., Kemler, M., and Begerow, D., Assessment of yeast diversity in soils under different management regimes, Fungal Ecol. , 2012, vol. 5, pp. 24–35.

Zhang, W., Parker, K.M., Luo, Y., Wan, S., Wallace, L.L., and Hu, S., Soil microbial responses to experimental warming and clipping in a tallgrass prairie, Global Change Biol. , 2005, vol. 11, pp. 266–277.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia

A. N. Tepeeva, A. M. Glushakova & A. V. Kachalkin

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. V. Kachalkin .

Additional information

Original Russian Text © A.N. Tepeeva, A.M. Glushakova, A.V. Kachalkin, 2018, published in Mikrobiologiya, 2018, Vol. 87, No. 3.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Tepeeva, A.N., Glushakova, A.M. & Kachalkin, A.V. Yeast Communities of the Moscow City Soils. Microbiology 87 , 407–415 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0026261718030128

Download citation

Received : 06 September 2017

Published : 02 June 2018

Issue Date : May 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1134/S0026261718030128

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• taxonomic diversity
• urban soils
• anthropogenic impact
• clinically important species
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 08 July 2022

A critical examination of a community-led ecovillage initiative: a case of Auroville, India

• Abhishek Koduvayur Venkitaraman   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8515-257X 1 &
• Neelakshi Joshi   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8947-1893 2  

Climate Action volume  1 , Article number:  15 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

6699 Accesses

2 Citations

6 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Sustainability

Human settlements across the world are attempting to address climate change, leading to changing paradigms, parameters, and indicators for defining the path to future sustainability. In this regard, the term ecovillage has been increasingly used as models for sustainable human settlements. While the term is new, the concept is an old one: human development in harmony with nature. However, materially realizing the concept of an ecovillage is not without challenges. These include challenges in scaling up and transferability, negative regional impacts and struggles of functioning within larger capitalistic and growth-oriented systems. This paper presents the case of Auroville, an early attempt to establish an ecovillage in Southern India. We draw primarily from the ethnographic living and working experience of the authors in Auroville as well as published academic literature and newspaper articles. We find that Auroville has proven to be a successful laboratory for providing bottom-up, low cost and context-specific ecological solutions to the challenges of sustainability. However, challenges of economic and social sustainability compound as the town attempts to scale up and grow.

Graphical abstract

Similar content being viewed by others

Sustainability and social transformation: the role of ecovillages in confluence with the pluriverse of community-led alternatives

Renata Amorim Almeida Fonseca, Marta de Azevedo Irving, … Graciella Faico Ferreira

Reviving natural history, building ecological civilisation: the philosophy and social significance of the Natural History Revival Movement in contemporary China

Siyu Fu & Kristian H. Nielsen

The paradox of collective climate action in rural U.S. ecovillages: ethnographic reflections and perspectives

Chelsea Schelly, Zach Rubin & Joshua Lockyer

Introduction

Scientists have repeatedly argued and emphasized for an equilibrium between human development and the basic ecological support systems of the planet (IPCC 2014 ; United Nations 1987 ). Human settlements have been important in this regard as places of concentrated human activity (Edward & Matthew E, 2010 ; Scott and Storper 2015 ). Settlement planning has responded to this call through visions of the eco-city as a proposal for building the city like a living system with a land use pattern supporting the healthy anatomy of the whole city and enhance its biodiversity, while resonating its functions with sustainability (Barton 2013 ; Register 1987 ; Roseland 1997 ). In planning practice, this means balancing between economic growth, social justice, and environmental well-being (Campbell 1996 ). However, the concept of eco-cities remains top-down in its approach with city authorities taking a lead in involving the civil society and citizens to implement the city’s environment plan (Joss 2010a , b ).

Contrary to the idea of eco-cities, ecovillages are small-scale, bottom-up sites for experimentation around sustainable living. Ecovillages resonate the same core principles of an eco-city but combine the social, ecological, and spiritual aspects of human existence (Gilman 1991 ). Findhorn Ecovillage in Scotland is one of the oldest and most prominent ecovillages in the world and has collaborations with the United Nations and was named as a best practice community (Lockyer and Veteto 2013 ).

Another notable example is the Transitions Town movement that started in Totnes, United Kingdom but has now spread all over the world (Hopkins 2008 ; Smith 2011 ). The movement focuses upon supporting community-led responses to peak oil and climate change, building resilience and happiness. Additionally, it emphasizes rebuilding local agriculture and food production, localizing energy production along with rediscovering local building materials in the context of zero energy building (Hopkins 2008 ). Ecological districts within the urban fabric are also termed as ecovillages (Wolfram 2017 ).

Ecovillages are intentional communities characterized by alternative lifestyles, values, economics and governance systems (Joss 2010a , b ; Ergas 2010 ). At the same time ecovillages are located within and interact with growth-oriented capitalistic systems (Price et al. 2020 ). This dichotomy presents a challenge for ecovillages as they put ideas of sustainability transformation into practice. We explore some of these contradictions through the case study of Auroville, an ecovillage located in southern India. A discussion on the gaps between the ideas of an ecovillage against their lived reality throws light upon the challenges that ecovillages face when they attempt to grow. We begin by elaborating the key characteristics of ecovillages in the “Characteristics of ecovillages” section. We then present our material and methods in the “Methodology” section. Furthermore, we use the key characteristics of an ecovillage as a framework for analysing and discussing Auroville in the “Auroville, an ecovillage in South India” and “Discussion” sections. We conclude with a reflection on the concept of ecovillages.

Characteristics of ecovillages

The concept of an ecovillage is broad and has multiple interpretations. Based on a reading of the existing literature on ecovillages, we summarize some of their key characteristics here:

Alternative lifestyles and values : Ecovillage can be seen as intentional communities (Ergas 2010 ) and social movements which have a common stance against unsustainable modes of living and working (Kirby 2003 ; Snow et al. 2004 ). Ecovillages advocate for achieving an alternate lifestyle involving a considerable shift in power from globalized values to those internalized in local community autonomy. Therefore many ecovillages aspire to restructure power distribution and foster a spirit of collective and transparent decision-making (Boyer 2015 ; Cunningham and Wearing 2013 ). However, it is difficult to convince many people to believe in a common value system since the vision is to establish a world that is not only ecologically sustainable but also personally rewarding in terms of self-sacrifice for a good cause (Anderson 2015 ).

Governance : ecovillages tend to rely on a community-based governance and there is an assumption that the local and regional communities respond more effectively to local environmental problems since these problems pertain to the local context and priorities (Van Bussel et al. 2020 ). In a community-based governance system, activities are organized and carried out through participatory democracy committed to consensual decision-making. However, participatory democracy has its own set of problems. Consensual decision-making is time-consuming, and the degree of participation tends to vary from time to time (Fischer 2017 ). Participatory processes have also been criticized on the grounds for slowing down the decision-making process and resulting in a weak final agreement which doesn’t balance competing interests (Alterman et al. 1984 ).

Economic models in an ecovillages : ecovillages have attempted to combine economic objectives along with the overall well-being of people and have experimented with budgetary solutions appealing to a wider society (Hall 2015 ). As grassroots initiatives, ecovillages have advocated and practised living in community economies (Roelvink and Gibson-Graham 2009 ) and have influenced twentieth century economic practices beyond their geographical boundaries (Boyer 2015 ). Due to the emphasis on sharing in ecovillages, they can be considered to accommodate diverse economies (Gibson-Graham 2008 ) where human needs are met through relational exchanges and non-monetary practices, highlighting strong social ties (Waerther 2014 ). In some ecovillages, living expenses are reduced by sharing costly assets and saving cost on building materials by bulk buying and growing food for community consumption and sale (Pickerill 2017 ). These economic models have their own merit but are perhaps insufficient for the long-term economic sustainability of ecovillages (Price et al. 2020 ). Eventually, ecovillages might have to rely on external sources to import goods and services which cannot be produced on-site. This contradicts the ecovillage principles of being a self-reliant economy, reduction of its carbon footprint and minimizing resource consumption, thus implying a dependence on the market economy of the region (Bauhardt 2014 ).

Self-sufficiency : fulfilling the community’s needs within the available resources is a cornerstone principle for many ecovillages (Gilman 1991 ). This is often achieved through organic farming, permaculture, renewable energy and co-housing. Such measures are an attempt to offset and mitigate unsustainable development and limit the ecovillage’s ecological footprint (Litfin 2009 ). The initial small scale of the community often allows for this. However, as ecovillages grow in size and complexity, the interconnectedness and inter-dependence to the surrounding space become more apparent (Joss 2010a , b ). Examples include drawing resources from central energy and water systems (Xue 2014 ). Furthermore, ecovillages might turn out to be desirable places to live, with better quality of life, driving up land and property prices in the region as well as carbon emissions with additional visitors (Mössner and Miller 2015 ). Furthermore, in their role as catalysts of change in transforming society, ecovillages need to interact with their external surroundings and neighbouring communities, the municipalities, and the state and national level policies (Dawson and Lucas 2006 ; Kim 2016 ). This is particularly relevant in the Global South, where the ecovillage development has the potential to drive regional-scale sustainable development.

The characteristics of an ecovillage, however, do not exist in a geographical vacuum. Scholarly understanding of ecovillages as bottom-up efforts to drive sustainability transitions largely draw from the experiences of the Global North (Wagner 2012 ). Such ecovillage models often challenge the dominant capitalistic paradigm of post-industrial development, overconsumption and growth. Locating ecovillages in the Global South requires an expansion or re-evaluation of their larger socio-economic context as well as their socio-ecological impacts (Dias et al. 2017 ; Litfin 2009 ) .

To build upon the opportunities and challenges of ecovillages, locating them within the context of the Global South, we present the case of Auroville, an ecovillage located in southern India.

Methodology

We use the initial theoretical framework of ecovillage characteristics as a starting point for developing the case study of Auroville. Here, we draw from academic literature published about Auroville during 1968–2021. We also draw inferences from self-published reports and documents by the Auroville Foundation. Although we cover multiple interconnected aspects of Auroville, the characteristics pertaining to an ecovillage remain the focus of our work. We review the literature sources deductively, drawing on aspects of values, governance, economics and self-reliance, established in the previous section.

We triangulate the secondary data sources against our ethnographic experience of having lived and worked in Auroville for extended periods of time (2010–2012 and 2013–2014, respectively). We have worked in Auroville as architects and urban planners. During this time, we participated in multiple meetings on Auroville’s development as part of our work. We have discussed aspects of Auroville’s sustainability with Aurovillians working on diverse aspects, from urban planning to regional integration. Furthermore, living and working in Auroville brought us in conversation with several individuals from villages surrounding Auroville, employed in Auroville. For writing this case study, we have revisited our lived experience of Auroville through memory, research and work diaries maintained during this period, photographs as well our previously published research articles (Venkitaraman 2017 ; Walsky and Joshi 2013 ). Given our expertise in architecture and planning, we have also presented the translation of the key characteristics of an ecovillage, namely, alternative values, governance and economic systems and self-reliance, in these domains.

We acknowledge certain limitations to our methodology. We rely largely on secondary data to expand upon the challenges and contradictions in an ecovillage. We have attempted to overcome this by drawing from our first-hand experience of having lived in Auroville. Although our lived experiences are almost a decade old, we have attempted to compliment it with recently published articles as well as newspaper reports.

The next section presents Auroville as an ecovillage followed by a critical examination of its regional impact, governance, and economic structure.

Auroville, an ecovillage in South India

Foundational values.

Sri Aurobindo was an Indian philosopher and spiritual leader who believed that “man is a transitional being” and developed the practice of integral yoga with the aim of evolving humans into divine beings (Sen 2018 ). His spiritual consort, Mirra Alfassa realized his ideas in material form through a “universal township” which would hopefully contribute to “progress of humanity towards its splendid future”. Auroville was founded in 1968 by Mirra Alfassa, as a township near Pondicherry, India. Alfassa envisioned Auroville to be a “site of material and spiritual research for a living embodiment of an actual human unity” (Alfassa 1968 ). On 28 February 1968, the city was inaugurated with the support of UNESCO and the participation of people from 125 countries who each brought a handful of earth from their homelands to an urn that stands at its centre as a symbolic representation of human unity, the aim of the project. This spiritual foundation has guided the development of the socio-economic structure of Auroville for individual and collective growth (Shinn 1984 ). To translate these spiritual ideas into a material form, Mirra Alfassa provided simple sketches, a Charter, and guiding principles towards human unity (Sarkar 2015 ).

Roger Anger, a French architect translated Alfassa’s dream into the Auroville City Plan that continues to inform the physical development of Auroville (Kundoo 2009 ). The Auroville Masterplan 2025 envisions Auroville to be a circular township (Fig. 1 ) spread over a 20 sq. km (Auroville Foundation 2001 ). Initially planned for a population of 50,000 people, today Auroville today has 3305 residents hailing from 60 countries (Auroville Foundation 2021 ). Since its early days, there has been a divide between the “organicists” and the “constructionists” of Auroville (Kapur 2021 ). The organicists have a bottom-up vision of low impact and environmentally friendly development whereas the constructionists have a top-down vision of sticking with the original masterplan and realize an urban, dense version of Auroville.

A map of Auroville and its surrounding regions, with the main villages in the area

Auroville has served as a laboratory of low-cost and low-impact building construction, transportation, and city planning. Although the term sustainability has not been explicitly used in the Charter, it has been central to the city planning and building development process in Auroville (Walsky and Joshi 2013 ). Unlike many human settlements that negatively impact their ecology, the foundational project of Auroville was land restoration. The initial residents of Auroville were able to grow back parts of the Tropical Dry Evergreen Forest in and around Auroville using top-soil conservation and rainwater harvesting techniques (Blanchflower 2005 ). While the ecological restoration has been lauded both locally and globally, Namakkal ( 2012 ) argues that it is seldom acknowledged that the land was bought from local villagers at low prices and local labour was used to plant the forest as well as build the initial city. At the time of writing this paper, the Auroville Foundation still needs to secure 17% of the land in the city area and nearly 50% of the land for the green belt to realize the original masterplan. However, land prices have gone up substantially as have conflicts in acquiring this land for Auroville (Namakkal 2012 ).

Governance structure

While the Charter of Auroville says that “Auroville belongs to humanity as a whole” (Alfassa 1968 ), in reality, it is governed by a well-defined set of individuals. Auroville’s first few years, between 1968 and 1973, were guided directly by Mirra Alfassa. After her passing, there was a power struggle between the Sri Aurobindo Society, claiming control over the project, and the community members striving for autonomy (Kapur 2021 ).

The Government of India founded the Auroville Foundation Act in 1988 providing in the public interest, the acquisition of all assets and undertakings relatable to Auroville. These assets were ultimately vested in the Auroville Foundation which was formed in January 1991 (Auroville. 2015 ). The Auroville Foundation envisioned a notion of a planned future, resulting in a new masterplan in 1994. This masterplan encouraged participatory planning and recognized that the architectural vision needs to proceed in a democratic manner. This prompted the Auroville community to adopt a more structured form of governance. The Auroville Foundation has other governing institutions under it, namely: The Governing Board which has overall responsibility for Auroville’s development, The International Advisory Council, which advises the Governing Board on the management of the township and the Residents’ Assembly who organize activities relating to Auroville and formulate the master plan. Furthermore, there are committees and working groups for different aspects of development from waste management to building development.

Auroville is an example of the ‘bottom-up’ approach, in the sense that developments are decided and implemented by the community and the state level and national level governments get involved later (Sarkar 2015 ). An example of this is seen in the regular meetings held by the Town Development Council of Auroville which also conducted a weeklong workshop in 2019 for the community which covered themes such as place-making, dimensions of water and strategies for liveable cities and community planning (Ministry of Human Reource Development Government of India 2021 ).

Conflicts often arise between the interpretation of the initial masterplan and the present day realities and aspiration of the residents (Walsky and Joshi 2013 ). This is often rooted in the initial vision of Auroville as a city of 50,000 versus its current reality of being an ecovillage of around 3000 people. Spatially, this unusual growth pattern has been problematic in Auroville’s building and mobility planning (Venkitaraman 2017 ). At the time of writing this paper, there is a clash between the Residents’ Assembly and the Auroville Foundation over the felling of trees for the construction of the Crown Road project inside Auroville (The Hindu 2021 ). While the Residents’ Assembly wants a re-working of the original masterplan considering the ecological damage through tree cutting, the Auroville Foundation wants to move ahead with the original city vision.

Beyond its boundaries, Auroville is surrounded by numerous rural settlements, namely, Kuyilapalyam, Edayanchavadi, Alankuppam, Kottakarai, and Attankarai. The Auroville Village Action Group (AVAG) aims to help the village communities to strive towards sustainability and find plausible solutions to the problems of contemporary rural life. In September 1970, a charter was circulated among the sub-regional villages of Auroville, promising better employment opportunities and higher living standards with improved health and sanitation facilities (Social Research Centre Auroville 2005 ). Currently, there are about 13 groups for the development of the Auroville sub-region. However, Jukka ( 2006 ) points out that the regional development vision of Auroville is top-down and does not sufficiently engage with the villagers and their aspirations.

Auroville’s economic model

Auroville has also strived to move away from money as a foundation of society to a distinctive economic model exchange and sharing (Kapoor 2007 ). However, Auroville needs money to realize its multiple land and building projects. Auroville also receives various donations and grants. During 2018–2019, Auroville received around Rs. 2396 lakhs (around 4 million USD) under Foreign Contributions Regulation Act (FCRA) and other donations. The Central Government of India supports the Auroville Foundation with annual grants for Auroville’s management and for the running costs of the Secretariat of the Foundation, collectively known as Grant-in-Aid. Auroville received a total of Rs. 1463 lakhs (around 2 million USD) as Grant-in-Aid during 2018–2019. The income generated by Auroville during this time was Rs. 687 lakhs (around 91,000 USD) (Ministry of Human Reource Development Government of India 2021 ).

Presently, the economy of Auroville is based on manufacturing units and services with agriculture being an important sector, and currently, there are about 100 small and medium manufacturing units. The service sector of Auroville comprises of construction and architectural services and research and training in various sectors (Auroville Foundation 2001 ). In addition to this, tourism is another important source of income generation for Auroville. As per the Annual Report of Auroville Foundation, the donations and income have not been consistent over the years. In this regard, Auroville’s growth pattern in terms of the economy has not been linear and it does not mimic the usual growth patterns associated with the development of counterparts, in terms of capitalization, finance, governance, and on key issues such as distribution policies and ownership rights (Thomas and Thomas 2013 ).

Auroville also benefits from labour from the surrounding villages. The nature of employment provided in Auroville to villages remains largely in low-paying jobs (Namakkal 2012 ). It can be argued that the fruits of Auroville’s development have not been equally shared with the surrounding villages and a feeling of ‘us and them’ still pervades. Striving for human unity is the central tenet of Auroville (Shinn 1984 ), however, it has struggled to do so with its immediate neighbours.

Striving for self-sufficiency

Auroville has strived for self-sufficiency in terms of food production from local farms, energy production from renewable sources like solar and wind sources and waste management.

Many prominent buildings of Auroville have been designed keeping in mind the self-sufficiency principle in Auroville. For example, the Solar Kitchen was designed by architect Suhasini Ayer as a demonstration project to tap the solar energy potential of the region. At present, this building is used for cooking meals thrice a day for over 1000 people. The Solar Kitchen also supports the organic farming sector in Auroville by being the primary purchaser of the locally grown products (Ayer 1997 ). Another example is the Auroville Earth Institute, renowned for its Compressed and Stabilized Earth Block (CSEB) technique, which constitute natural and locally found soil as one of its main ingredients (Figs. 2 and 3 ).

Compressed earth blocks manufactured by Auroville Earth Institute

A residence in Auroville constructed using compressed earth blocks

However, it is important to acknowledge that Auroville does not exist as a 100% self-sufficient bubble. For example, food produced in Auroville provides for only 15% of the consumption (Auroville Foundation 2004 ). An initial attempt to calculate the ecological footprint of Auroville estimates it to be 2.5 Ha, against the average footprint of an Indian of 0.8 Ha (Greenberg 1998 ). Furthermore, though Auroville has strived for material innovation in architecture, it has not been successful in achieving 25 sq. metres as the limit to individual living space (Walsky and Joshi 2013 ). This challenges the notion of Auroville continuing to be an ecovillage if it aspires to be a city of 50,000 people and might end up having substantial ecological impact on its surroundings.

Urban sustainability transformation in a rapidly urbanizing world runs into the risk of focusing on technological fixes while overlooking the social and ecological impacts of growth. In this light, bottom-up initiatives like ecovillages serve as a laboratory for testing alternative and holistic models of development. Auroville, a 53-year-old ecovillage in southern India, has achieved this to a certain extent. Auroville is a showcase of land regeneration, biodiversity restoration, alternative building technologies as well as experimentations in alternative governance and economic models. In this paper, we have critically examined some achievements and challenges that Auroville has faced in realizing its initial vision of being a “city that the world needs” (Alfassa 1968 ). Lessons learnt from Auroville help deepen our understanding of ecovillages as sites of fostering alternative development practices. Here we discuss three aspects of this research:

Alternate lifestyles and values in the context of an ecovillage : Ecovillages are niches providing space for realizing alternative values and lifestyles. However, ecovillages seldom exist in a vacuum. They are physically situated in existing societies and economies. Although residents in an ecovillage seek to achieve collective identity by creating an alternative society, an ecovillage is embedded within a larger culture and thus, the prevailing ideologies of the dominant society affect the ecovillage (Ergas 2010 ) as seen in Auroville. This can be noticed between the material and knowledge flows in and out of Auroville. Furthermore, the India of the 1970s when Auroville was born with socialist values is very different from present-day India where material and capitalistic aspirations are on the rise. These are reflected in higher land prices and living costs in and around Auroville. Amidst the transforming political landscape of India in the 1970s, there were implications which were seen in the character of architectural production. Auroville welcomed and immersed itself into this era of experimentation. These developments form an integral part of the ethos of Auroville. To achieve its initial visions, Auroville depends on multiple external economic sources. In analysing ecovillages, it is important to critically examine the broader context within which they are located and how they influence and, in turn, are influenced by their contexts.

Even though Auroville’s architects and urban planners remain committed to their belief that architecture is a primary tool of community - building, decades later, the developments seem to have progressed at a slow pace. The number of permanently settled residents in Auroville has barely reached 2000 currently and the overall urban design remains fragmentary. Despite witnessing a slower rate of progress, it has been able to sustain a culture of innovation and Auroville remains utopian in its aim to create an alternative lifestyle (Scriver and Srivastava 2016 ).

Governance, economy, and self-sufficiency in an ecovillage that wants to be an eco-city : In growth-based societies, ecovillages present the possibility of providing an alternative vision of degrowth (Xue 2014 ). However, Auroville currently functions as an ecovillage that aspires to be an eco-city as per its initial masterplan. This growth-based model sometimes conflicts with Auroville’s vision of being a self-reliant, non-monetary society. Given the urgent need to remain within our planetary limits, ecovillages like Auroville could re-evaluate their initial growth-based visions and explore alternatives for achieving sustainability and well-being. The visions of ecovillages should thus not be set in stone, but rather remain flexible to evolving ideas and practices (Ergas 2010 ).

Similarly, governance structures might need a re-evaluation with changing priorities within the ecovillage as well as a need to be inclusive of regional visions and voices. It would be intriguing to explore on what kind of governance model/leadership is best suited to fulfil the aims of an ecovillage. Auroville seems to follow the elements of sustainability-oriented governance: empowerment, engagement, communication, openness and transparency (Bubna-Litic 2008 ), yet it is seen that conflicts arise. One solution to this could be greater external engagement with government and continuing to engage the external community about Auroville. Generally, intentional communities are organized by embracing the ideology of consensus, but it remains to be seen whether the consensus decision-making model works to its full potential in the context of alternative lifestyles. When individuals seek alternative lifestyles in the current world, there is a shift from globalized values towards local community autonomy, this shift demands a need for processes that allow for a different and more equitable approach to governance (Cunningham and Wearing 2013 ).

Ecovillages in the Global South : Situating ecovillages in the Global South requires a nuanced examination of the social, economic, and environmental aspects of sustainability that the ecovillage aims to achieve (Dias et al. 2017 ; Litfin 2009 ). In the case of Auroville, Auroville has helped bring back ecologically restorative practices in forestry, agriculture, and architecture in the region. However, the average Aurovillian has a higher standard of living than the neighbouring villagers. This in-turn influences the material consumption practices within the community. The lessons in sustainable living, in ecovillages located in the Global South, need not be unidirectional (from the ecovillage to the surrounding society). Rather, the ecovillage also stands to lean from the existing models of low-impact living.

Ecovillages in the Global South such as Auroville face similar problems related to Governance as seen in some other ecovillages in the developed world such as The Aldinga Arts Village in South Australia (Bubna-Litic 2008 ) and in Sweden (Bardici 2014 ). However, despite the issues related to consensus in Governance, the ecovillages are noted for their sustainable innovations.

Auroville’s sustainable measures have been endorsed by the Government of India as well. The Auroville Master Plan for 2000–2025 has been dedicated to creating an environmentally sustainable urban settlement which integrates the neighbourhood rural areas. The surrounding Green Belt, intended to be a fertile zone is presently being used for applied research in various sectors such as water management, food production, and soil conservation. The results promise a replicable model which could be used in urban and rural areas alike (Kapoor 2007 ).

To address the expansion and re-evaluation of the larger socio-economic context of Auroville and its socio-ecological impacts, as enunciated by Dias et al. ( 2017 ) and Kutting and Lipschutz (2009), a proposal for a sustainable regional plan was prepared in 2012 jointly by Government of India, ADEME (French Environment and Energy Management Agency), INTACH (Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage) and PondyCAN (An NGO which works to preserve and enhance the natural, social, cultural and spiritual environment of Pondicherry). The report was prepared and aimed to be a way forward for unique and diverse communities to grow together as a single entity and to develop a holistic model for future development in this region. This report takes into consideration the surrounding villages and districts around Auroville: Puducherry, Viluppuram and Cuddalore (ADEME, INTACH, PondyCAN,, and Government of India 2012 ).

The concept of eco-cities in urban planning is defined as utopias, hard to achieve standards of human settlements. Ecovillages emerge as small-scale realization of the ideas of an eco-city. Over the years, the alternative practices of Auroville have served as an educational platform for researchers, students, and the civil society alike. However, realizing alternative ecological lifestyles, governance and economic system and self-sufficiency struggle with challenges and contradictions as the ecovillage interact with a larger growth-oriented capitalistic system. Although ecovillages are sites of experimentation, they are seldom insular space. Regional impacts of and on ecovillage are important in analysing their developmental trajectories. Finally, the vision of ecovillages needs to evolve as the ecovillage as well is surroundings grow and change. Experiments in ecovillages like Auroville remind us that alternative visions of human settlements come with opportunities and challenges and are a work-in-progress in achieving a more sustainable future. There is further potential to understand the consensus-based approach and the governance models in an ecovillage in a better manner.

It can be deduced from the findings that ecovillages as catalysts of urban sustainability have a lot of potentials and challenges. The potential is in terms of devising an alternate lifestyle based on an alternative style of governance while the challenges include the local ecological impact and the difficulty in consensus about certain things. There is a future possibility to explore other conditions which facilitate the mainstream translation of ecovillage practices and how future ecovillages can progress to the next level (Kim 2016 ; Norbeck 1999 ).

Availability of data and materials

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

ADEME, INTACH, PondyCAN, & Government of India (2012) Sustainable Regional Planning Framework for Puducherry. Viluppuram, Auroville and Cuddalore

Google Scholar  

Alfassa, M. (1968). The Auroville Charter: a new vision of power and promise for people choosing another way of life. https://auroville.org/contents/1

Alterman R, Harris D, Hill M (1984) The impact of public participation on planning: the case of the Derbyshire Structure Plan ( UK). Town Plann Rev 55 (2):177–196. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.55.2.f78767r1xu185563

Article   Google Scholar  

Anderson E (2015) Prologue. In: Lockyer J, Veteto JR (eds) Environmental Anthropology Engaging Ecotopia: Bioregionalism, Permaculture, and Ecovillages. Oxford, pp 1–18

Auroville Foundation. (2004). No Title.

Auroville Foundation. (2021). Auroville Census.

Auroville SRC (2005) Socio-economic survey of Auroville employees, p 2000

Auroville. (2015). Orgnaisational History and Involvement of Government of India. https://auroville.org/contents/850

Ayer S (1997) Auroville Design Consultants

Bardici VM (2014) A discourse analysis of Eco-city in the Swedish urban context - construction, cultural bias, selectivity, framing and political action, p 32

Barton, H. (2013). Sustainable Communities. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315870649

Bauhardt C (2014) Solutions to the crisis? The Green New Deal, Degrowth, and the Solidarity Economy: Alternatives to the capitalist growth economy from an ecofeminist economics perspective. Ecol Econ 102 :60–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.03.015

Blanchflower P (2005) Restoration of the Tropical Dry Evergreen Forest of Peninsular India. Biodiversity 6(1):17–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/14888386.2005.9712755

Boyer RHW (2015) Grassroots innovation for urban sustainability: comparing the diffusion pathways of three ecovillage projects. Environ Plann A Econ Space 47(2):320–337. https://doi.org/10.1068/a140250p

Bubna-Litic K (2008) The Aldinga Arts Ecovillage. Governance for Sustainability, pp 93–102

Campbell S (1996) Green Cities, Growing Cities, Just Cities?: Urban Planning and the Contradictions of Sustainable Development. J Am Plann Assoc 62 (3):296–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369608975696

Cunningham PA, Wearing SL (2013) The Politics of Consensus: An Exploration of the Cloughjordan Ecovillage, Ireland. Cosmopolitan Civil Soc 5:1–28 https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/10453/27731

Dawson, J., & Lucas, C. (2006). Ecovillages: new frontiers for sustainability. Green Books.

Dias MA, Loureiro CFB, Chevitarese L, Souza CDME (2017) The meaning and relevance of ecovillages for the construction of sustainable soceital alternatives. Ambiente Sociedade 20(3):79–96. https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-4422asoc0083v2032017

Edward G, Matthew E, K. (2010) The greenness of cities;Carbon dioxide emissions and urban development. J Urban Econ 67(3):404–418

Ergas C (2010) A model of sustainable living: Collective identity in an urban ecovillage. Organ Environ 23 (1):32–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026609360324

Fischer F (2017) Practicing Participatory Environmental Governance: Ecovillages and the Global Ecovillage Movement. In: Climate Crisis and the Democratic Prospect :Participatory Governance in Sustainable Communities, Oxford, pp 185–207. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199594917.001.0001

Foundation A (2001) The Auroville Universal Township Master Plan , Perspective, p 2025 https://www.auroville.info/ACUR/masterplan/index.htm

Gibson-Graham J (2008) Diverse Economies:performative practices for “other worlds.”. Progress Human Geography 32(5):613–632

Gilman, R. (1991). The Eco-Village Challenge. In Context. https://www.context.org/iclib/ic29/

Greenberg, D. (1998). Auroville’s Ecological Footprints. Geocommons.

Hall R (2015) The ecovillage experience as an evidence base for national wellbeing strategies. Intellect Econ 9 (1):30–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intele.2015.07.001

The Hindu. (2021). Auroville residents protest uprooting of trees for contentious Crown Project. The Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/auroville-residents-protest-uprooting-of-trees-for-contentious-crown-project/article37835625.ece#

Hopkins R (2008) The Transition Handbook From Oil Dependency to Local Resilience

IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. In: Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Joss S (2010a) Eco-cities: A global survey 2009. WIT Transact Ecol Environ 129:239–250. https://doi.org/10.2495/SC100211

Joss, Simon. (2010b). Eco-Cities — A Global Survey 2009 Part A : Eco-City Profiles. Governance & Sustainability: Innovating for Environmental & Technological Futures, May.

Jukka, J. (2006). Jukka Jouhki Imagining the Other Orientalism and Occidentalism in Tamil-European Relations in South India. In Building (Issue September).

Kapoor R (2007) Auroville: A spiritual-social experiment in human unity and evolution. Futures 39(5):632–643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2006.10.009

Kapur, A. (2021). Better to Have Gone: Love, Death, and the Quest for Utopia in Auroville. Scribner Book Company.

Kim MY (2016) The Influences of an Eco-village towards Urban Sustainability: A case study of two Swedish eco-villages

Kirby A (2003) Redefining social and environmental relations at the ecovillage at Ithaca: A case study. J Environ Psycho 23 (3):323–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(03)00025-2

Kundoo A (2009) Roger Anger: research on beauty: architecture. Jovis, pp 1953–2008

Litfin K (2009) Reinventing the future: The global ecovillage movement as a holistic knowledge community. In: Kütting G, Lipschutz R (eds) Environmental Governance: Knowledge and Power in a Local-Global World. Routledge, pp 124–142. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203880104

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Lockyer J, Veteto JR (2013) Environmental Anthropology Engaging Ecotopia

Ministry of Human Reource Development Government of India. (2021). Auroville Foundation: Annual Report and Accounts(2018-19). https://aurovillefoundation.org.in/publications/annual-report/

Mössner S, Miller B (2015) Sustainability in One Place? Dilemmas of Sustainability Governance in the Freiburg Metropolitan Region. Regions Magazine 300(1):18–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13673882.2015.11668692

Namakkal J (2012) European Dreams, Tamil Land: Auroville and the Paradox of a Postcolonial Utopia. J Study Radicalism 6 (1):59–88. https://doi.org/10.1353/jsr.2012.0006

Norbeck, M. (1999). Individual Community Environment: Lessons from nine Swedish ecovillages. http://www.ekoby.org/index.html

Pickerill J (2017) What are we fighting for? Ideological posturing and anarchist geographies. Dial Human Geography 7 (3):251–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820617732914

Price OM, Ville S, Heffernan E, Gibbons B, Johnsson M (2020) Finding convergence: Economic perspectives and the economic practices of an Australian ecovillage. Environ Innov Soc Trans 34(April 2019):209–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.12.007

Register, R. (1987). Ecocity Berkeley : building cities for a healthy future. Berkeley, Calif. : North Atlantic Books, 1987. https://search.library.wisc.edu/catalog/9910124360102121

Roelvink G, Gibson-Graham J (2009) A Postcaptialist politics of dwelling:ecological humanities and community economies in coversation. Austrailian Human Rev 46:145–158 http://australianhumanitiesreview.org/2009/05/01/a-postcapitalist-politics-of-dwelling-ecological-humanities-and-community-economies-in-conversation/

Roseland M (1997) Dimensions of the eco-city. Cities 14(4):197–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0264-2751(97)00003-6

Sarkar AN (2015) Eco-Innovations in Designing Ecocity, Ecotown and Aerotropolis. J Architect Eng Technol 05 (01):1–15. https://doi.org/10.4172/2168-9717.1000161

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Scott AJ, Storper M (2015) The Nature of Cities: The Scope and Limits of Urban Theory. Int J Urban Regional Res 39(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12134

Scriver, P., & Srivastava, A. (2016). Building utopia: 50 years of Auroville. The Architectural Review. https://www.architectural-review.com/essays/building-utopia-50-years-of-auroville

Sen, P. K. (2018). Sri Aurobindo: His Life and Yoga 2nd Harper Collins Publishers India.

Shinn LD (1984) Auroville: Visionary Images and Social Consequences in a South Indian Utopian Community. Religious Stud 20 (2):239–253. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034412500016024

Smith A (2011) The Transition Town Network: A Review of Current Evolutions and Renaissance. Social Movement Studies 10(1):99–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2011.545229

Snow DA, Soule SA, Kriesi H (2004) In: Snow DA, Soule SA, Kriesi H (eds) The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470999103

Thomas H, Thomas M (2013) Economics for People and Earth - The Auroville Case 1968-2008. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.33040.40967

United Nations. (1987). Our common future: report of the world commission on environment and development 0, 0. https://doi.org/10.1080/07488008808408783

Book   Google Scholar  

Van Bussel LGJ, De Haan N, Remme RP, Lof ME, De Groot R (2020) Community-based governance: Implications for ecosystem service supply in Berg en Dal, the Netherlands. Ecological Indicators 117(June):106510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106510

Venkitaraman, A. K. (2017). Addressing Resilience in Transportation in Futurustic Cities: A case of Auroville,Tamil Nadu, India. International Conference on Sustainable Built Environments , 2017. https://aurorepo.in/id/eprint/78/

Waerther S (2014) Sustainability in ecovillages – a reconceptualization. Int J Manage Applied Research 1(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.18646/2056.11.14-001

Wagner F (2012) Realizing Utopia: Ecovillage Endeavors and Academic Approaches. RCC Perspectives 8 :81–94 http://www.environmentandsociety.org/sites/default/files/ecovillage_research_review_0.pdf

Walsky T, Joshi N (2013) Realizing Utopia : Auroville’s Housing Challenges and the Cost of Sustainability. Abacus 8 (1):1–8 https://aurorepo.in/id/eprint/110/

Wolfram M. (2017). Grassroots Niches in Urban Contexts: Exploring Governance Innovations for Sustainable Development in Seoul. Proc Eng 198, 622–641 (Urban Transitions Conference, Shanghai, September 2016)

Xue J (2014) Is eco-village/urban village the future of a degrowth society? An urban planner’s perspective. Ecol Econ 105:130–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.06.003

Download references

Acknowledgements

Code availability.

Code availability is not applicable to this article as no codes were used during the current study.

The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies, Kyoto University, Yoshida-Honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan

Abhishek Koduvayur Venkitaraman

Leibniz-Institut für ökologische Raumentwicklung (www.ioer.de), Research Area Landscape, Ecosystems and Biodiversity, Weberplatz 1, 01217, Dresden, Germany

Neelakshi Joshi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abhishek Koduvayur Venkitaraman .

Ethics declarations

Consent to participate.

Consent to participate is not applicable to this article as no participants were involved.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethics approval is not applicable to this article since the study is based on secondary data.

Competing interests

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Koduvayur Venkitaraman, A., Joshi, N. A critical examination of a community-led ecovillage initiative: a case of Auroville, India. Clim Action 1 , 15 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44168-022-00016-3

Download citation

Received : 29 December 2021

Accepted : 24 June 2022

Published : 08 July 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s44168-022-00016-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Global South

This article is cited by

• Chelsea Schelly
• Joshua Lockyer

npj Climate Action (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology

2023 outstanding papers published in the environmental science journals of the royal society of chemistry.

a Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong, China

b Carnegie Mellon University Department of Chemistry, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

c Department of Civil and Resource Engineering, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

d Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, UK

e Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Portugal

f Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, USA

g Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA

A graphical abstract is available for this content

• This article is part of the themed collection: Outstanding Papers 2023 – Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology

Article information

Download citation, permissions.

Z. Cai, N. Donahue, G. Gagnon, K. C. Jones, C. Manaia, E. Sunderland and P. J. Vikesland, Environ. Sci.: Water Res. Technol. , 2024, Advance Article , DOI: 10.1039/D4EW90011A

To request permission to reproduce material from this article, please go to the Copyright Clearance Center request page .

If you are an author contributing to an RSC publication, you do not need to request permission provided correct acknowledgement is given.

If you are the author of this article, you do not need to request permission to reproduce figures and diagrams provided correct acknowledgement is given. If you want to reproduce the whole article in a third-party publication (excluding your thesis/dissertation for which permission is not required) please go to the Copyright Clearance Center request page .

Read more about how to correctly acknowledge RSC content .

Social activity

Search articles by author.

This article has not yet been cited.

Advertisements