Seminar

Hi Daniel. I think you ask an important question and highlights an area where there is much confusion.
Permaculture is a Design tool. It is not any 'thing'. More below..
Forest gardening is a technique. It has been embraced by the permaculture movement as its such a brilliant idea.
Agroforestry is an umbrella term given to agriculture that involves trees of which forest gardening is one technique, alley cropping is another.

Permaculture. To even call something a Permaculture garden is grammatically misleading it is more correct to say a permaculture designed garden or a garden inspired by Permaculture. In David Hologram's new book 'RetroSuburbia' he lays out an enlightening chart of all different gardening techniques and different permaculturalists. Even within permaculture circles it is assumed it is a particular 'thing'. It is not just about food production but every aspect of human life. Its more a case of why we do things (permaculture ethics) rather than what. I hope thats helps.

Good luck on Friday. Btw in case it is of interest, I have been planting nut trees as future food. I was inspired by Martin Crawford. I have a 7 layered plan for planting different trees in different areas as well as conserving existing plants. I would be happy to share this.

I hope you find the seminar rewarding & helpful. To answer your question I would say: Forest gardening is an example of both permaculture and agroforestry; both can be practiced in other ways but Forest gardening is exemplary, perhaps the most accessible and widely applicable form of either practices.
By the way I found ''London’s Urban Forest: A Guide for Designers, Planners and Developers' that you mentioned very disappointing given London's previous food policy lead. Good luck with changing the focus!

I agree with Jane and Jo above. In addition I'd throw in the term agroecology, which frames both agroforestry and forest gardening. In other words, Agrforestry is a set of practices within agroecology, forest gardenning is one of those practices. In comparison to other agroforestry practices forest gardening is typically smaller in scale, more diverse and more intensively managed. That's what makes it particularly suited to urban landscapes and to private gardens and community settings. Other agroforestry usually works on the larger, commercial scale (but there is no reason why they couldn't be integrated along transport corridors and waterways, for example.
Permaculture and agroecology, now that's another whole interesting story - twins separated at birth, who now come to meet each other. The strength of permaculture is a great body of practice that up to now has largely gone unnoticed by researchers. Agroecology has more academic and increasinlgy policy clout, but is (even) less known to the general public. There is much overlap between the two approaches, and right mow there is an interesting process going on of merging and exchanging ideas.
I could draw you a nice diagram that might help make sense of it all!

Hi Daniel, I would say that permaculture is a design system that applies to land but also much, much more; it includes both agroforestry and forest gardens along with many other skills and techniques / knowledge. Agroforestry and forest gardens both use trees to produce food crops but agroforestry is generally simpler combinations of tree and other crops on an agricultural scale and in rural locations (though I like Tomas' suggestion above). Forest gardens have more components (more trees and plants and potential for wide range of foods grown), they are therefore that bit more complicated in structure but this gives a potential for very many different trees and plants to be grown and therefore makes forest gardens very versatile and adaptable to many different contexts. They fit very well into urban and suburban spaces as well as expansive rural acres.

Thanks for your help. I'll report back with anything of general interest

Best of luck with pursuit of our aim: to promote and support creation of publically accessible and communally run Forest Gardens [that enhance food sovereignty and well-being, and connect as many people as possible to these inspiring spaces and engage them in gardening with nature!]

I have just posted this on www.dantheplan.blogspot.com:
The Institute of Foresters have just met with their Royal Town Planning counterparts at a seminar to discuss what they could do for each other. I went as an adviser to the National Forest Garden Scheme to see whether forest gardening, permaculture, agroforestry or agro-ecology was part of what arboriculturalists do or talk about. It seems that they are most concerned about structural landscaping; the impact that existing and new larger trees have on ‘amenity’, in townscapes and or landscapes. Ecology and biodiversity barely got a mention.

The planners in the audience might have been aware of the not uncommon practice of imposing conditions on planning permissions requiring the submission of travel plans that, in turn, require the appointment of a travel adviser to help the new residents embrace low carbon travel behaviours. This could be through providing bus/train timetables, car pooling or car clubs, useful web sites, footpath maps, bicycle repair manuals or classes or even discounts on new bikes.

Following that model a condition could be imposed securing the appointment of a horticultural (preferably a permaculturalist) adviser seeking to enabling new residents to enhance the biodiversity and food growing potential of the area. The adviser could help with recommending how the landscaping of public areas might be maintained and go on to suggest planting schemes and practices in private gardens, taking into account matters of soil types and aspect. Fruit trees could be chosen to increase fertility. Screening could be minimized. Bee friendly plants maximized. The most could be made of what are likely to be quite restricted garden areas. A tool sharing scheme could be established (greenhouses, mowers, strimmers, trimmers and even spades and forks). Seed buying could be another saving. Some householders could specialize in vegetables, others in flowers and others with children’s play and gardening club(s) could be established.

This idea fell on deaf ears. Whilst such advice might be seen as intrusive and unwelcome to some new residents, this attempt at sharing skills, knowledge and kit could be attractive to others and could have a significant impact on household expenditure and the biodiversity of the estate.
That brings me on to para 118 of the 2012 National Planning Policy Framework which requires developments to conserve and enhance biodiversity. The imposition of a condition requiring developers to appoint horticultural advisers would be entirely consistent with that paragraph, that will hopefully survive the changes to the NPPF currently being considered.

What a shame Daniel. I guess that the terminology and concepts used by forest gardeners and foresters and planners are quite different. I remember the language differences when speaking to foresters when I first began volunteering in the countryside and it was all about amenity value - but failed to mention or engage community. If anything trees were for looking at or walking through and the community would often be seen as the problem, either through wanting to build on the trees or complaining about management techniques and regimes.
I wonder if and how we could go about translating our language to theirs, or how we could expand their vocabulary? Was their a single forester or planner there who got permaculture? That might be a good person to begin talking to?
Best wishes
Keith

I must also say well done Daniel! You have hopefully planted the seed of permaculture in the minds of those who attended :)