Interdisciplinairy Project - Final Version 22-1-2016 Koen van der Gaast (tutor), Crelis Rammelt (expert)
The self-reliance of Café De Ceuvel:
An interdisciplinary approach
Students: Pleun Aarts 10525815 Igno Notermans 10651136 Josephine Schuurman 10632867 Floris Wouters 10559752Inhoud
Abstract ... 3 Introduction ... 4 Theoretical Framework ... 6 Industrial Ecology ... 6 Externalities ... 7 Planetary Boundaries ... 8 Biodiversity ... 9 Phosphorus cycle ... 10 Social Capital ... 10 Self-reliance ... 13 Methods ... 15 System modelling... 15 Integration of methods ... 16 Results ... 18Data obtained from the Ceuvel ... 18
Model description ... 20
Self-reliance of Café de Ceuvel ... 21
Conclusion and discussion ... 22
References ... 23
Appendix 1: Extensive model description ... 29
Abstract
This interdisciplinary research examines the self-reliance of a Café-restaurant: Café the Ceuvel in Amsterdam Noord. The Café is seeking for self-sufficiency in order to be sustainable. However the term does not fully cover the process which takes place, therefore this research approaches Café de Ceuvel as self-reliant. A combination of literature study, semi-structured interviews and system modelling resulted in the analysis of self-reliance through a combination of a causal loop-diagram and stock-flow model. The framework of Industrial Ecology together with the concepts of
externalities, planetary boundaries and social capital has shaped this analysis and the model presented. The model includes both food, water, gas, energy and financial capital. As self-reliance builds on social structures, social capital is the precondition for self-reliance. This research concludes that Café de Ceuvel is partly self-reliant.
Introduction
Eating and drinking in cafés and restaurants is a very popular leisure. In the Netherlands, the hospitality industry even accounts for 3% of the BNP and 4% of the jobs (Koninklijke Horeca Nederland, 2015). But speaking in terms of sustainability, what is at stake in the restaurant sector? As Freeman (2011) points out most restaurant sustainability indicators do not only cover the food source, but also energy, waste, and water.
This research is a case study of ‘Café de Ceuvel’, a café located at the van Hasselt kanaal of the river IJ in Amsterdam North. The area where the cafe is situated, also named ‘the Ceuvel’, is a planned workplace for creative and social enterprises. The land was secured for a 10-year lease from the Municipality of Amsterdam, because it is heavily polluted soil, after a group of initiators won a tender to turn the site into a regenerative urban oasis. The soil will be purified by phytoremediation techniques, in which plants are used to clean the soil. These pollution made the Ceuvel seek for innovative solutions since this phytoremediation does not work with interference from outside (www.deceuvel.nl, 2015).
What makes this case especially interesting is Café de Ceuvel’s aims and how these are carried out. According to the website of Café de Ceuvel (2015) they try to explore how they can be as self-sufficient as possible in different ways and therefore use the theory of ‘closing loops’, which will be elaborated on further in this research. Processes at stake at Café de Ceuvel include making biogas from organic waste, in order to cook on, and extracting nutrients to use for growing food. The building itself is made up entirely of recycled materials (www.deceuvel.nl, 2015) and, as Daan Dijkstra (Personal correspondence, 16-12-2015) explained, a greywater system is used to purify the water used at the Ceuvel to responsibly release it to the groundwater. Café de Ceuvel (2015) mentions they try to keep up the dialogue with their consumers through the choices they make in managing the café.
As the Ceuvel argues, the workplace inspires to seek for sustainable solutions to fight the current challenges on the planet Earth. However as Ayres, R. U. (2000) states self-sufficiency is not necessarily related with sustainability. According to the website of the Ceuvel’s Cleantech
Playground (2015), which implements the previously described processes, self-sufficiency will lead to more resilience. Fiksel (2006) argues that the sustainability of living systems - including humans - within the changing Earth system will depend on their resilience. Thus can be stated that The Ceuvel’s approach of self-sufficiency indeed intends to improve sustainability.
However the term self-sufficiency implies that in all aspects the own demand (of for instance food and energy) is provided for. Therefore closing loops, as the Ceuvel strives for, can be done. This could make sense in for example resource terms such as energy and phosphorus. However,
according to Pinstrup-Andersen, P. (2009) economic demand has to meet production and at the level of Café de Ceuvel this is not realistic (Daan Dijkstra, Personal correspondence, 16-12-2016). Thus, in order to incorporate both perspectives, the concept of self-reliance will be introduced. This concept embodies ‘closing loops’ as well. Simply put, self-reliance is the social and economic ability of an individual, a household or a community to meet essential needs in a sustainable manner (UNHCR,
2006). More elaborate and disciplinary perspectives on self-reliance will be discussed in the theoretical framework.
Furthermore, Brown, B. J., Hanson, M. E., Liverman, D. M., & Merideth Jr, R. W. (1987) state there are many ways of defining sustainability, these include the continued support of human life on earth, long-term maintenance of the stock of biological resources, the productivity of agricultural systems, stable human populations, limited growth economies, an emphasis on small-scale and self-reliance and continued quality in the environment and ecosystems. When looking into these
definitions the most relevant and applicable definition of sustainability at Cafe de Ceuvel is to be the small-scale and self-reliance approach.
Therefore this research will examine: ‘to what extent is the Ceuvel self-reliant?
This will be done by using theories from both an earth science, ecologic, economic and a social-geographic perspective which respectively cover Industrial Ecology, Externalities, Planetary
boundaries and Social Capital. These points of view will describe current processes in ‘the system’ of Café de Ceuvel. By means of a system model, in which a causal loop-diagram and stock-flow model are combined, the different perspectives are integrated, and through a categorisation of the concept of self-reliance the research question is answered.
Theoretical Framework
Industrial Ecology
As mentioned in the introduction, the Ceuvel is seeking for methods to ‘close the loop’. Closing the loops is one of the main topics of a concept that looks at sustainability in an interdisciplinary way. This concept, focussing on sustainability in industrial systems, is called Industrial Ecology (IE). The term was first coined in 1989, when Frosch and Gallopoulos published their paper ‘Strategies for Manufacturing’ in the Scientific American paper. The core of their concept was that within industries, the more efficient use of materials, energy and capital, the less environmental damage would occur (Frosch and Gallopoulos, 1992, p.288). It is only since the last two decades that IE has widely attracted the attention of academics, business managers and policy makers (Ehrenfeld, 2000). Frosch and Gallopoulos (1990, via O’Rourke et al., 1996) explained that 'the traditional model of industrial activity - in which individual manufacturing processes take in raw materials and generate products to be sold plus waste to be disposed of -should be transformed into a more integrated model: an industrial ecosystem. To optimize the use of energy and goods from this industrial ecosystem, waste has to be used as a material for other processes in the ecosystem (O'Rourke et al. 1996). This is something Café de Ceuvel could consider ‘closing the loops.’
Examining the in- and outflows of a system was the main focus of industrial ecology in its early history, but from an ecological perspective, it offers more. A stable ecosystem is very
parsimonious in its use of both energy and material. Material flows are essentially closed loops, with scavengers converting metabolic waste into food, playing a critical role in closing these loops. Also, in natural stable ecosystems, energy flows are thermodynamically efficient within the system, using much of the solar energy captured by the system. Finally, stable ecosystems can only exist when none of the component organisms act as an upsetting mechanism for any other: all components exist together in a dynamically stable state.
The concept of Industrial Ecology can be applied to social systems as well. When applying IE, companies might look from the ‘resource productivity’ perspective, where not the classical
productivity of a person or a machine is optimized, but that of a certain product or resource (Esty & Porter, 1998). This could lead to a reduction of costs, higher efficiency, and a greater value created by the company (Ibid.). Moreover, as O'Rourke et al. (1996) argue, a technological shift has to be accompanied by cultural and cognitive changes. Closing material cycles must be supported by changes in the way we think and analyze, as decisions at the individual level usually do not account for the system as a whole.
The ecosystem analogy plays a central role in most papers on IE. Generally, the development and behaviour of industrial systems on patterns of natural ecosystem evolution are modelled, using different types of system modelling, including material flow analyses and stock-flow models. While the concept of Industrial Ecology is broad, criticism is broad as well. One of the papers which criticizes IE is from O'Rourke et al. (1996). Firstly, there is doubted that massive data requirements would yield decisive information about complicated products. Considering all the potential
environmental implications of a product can lead to uncertain outcomes that must be reduced to social value judgements in the end. As an example, O’Rourke et al. ask themselves which is worse:
localize air emissions that can damage worker health or global emissions that will be a disadvantage to future generations? They argue that system models cannot give an answer to this.
Secondly, system models that have been proposed in different IE literature function as a way for companies to see the ‘bigger picture’. Consequently, O'Rourke et al. (1996) think it is likely that industries will get enmeshed in small complicated parts of the system, overlooking what is fundamentally important in a broader way. This similarly accounts for this research of the Ceuvel where, because of its aim to be sustainable and close loops thus its complexity, the ‘bigger picture’ is important not to be overlooked.
In the case of the Ceuvel, the Industrial Ecology approach can contribute to an understanding of the Ceuvel in a more holistic way, were closing different loops, lowering energy use and
dematerialization are combined. The Ceuvel uses the concept of ‘closing loops’ itself as well to explain its operations (Café de Ceuvel, 2015). To illustrate: ’currently, urban areas import energy and
material and export waste. The Cleantech Playground applies the model of ecosystems to human neighborhoods, where a much more distributed model of producing and recycling energy, water, and food make urban neighborhoods more resilient and empowered’ (De Ceuvel, 2015,
http://deceuvel.nl/project/cleantech-playground/).
At de Ceuvel, closing loops in resource terms, like energy, makes sense from a natural science perspective, but not for social sciences. Von Bertalanffy (1973) distinguishes between open and closed systems, where the latter are isolated from their environment. Closing loops within the system of Café de Ceuvel is possible for natural aspects like energy, but is not a characteristic for human interactions such as social or financial capital. In order to incorporate both perspectives, the concept of self-reliance will be used. This concept embodies ‘closing loops’ as well but does not exclude social and financial perspectives.
Externalities
Identifying which ‘loops’ need to be considered to analyse the self-reliance of Café de Ceuvel is not obvious. The economic concept of externalities might help to indicate them. Therefore, first the concept will be explained, where after it will be applied to the Café by examining the concepts of several externalities.
In economics, a key concept of market failure is an externality. According to Nicholson & Snyder (2005, p.670), it occurs“... whenever the activities of one economic actor affect the activities of
another in ways that are not reflected in market transactions”. Externalities can be both positive and
negative. Markets will provide too much of a good providing negative externalities and too little of a good with positive externalities (Hindriks & Myles, 2006). Externalities are market failures because the equilibria under competition, like the price and quantity, are not (Pareto) efficient.
To illustrate the economic argument made, consider the example of neighbourhood nuisance. When there are many people at Café de Ceuvel, the bike racks might be overcrowded, or visitors park their bikes in front of entrances. This creates a negative externality, annoyance, for neighbours. If this would be considered, less people would be accommodated in de Ceuvel, or de Ceuvel could install sufficient bike racks (as is the case now).
The solution proposed here, so if the market would consider these costs, is called internalizing. In short, by internalizing the market could solve the externality problem. Such policies have been
widely proposed to internalize environmental externalities and enhance sustainable industry practices as well (O'Rourke, Connelly & Koshland, 1996).
However, two problems arise. First, the externalities need to be identified, which will be discussed later on when discussing the implications for Café the Ceuvel. The other, possibly greater, problem is how these externalities can be valued. As Heal (2000) points out, this is a problem because economic value is usually through pricing. They can be priced through the market, but often this is not
straightforward. For example, how can the soil fertility or the price of annoyance from the previous example be determined if there is not a market providing that price? It is then hard to internalize the negative externality of soil degradation.
The solution to this pricing problem is applying other valuation methods. Roughly, these methods can be categorized in use values, like the hedonic pricing and travel cost method, and non-use values, like stated preferences or choice modelling (Perman, 2003)1.
Moreover, zero externalities might not be necessary for sustainability. Even a level of an externality as a result of market forces might be sustainable if it falls within the boundaries of the regenerative capacity of the environment (Esty & Porter, 1998). Zero externalities are also unsustainable in economic terms, when the costs of reduction exceed its benefits (Ibid.). This demonstrates that a discussion is needed when it makes sense to ‘close the loops’.
Moving beyond the general difficulties of valuation externalities, the concept can be used to define human interactions beyond market boundaries. The restaurant business of de Ceuvel has impact on many factors, not all accounted for in the market. The process of internalization can be applied to environmental system functions for example, like resilience or biodiversity. Other concepts and disciplines need to be added in order to identify them however. Therefore, the concepts of planetary boundaries and social capital will be discussed. The aspects the Ceuvels projects have a link with the planetary boundaries will focus on two aspects, namely biodiversity and the phosphorus cycle.
Planetary Boundaries
The relevance of internalizing certain externalities can be understood within the perspective of planetary boundaries, both also serve as relevance for the system model later on.
Planetary boundaries defines the safe operating space for humanity with respect to the Earth system (Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, et al., 2009). They are associated with the planet’s biophysical subsystems or processes, of which nine are distinguished: climate change; rate of biodiversity loss (terrestrial and marine); interference with the nitrogen and phosphorus cycles; stratospheric ozone depletion; ocean acidification; global freshwater use; change in land use; chemical pollution; and atmospheric aerosol loading.
Most of these thresholds can be defined by a critical value for one or more control variables. In general, planetary boundaries are values for control variables that are either at a 'safe' distance from thresholds — for processes with evidence of threshold behaviour — or at dangerous levels — for processes without evidence of thresholds. Human activities are pushing the Earth system outside its stable environmental state and pushes it towards dangerous levels (Ibid.). According to Steffen et al. (2015) planetary boundaries defines well how human development can be guided in a sustainable manner.
Most of these global boundaries can also be approached locally. Café de Ceuvel takes some of them into account in its policy to close loops. These are partly or even completely internalized.
‘Internalisation’ in the conventional, economic, way is done by repairing caused damages or transfer benefits, but here the problem of valuation arises (Hindriks & Myles, 2006). Moreover, the actors could merge, as for the benefits and costs of both are accounted for. This is however quite
unrealistic, as some externalities like biodiversity are not ‘owned’ by another agent. As it is beyond the scope of this research how the Café internalises costs or has the potential to do so, this will not be discussed in this research. ‘Internalizing’ will be used when the Café accounts for specific externalities in its policy and puts effort (costs) in it. Of course, it remains the question to what extent it accounts for them. Before elaborating on the policy of de Ceuvel, two of the planetary boundaries (biodiversity and phosphorus) and the concept of social capital will be discussed and applied to de Ceuvel.
Biodiversity
According to Wilcove et al. (1998, via Dunne et al., 1998) it is well known that most of the earth’s ecosystems are experiencing great losses of biodiversity, caused by habitat destruction, alien species introduction, climate change, and pollution. The effects of these losses mostly depend on the complexity of the ecosystem impacted, and also on the number and function of species lost. (Dunne et al 1998). Biodiversity should be protected, not only for its intrinsic value but ecosystem services are also often a function of biodiversity levels (Loreau et al., 2001 via Dunne et al., 1998), which means that keeping biodiversity high will help to continue making use of these ecosystems. This is the case because local species richness may enhance ecosystem productivity and stability (Worm et al., 2015).
An example of how the Ceuvel could internalize the problem with the biodiversity planetary boundary is as follows.
Café the Ceuvel does partly stands on its own merits by producing food on the roof and in gardens floating on the Johan van Hasseltkanaal which is part of the terrain (Toon Maassen, personal correspondence, 18-12-2015). Producing food in the urban environment is named urban agriculture (UA). Urban green spaces such as UA can bring diverse green habitats back into the urban
environment, providing natural structures across fragmented habitats and biodiversity for the functioning and thus services of the ecosystem (Lin & Fuller, 2013 via Lin et al 2015).
Implementing these more complex green spaces into the mostly simply structured cities can even have a greater effect on biodiversity than in more natural landscapes (Tscharntke et al.,
2012 via Lin et al. 2015).
Urban agriculture has the potential to not only improve the landscape within the urban
environment, but can also indicate a ‘spillover’ effect which improves the persistence of wildlife populations in the whole human-dominated landscape because it allows for resource acquisition and recolonization events(Blitzer et al., 2012 via Lin et al. 2015).
On the contrary, there are some constraints. Firstly: the lack of space in cities for growing food is obvious (Deelstra & Girardet 2000). Secondly, biodiversity patterns in urban agro-ecosystems have not been widely documented yet. Also, the valuable ecosystem services that UA provides is not yet been well-established. This all also greatly depends on the way UA is implemented. For example, if
intensified management such as pesticide application and frequent mowing occurs in backyards, this can limit the capacity of gardens to maintain rare or sensitive insect species (Matteson &
Langellotto, 2011 via Lin et al. 2015). However, the Ceuvel does not have a clear policy on this.
Phosphorus cycle
Café the Ceuvel has an effect on the phosphorus cycle, as described by the planetary boundaries theory, in different ways, through the consumption of food and the most active and probably conscious way this is happening is through the recycling of phosphorus through human waste. These processes will be described in succession.
On average, about 30–40% of food produced is spoiled or wasted and this wastes around 1 million tonnes of phosphorus every year. When food is produced closer to cities the amount of food wasted can be reduced (Elser, & Bennett, 2011). Café the Ceuvel mainly buys locally produced
(www.cafedeceuvel.nl) and in this way helps to reduce phosphorus dissipation. Elser & Bennett (2011) also state that when locally mined phosphorus is used as fertilizer to support locally grown food this is a sustainable improvement and this is exactly what is happening at the Ceuvel. As stated by Bouwman et al. (2013) a shift in human diets, with poultry or pork replacing beef, can reduce nutrient flows in countries with intensive ruminant production. Café de Ceuvel is not even replacing the beef with poultry or pork, but is completely vegetarian (De Ceuvel, 2015) and in this way reduces the nutrient flow and thus phosphorus use.
Close to 100% of phosphorus eaten in food is excreted (Jönsson et al., 2004). According to Elser, & Bennett (2011) each person excretes about 1.2 grams of phosphorus per day, when all extracted this would produces about 3 million tonnes per year globally, which is about 20% of the annual
worldwide phosphate fertilizer consumption. Currently, only 10% of phosphorus from human waste is returned to agriculture. Given that more than half the world's population now lives in urban centres, and urbanization is set to increase (FAO, 2007b), cities are becoming phosphorus ‘hotspots’ and urine is the largest single source of phosphorus emerging from cities.
The idea that separating urine at source could promote the sustainability of wastewater arose in the 1990’s (Kirchmann, H., & Pettersson, S. 1994). The different approaches were based on the fact that urine contains most of the nutrients in domestic wastewater but makes up less than one percent of the total wastewater volume. Substantial separation of urine at the source, would thus allow nutrient recycling from a concentrated nutrient solution. This process not only includes phosphorus elimination as the Ceuvel does but also nitrification and denitrification (Wilsenach, J. A., & Van Loosdrecht, M. C. 2004). The idea behind the phosphorus recovery is to apply it as fertilizer so that the phosphorus becomes a renewable resource. Because the composition of urine reflects the average requirement of nutrients for plant growth, thus the use of urine as a fertilizer in agriculture is the most obvious application (Heinonen-Tanski, H., & van Wijk-Sijbesma, C. 2005).
When linking the phosphorus story to the IE theory there can be stated that loops are being closed since no new phosphorus has to be bought in order to use as fertilizer.
Social Capital
This section is an explanation of the theory of social capital and the concepts connected to it. Within these concepts eventually the linkage of social capital to Café de Ceuvel, or rather its
embeddedness, is made through discussing the benefits of social capital for local economies, in which Café de Ceuvel is a player.
First of all, there are multiple theories on what social capital is and what concepts are involved. Some leading writers are for instance Bourdieu, Coleman, Lin and the most famous writer: Robert Putnam (Häuberer, 2010). There is a difference between the perspectives of an individual on social capital compared to that of a group in regard to power relations. The two perspectives are described by the writings of Robert Putnam and Nan Lin, because they explain respectively the benefits of social capital to a community and to individuals. According to Putnam social capital refers to features of social organisation such as networks, norms and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit (Putnam, 1995). It influences the quality of life of groups and their productivity and it allows individuals in a group to reach collective goals more effectively. Evans & Syrett (2007) divide the theory of social capital in a structural and a cognitive aspect. The cognitive aspects are the shared norms, trust and values. The structural aspect is the networks, bonds and linkages through which the cognitive aspect is conveyed.
In the famous book ‘Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital’ Putnam (1995) stresses the importance of the norms and networks of civic engagement (to increase social capital) in a
community. Civic engagement is the forming of any type of association. Research has shown that improving education, decreasing urban poverty and unemployment, social control on crime and bringing back drug abuse, and even health are more likely to be successful in civically engaged communities. An increase in social capital would, in a community, lead to an enhanced sense of collective action (developing the ‘I’ into the ‘We’). The relations in a group form social networks, norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness. These are the main concepts in Putnam’s theory of social capital (Häuberer, 2010).
To clarify what social networks are: from the perspective of an individual social networks are all the other people this individual knows. Norms of reciprocity are the inclinations that arise from these networks to do certain things for each other, or simply stated: mutual aid. For a group to achieve collective goals it is necessary for the individuals in it to not just know one another, but also to trust each other so that these individuals will not exploit or cheat in their relationship, and can expect truly to benefit from their (mutual) cooperation.
The concept needs to be put in context to understand its meaning and relevance: for instance the trust within members of a family is different from organisational trust, which is based on working experience and reputation. Trust is closely linked to the concept of reciprocity. Reciprocity is based on the assumption that a certain good action from an individual to another will be repaid sometime in the future (Fu, 2004). This assumption is the trust between the individuals. There is a positive relationship between social capital and trust. They are actually mutually reinforcing—social capital generates trusting relationships that in turn produce social capital (Fu, 2004). Where relationships are high in trust, people are more willing to engage in social interaction, which increases the size of the social network. Similarly, these ties, the social capital, leads to the development of increased trust as people interact with one another over time. This way trust is both a pre-condition and a product of social capital.
Social capital can be divided into two forms: and ‘bonding’ and ‘bridging’ social capital. Bonding social capital refers to strong, personal and reciprocal relationships between individuals. Bridging social capital refers to more superficial relationships between individuals, which is the case in for instance groups working and living within a certain area: there is no significantly reciprocal link
between two individuals. Bridging social capital is a question of whether residents and workers in a community feel they can trust others on a broader basis. It is especially beneficial to facilitation of the flow of information that Lin (1999) mentions, because it simply is the enlargement of a social network. Groups or communities mostly feature both bonding and bridging characteristics at the same time (Power & Willmot, 2007).
Putnam mostly researched the significance of social capital for groups. It can also be approached from an individual perspective. In accordance with the concepts of the scholars that previously wrote about social capital, Lin (1999) formed a simple definition. He describes social capital as an investment in social relations (or networks) with expected returns. Individuals engage in interactions and networking in order to produce profits. The ‘expected returns’ emphasises the norms of
reciprocity in relations between individuals.
Lin (1999) gives two explanations on how a large stock of social capital (a large social network) will enhance the production of benefits for an individual. First, a social network facilitates the flow of information. In the example of a market situation a larger social network would grant a broader range of information sources to be able to conform to market needs and demands. And second, this social network may carry weight which exerts a certain influence (over for instance decision-making processes). A large social network can be seen as a measurement of status and importance. This way, social capital is a form of power.
There are some assumptions in the theory of social capital. First, the theory always seems to focus on the benefits of sociability, on the positive consequence, while negative features are
underexposed. Leading writers have repeatedly researched the advantages social capital has on societal structures and economies, but the research on drawbacks seems underdeveloped. Second, naming the theory social capital implies that social capital and other forms of capital, such as
financial capital, are at some level fungible as a source of power. This nonmonetary form of capital is in this way compared to monetary capital, while this is arguably a different form of power (Portes, 2000).
Social capital plays an important role in the development of a local economy. Research by Leyden (2003) found that communities with high social capital generally have low crime rates and are economically more developed than communities with low social capital. There is significant overlap between building a successful framework for (local) economic action and concepts of social capital such as the necessity of a trustful relationships with mutual benefit, face-to-face contact and shared values and norms (Evans & Syrett, 2007).
For the development of a local economy it is, logically, essential to form trading relations. The economic relation of trading products for money is an example of bridging social capital of a local economy. The flow of information through the structure of a social network is what enlarges this social network by indirect linkages: ‘knowing someone in your social network who knows someone else’ is an important factor in finding new economic relations. The most important economic characteristic of networks for increasing social capital is reducing transaction costs. An economic transaction with two parties in a trustful relationship is completed at less cost to the parties involved in terms of both the reduced time taken to conclude the transaction and maximising mutual benefit. A second characteristic is that existing economic relations are re-usable by other economic players, because the relation has become a regular exchange. Economic development is therefore
accelerated by the presence of networks exhibiting such characteristics of social capital as trust and reciprocity.
Self-reliance
Broken down simply: reliance is the state of being dependant on something or someone. Thus, self-reliance is self-reliance on one’s own efforts and abilities. Even though there are similarities between the goals of the concepts, which primarily is depending more on one’s own efforts and abilities, self-reliance is not the same as self-sufficiency in the sense that self-sufficiency is more absolute. One can (theoretically) be completely self-sufficient: re-using water, producing food etc. in a closed environment. But there is no absolute self-reliance. Self-reliance is rather the acceptance of being part of greater social and natural systems on the path to self-sufficiency.
Self-reliance is important to the sustainability of community-based human services (Howard, D. C., & Howard, P. A. 2000). Howard & Howard (2000) also state self-reliance is the recognition and
development of interdependent relationships that profit both the service and the environment in which the service is maintained. While total self-sufficiency is likely unachievable for the most individuals, organizations or communities, as well for Café the Ceuvel.
The concept of self-reliance in resources can be realized by changing waste management (Anthony, R., & Seldman, N. 1980) in order to reduce the flows. This is in accordance with the IE theory, when an industry creates closed material loops, it does not rely on inflows from outside the system, which makes it more self-reliant.
According to this research, this means that the self-reliance of Café de Ceuvel could be a method to contribute less to the phosphor depletion and the loss of biodiversity. To find out to what extent the Ceuvel is self-reliant regarding these planetary boundaries, it seems important to visualize the food system of the Ceuvel, because food production is a major force behind both phosphor depletion and loss of biodiversity. The production of food requires the application of various fertilizers containing phosphorus, nitrogen and potassium in order to sustain certain crop yields (Cordell, Drangert, & White, 2009). As Vaccari (2009) argues, mining phosphorus for fertilizer is consuming it faster than it can be replenished by geologic cycles and mineable resources of this essential nutrient are limited (Elser, & Bennett, 2011).
Biodiversity is lost through converting biodiverse areas into agricultural land (Geist and Lambin, 2002 via Machovina et al., 2015). An indicator for self-reliance is in this case the re-use of resources like phosphor and the overall production of food within the system boundaries. If phosphor is re-used less phosphor is needed elsewhere to produce food. The assumption here is that the alternative food supplier does not reuse phosphor. Another indicator of self-reliance of the food system is the production of food within the system boundaries in case of the Ceuvel, producing food in the urban landscape of the Ceuvel.
Economic self-reliance is explained by Bridger & Luloff (2001) as: “the creation of local markets, local
production and processing of previously imported goods, greater cooperation among local economic entities, and the like. Self-reliant communities would still be linked to larger economic structures, but they would have vibrant local economies that would better protect them from the whims of capital than is currently the case” (ibid. p.462). For instance for the food supply at Café de Ceuvel economic
self-reliance is therefore indicated by the amount to which is imported from local producers, non-local producers and is produced by Café de Ceuvel itself. The main benefit of self-reliance is greater
resilience, which provides a quicker recovery after or a less severe response to external shocks such as food crises (Godfray, 2008).
Self-reliance builds upon strong social structures and increasing levels of economic activity, and social and economic links with local communities (UNHCR 2006). To become self-reliant on itself and the local economy one needs to build this local economy and to build a local economy one needs a network. Thus, there first needs to be (bridging) social capital to connect local players and to form mutually beneficial and reciprocal trading relationships to be able to depend on a local economy. In a local economy, self-reliance is dependent on the quality and size of the aforementioned structural aspect: the social networks, bonds and linkages. Strong, trustful networks and relationships are the foundation for a local economy to be self-reliant. Social capital influences the self-reliance of Café de Ceuvel in the way that it is its pre-condition. One can evaluate the self-reliance of a system by defining the scales of the system boundaries, and determining to what extent the system stands on itself or is connected with concepts across the system boundaries. Minimising and redirecting external flows is done to be sustainable. This is in accordance with Andruss, V. (1990) who also makes the link with the previously described perspective of economic self-reliance.
Which sources define the self-reliance of the Ceuvel might be straightforward: a cafe needs to serve drinks and food. However, behind these products are ‘hidden’ resources. As explained before, it becomes more and more apparent that global food production has an overall negative effect on biodiversity and phosphorus availability. These hidden resources are less straightforwardly identified however. From an economic framework, these can be called externalities, a cost or benefit occurring to an economic actor which did not choose to have that externality. The externality framework helps to identify the hidden resources. Self-reliance occurs when the identified externalities are kept within the identified system (Galtung, 1986).
To operationalize the concept of self-reliance, several categories with values of the extent to which Café de Ceuvel is self-reliant are defined. To assess these values, categories could not be derived from scientific literature. Therefore, simply three categories are used and they are defined as non-self-reliant, partly self-reliant and self-reliant. Since this research does not quantify the flows within the system, it is inconvenient to give clear benchmarks of the distribution of the pillars within the system. For example, ‘non self-reliant’ could be 80-100% dependency of sources from outside the system, ‘partly self-reliant’ a 50-80% dependence on sources from outside the system and ‘self-reliant’ 0-50% dependency on sources from outside the system. Zero percent dependency would theoretically be sufficiency. Since it was argued that reliance is on the path to
self-sufficiency the border of being over 50% self-sufficient is in this research named ‘self-reliant’. When these categories are defined, pillars can be divided into these categories by quantifying data. An example: one could determine the self-reliance of the energy pillar by examining the energy bill and make clear how much percent of the energy use was produced by the Ceuvel’s solar systems in comparison to the overall energy use. In this research, an interview method will be used, which is not sufficient for quantifying the data since the respondents cannot provide this data. Therefore, an estimation is made using the visualization from the model. The pillars from the restaurant
sustainability industry are categorized into these three values. Non self-reliant: completely dependent on sources from outside of the system boundaries. Partly reliant: somewhat self-reliant, but a lot can be done to improve. Self-reliant: the Ceuvel stands on its own merits as much as needed.
Methods
Together with the literature search, this research uses empirical data and system modelling to connect theory and practise. The model will be based on both scientific literature and data obtained from the Ceuvel. In semi-structured interviews, the operations within the Ceuvel are discussed with experts from the Ceuvel itself. These experts are Chris Monaghan, from Metabolics -a company who hosts most of the projects-; Daan Dijkstra, entrepreneur at The Ceuvel; Toon Maassen and Joey Hodde, co-founders of Café de Ceuvel; Laura Hoekzema, bartender at Café de Ceuvel and Nicolas Adam, chef at Café de Ceuvel. The interviews are about the operations of the Café in accordance with the four sustainability indicators (food, water, waste and energy) and their supply system. The resulting model will be a combination of both theory and practice. The background of system modelling, the used modelling techniques and their integration is discussed first however.
System modelling
According to Meadows (2008), a system consists of interconnected elements with a certain function or purpose. These interconnections hold the elements together. The change of elements usually does not change the system much, as changing the interconnections or purpose do. This system structure is the source of the behaviour of the system. Different system models are suitable for different kinds of research. In general, Stock-Flow diagrams are used for Quantitative research and Causal Loop diagrams are used for qualitative research (Wolstenholme, 1999). Both forms of will be system modelling discussed shortly.
At the core of stock-flow diagrams are stocks and flows in a system, which are the observable elements over time (figure 1). Another important concept is a feedback loop. These feedback loops are apparent when the change in a stock affects the flow into or out of that same stock. There are two different feedback loops: balancing feedback loops which try to keep the stock at a certain level, and reinforcing feedback loops. The visualization in Meadows (2008) uses a line from the stock to the flow to indicate these feedback loops. It is worthy to note here that a cloud represents a source of the flows beyond the (chosen) boundaries of the system under investigation. In this research, the system boundaries are set on the property of the Ceuvel. From the perspective of self-reliance this seems necessary, because this way one can evaluate to what extent the Ceuvel relies on sources from outside the Ceuvel and the rate of self-reliance can be examined.
Figure 1: A stock-flow model. From: Meadows (2008), p.26.
In the past, Causal Loop diagrams (CLDs) have mostly been used for purposes connected to qualitative simulation modelling. They have been used prior to simulation analysis, to depict the causal behaviour of a system over time. (Randers, 1980; Richardson, 1999; Sterman, 2000). Later, CLDs have started to be used for purposes other than setting up a framework for model building, namely, for detailed system description and policy analysis (Wolstenholme, 1999; Homer & Oliva, 2001; via Binder et al. 2004). The main process of making a CLD, consists of documenting relevant factors and the causal relationships between them. Any link that is made, might come with annotations about its polarity and delay. The polarity tells if the dependency has positive polarity, which means that if the cause increases, the effect will also increase. Negative polarity means that if the cause increases, the effect will also increase.
Where the stock-flow model relations are very static, polarity is subtle (cf. Richardson, 1995). There are scenarios where even with positive polarity the cause decreases while the effect increases, even when there are no other causes for the same effect (Binder et al. 2004). Summarizing, causal loop diagrams provide a language for articulating our understanding of the dynamic, interconnected nature of complex systems. By stringing together several loops a coherent story about a particular problem or issue can be created (Kim, D. H. 1992).
In this research, the model will be constructed using the software-program AnyLogic. AnyLogic supports ready to use constructs for defining both a CLD and an SFD. Moreover, AnyLogic enables one to specify different parts of the model using different paradigms thus providing for more adequate modelling of large and complex systems (Borshchev & Filippov, 2004).
Integration of methods
Both qualitative and quantitative analyses can have important contributions to the success of a system dynamics study. However, they are mostly used separately. Wolsenholme (1999) warns that neither qualitative nor quantitative system dynamics will achieve their full potential. The qualitative system might be still too abstract to implement into operational realities, while the quantitative system does not relate its insights back into general management development. A method for combining both qualitative and quantitative system dynamics in large companies, is to build upon the inter-dependence of qualitative and quantitative system dynamics (Ibid.). This will be applied in this research, although no actual quantitative data are used. This can be explained by the
importance of the flow for this system since this is an important aspect of self-reliance as used in this research. The need for partly using a quantitative measuring method is that the material flows, and where they originate from, are visualized which is important in order to measure self-reliance.
Both quantitative and qualitative analyses and modelling will be used in this research in order to visualize Café de Ceuvel. Some elements are depicted in the quantitative stock-flow model way to stress their flows through the system. These are the more general elements which are explained further by the qualitative aspects depicted in the causal loop diagram way.
Results
As previously argued by Freeman (2011) sustainability indicators do not only cover the food source, but also energy, waste, and water. Bazilian et al. (2011) agree upon this by stating these pillars are the main driving force behind environmental issues. Also, they are important factors in the
operations of a restaurant. Therefore, in the model these pillars are used to build the different operations of Café de Ceuvel around it. The system boundaries are for the outflows set on the terrain of the Ceuvel itself, and for the inflow the boundaries are set on the suppliers. It is visualised this way to make an extinction between what factors from outside the system influence the inflows, and what factors from within the system have influence on the self-reliance of Café de Ceuvel. The model will be used to visualise the boundaries of Café de Ceuvel’s self-reliance. The ‘clouds’ and the yellow dots in the model represent the actors outside of the borders of Café de Ceuvel’s virtual grounds: an outside source of flows. The yellow dots are merely clarifications on what these outside sources are. The model is essentially a scheme of the pillars that are involved in the sustainability indicators for restaurants in general, complemented by the factors that make this model specific to Café de Ceuvel. Self-reliance as defined in this research is visualised by the model. The more Café de Ceuvel relies on flows within its own system, the more self-reliant it is. Similarly, the more it is on external flows, the less self-reliant it is. The model will be described by guidance of the different stocks, dynamic variables, flows and interconnections. First, data obtained from the Ceuvel will be described. Based on this data, the model of Café de Ceuvel will be discussed and analyzed.
Data obtained from the Ceuvel
The Ceuvel does not have a sewage system, one of the disadvantages of the polluted soil, therefore used water cannot be carried off normally. For this reason a greywater system is used. According to Daan Dijkstra (Personal correspondence, 16-12-2015) greywater systems are used to filter this used thus polluted water. These systems consists of water tanks with a natural plant filter made from reeds, this method has proved to remove pollution and change wastewater into water that is clean enough to be released freely and become groundwater.
As it comes to food production the Ceuvel is building on a system which is called aquaponics. This system combines conventional aquaculture, which is described as raising aquatic animals, fish in this case, with hydroponics which signifies as cultivating plants in water. As Daan Dijkstra (Personal correspondence 16-12-2015) explains the plants will grow on water where the fish live in, so that the fish contribute to fertilizing the plants with their feces and a symbiotic environment is created. The idea behind this is that the food will be used for consumption at café the Ceuvel.
Another project the Ceuvel works on are the floating gardens, according to the Ceuvel (2015) these platforms are food-producing gardens with water cleaning properties. The reason for making it floatable is to avoid direct contact with the polluted soil, it can be said that cultivating on water also benefits spatial problems as it comes to urban agriculture.
For this reason the Biogasboot was introduced. Organic waste is used in order to make methane gas, on this gas there can be cooked. After the process of converting the waste into biogas there is some rest material. This rest material is still usable as fertilizer for the floating gardens and the aquaponics
system (www.biogasboot.nl), although this is not yet implemented. For the realisation of the
Biogasboot Café de Ceuvel used crowdfunding. This is a form of project funding by any person who is willing to donate money. Toon Maassen stated that this method of raising money for a project is actually exemplary for ‘cashing out’ the social capital of Café de Ceuvel (personal correspondence, 18-12-2015): Café de Ceuvel reached out to people in their social network to ask them for funding. The Café collected €10.000 for the realisation of the Biogasboot next to €16.000 for other projects. Another way to make fertilizer is extracting it from human urine. As explained by Daan Dijkstra (Personal correspondence 16-12-2015) the Ceuvel catches the urine, of the urinals only, and leads it to a certain tank where a filter makes it into usable fertilizer again. The remainder human waste from the Ceuvel goes into a big tank which is collected by a company called Ecova.
As it comes to energy the Ceuvel has a solar system which, according to by Daan Dijkstra (Personal correspondence 16-12-2015), accounts for 60-70% for the total energy supply of the Ceuvel, the rest comes from the conventional energy network where they are connected to. Their energy supplier is Greenchoice, which generates energy in the Netherlands and EU out of wind, solar and biomass (Greenchoice, 2015). Their energy is thus not exclusively local.
Food production at the area of the Ceuvel is, according to Nicolas Adam (Personal correspondence, 16-12-2015) not enough to fully rely on yet. There suppliers consist of local suppliers and from an organic wholesaler. He said that Café de Ceuvel orders 25% percent from the wholesaler and 75% comes from local suppliers, within a range of 20 kilometres. For drinks Laura Hoekzema (Personal correspondence, 16-12-2015) could not give such an approximation. For drinks, the ambition is similar to foods. The Café strives for connecting with local producers. When this is not possible other options are considered, provided that they are organic or sustainably transported.
In their aim of becoming more self-sufficient the Café has, since its establishment, increasingly been doing business with local foodstuff suppliers. These suppliers are based in and around Amsterdam. The Café has made connections with food suppliers by using their direct and indirect social network. The reason why Café de Ceuvel wants more local suppliers is because of two reasons. First and most obvious: the Café wants to reduce the environmental costs of transportation. Second and foremost, they want to ensure that the products they buy and use in the restaurant are fresh and from a reliable and environmentally and socially sustainable source. Buying locally means that the
production process to them is more transparent, because they actually meet the producers face-to-face. Meeting face-to-face is beneficial to the trust in the relationship between de Café and the producers. Café de Ceuvel for instance daily buys products from 50/50 Green, a garden which is run by the Red Cross in Amsterdam-Noord (Toon Maassen, personal correspondence, 18-12-2015). They know the producers of the food and its production process and rely on the producer’s productivity, just as the producer relies on the sales to Café de Ceuvel. This relation is exemplary for bridging social capital of a local economy in which the relation is based on mutual benefit and norms of reciprocity.
Figure 2: System model of Café de Ceuvel.
Model description
Here, the most important aspects of the model are described (figure 2). For a more elaborated description, see appendix 1, for a larger version of the model, see appendix 2.
The stock ‘water supply’ is increasing by water from the water supplier, and is decreasing as an outflow of water into the Grey Water System. The filtered water is released into the groundwater again, leaving the system of the Ceuvel (Daan Dijkstra, personal correspondence, 16-12-2015). Both the floating gardens and the aquaponics greenhouse are visualized as the dynamic variable ‘food production of the Ceuvel’. The crops are fertilized with phosphorus extracted from the organic waste, urine in this case (Ibid.).
Also, the organic waste is visualized as a stock, with the inflow of organic waste from humans and also from the organic material that is not used for food production and preparation. This is positively linked to the food inflow of the food supply, the rest of the food inflow consists of the food that comes in via the local and non-local food suppliers. The food supply is linked to consumers, when they consume at the Café.
These consumers also provide the financial capital (money) of Café de Ceuvel, which is in both cash and pin. Money flows to different suppliers outside of the model, as for example to the dynamic variable energy suppliers. This variable contributes to the energy inflow where the solar systems do not succeed to provide all the energy needed (Daan Dijkstra). These flow into energy supply. As can be seen through the financial capital flows outside Café de Ceuvel, several suppliers are accompanied by supply lines from within the system. Externalities like polluted water are internalized by the Café, as they have no sewage system. For all four indicators of energy, water, food and waste are external suppliers, but the Café also has mechanisms to include them in their system.
Currently, all the used gas comes from outside of the system. However, a ‘Biogasboot’ is under construction, where organic waste is used to produce gas, which will contribute to the gas supply of the Ceuvel (Toon Maassen, personal correspondence, 18-12-2015).
Self-reliance of Café de Ceuvel
As the data and model of Café de Ceuvel are combined and analysed along the pillars of waste, waste, energy and water, and furthermore along with social and economic aspects, the overall self-reliance of the Café can be examined.
First, within the pillar of waste only the phosphorus is examined here. The phosphor supply at the Ceuvel is partly self-reliant since it uses organic waste to produce the phosphor. This can be used as fertilizer for production. Regarding the local food production, the Ceuvel is partly self-reliant, since the internal production is not sufficient to provide food for the whole café the Ceuvel also uses food from external suppliers (either local or not). But there is still more urban agriculture spaces that are being developed at the terrain, which makes improvements possible. Second, the Ceuvel is
connected to the outside for their water supply, but for the filtering of their water they do not rely on the sewing system of the municipality. An effort could be made to filter the water into drinking water, to completely close the loop, but this might be unnecessary considering the good quality of the Dutch water purification. Whenever this makes sense should be analyzed in further research. So far, the wastewater system is self-reliant.
Third, the self-reliance of the energy system is clear: an effort is made to rely on the Ceuvel’s ‘own’ energy source, namely the sun through the solar panels. Hereby another part of the industrial ecology analogy, the efficient use of energy, is also covered. Not all of the energy originates from the Ceuvel’s solar panels. About 30-40% of the energy still comes from outside the system. However, this means 60-70% of the energy is produced at the Ceuvel so according to the categorisation used in this research the energy system still is self-reliant. Regarding the gas supply, currently all the gas comes from outside the system, which the Ceuvel is trying to change in the future with the
development of the Biogasboot. So far, a self-reliance for the gas supply has not been met and the gas system would be categorized as ‘non self-reliant’.
A quarter of the total procurement of food is estimated to be non-local. Even though Café de Ceuvel started its own food production, it only supplies a very small part of its total food demand. The café mostly relies on local producers for its food, which does not influence the categorization of the food system of the Ceuvel, but could be taken into consideration when adjusting the system boundaries and/or measuring the economic self-reliance. When analysing the model from a social-economic self-reliance perspective, multiple resources are from local suppliers, or supplied by operations of the Ceuvel itself. The relevance of the social capital of Café de Ceuvel to the self-reliance is most obviously observable through the pillar of food. Café de Ceuvel has multiple local food suppliers, with whom trading relations are formed in order to have the desired produced supply of food. This is for instance the aforementioned 50/50 Green. The links to these suppliers are the bridging social capital in the local economy of Café de Ceuvel. It is mentioned that self-reliance builds upon strong social structures and increasing levels of economic activity, and social and economic links with local players. This means that the more these relations are trustful and reciprocal, the stronger they are and the more Café de Ceuvel is.
Whether it is possible to generate all its energy, but also the gas, phosphorus, water and food or be supplied from local suppliers exclusively, also influences the analysis of the self-reliance. Comparable data of other restaurants or cafés would illustrate the possibilities for the sector. Moreover, it is not always economically viable to become completely self-reliant, as its costs could outweigh its
Conclusion and discussion
The self-reliance of Café de Ceuvel are described through several stocks from the model (figure 2). The energy and food stocks of the Ceuvel are partly reliant. Although the water outflow is self-reliant, the inflow of water does completely rely on the Dutch water system. A Biogasboot is currently being developed, which will partly improve the self-reliance of the energy. Also, an extra garden for food production is under construction, which will make the food production more self-reliant in the near future. Overall, at the time of writing the Café is partly self-self-reliant according to the categorisation of these pillars. However, there already have been many technical and
economical innovations to become self-reliant and Café de Ceuvel is planning on even more. The framework of Industrial Ecology together with the concepts of externalities, planetary
boundaries and social capital has shaped this analysis and the presented model. Further research is needed in order to be able to analyse the self-reliance more thoroughly. First of all, more data from the Café itself would further support our results. Moreover, comparable studies from other cafés or restaurants would help to ‘rank’ the Ceuvel and how self-reliant it is in comparison to the industry. Also, best practices and possibilities to improve the self-reliance could then be examined.
For this research, highly different theories have been integrated and used to examine the self-reliance of Café de Ceuvel. The interdisciplinary character does not always contribute to a clear structure or easy answers. However, it contributed to the complex analysis of the Café. Still, several aspects could be included further on to extent the analysis and model to get a better understanding of the self-reliance. As this research simultaneously addresses both integration of theories and analysis of de Ceuvel, these have not been included. It is a trade-off between broadness and an in-depth analysis.
An extended version of this analysis and model should include more social linkages, such as the role of employees and neighbourhood. Moreover, only part of the day to day spendings are visualized, more payments, revenues and financial investments in the long run should be accounted for. Also, other waste streams than phosphor should not be neglected. A more thorough qualitative analysis, with data of the phosphorus extraction for example, but also of the other stocks in our model, is needed. Finally, a real profound analysis could be made on the basis of Life cycle assessments of all products used, but this would be for the long run.
References
Amin, A. and Thrift, N. (1995) ‘Institutional Issues for the European Regions: from Markets and Plans to Socioeconomics and Powers of Association’, Economy and Society 24 (1): 41–66.
Andruss, V. (1990) Home. t A Bioregional Reader. New Society, Philadelphia.
Bailey, R., Allen, J. K., & Bras, B. (2004). Applying Ecological Input‐Output Flow Analysis to Material Flows in Industrial Systems: Part I: Tracing Flows. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 8(1‐2), 45-68.
Baldwin, C., Wilberforce, N., & Kapur, A. (2011). Restaurant and food service life cycle
assessment and development of a sustainability standard. The International Journal of Life Cycle
Assessment, 16(1), 40-49.
Barrett, J., Vallack, H., Jones, A., & Haq, G. (2002). A material flow analysis and ecological footprint of York. Stockholm, Stockholm Environment Institute.
Baynham, M., & Dalton, J. (2005). Ecofootprinting the pendulum restaurant. Retrieved from: https://circle.ubc.ca/bitstream/handle/2429/24007/Ecofootprinting%20the%20Pendulum%20R estaurant.pdf?sequence=1.
Bazilian, M., Rogner, H., Howells, M., Hermann, S., Arent, D., Gielen, D., ... & Yumkella, K. K. (2011). Considering the energy, water and food nexus: Towards an integrated modelling approach. Energy Policy, 39(12), 7896-7906.
Binder, T., Vox, A., Belyazid, S., Haraldsson, H., & Svensson, M. (2004, July). Developing system dynamics models from causal loop diagrams. InProceedings of the 22nd International Conference
of the System Dynamic Society.).
Bouwman, L., Goldewijk, K. K., Van Der Hoek, K. W., Beusen, A. H., Van Vuuren, D. P., Willems, J., ... & Stehfest, E. (2013). Exploring global changes in nitrogen and phosphorus cycles in
agriculture induced by livestock production over the 1900–2050 period. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences,110(52), 20882-20887.
Brown, B. J., Hanson, M. E., Liverman, D. M., & Merideth Jr, R. W. (1987). Global sustainability: toward definition. Environmental management, 11(6), 713-719.
Café de Ceuvel, (2015). Retrieved on 16-12-2015, from: www.cafedeceuvel.nl.
Cencic, O., & Rechberger, H. (2008). Material flow analysis with software STAN. Journal of
Environmental Engineering and Management, 18(1), 3.
Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, (april 20, 2015). Dienstverlening; arbeids- en financiële
gegevens, per branche, SBI 2008. Retrieved from:
statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?VW=T&DM=SLNL&PA=81165NED&D1=a&D2=0-9&D3=l&HD=110726-1131&HDR=T&STB=G1,G2.
Chris Monaghan, Chief of Operations of Metabolics, situated at the Ceuvel, Personal Correspondence 21 September 2015.
Cordell, D., Drangert, J. O., & White, S. (2009). The story of phosphorus: global food security and food for thought. Global environmental change, 19(2), 292-305.
Daan Dijkstra , co-owner at café the Ceuvel, owner by Logic.Works, Personal Correspondence 16 december 2015.
Daly, H. E. (1992). Allocation, distribution, and scale: towards an economics that is efficient, just, and sustainable. Ecological Economics, 6(3), 185-193.
De Ceuvel (2015). Retrieved on 16-11-2015 from: http://deceuvel.nl/project/cleantech-playground/.
De Ceuvel. http://deceuvel.nl/project/cleantech-playground/ , retrieved at 16 December 2015.
Deelstra, T., & Girardet, H. (2000). Urban agriculture and sustainable cities. Bakker N., Dubbeling ecosystem services: Challenges and next steps. Basic and Applied Ecology, 16(3), 189-201.
Dietz, T., Den Hertog, F., & van der Wusten, H. (2008). Van natuurlandschap tot
risicomaatschappij: de geografie van de relatie tussen mens en milieu. Amsterdam University
Press.
Dunne, J. A., Williams, R. J., & Martinez, N. D. (2002). Network structure and biodiversity loss in food webs: robustness increases with connectance.Ecology letters, 5(4), 558-567.
Ehrenfeld, J. R. (2000). Industrial Ecology Paradigm Shift or Normal Science?.American Behavioral Scientist, 44(2), 229-244.
Elser, J., & Bennett, E. (2011). Phosphorus cycle: a broken biogeochemical cycle. Nature,
478(7367), 29-31.
Esty, D. C., & Porter, M. E. (1998). Industrial ecology and competitiveness. Journal of Industrial
Ecology, 2(1), 35-43.
Evans, M., & Syrett, S. (2007). Generating social capital? The social economy and local economic development. European Urban and Regional Studies, 14(1), 55-74.
FAO, 2007b. Food for the Cities Homepage. Rome, Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations.
Fiala, N. (2008). Measuring sustainability: Why the ecological footprint is bad economics and bad environmental science. Ecological economics, 67(4), 519-525.
Fiksel, J. (2006). Sustainability and resilience: toward a systems approach.Sustainability: Science
Practice and Policy, 2(2), 14-21.
Freeman, E. M. (2011). Restaurant industry sustainability: barriers and solutions to sustainable
practice indicators (Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University).
Frosch, R.A. (1992) 'Industrial ecology: a philosophical introduction', Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, Vol. 89, pp.800-803.
Fu, Q. (2004). Trust, Social Capital, and Organizational Effectiveness. Master of Public and International Affairs.
Galtung, J. (1986). Towards a new economics: on the theory and practice of self-reliance. In: P. Ekins ed. The living economy: a new economics in the making. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul: 97-109.
Green Key (2015). Handleiding bedrijfsrestaurant 2015-2018. Retrieved from: http://www.greenkey.nl/criteria.
Greenchoice (2015). Groene energie. Retrieved on 17-12-2015 from: https://www.greenchoice.nl/groene-energie/.
Häuberer, J. (2010). Social capital theory: Towards a methodological foundation. Springer Science & Business Media.
Heal, G. (2000). Valuing ecosystem services. Ecosystems, 3(1), 24-30.
Heinonen-Tanski, H., & van Wijk-Sijbesma, C. (2005). Human excreta for plant production.
Bioresource technology, 96(4), 403-411.
Hendriks, C., Obernosterer, R., Müller, D., Kytzia, S., Baccini, P., & Brunner, P. H. (2000). Material flow analysis: a tool to support environmental policy decision making. Case-studies on the city of Vienna and the Swiss lowlands. Local Environment, 5(3), 311-328.
Hindriks, J., & Myles, G. D. (2006). Intermediate public economics. Cambridge: MIT press.
Jackson, M. C. (2003). Systems thinking: Creative holism for managers. Chichester: Wiley.
Joey Hodde, Co-founder and co-owner at café the Ceuvel, Personal Correspondence 15 September 2015.
Jönsson et al., 2004, H. Jönsson, A.R. Stintzing, B. Vinnerås, E. Salomon, Guidelines on the Use of
Urine and Faeces in Crop Production, EcoSanRes, Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm
(2004).
Kirchmann, H., & Pettersson, S. (1994). Human urine-chemical composition and fertilizer use efficiency. Fertilizer research, 40(2), 149-154.
Koninklijke Horeca Nederland (2015). Economisch Belang Gastvrijheidsector. Retrieved from: http://www.khn.nl/belangenbehartiging/standpunten/economisch-belang-gastvrijheidsector. Laura Hoekzema, bartender at the Ceuvel, Personal Correspondence 16 December 2015.
Leyden, K. M. (2003). Social Capital and the Built Environment: The Importance of Walkable Neighborhoods. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1546–1551.
Lin, B. B., Philpott, S. M., & Jha, S. (2015). The future of urban agriculture and biodiversity- Lin, N. (1999). Building a network theory of social capital. Connections, 22(1), 28-51.
M., Gündel S., Sabel-Koshella U., de Zeeuw H. Growing cities, growing food. Urban agriculture on the policy agenda. Feldafing, Germany: Zentralstelle für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft (ZEL), 43-66.
Machovina, B., Feeley, K. J., & Ripple, W. J. (2015). Biodiversity conservation: The key is reducing
meat consumption. Science of the Total Environment,
Meadows, D. H., & Wright, D. (2008). Thinking in systems: A primer. Chelsea Green Publishing.
Nicholson, W., & Snyder, C. (2005). Microeconomic theory. South Western/Thomson.
Nicolas Adam, cook at the Ceuvel, Personal Correspondence, 16 December 2015.
Nordhaus, W. D. (1992). The ecology of markets. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 89(3), 843-850.
O'Rourke, D., Connelly, L., & Koshland, C. P. (1996). Industrial ecology: a critical review. International Journal of Environment and Pollution, 6(2-3), 89-112.
Peregrin, T. (2011). Sustainability in foodservice operations: An update. Journal of the American
Dietetic Association, 111(9), 1286-1294.
Perman, R. (2003). Natural resource and environmental economics. Pearson Education.
Pinstrup-Andersen, P. (2009). Food security: definition and measurement. Food security, 1(1), 5-7.
