Removable and Place-Based Economies: Alternative Futures for America’s Deserts - Design with the Desert: Conservation and Sustainable Development - page 294

TABLE 16.1
Comparing Resource Types

Removable Resources Place-Based Resources

Natural resources as “raw materials” “Ecosystem services”

Products for “export” (e.g., water and air cleansing by vegetation)

Historic and cultural resources, activities, and institutions
Landscape amenity resources
(landmarks, climate, scenery, outdoor activities)
Products for local use and investment
“Regional image” products and services

Interchangeable enough to be widely valued Unique to region

Other producers can compete directly Competition based on uniqueness

Distance-dependent losses Proximity-enhanced value

like the sequestration of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, are truly global and place
independent. Unlike mechanical functions, ecosystems are inextricable from place.
The distinction between the two types of resources is in some cases a matter of scale. Crops
and minerals, for example, have a place-based value that is finite: a given population can
only consume so much corn or copper locally, for example. When the same resource is seen
as exportable, its production can become an unlimited good—the more that is produced,
potentially the more economic value that is created. Treating growth as an unlimited good
has been frequently noted as a major contributor to unsustainable development.*
Removable-resource economics relies on several concepts that have troubling results
when place is a concern. Exporting a removable resource requires transportation, whether
haulage by vehicle or transmission through pipes or wires. Transport has distance-
dependent costs, ranging from fuel energy to voltage drop or pipeline leakage. † In addi-
tion, geographic separation of production and consumption encourages consumers to
ignore limits on the resource. Urban consumption can easily exceed the capacity of invis-
ible hinterlands which become depleted, essentially creating new deserts. The production,
transportation, and consumption of economy-of-scale resources also contribute immea-
surably to homogenization of landscapes and of architecture.
Distance-based costs are minimized when resources are used locally. In fact, it has
become a central principle of green building, as well as of the local food or “locavore”
movement, that sustainability requires the shortest possible distance between source and
user. ‡
Export of resources is most profitable if there is a large market for the same product. Thus,
the product must have least-common-denominator characteristics, being interchangeable
or generic enough to be universally (or at least widely) valued. Where products are generic,
competition is based on volume, price, quick availability, and artificially created branding.
Regional place-specific products compete on the basis of uniqueness and distinctive
quality, in addition to price and availability.
The theory of economies-of-scale, which applies best to exportive economics, is such
gospel that an opposite truth is overlooked: for ecosystem services and green development,

* Probably the first such observations should be credited to Malthus; they have been part of common discourse
since the Club of Rome report.
† This type of cost is sometimes known as a “friction cost.”
‡ Nelischer 11 is a landscape construction materials expert, author of the Handbook of Landscape Construction . One
of his primary recommendations for choosing among materials is to favor local ones.