As a nation, agriculture has played an important role in the development of our country. And while the article may be attacking the Small is Beautiful approach of a community garden, on a broader sense the author is attacking a viable economic sector that has for generations inspired scientists to discover and entrepreneurs to flourish. Who is not to say that a fifth grade school child learning about photosynthesis while helping tend the school garden could not become inspired to further study biology or chemistry? Is a hands-on approach really demeaning? For anyone who has studied science, the laboratory is an essential part of the scientific journey! And, regarding higher level math, in middle school most children are taking algebra; many algebra problems (especially word problems) are developed around day to day activities- even gardening and recycling can be sources for context.

You just have to look at the life of one of our country’s most notable scientists, George Washington Carver, to see how working with crops (even on a small scale) can benefit society. Mr. Carver, a southern born slave, not only helped poor Southern farmers “grow and preserve nutritious foods” but established these same crops as valuable ingredients for “cosmetics, dyes, paints, plastics, gasoline, and nitroglycerine”. While C. Flanagan’s article states, “if this patronizing agenda (referring to the school garden) were promulgated in the Jim Crow South… we would see it for what it is: a way of bestowing field work and low expectations on a giant population of students who might become troublesome if they actually got an education.” If he were alive today, I bet Mr. Carver (whose agricultural extension work touched many a poor sharecropper and changed lives) could list hundreds of reasons how a garden can inspire someone to do great things. In his words, “How do I talk to a little flower? Through it I talk to the Infinite…I refer to the unseen Spirit that defies the power of human reproduction, that challenges the power of human expression…When you look into the heart of the rose, there you experience it.” May be all Ms. Flanagan needs to do is to “stop and smell the roses”.

When Sir Isaac Newton asked himself, “Why does the apple fall to the ground?” The idea of gravity was formed. He contemplated that perhaps gravity not only affected objects on the earth (like an apple) but celestial bodies (like the moon) as well. His “Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy” (one of the greatest works of theoretical physics) showed “how his principle of universal gravitation explained both the motions of the heavenly bodies and the falling bodies of the earth”. All this from an apple? Yes and even more- the mathematical proofs of his scientific inquiries “led to the development” of differential calculus. Talk about garden inspiration!!

As a science, agriculture has been a founding force for the establishment of some of our most notable institutions of higher education, the land-grant universities. These educational institutions were established by the Morrill Acts (1862) which granted federally controlled land to the states for the development of “land grant colleges” with the mission to teach agriculture, science and engineering. While the “Classics” had long been the main inspiration for higher education, the teachings and research of these institutions would help to move our country forward technically. Schools such as Michigan State University, University Texas A & M, Pennsylvania State University, University of California, Rutgers, Clemson University, University of Rhode Island and over 40 others got their starts this way. Today, these institutions offer broad curricula and programs (including the “Classics” and “Agricultural Extensions”). Who says that the two must be mutually exclusive? Why can’t one provide inspiration for the other?

Augmenting our middle school curricula with a hands-on approach to subject matter does not rob our students of learning fundamental skills but enhances the experience. While Ms. Flanagan implies that the school garden program is replacing the critical review of classic literature with recipe writing, I think she is exaggerating. And even if some of the programs do entail recipe development, is applied knowledge not a form of learning? For many of America’s immigrants, taking English as a second language is a vital part of the educational process. What is wrong with using the food cultivated from a garden to introduce useful day to day vocabulary and help teach American culture? Since the dawn of history, man has been breaking cultural barriers and forming relationships through food. We only have to think back to the first Thanksgiving to realize just how important “breaking bread” can be.

While I admire Ms. Flanagan as a writer, I disagree with her narrow view on education. A great teacher can take any curriculum and make it successfully teach the requirements. Introducing theory with a hands-on approach can teach the necessary skills and help to spark the “love of learning”. Even the works of Shakespeare can be taught from a garden, as when Cleopatra refers to the inexperience and innocence of youth in “Antony and Cleopatra” as, ”My salad days, When I was green in judgment,..”. If Shakespeare can use garden inspiration to write meaningful dialogue, I think a middle school child can use the inspiration of a garden to write a coherent sentence.

Since the beginning of time, cultivation has not kept us in the dirt but helped us to create great civilizations. For those middle school gardeners who Ms. Flanagan has stuck forever in the urban dirt of a city famous for a university which bears its name, one day attending Berkley may not be such an educational leap. Vitamin E was discovered at Berkley. And, where is Vitamin E found? It is found in the sunflowers, spinach and broccoli of a garden. Need I say more?

© 2010 Recycle Life, LLC
The RecyGal^TM and the RecyGal character, logo are trademarks of Recycle Life , LLC

References for this article were obtained from: “Cultivating Failure – How School Gardens are cheating our most vulnerable students”, C. Flanagan, “The Atlantic”, January/February 2010, p.101- 111, Small is Beautiful, E.F. Schumacher, Harper & Row, 1973, “George Washington Carver“, wikepedia.org, George Washington Carver”, sps.k12.mo.us/historyday/feb/carver.htm, “Jim Crow laws”, wikipedia.org, “Sir Isaac Newton (1642- 1727)”,bluepete.com, “Sir Isaac Newton”, inventors.about.com, “Land-grant university”, wikepedia.org,William Shakespeare, The Complete Works, Dorset Press, 1988.“Antony and Cleopatra”, Act I, Scene IV, p. 930, berkley.edu, “Vitamin E”, ods.od.nih.gov

To give you an idea on how disparate recycling efforts can be across our nation, we only have to take a peek at the recycling rates of a few cities: San Francisco, CA (70%), Houston, TX (3%), New York, NY (34%), and Chicago, IL (15%). What compels one person to deposit a used plastic bottle in a recycle bin while another person dumps a similar plastic bottle into the trash? Recycling behavior seems to be influenced by factors such as: governance, education, economic status, and opportunity for profit.

It is an accepted notion that people with ecological consciousness and beliefs will recycle, so governments and educators spend lots of time and money to inform the public about recycling. Unfortunately, recycling education is often targeted on “what is to be done” rather than strengthening ecological belief. One study conducted in New York City (where it is the law to recycle) found boroughs with higher incomes tended to have higher recycling rates; could higher income boroughs also have more constituents with higher educations? Creating a habit to recycle by providing incentives appears (at least in the short run) to work better than by raising public consciousness. Even the NYC study found that bottles and cans had a 10% higher recycle rate than paper. Why? The researchers surmised because bottles and cans had a 5¢ cash refund for recycling and paper did not. Sounds like an easy fix here!

In the USA, the financial incentive to recycle was set into motion in 1971 when Oregon passed the first deposit law “requiring consumers to pay a deposit on bottles and cans to be redeemed when the product is recycled”. Today, eleven states have bottle bills; it is no surprise that states with refundable deposit on beverage containers tend to have higher recycle rates than non-deposit states. Up until last year, California boasted that its 23 year old program was the most successful of them all. Why up until last year? That’s when the program’s finances went into the dumpster…all the way to the bottom! Like Oregon, the program charges deposits fees to beverage buyers that are reimbursed upon recycling. However, California goes a few steps further, it also charges beverage distributors a per container fee which goes into a state fund and mandates that supermarkets be served by parking-lot recyclers (separate businesses that handle container returns). To top it off, any supermarket that does not accommodate a parking-lot recycler is fined $100 daily by the state or must reimburse recyclers itself. Money, money, money! Over the years, many businesses built up around this lucrative program; at its apex, the overall recycle rate for all beverage containers reached 85% (91% for aluminum cans). So, what happened? In recent years, the redemption rates rose and beverage sales fell, squeezing projected program revenues. However, the declining revenue stream did not stop the administration from using $250 MM dollars from the Bottle Bill Fund “to close gaps in the State General Fund and other unrelated programs”. Nothing like using recycling to bail out the state! Redemption at its finest!!

Taking recycling incentives to the next level is the company RecycleBank. Launched in 2004, RecycleBank works with municipalities and haulers to offer reward programs to residential customers. Residential participants earn reward points based on the weight of recyclables collected; these rewards are redeemable at retailers like CVS/pharmacy® and Target®. Imagine you earn points for recycling! Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle has now turned into Recycle, Rack Up, and Redeem! To date, over 20 USA cities and 2 British communities have signed on. According to “The New York Times”, “RecycleBank charges municipalities (or private haulers, depending on the arrangement)…” a monetary fee” per household, and guarantees clients that they will save at least that much in disposal fees as waste is diverted from landfills and incinerators. The company also receives revenue from recycling plants, depending on how much it increases the amount of materials that are processed. ” To learn more about the RecycleBank program, visit: www.corporate.recyclebank.com

Giving consumers financial incentives to recycle, does result in increased collection rates. However, by increasing collection rates, we are not necessarily reducing the amount of trash being sent to landfills. It is a well known industry fact that the infrastructure to process and market recyclables has not kept pace with the growth of collection volume. With financial incentive programs sometimes doubling municipal collection rates, the amount of materials collected can exceed the capacity available for processing. To truly operate in a closed loop system, the industry needs more back end infrastructure. Proceeds from financial incentive programs can and should be used to help fund infrastructure development. Building sound closed loop infrastructure will ensure that the reclaimed materials we collect never end up in landfills.

To keep any recycling infrastructure viable, a constant supply of reclaimed materials is needed. Financial incentives for recycling can help to ensure supplies never run out. However, what will happen to collection rates if rewards cease? I am not a fortune teller, but I’d bet the collection rates would decrease. To make recycling an ingrained American habit, financial incentives need to be reinforced with teaching the ecological benefits of recycling. Continual environmental education targeted to schools and communities will help to make recycling more than just a financial transaction; it will help it to become a core American value.

© 2010 Recycle Life, LLC
The RecyGal^TM and the RecyGal character, logo are trademarks of Recycle Life , LLC

References for this article were obtained from:“Saving our Earth: Is Recycling the Answer?”, Wittman, Dusty, July 24, 2008, “San Francisco Hits 70 Percent City Recycling Rate”, www.ems-newswire.com, April 23, 2008, “Houston Resists Recycling, an Independent Streak Is Cited”, Ellick, Adam, “The New York Times”, July 28, 2008, “Recycling in New York City”, Alcalay, Morgan, et al, www.nyu.edu, “What’s up with blue recycling bins?”, “Straight Dope Chicago”, June 4, 2009. “How to teach recycling at an advanced phase of diffusion, “The Journal of Environmental Education”, Menesses, Gonzalo Diaz, June 22, 2006, “ History of Recycling”, www.all-recyclingfacts.com, “2002 Report on Post Consumer PET Container Recycling Activity”, National Association of PET Container Resources, Sept. 2003, “Oct 15- Schwarezenegger Retreats on Recycling”, Californians Against Waste, www.cawrecycles.org, “Bottle Bills in the USA: California”, www.bottlebill.org, “California Recycling Program Is on the Rocks”, NACS Daily News, www.nacsonline.com, “Rewarding Recyclers, and Finding Gold in the Garbage”, “The New York Times”, www.nytimes.com, Feb. 21, 2006, “Phoenix Partners with RecycleBank to Reward Residents for Recycling”, www.corporaterecyclebank.com, August 18, 2009, “RecycleBank- making waste pay”, BBC News, www.bbc.co.uk, Bone, Victoria, July 9, 2008, “RecycleBank® Rewards Program Helps Nearly Double Recycling Rate in Northern Virginia, Business Wire, August 5, 2008.