I don't think that's an accurate viewpoint any more. Farming is already on the order of 1% of the workforce for developed nations. Making that 0.1% won't make a big difference. Extraction of raw materials in general, maybe, but a bigger factor than how much materials are extracted is how those materials are used. Look at how Silicon atoms can be used: as sand, as glass, or as computer chips. The economy can grow without extracting additional raw materials by using those materials in different ways.
Farming remains a large share of the workforce, to 90% and more, for less-developed nations. In the time of Smith and Ricardo, farms and the land were the source of all wealth. Ricardo lamented over the inequitable distribution of good farmland...
And developed nations are dependent upon petroleum and other fossil fuels. Effectively farming ancient plant growth by way of buried reserves.
My read though of the Trophic Theory is that it's less one of money than of wealth creation (that is, economic productivity), assuming a sustainable economic system.
Though I may have to give it a longer look.
Eric Zencey, one of the contributors to the Daly News piece cited is also the author of the Soddy critique I just referenced in another comment.
