In the previous article we made a case to have a shared language for regeneration in the built environment. We explained how it would help communicate and coordinate industry’s actions; as well as avoid the pitfalls of sustainability paradigm such as greenwashing. In this article we explore the importance of having protocols that ensure due processes are followed and recorded in a transparent, permanent and immutable way. This allows for tracking, measurement and validation of impact over time, enabling a shared source of truth, which in turn helps us write better stories of regeneration backed with real, verifiable data. If we are to foster a culture of regeneration, a shared source of truth goes a long way to build better systems that are rooted in symbiotic relationships between humans and nature.

Standards vs Protocols

Standards provide broad guidelines and benchmarks for quality, safety, and best practices across various objects and processes. They are formalized by recognized institutions and require stakeholder consensus.

Protocols are specific sets of rules and procedures that define the flow and sequence of actions or information, ensuring technical interoperability and consistency. They may be developed by organizations or industry groups without formal institutional backing.

Table 1 highlights the core differences between standards and protocols, making it easier to understand their distinct roles and applications. While the distinction may not be always clear in all cases, we hope this provides good context for the rest of the article.

Evolution of Standard Making

According to David Lang’s research paper “Standards Make the World”, the standards-making process has evolved over time through three distinct waves:

1. The first wave (1880s to 1920s): Standards-making was a straightforward process where interested parties and groups of engineers made a case for a shared design and convinced others to adopt it. Organization followed function, and the process was driven by pragmatism.

2. The second wave (1960s to 1980s): Formal international standards organizations, such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), were formed to facilitate transnational adoption. This wave was characterized by the emergence of global industries and a convergence of political interests, with standards-making becoming more bureaucratic and consensus-driven.

3. The third wave (alongside the development of computers and computer networking): A "consortium" model emerged, where parties most closely involved in development (companies, engineers, etc.) self-organized to create standards that worked for their purposes. This wave has two distinct stories:

   a. Insiders: Information age companies compete to control standards to induce network effects and gain market share, known as the "art of commercial diplomacy."

   b. Outsiders: Scrappy upstarts and entrepreneurs engage in "disruptive standards-making," reminiscent of open source software development. This model involves getting something working, gaining traction and adoption within the market, and then potentially formalizing the standard within a standards body or creating their own governance structure.

Lang argues that this third wave, particularly the outsider-driven "disruptive standards-making," has opened up new opportunities for individuals and communities to shape technological progress and societal outcomes. This disruptive model challenges the notion that standards-making is an exclusive domain reserved for established institutions and industry giants.

Why its Different now?

The rise of the "outsider" approach, exemplified by the open-source software movement and other grassroots initiatives, has demonstrated that standards-making can be a more accessible, collaborative, and iterative process. This approach empowers individuals and communities to take a proactive role in defining the standards that shape their industries, rather than waiting for established organizations to dictate the terms.

At its core, the outsider approach to standards-making is driven by a spirit of experimentation, collaboration, and a willingness to challenge the status quo. It begins with identifying a problem or opportunity that is ripe for standardization, and then bringing together a group of like-minded individuals who share a passion for solving that problem. These individuals may come from diverse backgrounds but they are united by a common goal and a belief in the power of collaborative innovation.

One of the key advantages of the outsider approach is that it allows for a more agile and responsive standards-making process. Rather than being bogged down by bureaucratic procedures and lengthy approval cycles, outsider initiatives can move quickly to develop and test prototypes, gather feedback from early adopters, and refine their standards based on real-world usage. This iterative approach enables the creation of standards that are more closely aligned with the needs and preferences of the communities they serve.

Moreover, the outsider approach often leverages the power of open collaboration and transparency. By sharing knowledge, resources, and best practices openly, these initiatives can tap into the collective intelligence of their communities and accelerate the pace of innovation. This open ethos also helps to build trust and credibility, as the standards-making process is subject to public scrutiny and feedback.

As David Lang points out, the success of outsider-driven standards is not necessarily measured by their formal adoption by established standards bodies. Instead, the true measure of success is the level of adoption and impact within the target community. When a standard gains traction and proves its value in real-world applications, it can organically grow and evolve, attracting more contributors and users along the way.

To encourage more people and communities to engage in standards-making, it is essential to highlight the success stories and benefits of the outsider approach. By showcasing examples of grassroots initiatives that have successfully created and promoted standards, we can inspire others to follow in their footsteps. It is also important to provide resources, platforms, and support networks that enable individuals and communities to collaborate effectively and build momentum around their standards-making efforts.

Protocols to Regenerate the Built Environment

Regeneration focuses on the dynamic interaction between human and natural systems, making protocols more suitable than static standards. Protocols, by nature, are flexible and process-oriented, allowing for adaptation to the unique conditions of each project and place. Regenerative approaches emphasize the importance of context and the need to work with living systems that evolve over time. As the "Designing from Place" paper highlights, regenerative methodologies are rooted in an ecological worldview that requires ongoing adjustment and learning, rather than adherence to fixed benchmarks.

The unique advantages that protocols offer make them more suitable for regeneration than standards. The key differentiators are listed as follows:

1. Dynamic Adaptation: Protocols provide a structured yet flexible approach to manage the complexity and variability of ecosystems. This flexibility is crucial for addressing the specific needs of different places and communities, allowing for tailored solutions that standards cannot offer.

2. Holistic Integration: Regenerative design seeks to harmonize human activities with natural processes, integrating economic, social, and environmental factors. Protocols facilitate this holistic integration by defining processes that encourage continuous improvement and adaptation.

3. Continuous Learning and Evolution: The regenerative process involves learning from the environment and evolving practices based on feedback. Protocols, unlike standards, are designed to accommodate new information and insights, fostering an iterative cycle of improvement that is essential for long-term sustainability(Designing from Place Re…).

4. Engagement and Co-Creation: Effective regeneration requires active participation from all stakeholders, including designers, local communities, and ecosystems. Protocols enable collaborative processes that engage diverse perspectives and expertise, creating a shared vision and commitment to sustainable outcomes.

Protocols are essential for regenerating the built environment because they offer the flexibility and collaborative framework needed to address the complexities of living systems. They support a regenerative approach that evolves with the environment, fostering resilience and sustainability in ways that rigid standards cannot achieve.

The new age protocol builders don’t need to be an industry insider or a member of a formal standards organization to make a difference. With passion, collaboration, and a willingness to experiment, anyone can contribute to the creation of protocols that shape the future of the built environment industry and society as a whole. The outsider approach that applies to standards is also true with protocol-making; it democratizes the process, making it more accessible, inclusive, and impactful than ever before.

Additionally, building protocols on blockchain technology enhances their transparency, security, efficiency, inclusivity, and overall effectiveness. Blockchain’s decentralized and immutable nature makes it an ideal platform for managing the complex, dynamic, and collaborative processes required for regenerating the built environment with smart contracts. By leveraging blockchain, regenerative protocols can ensure greater trust, accountability, and continuous improvement, ultimately leading to more regenerative built environment.

Conclusion

Traditionally, creating standards was seen as a complex, time-consuming, and bureaucratic process, deterring many potential contributors. In the digital age, the standards-making has become more accessible and collaborative, driven by the rise of the internet and open-source software. This has empowered individuals and communities to collaborate more effectively on the causes they care about without needing institutional permissions. This grassroots approach has led to the rapid development of transformative technologies, from internet protocols to smart contacts on blockchains, unlocking the potential of collective intelligence and creativity in the 21st century.

This is where the opportunity lies if we want to truly transform the built environment in a collaborative, community-driven way. By bringing together architects, engineers, developers, sustainability experts, and end-users in an open and inclusive process, we can co-create protocols of regeneration that truly reflects the diverse needs and aspirations of all stakeholders. This approach emphasizes experimentation, iteration, and continuous improvement, allowing for the incorporation of real-world feedback and evolving best practices. Through open knowledge-sharing and a shared sense of ownership, we can accelerate the adoption of regenerative principles across the industry.

Protocols for regeneration offer a holistic, adaptable, and participatory approach to designing and maintaining the built environment. We have the opportunity to tap into the collective intelligence and passion of our community, and to create protocols that are technically rigorous and responsive to the unique challenges and opportunities of our industry. By prioritizing ecological health, human well-being, economic vitality, climate resilience, cultural integrity, and long-term sustainability, these protocols can lead to the creation of thriving, resilient, and sustainable communities. Let us work together to build a future where every project, every building, and every city is a source of health, vitality, and regeneration for people and the planet.