Context
This article is the first part of a series seeking to establish coherence among the practitioners of regeneration in the built environment with a shared language that serves as a foundation for the growth of the ecosystem.
A shared language is a standardised communication widely understood and used within a particular community, domain, or field. It provides a shared vocabulary, syntax, and semantics that enable effective dialogue and collaboration among its users.
The objective of this article is to present an approach to streamline regenerative practices from a strong foundation of a shared language across the industry. The aim is not to create a new certification system but to connect and map existing standards and frameworks to simple terminologies that foster a shared understanding.
Introduction
Regeneration represents a paradigm shift poised to reorient the built environment by introducing a holistic philosophy. This approach challenges conventional practices and seeks to redefine the industry's trajectory, guiding its development through a comprehensive lens that prioritises the regeneration of both people and the planet.
The regenerative paradigm promises to overcome the shortcomings of conventional sustainability thinking. Grounded in an ecological worldview, it recognises that we are embedded participants within an interconnected, co-evolutionary system of life on Earth. Instead of trying to sustain an inherently degenerative status quo, the goal becomes revitalising the whole, allowing it to positively adapt and flourish into more abundant, thriving states. This holistic approach moves beyond increasing efficiency to generating enriching conditions that benefit all life. By reintegrating humans with nature and focusing on fostering healthy relationships across the socio-ecological system, the regenerative paradigm aligns human endeavours with reality's complex dynamics. It provides a framework for collectively strengthening systemic vitality through attuned participation, rather than demanding control. With new holistic assessment tools to understand evolving system conditions, this paradigm can help guide wise actions that allow human and ecological potentials to synergistically co-evolve and create a regenerative, life-affirming planetary future.
To gain a deeper understanding of the paradigms surrounding sustainability and regeneration, we recommend exploring Daniel Christian Wahl's seminal article, “Sustainability is not enough: we need regenerative cultures.” This piece brilliantly illuminates the distinctions between these two concepts and their implications for our future. Additionally, Bowie Yin Sum Kung's blog post, “Sustainability Vs Regenerative, Explained by 5 Graphics" provides a visually compelling explanation of these ideas with the use of images, offering a clear and accessible perspective on this crucial topic.
The regenerative paradigm is not a distant, utopian dream; it is a reality that has been championed by organisations like Regenesis Group for over three decades. Practitioners worldwide are increasingly adopting and working with regenerative mental models, recognising their potential to create a more sustainable and resilient future.
Innovative projects such as Regen Villages, Regen Cities, Regenesis Institute, Regen Tribe, OASA, Global Ecovillage Network and numerous other regenerative eco-villages and startup cities are emerging globally. While these initiatives incorporate a wide range of regenerative principles, they often operate in silos, employing different frameworks and methodologies. To ensure the success and scalability of the regenerative movement, it is crucial to establish a standardized set of terminologies and definitions within the industry. Furthermore, the use of industry-standard baselines tailored to local contexts is essential for comparing and classifying projects within the regenerative paradigm.
Failing to establish clear guidelines and definitions may lead the regenerative paradigm down a path similar to that of the sustainability paradigm, where misinterpretation and greenwashing dilute the true meaning and impact of sustainability. To avoid such pitfalls and successfully transition into the regenerative paradigm, developing a shared language of regeneration in the built environment is essential. The absence of a shared language hinders collaboration, innovation, and effective communication among stakeholders, including architects, engineers, companies, policymakers, and communities. Without consensus among the pioneers of this movement, healthy adoption and growth of regenerative practices within the wider community may be impeded.
Language as a Powerful Tool
Language is considered humanity's greatest invention because it enables effective communication, preserves and transmits knowledge across generations, facilitates abstract thinking, fosters social bonding and cultural identity, supports problem-solving and collaboration, empowers creativity and imagination, plays a crucial role in intellectual development, and is essential for technological advancement. In essence, language has been instrumental in shaping human civilization and enabling the richness and diversity of the human experience.
Developing and adopting a shared language for regeneration in the built environment is crucial for enhancing understanding, communication, knowledge sharing, facilitating interdisciplinary collaboration, easier alignment with policy, regulatory compliance and ensuring the successful execution of regenerative development projects. Below we highlight some instances where such an approach has aligned respective industries and paved the way for better collaboration and adoption of sustainability practices.
Common Materials Framework
The impact of well-crafted frameworks on the built environment is not a new phenomenon. The Common Materials Framework (CMF) initiative by mindful Materials exemplifies how a simple, modular approach can transform the way we perceive and utilize materials. By establishing a shared language and metrics for evaluating materials across five key dimensions - ecosystem health, human health, climate health, circularity, and social health & equity; the framework has fostered enhanced collaboration with owners, design & engineering teams, material manufacturers, standards, reporting bodies and end users.
CMF is a shared language that maps various standards and frameworks into an easy-to-consume format which enables a better understanding of material impact and can easily communicate impact to stakeholders. It has now been adopted by stakeholders as it solves the shared context problem withholding the AEC industry from making progress toward using better materials in projects. The complexity of data, its integrity, technicality and a broad spectrum of metrics from multiple certifications concerning the same material leads to analysis paralysis for the end users and key stakeholders in decision-making positions at organisations. A deep dive into CMF’s approach and raison d'etre is highly recommended to understand why a similar solution is needed for regeneration in the built environment.
Ecological Benefits Framework
Similarly for natural ecosystems, the Ecological Benefits Framework (EBF) represents a groundbreaking approach that aims to revolutionise global carbon and ecological benefits markets. It addresses critical environmental challenges by providing a holistic, standardised approach to measuring and communicating ecological impacts, including air, water, soil, biodiversity, equity, and carbon. By establishing a comprehensive and transparent architecture, EBF seeks to enhance trust, quality, and equity while unlocking positive financial and environmental outcomes.
This shared framework fosters alignment between public and private sectors, facilitating effective capital allocation towards initiatives that generate quantifiable and life-sustaining ecological impacts. EBF acts as a bridge to seamlessly connect global environmental challenges with existing market solutions with a simplified framework that is easily understood by all stakeholders. Through enhanced collaboration among financial markets, UN agencies, NGOs, companies, and philanthropic organisations, EBF will enable the development of a streamlined pathway for accelerating climate solutions.
The Common Materials Framework and Ecological Benefits Framework exemplify the transformative role a shared language can play in an industry by facilitating communication, collaboration, and decision-making based on a unified understanding of key concepts and metrics.
Regenerative Development and Design
Regenerative Development and Design by Regenesis Group pioneered a set of principles and methodologies for designing and developing projects through a regenerative lens in the built environment. At its core, it recognises that built environments are part of a larger, living system that includes social, economic, cultural and ecological dimensions. It considers a place's unique context and potential, aiming to create a mutually beneficial, co-evolutionary relationship between human and natural systems. It involves a deep understanding of the patterns and processes of living systems, and using that understanding to inform design decisions at multiple scales, from individual buildings to entire communities and regions.
This approach focuses on improving the overall health and vitality of human & natural systems. By partnering with place, regenerative practices build the capacity of the underlying relationships and support systems necessary for resilience and ongoing evolution. Importantly, this framework also fosters a deep sense of caring, commitment, and connection to place, enabling the changes required for built environments to endure and evolve.
The above figure from the paper presents a spectrum of ecological strategies for sustainability, ranging from least to most comprehensive. These strategies include biophilic design, which incorporates natural elements to enhance human well-being; biomimetic design, which emulates natural forms and processes; restorative design, which involves active human intervention to restore ecosystem health; and regenerative design, which recognises humans as an integral part of nature and seeks to create a mutually beneficial, co-evolutionary relationship between human and natural systems. The diagram illustrates these approaches as nested and interconnected, with regenerative design encompassing and building upon the principles of the other levels, representing the most advanced and comprehensive approach to sustainability.
This framework enables stakeholders to work together towards a common vision of vibrant, thriving places that grow the capacity for health and well-being over time. As the built environment industry increasingly recognises the need for more regenerative approaches, this framework offers a promising pathway forward, aligning the industry around a new paradigm that embraces the potential for positive, evolutionary change.
Shared Language for Regeneration in Built Environment
Regenerative Development and Design provides the basis for building a shared language of regeneration in the built environments by offering a distinction between the paradigms. It is process-based and place specific but lacks a standard set of metrics. It could prove a challenge to take regeneration mainstream if we cannot measure and validate regenerative practices. Finding a balance by integrating processes and metrics would be a powerful way to address the shortcomings and create an accounting system to value regenerative actions in the built environment.
The paper offers useful terminologies to differentiate between the paradigms as shown in Figure 7. These terminologies provide context and meaning to the increasing levels of sustainable development. These can be further developed by adding metrics - both qualitative and quantitative to make them more robust. The metrics can be mapped to existing industry certifications (eg - LEED, LBC) and other frameworks so as to identify the category to which any project belongs through a consistent framework. The consistency helps the markets determine the value of projects accordingly, backed with actual data. We define the terminologies as follows:
Conventional
Conventional development typically refers to traditional methods of constructing buildings and infrastructure. This approach often prioritizes following code, meeting the mandatory regulations while optimising for cost-efficiency, speed, and economic growth without significant consideration for environmental impact or resource depletion. Conventional development usually relies on non-renewable resources and often results in negative environmental effects such as pollution and habitat destruction.
Green
Green development aims to reduce the negative environmental impacts associated with conventional development. It focuses on improving the efficiency of energy, water, and materials use, and minimizing waste and pollution. Green buildings often incorporate renewable energy sources, recycled materials, and technologies that enhance resource efficiency. The goal is to create a built environment that has minimal adverse effects on the natural world.
Sustainable
Sustainable development is a broader concept that seeks to balance economic growth, environmental protection, and social equity. It involves meeting present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. This approach integrates principles of ecological balance, resource efficiency, and long-term environmental stewardship into development practices. It involves considering the entire lifecycle of a product or building and also human health and comfort.
Restorative
Restorative development goes beyond sustainability by aiming to restore and rejuvenate natural systems that have been degraded by human activity. It involves human intervention to improve the health and functioning of ecosystems, enhancing their resilience and self-organizing capacity. Restorative development recognizes the importance of human participation in ecosystem health but sees it as a temporary role until the system can sustain itself.
Regenerative
Regenerative development represents the highest aspiration in the evolution of development practices. It seeks to create systems that are not only sustainable and restorative but that actively regenerate and enhance the health and vitality of ecosystems and human communities. This approach views human and natural systems as deeply interconnected and fosters a co-evolutionary relationship where both humans and nature thrive together. Regenerative development involves a whole-systems thinking approach, engaging stakeholders as co-creators to ensure long-term resilience of both human and natural systems.
Conclusion
Regeneration could become a buzzword in the built environment, often used interchangeably with terms like sustainability and green. However, as outlined in the introduction, regeneration represents a paradigm shift that goes beyond conventional practices and sustainability thinking. It is a holistic approach that recognizes the interconnectedness of human and natural systems, seeking to create a mutually beneficial, co-evolutionary relationship between them.
In this article, we explored the importance of developing a shared language for regeneration in the built environment. We examined the transformative role of well-crafted frameworks, such as the Common Materials Framework and the Ecological Benefits Framework, in aligning industries and fostering collaboration. We also delved into the Regenerative Development and Design framework, which provides a foundation for understanding the progression from conventional to regenerative practices.
By defining and describing the five levels of development - conventional, green, sustainable, restorative, and regenerative - we have established a common understanding of the terminology and the progression towards more advanced and integrated approaches.
The result of this exploration is a clearer understanding of the boundaries and relationships between different paradigms in the built environment. This lays the groundwork for future exploration and the development of a comprehensive framework for evaluating and representing regenerative practices in the industry.
In the follow-up article, we will examine existing frameworks that highlight current approaches to evaluating and representing regeneration in the built environment. Our objective is to identify a viable framework that can be effectively developed into a robust system to measure and value the positive externalities resulting from actions in the built environment. This would enable positive feedback loops to empower stakeholders and potentially unlock capital for projects that pursue regenerative goals.
Through this ongoing exploration, we aim to foster clear communication, consistent evaluation, and widespread adoption of regenerative principles in the built environment. By developing a shared language and a comprehensive framework, we can align the industry towards a regenerative future that actively restores and enhances the health and vitality of our planet and its communities.