Speaker
Description
“Regenerativity” has emerged as a response to sustainability challenges and the climate crisis by focusing on restoring ecosystems, enhancing resilience, and creating self-sustaining systems that go beyond reducing harm to actively improving the environment and society. The concept of "regenerativity", though increasingly central to discussions of sustainable development, ecological restoration, and regenerative design, remains ambiguously defined and inconsistently applied across disciplines. This paper seeks to clarify the term "regenerativity" by exploring its (1) conceptual roots, (2) practical application, and the (3) principles that underpin regenerative practices in potential transition pathways towards a regenerative built environment. In this way, this paper proposes an umbrella definition of "regenerativity" that encompasses diverse contexts and approaches in which different terms of ''regeneration" have been used as a concept.
Methodologically, this paper is based on two years of practice-oriented research. We have conducted three "Transformation Labs" to determine and initiate locally specific pathways toward a regenerative built environment across 3 city regions: Paro-Thimphu, Bhutan; Cape Town, South Africa; and Bali-Denpasar, Indonesia. This practice-oriented research has unfolded in three iterative phases: (1) a systemic analysis of the built environment and its regionally available nature-based and secondary building materials to build the necessary knowledge base for transition; (2) “Transformation Labs” – transdisciplinary learning journeys that bring together key stakeholders to co-create and test alternative visions and transition scenarios; and (3) strategic roadmaps that outline scalable solutions to guide short-, medium-, and long-term transitions.
Based on the experiences coming out from the three case studies, we propose a framework of "regenerativity" that emphasises the importance of an integrated approach to the regenerative built environment. This approach goes beyond simply adopting appropriate material technologies or practices; and entails: (1) Rethinking how human-built spaces interact with and impact natural ecosystems; (2) Critically examining the economic, political, and infrastructural systems of resource governance; (3) Ensuring fairness and equity by addressing social and ecological justice from a historical global perspective; (4) Addressing the power relations that drive the socio-ecological outcomes of prevailing economic development models; and (5) Articulating and enacting imaginaries of regenerative futures in specific places, across different scales from local to global, and over immediate and long-term horizons.
Our findings underscore that the transition towards regenerativity as a strategy to address the climate crisis, such as those in the built environment explored in this paper, is not a one-size-fits-all process. Instead, it requires adaptive strategies that respond to local conditions and stakeholder constellations while still aligning with inherently global principles of regeneration. The complexity inherent in this transition towards regenerativity demands that we move away from prescriptive frameworks and instead adopt a reflective, context-driven approach that encourages innovation and flexibility. By embracing this complexity, we open the door to more meaningful and transformative change towards regenerativity that extends beyond surface-level improvements, addressing the deeper socio-ecological challenges that have historically driven unsustainable development practices. Our proposed framework emphasises a shift toward regenerativity that enables place-specific innovation and deeper engagement with socio-ecological interdependencies.
| Keywords | Regenerativity; Regenerative Built Environment; Transformation Labs; Socio-Ecological Systems |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | Yes |
