The Principal’s Corner As a kid, I couldn’t wait for the yearly field trip to the Minnesota Science Museum. I loved going. The intrigue, the mystery, the complexity, the connections. I got to see mummies, dinosaurs, space, and an Omnitheater movie. It was easily the highlight of my month. That fascination has stayed with me. When I travel now, I still like to visit science museums in other cities. Recently, my wife and I were in her hometown of Boston and spent time at the Museum of Science there. In one exhibit, I noticed something that felt small at first, but stayed with me long after we left. There was a kiosk with two panels describing different forms of sustainability. One was titled “Sustainable technology” and featured a wind turbine motor made with rare earth metals. The other was titled “Sustainable construction” and highlighted emerging mycelium-based materials being grown into bricks, insulation, and flooring. Most people probably wouldn’t notice the issue. But with my training, it jumped out immediately.
The wind turbine example was appropriately framed as sustainable. It represented an effort to reduce harm and move toward cleaner systems, even while still carrying real ecological and extraction costs. But the mycelium materials were different. They were being undervalued by the language used to describe them. These are not just materials that reduce damage. They point toward a different possibility altogether: materials that can be grown, renewed, composted, and reintegrated into living cycles. In other words, they have the potential to participate in regeneration. That distinction matters. How we talk about things shapes how we understand them. The words we choose can either flatten possibility or help people see a fuller horizon. If we want to inspire the next generation of change-makers, builders, designers, and community leaders, then communication is not secondary. It is foundational.  Seeing the Big PictureSustainability is important. But sustainability is not enough! At its best, sustainability asks us to reduce harm, conserve resources, and operate within limits. That matters deeply in a world shaped by extraction, waste, and overconsumption. Conservation, sufficiency, and restraint are all necessary practices. They help interrupt the patterns that have brought so many of our social and ecological systems to the brink.  As we see from the above diagram by Regenesis and Bill Reed sustainability actually needs to be the middle of the road. It is the transition or balance point between a degenerative system and a regenerative one. Antiquated perspectives see sustainability as the goal when in fact it’s the pinnacle of the degenerative model or, the starting point on the regenerative one. But sustainability is still the middle of the road. It is a step on the path, not the destination. Regenerative design goes further. It asks not only, “How do we do less damage?” but also, “How do we repair, restore, and create conditions for life to thrive?” It moves us from maintaining depleted systems toward renewing living ones. It challenges us to design buildings, places, and processes that generate positive ecological, social, and cultural impact rather than simply minimizing negative outcomes. In the built environment, that can mean many things: supporting biodiversity instead of just protecting isolated green space, strengthening community dignity rather than merely avoiding displacement, designing for long-term adaptability instead of short-term efficiency, and choosing materials that can participate in healthy cycles rather than just doing a little less harm on the way to landfill. Sustainability matters because it helps us slow the damage. Regeneration matters because it asks us to become part of healing. To see the big picture is to acknowledge that we have a long road ahead of us. This journey requires a radical honesty: admitting that "less bad" is not the same as "good." We as a collective culture, lead by good design and collective will need to be moving, quickly, toward a model where our outputs don't just sustain the status quo but actively contribute to the health of the ecosystems and communities they inhabit.  The Thread That Binds: Honesty and Self-CorrectionThis month’s theme is honesty and self-correction. That may not sound flashy, but it is one of the most essential disciplines in regenerative work. The "thread" that makes regeneration possible is Transparency. In nature, ecosystems thrive because of tight feedback loops—the soil "tells" the tree what it needs, and the tree responds. In healthy human systems, this is called self-correction.  It’s critical in the effort to reverse the climate crisis that we get real about terminology and what the real goal is. The lift to healthy, thriving human systems is heavy and we just can’t get there by making one ‘green’ or ‘sustainable’ office tower at a time. That approach is too slow, too isolated and too dependent on existing extractive systems and supply chains. Living systems depend on feedback loops. They sense, respond, adapt, and recalibrate. Forests, watersheds, soil ecologies, and even our own bodies all rely on signals that help them correct course over time. Without feedback, systems become brittle. Without honesty, they become detached from reality. The same is true in design. If we are serious about creating places that support life, we have to be honest about what is working, what is not, and where our language or assumptions fall short. We have to be willing to learn in public. We have to resist the temptation to call something regenerative just because it sounds better, markets better, or feels more hopeful. Sometimes the most responsible thing we can say about a project, product, or process is that it is a meaningful step forward, but not the full answer. We also need to be careful about not undervaluing or glossing over the opportunity to make the distinction from sustainable to regenerative - like the exhibit at the Boston Science Museum. Self-correction is not failure. It is maturity. In a culture that often rewards certainty and speed, feedback loops ask something different of us: humility, attentiveness, and the courage to adjust. They remind us that progress is not always linear, and that integrity often looks like noticing where we are off course and responding before the gap widens.  https://unsplash.com/s/photos/forest-ecosystem What This Looks Like in Practice at TikunAt Tikun, this shows up in the questions we ask and the claims we are willing to make. We try not to confuse “better” with “enough.” A lower-carbon material is worth pursuing, but that does not automatically make it regenerative. An energy-efficient building is important, but efficiency alone does not guarantee justice, belonging, resilience, or reciprocity with place. A healthy design strategy may improve indoor conditions, but if it depends on extractive labor or inaccessible cost structures, the picture is still incomplete. We also like to include the transparent truth that much of our work is aspirational. Until built, in operation and collecting data for feedback many of our projects can only claim they aspire to be regenerative. We have set them up for that potential then it will be up to all the factors of a project to fulfill that intent.  That means our work often includes slowing down enough to name tradeoffs clearly. It means helping project teams distinguish between conservation, sustainability, and regeneration rather than collapsing them into one another. It means looking at materials not only for performance, but for sourcing, toxicity, reuse potential, and relationship to larger ecological cycles. It means asking whether a project is simply reducing harm, or whether it is actually contributing something life-giving back to its community and ecosystem. It also means building in room for learning. Early-stage planning, ecosystem mapping, regenerative frameworks, community engagement, and iterative design all matter because they create space for feedback before decisions become locked in. We believe the goal is not perfection on paper. The goal is deeper alignment over time. That is one reason we keep returning to transparency. If a strategy is promising but still emerging, we should say that too. Clear language helps clients, collaborators, and communities make better decisions. It also keeps us accountable to the future we say we want. Case StudyOne of the strongest current built precedents we wanted to share is the PAE Living Building in Portland, Oregon. It is a 58,000 sf commercial office + retail Living Building Certified project with a five-story vacuum-flush composting toilet system, 18 toilets feeding 20 compost bins, plus onsite greywater treatment and nutrient recovery. It also keeps a municipal sewer connection for overflow/fire-protection conditions, which makes it especially relevant as a real-world urban precedent rather than an off-grid idealization. This is an example of the direction building design is going and one success on the path to full regeneration. Learn more here.
An Invitation This month, we invite you to notice where sustainability is doing important work in your world, and where it may still be stopping short. We invite you to look at your own projects this month through the lens of the "middle of the road." Are you merely sustaining, or are you moving toward regeneration? Where are you reducing harm, but not yet restoring health? Where are you conserving resources, but not yet rebuilding relationship? Where might more honesty, better feedback, or a willingness to self-correct open the door to something more alive? Regeneration does not begin with grand gestures. Often, it begins with clearer seeing. With better language. With the humility to listen for feedback and the courage to respond. That is how living systems work. And, as we believe, better design must work. At Tikun, we are committed to helping clients, collaborators, and communities move beyond performative sustainability toward work that is more honest, more life-giving, and more capable of repair. Interested in the conversation? We would love to talk.
0 Comments
|
RSS Feed