People often ask me: what is "regenerative" architecture? I gently reframe the question: regeneration is not about what something is, but about what it does - for an environment, an ecosystem, a community of learners.
There is no checklist, but there are rules of thumb that help:
π± Regenerative buildings are made from materials that divert waste from landfill, agricultural byproducts and fibres that restore the soil where they're grown. The Woodleigh Regenerative Futures Studio, pictured below, is made from straw as a byproduct from wheat farming, salvaged timber, hemp as a soil-restoring rotational crop and clothing waste.
π± Regenerative buildings create habitat that supports the lifecycle of multiple species, providing substrate for ecosystem services like climate control, pollination, nesting, wildlife runs and succession.
π± They filter pollutants and toxins from the air while filling the atmosphere with a healthy microbiome that supports health and wellbeing.
π± They tap into our biologic affinity with nature through soft fascinations, like wind blowing over water or the rustling of leaves in a tree.
π± They generate more energy and capture more water than they consume, being powered by sun, wind and water that falls in the region, not by fossil fuels. They support the growth of regional micro-grids for energy resilience.
π± They are completely reusable, recyclable and compostable at the end of their use-life as buildings, with all natural fibres being re-incorporated into the Earth's carbon and nutrient cycles.
π± They invite occupants into a relationship with the metabolism of the building by making the consumption of energy and water visible and response-able.
π± By increasing the chance of encounters with nature, regenerative buildings create an atmosphere of wonder that shifts the learning context and expands the horizons of what is perceived to be possible by students and educators.
These are not motherhood statements, they are binary and measurable states of affairs. A building either creates habitat, or it does not, and we can measure how many species, what quantity, how it helps a biome stay within or cross critical thresholds, etc.
But measurable is not the same as universal. It's not about setting a target and chasing that everywhere, which produces buildings that score well but regenerate little.
Keeping Life as our frame doesn't remove measurement, it gives it a direction and a context. The question stops being "what did the building score?" and becomes "is the living system here β this site, this bioregion, this community of learners β better off because the building exists?" Is the system here moving in a degenerative or regenerative direction?