Svec, P; Berkebile, R and Todd, J A (2012) REGEN: Toward a tool for regenerative thinking. Building Research & Information, 40(1), pp. 81-94. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
To facilitate the practice of regenerative design and development, the US Green Building Council (USGBC) and a core team envisioned a forum, a repository of information and a framework that are capable of stimulating dialogue among a diversity of practitioners and decision-makers with different disciplinary backgrounds and viewpoints. The REGEN tool is a work in progress and intended to support any regenerative design and development process, particularly in the early planning and design stages, with new questions and new types of information organized into a web of interconnection. It is intentionally neither a rating system nor a universal definition of regenerative design. Instead, it is a systems-based model of making connections at and between systemic levels, issue level and strategic level, thereby allowing the discovery of synergies, and encouraging a dialogue about place and quality of life for all life. The conceptual development of the REGEN tool is presented along with thoughts for its realization. The regenerative design process has the potential to change worldviews in a constructive way when it brings together new types of information, examples of process, and a perspective that is systems based, place based and oriented on positive outcomes.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design tool; ecosystem services; living building; net-zero impact; quality of life; regenerative design; resilience; sustainable design |
| Index terms: | living building, green building, quality of life, regenerative design, practitioner, ecosystem services, sustainable design, synergy, design stage |
| Subjects: | design practice, practitioner, public and environmental health, professional practice, partnership management, design process, biodiversity, sustainability and energy |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Design Practice, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here