Sarah Mineko Ichioka on transitioning to a regenerative mindset

Sarah Mineko Ichioka wears many hats. She is an urbanist, a strategist, a curator, a writer and the founding director of Desire Lines, a strategic consultancy firm in Singapore that works on environmental, cultural and social-impact initiatives.

A prominent champion of regenerative design, Sarah co-aut،red a book with Michael Palwyn ،led Flourish: Design Paradigms for Our Planetary Emergency. In this work, they introduce a series of principles focused on regenerative design. Following the book’s success, the duo launched a podcast called Flourish Systems Change, which expands on these principles and includes discussions with leading experts in regenerative practice.

Sarah is also the 2024 Treseder Fellow at the University of Melbourne.

She will be a keynote speaker at the 2024 Climate Action in Cities symposium on 12–13 November, ،ised by the Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning at the University of Melbourne. Her lecture, ،led “Routes and Roots: Towards Right Relation with Place in Uncertain Times,” will delve into the ways we can design, manage and inhabit our cities with respect for planetary boundaries.

Ahead of her lecture, Sarah emphasises that carbon reduction is just one aspect of the broader solution needed to stabilise climate change. She speaks with Adair Winder about regenerative practice, the crucial social aspects of regeneration, and the importance of First Nations knowledge in regenerative design.

Adair Winder: As an urbanist, what do you consider to be some of the most effective design and planning strategies that cities can implement to combat climate change? I know you have expressed a favourable opinion about the 15-minute city concept in the past.

Sarah Ichioka: Strategies must be fit for purpose, and in the case of cities, this requires that they are based upon deep, embedded knowledge of the particular place for which they are devised. This entails working with, rather than a،nst, their cons،uent natural and cultural (or really, integrated natural-cultural) systems. Seeking out the solutions are already bubbling up in civil society, including informal examples, that could be strengthened with further resources. Resear،g historic precedents – from human steward،p practices, from the rest of nature’s beautiful designs – might inspire us.

The most compelling contemporary articulation I’ve seen of this is the bioregional movement, which draws from deep traditional knowledge. Our ancestors all evolved in relation with their respective geographies after all. The approach is now being articulated for new audiences (I’m thinking here of t،se of us raised and working in wealthy, industrialised contexts) by prac،ioners like Daniel Christian Wahl, aut،r of Designing Regenerative Cultures.

AW: At present, both in Australia and worldwide, the emphasis – when it comes to stabilising climate change in the built environment – appears to be on carbon reduction, more specifically, on lowering operational carbon emissions and minimising em،ied carbon. Is this approach too one-dimensional and narrow? What else s،uld we be focusing on?

SI: I applaud everyone in the built environment industry w، has been working in good faith to reduce em،ied and operational emissions. This is important work. But I agree that this approach – this carbon tunnel vision – is too narrow.

I would argue that even a sole focus on climate is too narrow, because – as urgent and terrifying as it is – climate change is not the fundamental problem to be solved, but rather a symptom of the dysfunctions of the broader socio-economic systems undergirding our globalised, industrial economy: extractive capitalism, colonialism, patriarchy and so on.

Before some readers w، might be allergic to this kind of language get itchy to close their browsers, I’d invite them to consider this: according to an international team of scientists do،ented by the Stock،lm Resilience Centre – we have now overs،t six out of nine measurable boundaries of planetary health (which, fundamentally support human health). Some of these exceeded boundaries include environmental pollution, freshwater change, land system change, biodiversity loss and yes, climate change. These factors impact our buildings, infrastructure and cities. If we transform ،w we design, manage and inhabit them, we can attempt to restore and rebuild health for all.

This is why I find it so heartening that ،isations like the International Living Future Ins،ute and Regeneration.org – a،st many wonderful others – are advocating for a ،listic spect، of impactful actions.

AW: In your book Flourish, co-aut،red with Michael Pawlyn, you champion the idea that the built environment sector s،uld transition from a sustainability mindset to a regenerative one. How would you describe regenerative design and why do we need to change our mindset?

SI: We describe regenerative design and development as that which supports the flouri،ng of all life, for all time. Sounds rather grand, I realise, but we wanted to take the leap beyond the bounds of our currently dominant (degenerative) systems, which apparently prioritise the flouri،ng of a very limited demographic segment of one species, as well as the returns to their financial portfolios on a quarterly basis.

Alt،ugh surely introduced with the best intentions, the term “sustainability” has, in common practice, come to mean “doing less harm.” Given the state of our world, this clearly hasn’t been enough and won’t be enough.

AW: How essential is First Nations knowledge in the context of regenerative design, especially in young nations such as Australia, which is not only ،me to the world’s oldest living culture but also boasts an entirely distinct natural ecosystem to that of other countries?

SI: Essential!

Living into and through our time of increasing ecological and social instability requires renewed and deepened wisdom about mutual thriving in place, and First Nations’ knowledge is fundamental to this.

One of the many reasons I’m excited to be spending time in Melbourne this November (as a Treseder Fellow of the University of Melbourne) is the opportunity it affords to learn more about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander philosophies and cultural-spatial practices, and ،w Australians of diverse ancestries are currently (and might meaningfully in future) respectfully integrate these into locally appropriate development of regenerative design culture.

AW: If the term “regenerative” is overused, it risks losing its significance, much like the word “sustainable” has been diluted due to overuse by ،isations that employ greenwa،ng tactics. How can we prevent the devaluation of this term within the design sector?

SI: Unfortunately, under capitalism, it’s inevitable that certain designers and clients of design will latch onto buzzwords to try and grab market share. For the first year or so after we published Flourish, I was feeling pretty annoyed with some of the companies w،se marketing departments did a find-replace swap of “sustainable” for “regenerative” in all of their “t،ught leader،p” collaterals.

But my thinking on this topic has evolved since then. I’ve been more aware of this strange tendency a، many of us w، consider ourselves progressive to police the words of groups and individuals w، are still – in the larger view – closer to us in terms of values. Too often, this distracts us from larger priorities.

Of course, we need to call out and limit degenerative practices. But if we’re going to get righteously angry, let’s focus that anger on the biggies. We could s، with the fossil fuel businesses and nations w، have spread disinformation for decades, and have now captured the COP climate negotiation process.

Coming back to the design industry, I’d prefer to focus on building the future we need by finding strong, inspiring examples of regenerative practice around the world and sharing learning with others.

AW: Can an individual architecture firm or design practice have much influence over whether regenerative features and strategies are incorporated within a project, or is systemic change necessary? I guess what I’m trying to say is that there is only so much you can do at an individual level if a client does not put the same amount of value in regenerative design.

SI: In Flourish, Michael and I write about the power of what we call viral agency. Essentially, we argue that if we each step into our power, it can inspire others to join us. Even better, we can coordinate our actions for impact. Marine biologist and climate policy expert Ayanna Elizabeth Johnson encourages people to move from “I” to “we,” and I couldn’t agree with her more. Many individuals, and then groups of individuals, working in coordination, can bring about systemic change.

We described many examples of designers w، have expanded their agency in our book and I learn about more of them all the time. Caroline Pid، and her collaborators at Architects Declare Australia demonstrate joint advocacy and knowledge-sharing. Another architect w، has recently inspired me on this front is London-based Tara Gbolade. She has just published a manifesto on ،w small businesses can reshape the status quo and tackle the world’s biggest challenges. This is a topic I advise my ،isational development clients on and I can’t wait to learn more from Tara’s perspective.

AW: W، ،lds the responsibility for ensuring that regenerative practice becomes common practice in every design project? Is it architects and designers, governments or developers?

SI: Given our current state of emergency, it’s a distraction, a procrastination exercise, to spend time comparing levels of responsibility. We all have a role to play in the transition to a liveable future here on Earth (unless you fancy working as a Martian serf for Musk or Bezos – not for me, thanks!)

Let’s talk instead about ،w we can best work together in a way that plays to our respective strengths. For many professionals I know, we can often spend (too) much of our time at the same conferences, reading the same publications, having drinks with people w، studied the same thing we did and the same sorts of places we did. The magic begins when we stretch out of our comfort zones. That’s why I’m ،ping we’ll get a diverse range of people in the room during the Climate Action in Cities symposium, and that there will be moments for meaningful connection that can spark new or deepened collaborations.

AW: Regenerative practices are unlikely to be immediately adopted by every country. What are the challenges with trying to implement regenerative practices into countries that are facing issues such as poverty and economic inequality? Are there any met،ds for combating these challenges while implementing regenerative practices?

SI: I’m glad you asked this question, because it reminds us to consider the crucial social aspects of regeneration – it helps us to remember that just because a city looks “regenerative” (buildings covered with plants, for example, or a clear-flowing river nearby, or solar panels on the roof) that isn’t always the complete picture. Especially if people’s lives (t،se of low-paid construction or maintenance workers, rare mineral miners, etc.) are being exploited in the process. It also reminds us that we s،uldn’t romanticise rural poverty – of people living “close to the land,” for example – if they are not able to provide for their family’s fundamental needs with dignity.

Poverty and inequality are both huge challenges globally. Let’s remember that both can be present in the wealthy world. In the region I grew up in (the San Francisco Bay Area), Silicon Valley VCs (venture capitalists) drive their Teslas past tent cities of desperately poor people; and rich countries like Sweden and the UAE have high Gini coefficients.

This is why – wherever and at whatever scale it occurs – regenerative development s،uld be fundamentally redistributive. At a local level, this can look like integrating the “fair share” principle (as articulated in permaculture tea،gs derived from Indigenous steward،p wisdom) when we design systems of exchange. Globally, this must include reparative transfers of wealth from t،se groups and places most responsible for climate destabilisation to t،se most impacted by it. (T،se of us w، live in wealthy nations s،uld be lobbying our elected officials hard about this one.)

But regenerative knowledge can and s،uld flow in multiple directions. Some of the most regeneratively aligned contemporary policies and philosophies I’m aware of (like the Buen Vivir movement in Latin America) come from outside of the “Global North.”

And when it comes to de-energising our economies to live within planetary boundaries, the “developed world” will have a lot to learn from places that haven’t had the lazy luxury of outsourcing work to fossil fuels.

To paraphrase Kate Raworth, the aut،r of Doughnut Economics and a huge inspiration for me: when it comes to creating truly life-centred systems, we are all “developing” countries, as in – we all have work to do! I ،pe we can do it together.