Intro, Thoughts, Paradigm(s)
I think we let the markets figure it out - the solutions will evolve so long as the protocol allows ample flexibility AND enough people engage so as to build out robust diverse refi networks, IRL. Big money won’t be invested in shit credits so long as protocol makes fraud difficult/impossible. I don’t mean fraud in any dMRV sense but an originator who sells credits “certified by Vera”, that type of thing. Big money will invest in permissionless ecocredits so long as we can demonstrate its’ higher efficacy, establish trust, make the sales pitch. Perhaps.
Our nonprofit status lends some flexibility. We don’t need build an ecocredit class that launches profitable enterprises. We have breathing room, can admit to uncertainty & try different things. The experiment is worthwhile by itself, lets’ try out novel approaches that market/govern natural resources via rule of code. Carbon is too inflexible & political, but our focus is water - and not water in the abstract (pun) but rather water as it cycles thru a landscape & its’ biome. We want to originate credits that “prove” the recovery of watershed or wetlands function, which has value sometimes extremely high value that admittedly varies by location. Again we don’t know all the answers yet.
Next we have some confusion as to the controlling paradigm. Is Regen meant to enable functional comprehensive PES marketplaces, or (ii) ecological contracts to increase natural capital value (assuming that can be realized somehow someday), or (iii) cultivation, recovery of “natural infrastructure” for health & resiliency of stakeholders. Not sure if its’ worth exploring the overlaps & differences of the controlling paradigm but our understanding is all three are valid.
Ecocredit Class Concept - Playa Wetlands
There’s effectively 2 routes that rehydrate our groundwater - playa wetlands & watersheds. The playa dynamics are better understood and a number of groups have done work that we can build
This is very indepth and thoughtful and I think the comments have fleshed out a lot of the concerns. What we see as very important in the long term is that there is a truly permissionless way to deploy new eco credit classes and make origination as cheap as possible for PDs.
This is a huge step in that direction so we definitely applaud and support it.
we’ll look to get some of the cerulean portfolio involved for feedback and direction, and we’ll watch closely how this develops. Awesome proposal
Shaila Agha and I have collaborated on an article addressing this proposal. Our perspectives are shaped by our experiences at the Regen Foundation and our dialogues with diverse stakeholders.
You can delve into the complete article here. If you’re keen to understand our specific stance, here’s a concise excerpt from our piece.
Envisioning the Future: The Permissionless Credit Class Creation
The allure of a Permissionless Credit Class Creation lies in its promise of decentralisation. However, this radical approach demands more than just shifting structures; it requires mutual trust, shared objectives, and a deep appreciation for global ecological diversity. In our current landscape, its immediate implementation poses challenges, including the risk of fragmented strategies and potential exploitation.
It is aspirational to think of a registry that is not in need of any gate-keeping, an anarchist registry that works on mutual goodwill and aligned vision with a deep commitment towards mitigating climate change. However the current market and its trends do not seem to favour that. At this stage, some level of gatekeeping is required to weed out exploitative players and maintain high integrity in the credits being minted. The essence of the Regen Registry is rooted in shared vision and trust. Without these foundational pillars, maintaining such a permissionless model could be challenging.
To truly embrace such a concept, we propose an approach based on progressive decentralisation. A good starting point would be to let each region have a dedicated registry team, composed of local experts, to ensure that practices resonate with specific needs. This not only promotes diversity but also guarantees that solutions are genuinely impactful and grounded in regional realities.
Here is how we think we can translate this ambitious idea into a
Given market conditions of REGEN price still slipping, and integrating discussions at Regen Gathering in Massachusetts regarding tokenomics and the need for multiple REGEN burns in the system, I would like to propose that we:
adopt the highest REGEN fee for Credit Class Creation (20,000 REGEN, now ~$600USD at REGEN 0.03)
implement it as a BURN to reduce token supply (this change will be forthcoming from the regen tokenomics working group, so its efficient to implement it now, so we don’t have to make these changes later)
As an aspiring eco credit creator with no institutional backing, or scientific background aside from a decade of permaculture practice, a permissionless eco credit is a light at the end of the tunnel, especially for independent, small-scale regenerators like myself.
One of the questions that has constantly been asked through the ReFi season has been how can we make regeneration a full time job?
With that said, I will skip much of the technical analysis of the merits of this proposal and instead share a bit about the ecosystem regeneration we are attempting on the ground in Sicily and the broader Mediterranean bioregion.
**Rifai Sicilia **was born out of ReFi Italia organizing and the experience from previous year’s event at ReFi Barichara. Activating a community of regenerators into an onchain economy is at the edge of cultural innovation.
The Pilot Site:
We have a 3 hectare farm that has been leasing out the land to monocroppers from melons to most recently grain.
The retired couple who owns the land has been generous to allow me and my permaculture partner to make a full-scale agroforestry site install and implementation. We are operating on full trust and a handshake deal.
Now remember we are in western Sicily, which can be described as the farthest shore in the European Union. Forgotten by even the people of Sicily. There is next to no institutional support for regeneration and even if there was, we are in a race against time as both the economy and ecosystem are collapsing in real time as forest fires, arson, and climate change are exponentially intensifying.
Now on this land, we have a container to model what regenerative agriculture can look like in our specific context. The land is also an anchor site, as it is on a main highway artery where both locals and tourists cross paths.
The current state:
Through both ReFi Italia, and Rifai Sicilia a small group of local regenerators have been establishing
After digesting more comments I see some themes emerging as potential benefits of this change:
For project developers, a quicker path to market
For buyers, an opportunity to fund their preferred projects, and more directly. Perhaps a way to differentiate their portfolio
A potential new market participant: community curators and auditing processes (ecocredit influencers instead of centralized rulemakers?)
Value in finding the best ecocredits → more community engagement → less fraud and more “quality”
Broader diversity of ecocredits → new emergent winners
To riff on what I imagine is possible…
This feels like kickstarter: engage your biggest fans first to get to onchain phase. Reward early supporters with early access to ecocredits, NFT airdrops…
Future projects iterate on the success of others. Seeing a quicker path to market, it is easier to innovate and maybe airdrop to past participants to hype your project.
Use cases for Group module and Data module - maybe small community groups can anchor data for a while, then realize there is potential for an ecocredit as their practices begin to bear fruit.
Standards and best practices emerging from market participation instead of from (well-meaning) thought-leaders or monolithic institutions. If it works, it works.
I wonder, where does basketing fall in this conversation? Permissionless basket tokens would be a natural follower, and possibly a way for curators or communities to gatekeep the quality of ecocredits. It adds another layer of complexity, but I think it is fair to say that this basket model has already been proven. And I believe the rails are already built.
Envisioning the Future: The Permissionless Credit Class Creation
(For readers who have not had the chance to read the original proposal, you can read it here.)
The allure of a Permissionless Credit Class Creation lies in its promise of decentralization. However, this radical approach demands more than just shifting structures; it requires mutual trust, shared objectives, and a deep appreciation for global ecological diversity. In our current landscape, its immediate implementation poses challenges, including the risk of fragmented strategies and potential exploitation.
It is aspirational to think of a registry that is not in need of any gate-keeping, an anarchist registry that works on mutual goodwill and aligned vision with a deep commitment towards mitigating climate change. However the current market and its trends do not seem to favor that. At this stage, some level of gatekeeping is required to weed out exploitative players and maintain high integrity in the credits being minted. The essence of the Regen Registry is rooted in shared vision and trust. Without these foundational pillars, maintaining such a permissionless model could be challenging.
To truly embrace such a concept, we propose an approach based on progressive decentralization. A good starting point would be to let each region have a dedicated registry team, composed of local experts, to ensure that practices resonate with specific needs. This not only
I’m weighing in on this governance discussion to highlight one final decisions we need to make - - **What is the new fee for a credit class creation? We need to decide this detail to bring this proposal to a vote! **
You can see below the polls that @Gregory | RND and myself ran on twitter. The weighted average of the results puts the new credit class creation fee at 5,000 REGEN (~$250USD).
**Therefore, I propose that the new fee for credit class creation should be 5,000 REGEN (~$250 USD). **Do you agree?
If yes, why? If no, why?
This is a reminder that the primary role of this fee is to reduce “spam” credits in an open crediting environment. Is a ~$250ish fee enough to keep spam credits out while low enough to be accessible for nonprofits and other underfunded environmental organizations?
Can someone representing RND, who is the maintainer of the marketplace application, provide a public roadmap update for when these features will be fully implemented? It would be helpful for the community to have transparency into this implementation as many are waiting use these features. Thank you.
