Proposal: Regen Network Ecosystem Narrative & Fundraising Alignment Facilitation Work

Governance
1

Hi Regen Network Community, Giulio Quarta here, community member and consultant, in this post I propose myself for a month of work aimed at clarifying the narratives and fundraising strategies of the Regen Network ecosystem.

Context and Proposal

The Regen Network ecosystem is going through a phase of changes, where the leading entities are discussing with the community to figure out what’s the direction to take for the next months and years in terms of narratives and revenue models / fundraising strategies.

The ecosystem is composed of different stakeholders and groups, with different functions, degrees of autonomy and interaction between each other. For the purpose of this proposal and work, I’ll simplify the ecosystem by dividing it in 3 entities : Regen Foundation (the non profit arm), Regen Network Development (the commercial arm) and the Regen Tokenomics DAO (the group dealing with the Regen Token and blockchain-related aspects, including Regen Liquidity DAO).

In the difficult effort which every ecosystem has to face, balancing coherence and autonomy among the stakeholders, it’s shared opinion among many that Regen Network has struggled with coherence, and still is : it’s not very clear, neither internally nor externally, what is the shared narrative of the ecosystem, what’s the function of every stakeholder and element - this is particularly true for what regards the role of the Regen Token.

My proposal here is to conduct a month of research and facilitation work meant to increase the clarity about what are the needs and plans of the different stakeholders, especially in terms of narratives and revenue models.

This Miro Board I already worked on can be useful to have a sense of the work I am proposing here, but please consider only this post in terms of the details of the current proposal.

Structure and timeline of the work

  1. (3-5 hours total) Narrative and revenue models so far :

For each of the three stakeholders (RF, RND, RTD) : synthesizing the narrative, expertise/function of the entity, revenues model, fundraising strategy, role in the ecosystem

-This doesn’t require calls because most of this information is already available online or in my knowledge, in case of doubts I’ll contact who is needed via email. This syntesis will also be shared in the context of the following point and edited in case of mistakes.

  1. (8-10 hours total) Narrative and revenue models for the next months/years :

same elements, but clarifying what is already decided/clear/unambiguous and what is not

-This will involve 1-2 calls for each stakeholders (either 1to1, 1toTeam, or questions during the corresponding community calls)

  1. (8-10 hours total) Ecosystem, synthesis of the info so far, plus a final round of targeted questions / calls

in this context the 3 narratives&revenue models will be synthesized in a broader ecosystem perspective, with a clear distinction between what is mostly clear and what has to be figured out yet, with a focus on which are the current points of misalignment among the stakeholders.

Deliverables

The deliverable will be a synthetic document with 1/2 pages for each of the following sections, including a visualization as support - similarly to what I did in the Miro Board - and a presentation of the output to the community.

(narrative and revenue model = N&RM)

  1. Regen Network Ecosystem so far (N&RM)

  2. Regen Foundation’s past & future strategy (N&RM)

  3. Regen Network Development PBC’s past & future strategy (N&RM)

  4. Regen Tokenomics DAO’s past & future strategy (Narrative and Tokenomics)

  5. Regen Network Ecosystem’s future strategy - synthesis and next steps : where should we focus on to achieve a clear and shared ecosystem strategy?

Note 1: the most complex part will be dealing with the Regen Token futures and its integration with the broader ecosystem narrative and business model, but it’s also the most important one!

Note 2: there is room for integrating this work in the context of the Regen Commons process, open to talk about it, but they can also run in parallel; importantly, this research work will take much less time than RC (1 / 1.5 months).

Pay

For this work, I would like to be paid 1000 USD of value in Regen Tokens from the Regen Community Fund, but also open to hear about other options in case.

Thanks for your attention!

Giulio Quarta

2

Guilio, I appreciate what you are pointing at here. I would be most interested to hear from people within these organizations about whether they think this would be valuable or not. My sense, as someone working with RND, is that this type of work is going on constantly and that having someone come from the outside to try to synthesize wouldn’t be that helpful to those who are already working on it.
My hope is that there will be some messaging clarity that will be offered to the community shortly from the work happening in RND, specifically about REGEN token messaging. And then, if the community responds well, we can run with it.

How do you propose that your work would add something of additional value to those who are already working full time in these organizations?

1 Like
3

We actually do have some active funding interfaces already:

That said, these aren’t unified or narrative-driven yet. A single hub that explains as well as channels capital flows — and how they connect to impact — could go a long way in strengthening both fundraising and comms.

4

Hi Christian and Brandon, appreciate the answers!

@RegenChristian : “How do you propose that your work would add something of additional value to those who are already working full time in these organizations?”

My answer:

The people that are both within one of these organizations and have a good sense of the ecosystem are few and more importantly, quite busy.

I am proposing to do this (for a very reasonable price) so that this process can be done sooner rather than later, as it just requires a person spending a few hours on talking to people and do a synthesis; I think I fit well for this task because

-I have a good understanding of the ecosystem and I have been a community member for years, but as I’m not part of any leading team, I can be more neutral

-I have the mix of competences and contextual knowledge on the many domains involved (public facing narratives, ecosystem strategy, tokenomics, business plan) with years of passion for ecosystem strategies (which is its own emerging field, I had a course from Boundarlyess in 2021 and since then I always had this lens)

As it’s been shared that both RND and RF and the Tokenomics DAO are going through this process of defining their own plans, I think it makes sense to have a person that collect these perspectives - also because again, I don’t think that these 3 processes can or should happen separatedly, especially for what regards the communication between the ecosystem and the outside (there should be a coordinated marketing strategy, different funnels, etc etc)

–

@brawlaphant : I didn’t mean that there is no interfaces yet, there are a lot of touch points communication and money flows wise; as you suggest, this would be a step in the direction of having all these interfaces / narratives / flows clear among the stakholders

(at the moment some aspects have to be confirmed yet, so it would be a mix of : clarifying what is solid, and what has to be figured out)

Let me know If I understood your points, and yeah as Christian indicated, would be crucial to get more feedback from the stakeholders’ leads

5

Giulio, you should chat with Dave. I have seen a document very similar to this already circulating so would be worth reaching out to him about this.

1 Like
6

I would lean against this being just a document, we need clicks. This is a chance for a full corporate packaged product suite.

Revenues for the RF are donations.
Revenues for the RND PBC are origination and retire fees.
Revenues for the RTD is REGEN coin volume across LPs and network.

Sustained revenue depends on an ongoing narration that consistently communicates the purpose and impact of donating, originating, retiring, buying, selling, and liquidity provision.

Only a fully packaged product suite (hub) combined with narrating distribution channels (YouTube) can achieve both sustained engagement and revenue growth.

Launching a YouTube channel with AI-driven, mission-aligned content is a low-hanging, highly achievable step that can power the narrative and community growth in tandem with the product suite.

7

I think the issue here is that you’re proposing to construct a synthesis doc that largely reflects what we already know — the Regen Token needs volume, the ledger needs RDS throughput, and both require serious product development to become functional economic engines.

What interests me is the possibility that this could go beyond just a doc — a spark that lets the Regen entities coordinate visibly on-chain and on-forum, where community can actually witness alignment happening in real time.

That said, PBC shared the proposal across socials like it was a public community decision — but it was aimed squarely at RF, RND PBC, and this working group. None responded, probably because there’s no polite, time-efficient way to say “this doesn’t click,” and everyone’s spread thin.

Humanity still has a long way to go to make effortless coordination feel normal. So I get it.

On narrative — yes, it’s needed. But it falls to the community and active projects to drive coherence through consistent, visible storytelling. That’s not something you can outsource to a report — it lives in content, memes, and lived engagement.

And honestly, in this AI-drenched era, it feels like you have to have hands in a few domains to stay alive: content, trading, contracts, labor, programming. Narrative just emerges when you’re in motion across those fronts.

8

Sorry for the delay and thanks for the answers Brandon!

I appreciate your focus on the tokenomics side of things and I think your work has been super valuable and needed in these months, but from your message is clear that you are simply not considering all the ecosystem elements and revenue streams that are not the token or blockchain-related - which is the whole point of my proposal :

(quote from your message) “Revenues for the RF are donations.

Revenues for the RND PBC are origination and retire fees.

Revenues for the RTD is REGEN coin volume across LPs and network.”

What about research and consulting as forms of revenues?

I understand that the primary focus of communication & business at the moment should be around the token and the Regen tech infrastructure—but as I brought up many times I believe that the real asset Regen has is its experts —the experts building digital tools for regeneration and the direct relationships with projects on the ground.

It’s very possible the crypto market stays low for years, as well as the demand for ecological credits. Even with all the nice work happening in the tokenomics group, upgrades alone may not bring sustainable revenue or sufficient token value appreciation and at some point it could be necessary to pivot/expand to other business models.

RF and RND already operate across a broader spectrum: engaging in regenerative governance and economics research, and offering consulting services that extend beyond the Regen Stack. For this to happen more and better, so that this can become a meaningful revenue streams over time, there should be an intentional effort in developing such narratives and pitches.

I think we need differentiated channels and communication strategies for different audiences. A fractal ecosystem narrative—one that includes and reflects the diversity of Regen’s work— and that this is critical to our long-term credibility, reach, and resilience.

You refer to my proposal as “producing a doc”, just a note on this : the point is not the doc but to bring some clarity over what could & should be done next in terms of ecosystem strategy development, which in my humble opinion is very needed; I also don’t think this narratives synthesis will emerge out of the community as Brandon mentioned, as the community is not substantial enough, and that this is work for the current lead/ers of the ecosystem - of course with community members that specifically want to engage with it, as I am here proposing.

In any case I also totally understand if this is not felt as a priority in the current group and moment. Thanks for your attention and glad if anybody feels like sharing their perspective on this.

1 Like
9

Now that I’m stepping into this work more directly, I’ll admit — the scope is pretty daunting. But I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about Regen’s broader strategy, especially how regenerative action could be mapped into clear, layered walkthroughs — like operational playbooks that break down into actionable steps depending on the context.

The approach would be from a place of abundance, we write the to-dos, so they may be done.

Not saying I’m taking this on, but one possible contribution area I’d surface — for deeper exploration — is the idea of targeted regeneration ops, especially focused on the Amazon, given its central role in food, water, and air systems.

If scoped well, something like this could interface with REGEN’s LPs and become an onchain-aligned initiative — but it would definitely require more coordination and refinement across the ecosystem.

I also want to be mindful not to over-ping RND or the Foundation — they’re already carrying a niche but difficult mandate: advancing an evolving tech stack under resource and coordination pressure.

That said, I do see real value in Regen’s research and consulting work — these are legitimate revenue streams beyond the token. But if they’re entering the governance process, I think it’s fair to ask: how do they plug back into the tokenomic system? Through incentives, alignment structures, or reinvestment? It’s worth exploring.

Since you already operate in this space as a consultant and researcher, Giulio, I know this perspective comes from real experience — and I can see the depth behind your response. That said, it does raise a question for me: if both RND and RF already engage in this kind of research and narrative development, and you’re embedded in that work too, then what exactly is missing?

Your clarification definitely helps illuminate the broader vision better than the initial proposal, and I’m aligned with the value of bringing ecosystem-wide coherence. But I also think part of the challenge is understanding where this work should live — and why it hasn’t already emerged from the groups already doing it. That’s the piece I’d love to see surfaced more clearly.