Governance and Protocol Architecture

Governance and protocol architecture

A forming governance and protocol architecture for co-creation: connecting ethical and governance principles with place-based relationship, observation, support, correction and stewardship — and allowing field learning to return. Public knowledge materials are held with explicit status; publication does not establish field activation, universal validity or authority.

What this is

Planetary Guardians is a governance and protocol architecture for place-based ecological stewardship, developed since 2019 and drawing on more than two decades of prior governance research. Spiralweb Stewardship Association is its present Danish organisational home. The earlier website at planetaryguardians.global is retained as historical documentation and is no longer maintained as a current account; current work connected to Planetary Guardians is developed through Spiralweb Stewardship Association. Planetary Guardians is not a single protocol, certification scheme, investment product, universal field method or claim of authority over local stewards.

Planetary Guardians has developed since 2019 not only through research and architecture, but through a wider field of conversations, encounters and relationships among many people and places. Some connections were brief, some continued over years, and some now inform Spiralweb’s first field processes. The historical website holds part of that earlier ecology; it is not a current membership or partnership register.

The architecture asks how ethical orientation, local relationship, situated observation, support, correction and accountability can be held together without turning living places into standardised programmes. Its public components are intentionally separated by function and status.

The Spiralweb Papers carry the theoretical, constitutional and methodological arguments. The field pages describe real relationships and preparation. The methods and PG Ledger pages describe how inquiry, consent, observation and correction may be organised. None of these elements alone constitutes an activated protocol.

From principles to place — and back

A sequence of responsibilities, not a universal programme

The architecture is intended to help people move carefully from orientation into place-based practice while preserving local authority and the right to pause.

Ethical and constitutional orientationPublic papers articulate moral, governance and stewardship horizons. They orient inquiry but do not activate a field or confer authority.Public papers

Relationship before programmeEntry begins with a real steward, a lived place, time, trust and permission—not with an imposed package or application form.Working principle

Situated observationLocal knowledge, direct observation, measurement, research and institutional records should be named for what they are and allowed to question one another.Method

Correction and accountabilityClaims, models and proposed interpretations remain correctable. AI may assist functionally, but final responsibility remains with a named human decision-maker.Accountability

Local autonomy and pauseA field may adapt, slow, refuse, withdraw or stop. Climate pressure, safety, consent and stewardship continuity are foundations, not exceptions.Field authority

Different documents, different responsibilities

No single document contains the whole architecture

Each public text should be read according to its own version, scope and stated status.

Report 05 · The Steward's JourneyA light public guide to observation, relationship, support and pause. It is not a fixed scale ladder or complete governance stack.Public guide

PG LedgerThe place-bound memory, provenance and traceability architecture: observations, decisions, uncertainty, dissent, flows, consequences and correction remain connected to their source.Working architecture

Knowing From the GroundThe epistemic argument: how situated, embodied, scientific and institutional forms of knowing can meet without collapsing into one another.Public paper

Sophia Lumen ProtocolThe current explicit, revisable candidate protocol for human–AI co-inquiry. Sophia Lumen names the living relation; publication activates nothing.Candidate protocol

The Correction LoopThe dedicated accountability mechanism for consequential AI-assisted work, including correction rights, stop rights and named human responsibility.Public paper

Penguin DashboardReport 04 v0.6.2 · public working report defines a small shared reading surface: Land / Life, Steward Viability and Governance / Commons remain non-compensatory, with Green, Yellow, Red or Unknown readings and no aggregate score.Public working report

Regenerative ReciprocityReport 06 holds the value-flow and non-capture architecture for support, steward viability, governance and possible later reciprocity.Public report

Field relationships and preparation

Relationships and preparation before protocol activation

Field status and protocol status are different. A real field relationship does not by itself mean that a protocol, indicator set or evidence cadence is active.

KitgumAn active steward relationship in drought-response and readiness work. The first Applied Format has been completed; this is one documented use, not validation. No regular evidence cadence is presented as active.Active relationship

DoukkalaA current project dialogue in which Abdelhamid Badaoui, Ingrid Pullar and Spiralweb are shaping an agreement basis for one possible six-month field cycle with two different starting areas on the same farm. The two areas are starting conditions within one possible cycle, not separate fields. Baseline, roles, recipient route, budget approval, payment readiness and observation cadence remain to be agreed.Agreement taking shape

Mexico CityActive project development with Arturo Flores López around Xochimilco, chinampa stewardship, field documentation and governance learning. A locally steward-held field scope is not yet agreed.Project taking shape

Wider relationshipsHad Soualem holds an existing practice and possible later inquiry; Casablanca is regional coordination; Karachi is an established relationship intentionally quiet while the first three country processes take root.Different rhythms

Protocol materials and status

Public protocol and machine-readable materials are published only when their purpose, scope, consent basis, stewardship, claim boundary, review state and practical status can be stated clearly. No protocol file is presented here as an active universal field kernel.

The Protocol Habitat holds public architecture, papers and tools with document-specific status. A wider maintained protocol library and field-application record remain in formation. Publication alone does not mean that a protocol is active in any field.

We publish only what we can hold with care.

How this connects

MethodsThe methods layer separates bounded-place entry, situated observation, epistemic responsibility, AI limits and field autonomy.
FieldsThe field index carries the current operational grammar for each named place or relationship: present position, evidence, agreed action and next return. These are public relationship and operational-status descriptions, not protocol certifications.
AnchorPointsThe relational and place-based threshold where local partners, stewardship continuity and access to a lived place are held. AnchorPoints are not identical to fields or protocols.
PG LedgerThe memory, provenance and traceability layer through which situated records can remain connected to source, uncertainty, decisions, flows and later correction. Categories and rhythms remain place-bound, consensual and correctable.
Penguin DashboardThe shared human reading surface that can use selected evidence to support bounded judgment and next actions. It is distinct from the Ledger, and neither governs.
Green PapersThe versioned public knowledge commons holds papers, protocols, tools and field documents with explicit type, version, publication status and operational status.

The invitation

Planetary Guardians invites local stewards, practitioners, researchers, public institutions, funders and other organisations to bring their distinct capacities into responsible relationship with a place, stewardship practice, inquiry or shared challenge. No one needs to adopt Spiralweb vocabulary or join a central programme in order to contribute.

Different participants may carry different forms of authority, knowledge, mandate, continuity and resources. A good bridge makes those differences usable and accountable: institutional responsibility remains visible, local authority is not displaced, and the shared work can be corrected by what happens in the field.

Entry may begin through a place, careful inquiry or dialogue. A first conversation creates no automatic entitlement to representation, funding, review or support; it tests whether a clear role, bounded movement and useful return can be shaped together.

A note on the name

Planetary Guardians began in 2019 as an independent initiative.

In January 2023, Johan Rockström contacted Lars Engberg about a separate initiative that was also preparing to use the name Planetary Guardians. Engberg confirmed that they were welcome to do so. The separate initiative can be found at planetaryguardians.org.

The two initiatives have distinct origins and governance. The shared name reflects permission to coexist, not organisational continuity, representation or affiliation.

← Back to Spiralweb Methods PG Ledger Fields index Spiralweb Papers

Planetary Guardians Governance and Protocol Architecture