The BioConomy is a coordination architecture for regenerative bioregional economics. It is organized as a three-layer nested stack: BioHub (the coordination body), BioRegion (the coordination geography), and BioConomy (the economy that emerges when coordinated BioRegions tender retention services into markets that need them).

The framework organizes around retention vs. extraction logic. The mandatory measurement is substrate function: soil, water, biodiversity, heritage, human capacity, coordination history. Retention services are tendered into markets already structured to purchase them, with pricing grounded in avoided cost, replacement cost, or precedent transactions.

The distinguishing move is that BioHubs offer verifiable commitments to counterparties who need what a functioning BioRegion produces. This is the "needed, not needy" positioning.

The Framework page carries the full concept map. The Prototype page shows the framework at work in the Overberg BioHub.

The bioeconomy (small b) is the conventional term for economies that use biological substitution for petrochemical inputs: bio-plastics, bio-fuels, industrial fermentation, agricultural biotechnology. It retains the vocabulary of sectoral extraction and throughput. Growth is measured in production volume. Substrate is treated as feedstock.

The BioConomy (capitalized) is organized on retention logic. Substrate function is the mandatory measurement. Value is generated by maintaining and increasing substrate function through coordinated tender to markets that need what the substrate produces. The vocabulary is retention, coordination, tender, pool.

The two share vowels and consonants. The economic logic is different.

Where they intersect (some biological substitution products may be tenderable under retention terms), the BioConomy framework specifies the retention discipline that governs the tender. Where they do not intersect (feedstock-scale monoculture, extractive processing), the frameworks pull in different directions.

A BioHub is a coordination body. It convenes stakeholders in a BioRegion, verifies commitments, operates pools, and holds contracts. It is the innermost layer of the BioStack.

A BioHub is founded by a cohort. The cohort has standing to convene coordination in the anchor location. Identity, entity form, patronage architecture, and governance are established through the BioHub Identity Template, offered as an open resource.

The coordination work is the load-bearing intervention. Ownership of substrate sits with landowners and custodians. Demand for retention services sits with utilities, corporates, philanthropies, and public bodies. Delivery capacity sits with partners, employees, and specialist collaborators. The BioHub is where these parties are convened around commitments that no party holds alone.

More than one BioHub can operate within a single BioRegion. Multi-BioHub coordination protocols are established in the Founding Compact and refined in the BioRegion Charter.

BioHubs are positioned as counterparties who offer verifiable retention services to markets already structured to purchase them.

The distinction matters because grant-dependent regenerative initiatives spend significant coordination capacity on grant cycles and reporting. Retention-service tender operates in existing procurement architecture, bond markets, and framework agreements. The counterparty is a utility, a corporate, a public body, or a patron who needs what the BioRegion produces.

The framework does not exclude philanthropic capital. Mycelial Patronage is a specific architecture for placing patronage capital under retention discipline.

Patronage sits alongside tender revenue. Both flows contribute to the coordination work; each has its own role.

Legitimacy comes from the retention services BioHubs can credibly deliver.

A BioHub is funded through a combination of tender revenue and patronage capital. The mix is established in the Founding Compact (produced by the BioHub Identity Template) and refined in the Tender Compact (produced by the BioConomy Value Proposition Template).

Tender revenue comes from counterparties who purchase retention services. Metropolitan utilities purchase water yield. Corporates purchase biodiversity data or heritage-linked tourism. Public bodies purchase coordination-as-employment. Philanthropic buyers purchase verified retention outcomes at scale.

Patronage capital comes from foundations, family offices, and comparable patrons who place capital under retention discipline through Mycelial Patronage or comparable architectures. Patronage capital sits in the commons substrate and continues generating value over time.

Government grants and conventional foundation grants are compatible with the framework where they can be structured under retention terms. Grant dependency, where a BioHub's operational continuity depends on continuous grant cycles, is a structural condition the framework is designed to avoid.

Three foundational templates are offered as open resources. They are used in sequence:

BioHub Identity Template. A three-prompt sequence for a founding cohort to establish the BioHub itself: name, cohort, entity form, patronage architecture, positioning, intellectual lineage, governance. Outputs: Identity Statement, Field and Lineage Positioning, Founding Compact.

BioRegion Establishment Template. A three-prompt sequence to establish the BioRegion within which the BioHub operates: boundaries, ecological and cultural profiles, coordination bodies, governance principles. Outputs: BioRegion Definition, BioRegion Atlas, BioRegion Charter.

BioConomy Value Proposition Template. A three-prompt sequence to establish what the BioHub tenders: services, counterparties, participants, retention terms, tender commitments. Outputs: Value Proposition Statement, Value Proposition Evidence Pack, Tender Compact.

Each template is designed for use with deep research AI platforms (ChatGPT Deep Research, Claude Research, Perplexity Deep Research, Gemini Deep Research). Each produces a tripartite output: a formal statement, a long referential document, and a governance compact.

The templates are freely offered and adaptable. Download them from the Resources page.

More than one BioHub can operate within a single BioRegion. This is anticipated across the template suite.

Multi-BioHub coordination protocols appear in three places. The Founding Compact establishes cohort-level protocols for how a new BioHub relates to existing ones. The BioRegion Charter establishes regional-level protocols for how BioHubs coordinate within the same BioRegion. The Tender Compact establishes operational protocols for how BioHubs coordinate on specific tenders where multiple BioHubs might offer overlapping services.

The three-layer coordination stack (cohort, region, tenders) enables multiple BioHubs to operate in the same BioRegion without collision.

Where an existing bioregional initiative already occupies the coordination space (a P4P Archipelago member, a Metabolic-listed initiative, a national bioregional network, a well-established local NGO), the founding cohort should approach that initiative first. The peer relationship comes before the coordination work. Where the existing initiative is a fit, the founding cohort may become part of it rather than founding a separate BioHub.

Where no adjacent BioHub or initiative exists, the founding cohort proceeds through the templates. The Founding Compact anticipates future adjacent BioHubs.

The three templates and the foundational essays are offered under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 license (CC BY-SA 4.0). The resources can be copied and adapted freely, for any purpose including commercial use, and redistributed under the same license. Attribution to the original authors is required.

The framework itself is not proprietary. There is no BioConomy Certified Body, no BioHub Association, and no license fee for using the vocabulary or the architecture. The templates are field infrastructure.

Michael Haupt and named collaborators are cited for attribution. Adaptations for specific bioregional contexts are actively encouraged. The field is strengthened by variation, refinement, and honest critique.

For questions about specific use cases (translation into other languages, republication in a book or journal, incorporation into a curriculum, adaptation for a different scale), contact through the Engage page.