Architecture · Thesis
The three-layer thesis
The architectural pivot: separate the property right, the governance vehicle, and the measurement layer.
The v1.2 NRD attempted to be the legal instrument, the governance container, and the measurement system in a single complicated deed. This was structurally misaligned with three different problem domains.
The architecture in three layers
The Three-Layer Architecture
The picture
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ LAYER 3 — MEASUREMENT & REGISTRY (largely already live) │
│ │
│ Earth Pulse Nodes ──► EC-M-1.1 Calculator ──► Attestation Receipts │
│ (sensors, planned) (35 indicators, 6 dim) (cryptographic │
│ attestation) │
│ ▲ │
│ Public, verifiable, tamper-evident. │
│ Same data both layers above consume. │
└────────────────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────┘
│
│ attestations consumed by both
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ LAYER 2 — PER-PROPERTY GOVERNANCE VEHICLE │
│ (one per property; no merging across properties) │
│ │
│ Form depends on stakeholder shape: │
│ │
│ Tier 1 (simple): Vermont LLC + multi-sig treasury wallet │
│ Operating-agreement governance │
│ Templates A, B, D, E, G │
│ │
│ Tier 2 (complex): Smart-contract DAO with audited governance │
│ modules; on-chain treasury and voting │
│ Templates C, F │
│ │
│ Both tiers: Wrapper entity has legal personhood, holds the │
│ VECR; permissioned membership; non-transferable; │
│ distributions OUT to beneficiaries when revenue │
│ flows IN. │
└────────────────────────────────┼────────────────────────────────────┘
│
│ legally anchored to
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ LAYER 1 — NRD-LITE (recorded property right, 8–15 pages) │
│ │
│ A jurisdiction-templated legal instrument that: │
│ • Severs the Verified Ecological Condition Right (VECR) │
│ • Names the Layer 2 entity as holder │
│ • Grants measurement standing │
│ • Binds successors │
│ • Defines term and reversion │
│ • Provides enforcement floor │
│ • Coordinates with conservation easements where applicable │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Earth Credits move on a parallel commodity track:
EC-M-1.1 attestation
│
▼
Landseed registry function issues Earth Credits
│
▼
Buyers purchase (direct, Exchange, Institutional Fund)
│
▼
Proceeds flow as revenue INTO property DAO/LLC treasury
│
▼
DAO/LLC distributes per its Economics module (per-template rules)
The Layer 2 entity does NOT issue credits. The Layer 2 entity does NOT
hold credit positions. The Layer 2 entity is NOT a counterparty to
credit buyers. This is the firewall between governance and commodity.Why three layers (not two, not four)
Why not two (NRD + DAO/LLC)
Without an explicit measurement layer, the governance vehicle would act on attestations supplied by Landseed itself, collapsing the assay-office thesis from The Unauditable Market. The measurement layer must be visible, separable, and independently verifiable. This is what allows external parties (buyers, regulators, auditors, the public) to verify ecological condition without trusting Landseed’s say-so.
Why not four (e.g., separating registry from measurement)
A natural fourth layer would split registry/credit-issuance from measurement. But registry is not architecturally a separate trust domain — Landseed is the registrar, and trust comes from the cryptographic attestation in Layer 3, not from registry separation. Adding a fourth layer here invents complexity without buying clarity.
The registry function is real and important, but it sits within Layer 3 as the credit-issuance surface of the measurement substrate.
What each layer provides
Layer 3 — Measurement and registry
- Methodology execution: EC-M-1.1 calculator produces ECI scores from satellite + sensor + climate inputs
- Attestation: cryptographic attestation infrastructure generates signed receipts of measurement events
- Registry: Landseed registry issues Earth Credits against attested condition (subject to methodology issuance rules)
- Credit market interface: registry sells credits to buyers; tracks issuance and retirement
Layer 2 — Governance vehicle (per property)
- Legal personhood: a real entity (LLC or DAO LLC) that can hold property and contract
- Membership: named, permissioned, non-transferable
- Decision-making: governance per template (operating agreement for Tier 1, smart-contract module for Tier 2)
- Treasury: receives revenue from credit sales; distributes per Economics module
- Management plan ratification: versioned forest, invasive, harvest plans evolve through governance
- Methodology version pinning: the property’s methodology version is determined here; updates require ratification
Layer 1 — Legal anchor (NRD-lite)
- Severance: makes the VECR a recordable property right
- Holder identification: names the Layer 2 entity
- Measurement standing: gives the Layer 2 entity legal right to measure
- Successor binding: future owners are bound
- Term: typically 99 years (jurisdictional caps may apply)
- Enforcement floor: injunction, damages, recoverable restoration costs
Trust direction — one-way, by design
Methodology code (open source, audited)
│
▼
Layer 3 attestations (attestation receipts)
│
┌─────────────┼─────────────┐
▼ ▼
Layer 2 (DAO/LLC) Registry
│
▼
Earth Credit buyers
│
▼
Exchange (when built)
│
▼
Institutional Fund (when built)Each entity trusts only what is below it (closer to the methodology). Cycles (DAO trusts Fund trusts Exchange trusts DAO) create governance and security pathologies. We do not build cycles.
Earth Credits and DAO/LLC positions — different things
This separation is the architectural firewall against securities characterization. It must be visible at every layer:
| Earth Credits | DAO/LLC Benefit Units |
|---|---|
| Commodity | Governance position |
| Tradeable | Non-transferable except by succession |
| Issued by Landseed registry (Layer 3) | Issued by Layer 2 entity at formation |
| Sold to anyone | Held by named real-world stakeholders only |
| Listed on Exchange (when built) | Never listed |
| Retired by holder for compliance/claim | Held until succession |
| Underlying value: methodology score | Underlying right: vote, distribute, ratify |
| Counterparty: any buyer | Counterparty: only existing members |
| Regulatory bucket: commodity (CFTC if derivatives) | Regulatory bucket: not a security (perimeter holds) |
If a member wants liquidity, they receive their distribution share in cash (per the Economics module) when revenue flows. They do not sell their position.
The architecture functions without coalition entities
The DAO architecture must function without any of the planned coalition entities. Specifically:
- The Exchange is not assumed. Most properties’ first credit sales are bilateral.
- The Institutional Fund is not assumed. Most first-cohort buyers are direct.
- Captain Landseed is not assumed. Each governance vehicle handles its own communications.
- The Earth Pulse Network is not assumed. EC-M-1.1 satellite-only assessment works as a fallback. Sensors are an upgrade per property.
This is what “well-defined interfaces” means in practice: Layer 2 is complete on its own, and external entities plug in optionally.
What changes across the layers when we update
- Layer 3 update (e.g., EC-M-1.1 → EC-M-1.2): methodology stewards publish, then DAOs/LLCs ratify through their governance. Methodology version pinning in NRD-lite means existing properties don’t get involuntary updates.
- Layer 2 update (e.g., template module upgrade): module-by-module upgrades with supermajority + time delay + guardian veto. Per-property only.
- Layer 1 update (NRD-lite amendment): rare. Requires recording-office filing per jurisdiction. Used for boundary changes, named-holder changes, or term extensions.
What does not appear in this architecture
For clarity, things explicitly not present:
- No fund-of-DAOs primitives
- No cross-property treasury merging
- No tradeable benefit units
- No public DAO governance offerings
- No on-chain credit issuance (registry handles that off-chain or via Landseed-controlled mechanism)
- No DeFi yield protocols on DAO treasuries
- No automated trading of benefit units
These exclusions are listed here for completeness; their justifications live in 04-perimeter/ (regulatory) and the various template specifications in 02-governance-templates/.
See the interactive map for the full graph of relationships among layers, modules, templates, and concepts.