structure, design, behavioral change
We Just Need to Change the Floor Plan.
There is a misconception that to reach a sustainable future, we need to fundamentally change people. We think everyone needs to become more altruistic, more self-sacrificing, more “green.”
But honestly? None of us want to admit that we are living a double life.
At home, many of us genuinely try. We recycle, conserve, repair, reuse—some even manage a bit of reciprocity. But the moment we return to work, we step right back into extractive systems.
Our higher ground stays at home, and our day job pulls us into extraction. Not because anyone is “bad”—but because in most industries, if you don’t perform extraction, you lose your livelihood.
Asking people to “change” while the structure remains the same is like asking someone to be a fish at home and a bird at work—then wondering why it isn’t going well.
Motivation, Understanding, and Behavior:
Our behaviors have a driver we rarely examine. Real lasting motivation doesn’t come from inspirational posters. It comes from understanding.
Understanding fuels motivation.
Motivation fuels the effort for deeper understanding.
Behavior is the visible expression of both.
It’s a cycle. And cycles follow the structure they’re built in.
This is where the double life becomes a problem. At home, the structure encourages reciprocity. At work, the structure rewards extraction. Two different structures teach two different logics—and the one tied to livelihood wins.
Every time.
Structure Motivates Behavior
This leads to something I see constantly in my work with Veridez: Human behavior is remarkably predictable. We adapt to the structure we inhabit.
If you design a highway, people drive.
If you design a walkway, people walk.
If you design a system based on extraction, people extract.
The behavior follows the design, not the other way around.
Right now, acting reciprocally with Earth feels like a heavy burden because our current linear system is designed to reward the opposite. To be “sustainable” today, you often have to swim against the current of the economy.
You have to work harder, pay more, sacrifice convenience—all while the extractive path remains the easiest, cheapest, most rewarded option.
Flipping the Current
But what if we flipped the design?
What if structural design for reciprocity became the path of least resistance instead of the path of most sacrifice?
When reciprocity is built into the logic of our industries, “doing the right thing” stops being a burden and starts being a livelihood. This is where the Compatibility Zone begins—designing systems where the path of least resistance aligns with the life-support systems we depend on.
We don’t need to retrain the driver. We just need to fix the road.
The Real Work: Systems Design,
Not Behavioral Change
This isn’t about convincing 8 billion people to change their nature, override their survival instincts, or sacrifice their economic security for moral reasons.
It’s about designing systems where reciprocity with Earth is also reciprocity with your own viability.
Where the profitable choice and the regenerative choice are the same choice.
Where extraction becomes the hard path, and reciprocity becomes the obvious one.
This is structural intelligence. This is what systems design for reciprocity looks like in practice. And this is why at Veridez, we don’t start by asking “How do we change behavior?” We ask:
“What structure is producing this behavior, and what structure would produce different behavior?”
Because humans don’t need to become different people. We just need different floor plans.
Why This Series?
I am sharing this perspective because clarity makes understanding possible—and understanding allows better structural choices to emerge. If this series can help light the road toward that clarity, then it is worth writing.
In the next post, I’ll talk about why Earth isn’t our hypermarket. It’s our life-support provider.
And why understanding that difference changes everything about how we design for reciprocity.
