OASA Logo OASA
Commons vs REIT vs CLT comparison

Commons vs. REIT vs. CLT Comparison

Comparing three different models for land ownership and management: regenerative commons, Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs), and Community Land Trusts (CLTs), understanding their differences in purpose, structure, and outcomes.

Three Models for Land Ownership

These three models represent different approaches to land ownership and management:

  • Regenerative Commons: Land held in perpetual commons for ecological restoration and community benefit
  • REIT (Real Estate Investment Trust): Investment vehicle for earning profit from real estate
  • CLT (Community Land Trust): Nonprofit holding land in trust for affordability or conservation

Regenerative Commons

Purpose

Regenerative commons exist to restore ecosystems and create thriving communities through regenerative practices.

Structure

Returns

  • Returns compound in ecosystem health
  • Improved soil, water, air, biodiversity
  • Community resilience and well-being
  • Access to regenerated land

Governance

REIT (Real Estate Investment Trust)

Purpose

REITs exist to generate profit for investors through real estate holdings.

Structure

  • Publicly traded company or private fund
  • Owns and manages real estate
  • Investors hold shares/equity
  • Land can be bought and sold

Returns

  • Financial returns (dividends, capital gains)
  • Measured in profit and growth
  • Returns to investors, not communities
  • Short-term focus

Governance

  • Corporate governance
  • Shareholder voting
  • Profit-maximizing decisions
  • Centralized management

CLT (Community Land Trust)

Purpose

CLTs exist to preserve affordability or conservation by holding land in trust.

Structure

  • Nonprofit organization
  • Holds land in trust
  • Separates land ownership from building ownership
  • Land typically cannot be sold

Returns

  • Affordability preservation
  • Conservation outcomes
  • Community benefit
  • Limited financial returns

Governance

  • Nonprofit board governance
  • Community representation
  • Mission-focused decisions
  • Limited to affordability/conservation

Detailed Comparison

Aspect Regenerative Commons REIT CLT
Purpose Ecological restoration, community Profit for investors Affordability, conservation
Land Tenure Perpetual commons, never sold Can be bought/sold Held in trust, typically permanent
Returns Ecosystem health, access Financial profit Affordability, conservation
Governance DAO, participatory Corporate, shareholder Nonprofit board
Practices Regenerative principles Profit-maximizing Affordability-focused
Timeframe 1000-year horizon Short-term, quarterly Long-term, mission-focused
Financing Bonding curve, tokens Equity, debt, public markets Grants, donations, loans

Key Differences

Regenerative Commons vs. REIT

  • Purpose: Regeneration vs. profit
  • Land: Never sold vs. can be sold
  • Returns: Ecosystem health vs. financial profit
  • Governance: Participatory vs. corporate

Regenerative Commons vs. CLT

Why Regenerative Commons?

Regenerative commons combine the best aspects of CLTs (permanent protection) with active regeneration:

Learn More

Read Rethinking Wealth for detailed comparison of these models.

See also: Regenerative Commons Economics, Perpetual Commons, Perpetual Land Trust Model

Related Terms