Decision Governance

Decision Governance Offerings

Pre-Commitment Admissibility Screen

Decision Determination (Formal Governance Record)

Permission to Consider

Determines whether a proposed irreversible commitment is admissible to contemplate at the moment of decision pressure.

The Admissibility Screen evaluates whether a decision constitutes a one-way door and whether consideration itself is defensible given irreversibility, uncertainty, and authority constraints. It does not recommend actions, optimize outcomes, or support execution.

What it evaluates

Whether the decision creates irreversible lock-in
Whether uncertainty dominates available evidence
Whether authority and responsibility are coherently held
Whether proceeding to deliberation is legitimate

Outputs

A documented admissibility ruling (ADMISSIBLE or INADMISSIBLE),
A framing statement of the dominant irreversibility and uncertainty,
Identification of actions not authorized,
Conditions required for reconsideration, if applicable.

Inadmissible decisions are blocked until conditions materially change. An Admissibility Screen may conclude that no Decision Determination is required.

Use when

You need to know whether a decision should be allowed to move forward for consideration:

Investment committee pre-screens
Underwriting or insurability review
Early permitting and jurisdictional exposure
Capital allocation decisions where refusal or deferral must be defensible.

Example domain

Grid-connected infrastructure

Request Admissibility Screen

Decision Determination (Formal Governance Record)

Permission to Commit

Issues a formal governance judgment on whether crossing an irreversible boundary is defensible now.

A Decision Determination assumes admissibility and determines whether commitment is justified under unresolved uncertainty and irreversibility. It does not recommend actions or manage execution. Responsibility for action remains with the decision holder.

What it governs

Commitment defensibility at the moment of action
Irreversibility versus value-of-information
Precedent and normalization risk
Refusal credibility under pressure

Output

A documented decision determination
(PROCEED, DEFER, or REFUSE),
A framing of the dominant irreversibility and governing uncertainty (including whether the uncertainty (PROCEED, DEFER, or REFUSE),
Identification of actions authorized and not authorized (including actions that would void reliance on the determination)
Conditions required for reconsideration, if applicable (evidence thresholds, time bounds, or trigger events; required for DEFER, optional for others)

Decision Outcomes

PROCEED: Issued only when irreversible exposure is bounded and refusal authority remains credible after commitment.
DEFER: Issued when admissibility flips across plausible states of the world and learning could change the decision without irreversible exposure.
DEFER requires explicit reconsideration conditions.
REFUSE: Issued when structural irreversibility, ignorance-dominant uncertainty, or authority erosion dominates before learning can occur. REFUSE is a valid and value-preserving outcome.

Use when

You are at or near a commitment moment and require a formal, defensible decision record:

Investment committee commitment authorization
Underwriting and reinsurance admissibility
Capital deployment and sequencing gates
Permitting and regulatory exposure decisions
Participation in shared or coupled infrastructure systems

Request Decision Determination

1. What a Decision Instruments Govern

Decision governance governs commitments that create one-way doors, including but not limited to:

Physical site and placement commitments
Subsurface access and exploration commitments
Corridor, routing, and access decision
Capital deployment and sequencing commitments
Regulatory, jurisdictional, or authority transfers
Participation in shared or coupled systems

Once these commitments harden, reversal becomes politically, financially, or physically non-credible. Optimization and execution cannot recover lost optionality.

Decision governance determines whether those commitments are admissible and how authority is exercised before paths harden.

Sustainable Exploration does not exercise decision authority on behalf of clients; it documents how authority is exercised by the institution under stated constraints.

2. What Decision Governance Produces

Decision governance produces formal, auditable governance artifacts that document:

The irreversible commitment under review
The constraints that cannot be undone
The dominant irreversibility and governing uncertainty
Key assumptions and dependency conditions
The formal outcome issued
Conditions required for reconsideration, if any

These records are reconstructible and designed to remain defensible after the moment of decision pressure has passed.

Sustainable Exploration does not scope analysis incrementally.
A governance instrument is either issued or it is not.

3. Decision Posture

Proceed, defer, and refuse are treated as legitimate outcomes.

PROCEED is issued only when irreversibility is bounded and uncertainty is governed
DEFER is issued when waiting preserves option value and learning does not require irreversible commitment
REFUSE is issued when defensibility cannot be established without permanent exposure

These determinations are governance judgments. They are not advice or execution guidance.

Responsibility for action remains with the decision holder.

Proceeding contrary to an issued outcome constitutes a rejection of this governance judgment and may not be cited, referenced, or relied upon in any internal or external justification.

4. Single Decisions and Programmatic Application

Each decision instrument governs a single irreversible commitment.

When multiple commitments are coupled through sequencing, shared capacity, or capital exposure, the same decision logic applied across the set to evaluate:

Portfolio fragility
Escalation pressure
Correlated downside
Refusal credibility over time

No separate artifact is issued. Programmatic governance emerges from the interaction of irreversibilities surfaced during individual decisions. Individually admissible does not imply jointly admissible.

6. Engagement Boundary

Sustainable Exploration engages only when:

The decision holder has authority to proceed, defer, or refuse
Deferral and refusal are acceptable outcomes
Responsibility for action remains with the institution

Sustainable Exploration does not design projects, manage execution, provide optimization, or replace domain expertise. Its role is upstream of engineering, finance, permitting, and operations.

This separation protects judgment from optimism pressure, execution bias, and outcome worship.

7. What This Approach Refuses

Decision governance refuses:

Prediction as a substitute for judgment
Optimization when irreversibility dominates
Analysis to justify predetermined outcomes
Learning strategies that require irreversible commitment

When uncertainty cannot be reduced without crossing a one-way door, deferral or refusal may be the only defensible outcome.

Decision Governance

Formal Governance Judgments for Irreversible Commitments