Evidence — Shared
Shared Environment Evidence
Co-working spaces, communal residential buildings, and mixed-use environments. Evidence records focus on multi-stakeholder consent, competing occupant needs, and system transparency across environments with overlapping governance responsibilities.
6
2
2
2
Site Context
The shared spoke encompasses nine monitored environments including co-working facilities, communal residential buildings with shared amenity spaces, and mixed-use developments. These environments are characterised by the presence of multiple occupant classes — residents, workers, visitors, and operators — each with distinct consent relationships and governance expectations. The shared environment presents the most complex governance challenges in the current evidence base.
Evidence by Principle
Awareness
P-01
Ambient Awareness
Ambient awareness behaviour was compliant in eight of nine environments. One co-working environment required reconfiguration to prevent awareness systems from tracking individual movement patterns across shared zones.
P-02
Contextual Sensitivity
Context interpretation required refinement for shared environments. The principle's definition of 'occupant context' was expanded to include 'occupant class context' — the system must distinguish between resident, worker, and visitor contexts when determining appropriate responses.
P-03
Boundary Recognition
Boundary recognition was compliant in all nine environments. Shared environments with explicit zone definitions showed stronger compliance than those with informal boundary conventions.
Agency
P-04
Occupant Primacy
Occupant primacy is structurally ambiguous in shared environments. When occupant instructions conflict — one occupant requesting warmer temperatures, another cooler — the principle provides no resolution mechanism. This is the most significant governance gap identified in the shared evidence base. A cross-occupant arbitration mechanism is under development.
P-05
Informed Consent
Shared environments produced a critical distinction not present in the current principle: the difference between occupant consent and operator consent. Operators (building managers, facility owners) hold a distinct consent relationship with intelligent systems that is not captured by the current principle. A new governance requirement for 'layered consent' is under development.
P-06
Preference Persistence
Preference persistence required refinement for shared environments. Individual preferences must be scoped to the occupant's designated zones. Preferences set in shared zones must be treated as temporary unless explicitly confirmed as persistent by an authorised occupant class.
Accountability
P-07
Proportional Response
Proportional response was compliant in all nine environments. Shared environments showed stronger compliance with this principle than residential environments, attributed to the presence of professional facility management.
P-08
Transparent Operation
System operation logs were accessible to both occupants and operators in all nine environments. The dual-access requirement (occupant view and operator view) was met without modification to the principle.
P-09
Audit Readiness
Audit log retention and format requirements were met in all nine environments. Shared environments with professional facility management showed the strongest audit readiness scores in the entire evidence base.
Adaptation
P-10
Graceful Degradation
All nine environments maintained safe fallback states during degradation scenarios. Shared environments required more complex fallback definitions to account for multiple occupant classes, but all met the specification requirements.
P-11
Reversibility
Reversibility in shared environments is complicated by the presence of multiple system owners. In two environments, full reversibility required consent from both the operator and the building owner — a process that exceeded the 72-hour window. The principle's applicability conditions are under review for shared environments.
P-12
Adaptive Learning Bounds
Shared environments produced a second emerged finding on adaptive learning: systems that learn from aggregate occupant behaviour can inadvertently encode the preferences of the majority occupant class, disadvantaging minority occupant classes. A governance requirement for 'equitable learning' is under development.
Key Findings
Occupant primacy requires arbitration in shared contexts
The most significant governance gap in shared environments is the absence of a conflict resolution mechanism when occupant instructions are mutually exclusive. The framework requires a new principle or an extended applicability condition for P-04.
Consent must be layered by occupant class
The distinction between occupant consent and operator consent is not adequately captured by the current principle set. Shared environments require a layered consent model that distinguishes between individual occupant rights and operator governance responsibilities.
Adaptive learning can encode majority bias
Systems that learn from aggregate behaviour in shared environments risk encoding the preferences of the dominant occupant class. Governance of adaptive learning in shared environments requires explicit equity constraints.