This role could exist across sectors such as: housing, health, education, justice. It would mark a shift from compliance to care.
Training custodians is not a luxury, it is a civic necessity. Without them, systems become unlivable. With them, the record speaks.
Custodianship as Civic Infrastructure The author proposes that custodianship must be embedded; not improvised. It cannot rely on individual resistance or informal discretion. It must be designed, resourced and protected as part of civic infrastructure.
Custodianship is not a role. It is a function and every institution must designate custodians—staff trained to hold presence within systems, to answer for decisions and to intervene when automation fails. These custodians must be visible, supported and accountable. Their judgment must be recognised as civic expertise.
Infrastructure means structure. Custodianship must be built into workflows, not added as exception. This includes override protocols, discretionary review panels and documented channels for appeal. It also includes time, protected time for reflection, conversation and repair. The author notes that speed is often privileged over care and infrastructure must rebalance this.
Custodianship also requires cultural shift. Institutions must move from compliance to care, from throughput to presence.
This means rethinking metrics, incentives and leadership. It means valuing judgment, not just efficiency. It means restoring the ethic of answerability.
The author proposes a national framework: every public-facing system must include custodial design. This could be formalised through legislation, professional standards, or civic charters. It would mark a shift from technical governance to relational accountability.
Custodianship is not a fix. It is a foundation, without it, systems become unlivable. With it, civic life becomes possible again.
