Fifteenth International Conference on Sport & Society

Abstract

The discourse of biomimicry–described as innovation inspired by nature (Benyus, 1997)–has gradually changed since the term was coined for the first time in 1997 by Janine Benyus. Initial criticism to biomimicry was focused on the naivety, lack of scientific rigour, and inconsistency of some of its foundational claims, as well as the limitations of its methods to be applied or adapted to traditional design processes. In addition, the biomimicry prospect demanded high technological advances not yet available or viable in many design industries. As a result of this combination of factors, biomimicry suffered from not having a good number of strong case studies of implementation to showcase for years. The examples frequently used were inventions older tan biomimicry itself (e.g. Velcro). Another angle of criticism to biomimicry has been the unsustainable nature of the materials and fabrication methods of such early biomimetic inventions. Biomimicry was not aligned to what sustainable design implied. Over the years though, the recalibration of the concept and consolidation of the biomimicry methodology allowed to three different levels of implementation, one of them– a systems level approach– clearly aligned to sustainability standards, and furthermore aligned to regenerative design practices. This study offers an epistemological framework of biomimicry, and reflects on the whole journey of the biomimicry discourse, from unsustainable implications in its beginning to today’s regenerative and sustainable prospect of the discipline.