Nature-inspired innovation policy: biomimicry as a pathway to leverage biodiversity for economic development

One of the most important challenges of the 21st century is the quest for economic development models that respect the planet's ecosystem. Rather than imposing our industrial systems on nature, why not let nature influence our industrial and innovation systems? From wind turbine blades to bullet trains and solar cells, many of the technologies we rely on today have been inspired by solutions found in nature. Although relatively widespread in the fields of architecture and engineering, biomimicry/biomimetics remains largely overlooked in economics, public policy, and development studies. This is paradoxical because the world's remaining biodiversity stock-a knowledge bank of solutions to both current and unknown challenges- is largely held in developing economies and can be leveraged as a source of inspiration for -and entry door to- industrial innovation. This paper, therefore, investigates the relevance of biomimicry in the formulation of sustainable development strategies in biodiverse developing countries and maps out the national policy landscapes that can advance it. Several findings arise from this study. First, despite the exponential growth of biomimicry as a field and our understanding of its economic impact, what drives nature-inspired innovation remains elusive. Second, the biomimicry innovation landscape is dominated by industrialised economies that have relied on proactive policy interventions, while virtually no developing country has adopted biomimicry as an innovation strategy, consolidating the exploitation of the biodiversity in the developing world by firms in high-income nations. Third, by drawing on empirical evidence from a selection of Latin American countries, this paper shows that while biomimicry presents tremendous opportunities to leapfrog towards high value-added knowledge-intensive activities by using local biodiversity and related expertise as factor endowments, policy, and institutional factors have led to the persistence of important coordination failures that hinder the expansion and commercialization of biomimicry-based R&D. This paper concludes by discussing the public policies needed to support the integration of developing nations at the innovation frontier through biomimicry

Return to the (managed) wild: Interpreting human settlements as “designer ecosystems”

Human civilizations stand out, recently, among other biotic communities for their instigation of global systems transformations that have been rapid, extensive, and enduring (Steffen, Crutzen, & McNeill, 2007). By virtue of cumulative, collaborative efforts, facilitated through the symbolic codification of knowledge, and stacked across generations and continents, the complexity of human cultures only continues to intensify (Christian, 2004): “Cultural change operates by mechanisms that can validate a general and driven trend to technological progress — so very different from the minor and passive trend that Darwinian processes permit in the realm of natural evolution” (Gould, 1996, p.223). By this means, the species has become a globally dominant presence, the impact of its activities echoed across terrestrial, marine, and atmospheric systems (Steffen et al., 2007; Hobbs, Higgs, & Hall, 2013). Human settlements might be described as a magnet for, container to, and emblematic expression of human cultural systems. They are socially constructed systems that interface between the human species and the biosphere, directly coordinating and mediating the debated nature-culture relationship. If one embraces Lovelock’s (1979) Gaia hypothesis, whereby the planet is considered to be an interdependent, self-regulating unit, or, McDonough and Braungart’s (2013) upcycle approach, whereby human creative pursuits feed reciprocally into biosphere cycles, then perhaps one can find a place for this domesticated species within the ‘natural order’ of things: “Our human role is to deepen our consciousness in resonance with the dynamics of the fourteen-billion-year creative event in which we find ourselves” (Swimme & Tucker, 2011, p.116). Deeply embedding human activities within the cycles of inhabited ecosystems, calls for designers and ecologists, together, to consider the notion of hybridization: “… ‘urbanization is not merely a … distancing of human life from nature, but rather a process by which new and more complex relationships are created’. The challenge of social-ecological integration, however, is one that requires closer articulation, both philosophically and schematically. For example, it is unclear what an application of philosophies such as Leopold’s (1949) land ethic or Rifkin’s (2009) biosphere consciousness should mean, on practical terms, for highly engineered, urban systems. Simply accepting human activity and its resulting technologies as an extension of nature risks dismissing environmental accountability (White, 2003). No doubt, achieving a state of complete integration with ecosystem processes would entail nothing short of a long-term unwinding of rigid infrastructural and social regimes, through a phased, scaled, and community engaged process of renewal. Thus, the arguments for pursuing this direction as part of a long-range sustainability strategy, and the means by which it might be possible to do so within the current social-technological landscape, are worth examination

Interactive analogical retrieval: practice, theory and technology

Analogy is ubiquitous in human cognition. One of the important questions related to understanding the situated nature of analogy-making is how people retrieve source analogues via their interactions with external environments. This dissertation studies interactive analogical retrieval in the context of biologically inspired design (BID). BID involves creative use of analogies to biological systems to develop solutions for complex design problems (e.g., designing a device for acquiring water in desert environments based on the analogous fog-harvesting abilities of the Namibian Beetle). Finding the right biological analogues is one of the critical first steps in BID. Designers routinely search online in order to find their biological sources of inspiration. But this task of online bio-inspiration seeking represents an instance of interactive analogical retrieval that is extremely time consuming and challenging to accomplish. This dissertation focuses on understanding and supporting the task of online bio-inspiration seeking. Through a series of field studies, this dissertation uncovered the salient characteristics and challenges of online bio-inspiration seeking. An information-processing model of interactive analogical retrieval was developed in order to explain those challenges and to identify the underlying causes. A set of measures were put forth to ameliorate those challenges by targeting the identified causes. These measures were then implemented in an online information-seeking technology designed to specifically support the task of online bio-inspiration seeking. Finally, the validity of the proposed measures was investigated through a series of experimental studies and a deployment study. The trends are encouraging and suggest that the proposed measures has the potential to change the dynamics of online bio-inspiration seeking in favor of ameliorating the identified challenges of online bio-inspiration seeking.PhDCommittee Chair: Goel, Ashok; Committee Member: Kolodner, Janet; Committee Member: Maher, Mary Lou; Committee Member: Nersessian, Nancy; Committee Member: Yen, Jeannett

Biotic analogies for self-organising cities

Nature has inspired generations of urban designers and planners in pursuit of harmonious and functional built environments. Research regarding self-organisation has encouraged urbanists to consider the role of bottom-up approaches in generating urban order. However, the extent to which self-organisation-inspired approaches draw directly from nature is not always clear. Here, we examined the biological basis of urban research, focusing on self-organisation. We conducted a systematic literature search of self-organisation in urban design and biology, mapped the relationship between key biological terms across the two fields and assessed the quality and validity of biological comparisons in the urban design literature. Finding deep inconsistencies in the mapping of central terms between the two fields, a preponderance for cross-level analogies and comparisons that spanned molecules to ecosystems, we developed a biotic framework to visualise the analogical space and elucidate areas where new inspiration may be sought

Society and synthetic cells:A position paper by the Future Panel on Synthetic Life

The BaSyC consortium, whose acronym stands for building a synthetic cell, proposes to develop a synthetic cell from the bottom up. In the context of this joined effort, the Rathenau Instituut and Radboud University Nijmegen have organised the Future Panel on Synthetic Life, consisting of societal experts, to explore the social challenges, dilemmas, and possible societal impacts of synthetic cell research, and to advise how this research may contribute to a fair and sustainable future. The goal for the Future Panel is to create an initial agenda for future political, academic, and public debate on the synthetic cell.The profile of science and technology is two-sided. On the one hand, they act as drivers for problem-solving, progress, and emancipation, but techno-scientific innovation can also give rise to disruptive threats. Therefore, societal reflection should be timely and anticipatory. Rather than asking what risks and benefits are involved, the question will be how to engage society in such a way that synthetic cell research can become a joint endeavour, responsive to societal hopes and concerns. Consequently, the Future Panel aimed to:• map the social challenges and dilemmas in a society where a synthetic cell exists;• identify conditions under which synthetic cell technology can be considered beneficial for society; and• advice on how these conditions can be realised.To contribute to this, the Future Panel discussed the role and perspectives of key stakeholders (academia, government and governance, industry, and civil society), besides more specific issues like public responses, biosafety, biosecurity, and intellectual property rights during multiple online and offline meetings within a period of two years. This position paper summarises the most important points of conversation, shared insights, key challenges, dilemmas that were discussed during these meetings, resulting in four recommendations, as a starting point for further analysis and debate.Key challengesDuring the deliberations, the Future Panel encountered four overarching challenges.1. The novelty of synthetic cell research makes it challenging to devise amethodology capable of anticipating public concerns in a domain where overt public attitudes do not exist as of yet.Society and synthetic cells 132. As long as the existing power structures within the contexts that shape developments in science and technology are not explicitly addressed, the development of a synthetic cell will inevitably reproduce and may even strengthen existing power inequalities.3. In order to involve civil society and allow citizens to articulate their views and concerns, besides factual information, the synthetic cell has to be positioned in a proper context: how to develop a responsible narrative that allows the public to actively relate to these developments?4. Even though the BaSyC project is halfway, there are still many unknowns, even unknown unknowns. A key challenge is to connect social, ethical, and science perspectives, and dilemmas, ambitions, and uncertainties related to the building of a synthetic cell.DilemmasDuring the panel discussions, many reasons have arisen, from different perspectives, for involving the general public, governments, industry and NGOs in an anticipatory way. However, doing this reveals some fundamental dilemmas and tensions that should be addressed.1. The BaSyC project is curiosity-driven, aspiring to deepen our understanding of life. At the same time, our desire to know is driven by an impetus to control. How to practice synthetic cell research as a dialogue with nature rather than an appropriation and instrumentalisation of the living cell?2. Many aspects of synthetic cell research are yet unknown. How to allow space for the unknown while, at the same time, opt for an anticipatory and imaginative approach to take the future social and ethical implications and concerns into account?3. How to make research more inclusive by involving public, politics and policy in such a way that it is fostering and inspirational rather than detrimental for curiosity-driven experimentation and exploration?4. Curiosity-driven science requires a great deal of specialism and thrives on serendipity. How to achieve convergence in science, involving multiple stakeholders and taking into account societal expectations and concerns, without frustrating the process of discovery?5. Deliberation requires a dialogue across disciplines, languages, and levels of information. How to combine different vocabularies, perspectives, socio- cultural and time horizons in a meaningful way?6. Within science and technology, and in particular biotechnology, there has long been a discussion about how to deal with knowledge and intellectual property rights. Should life be considered patentable or should life be seen as a common heritage that belongs to everybody?7. How to deal with researchers who need to make their work openly accessible, and companies, incubators, and organisations that want to protect their invention?8. Within projects of four to five years, researchers are under pressure to focus on and deliver scientific publications, while at the same time being encouraged to actively reflect on and engage with the potential societal impact of their work. How to balance conflicting expectations related to different time horizons?RecommendationsThe Future Panel proposes four recommendations for fostering a socially responsible development of the synthetic cell:1. Ensure that the synthetic cell contributes to a fair and sustainable futureTo foster sustainable synthetic cells, we need co-constructed narratives that allow us to explore how synthetic cells may contribute to a sustainable future. It is not enough to stimulate techno-scientific innovation as such. Governments must simultaneously stimulate social innovation, and promote broad stakeholder involvement in synthetic cell research.2. Organise participation of civil society in synthetic cell researchIn order to ensure that synthetic cell research contributes to a fair and sustainable society, an inclusive and participatory process of reflection is required, open to public intelligence, and sensitive to societal expectations and concerns. This requires innovative methods to engage the wisdom of the crowd. Meetings with societal stakeholders should be organised on relevant issues at different moments of the project and should be designed as in-between spaces in which different meanings, interests, and societal values come together and are made explicit.3. Foster a socially responsive academic ecosystemRather than endorsing the status quo, synthetic cell research emphasises the importance of rethinking the university of the 21st century, where research and education must become more inclusive and interactive, bent on developing long- term partnerships with society: with industry and governmental organisations, but first and foremost with society at large. Societal reflection and interaction with society should be an integral part of academic research and education. Therefore, researchers must be empowered to engage with society in such a way that dialogue and interaction become an inherent part of their work, from design to publication.4. Design social governance experiments aimed at renewing the regulatory landscape for new biotechnologies, including the synthetic cellEnsuring that the synthetic cell may contribute to a more sustainable and socially equitable world requires an adequate social understanding of governance and regulatory systems. The current regulatory system is not prepared for that task. We need a new system, which does not reproduce previous polemics. Besides looking at risks, a more comprehensive regulatory regime would integrate questions concerning sustainability, human rights, ethics, and societal desirability. Governance experiments co-designed with societal actors are needed to gain insight into the contours of such a new regulatory landscape on synthetic biology or new biotechnologies, including the synthetic cell

Systematic knowledge transfer for the development of integrated architectural systems

Thesis (S.M.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Architecture, 2010.Cataloged from PDF version of thesis.Includes bibliographical references (p. 64-67).In the last century, many of the developed computational theories and methods have been inspired by biological principles. The design generation methods, originating from these theories, along with the advances in digital fabrication technologies have impacted architecture in the last thirty years. One of the main qualities of the biological systems, functional integrity, can be adapted to architectural systems to shape a new generation of digitally designed and fabricated architectural systems. Proposing a guideline for the development of integrated systems, this thesis first presents a critical review on the precedents of biologically inspired computational theories, form generation tools and digital fabrication techniques. Later, it frames a systematic cross-domain knowledge transfer method, specifically with some guidelines for the development of architectural integrated systems. And finally through an example, it has been demonstrated how the described process can lead to the development of a method for the design and fabrication of an integrated wall system.by Shani Sharif.S.M

Graphic design + biomimicry

GRAPHIC DESIGN + BIOMIMICRY: Integrating Nature into Modern Design Practices is a thesis that explores how to effectively integrate the methodologies and principles of graphic design and biomimicry. The objective is to create an innovative design process resulting in successful, sustainable and timeless design solutions. This process is meant to remind designers of the benefits nature has to offer in helping us solve many of the problems that society is currently grappling with today. Nature over 3.8 billion years has already used its imaginative prowess to find what works, what is appropriate, and most importantly, what lasts here on Earth. The final print application acts as a resource guidebook cataloging all of the research, processes, and findings throughout the documentation of this thesis. This includes the indirect method; applying nature\u27s fourteen design principles with the fourteen universal design principles and elements, as well as the direct method of the biomimetic design process; applying the six stages: (1) Defining, (2) Analyzing, (3) Observing, (4) Selecting, (5) Implementing, and (6) Evaluating. Each chapter within the resource guidebook is defined by each stage in the graphic design + biomimicry process. Informational charts, diagrams, text and photographs are also included throughout to enhance user comprehension of the subject matter that is presented. Overall, this thesis is meant to encourage designers to think differently, forcing themselves to innovate, experiment, push and adapt their designs further than ever before. The objective at hand is to create good design that also has the potential to do good, for the world and everything that encompasses it. We are on the cusp of great change: will designers curl up at the thought of this or embrace this new mode of thinking and biomimetic mindset to help shape a positive future for design, people, and most importantly, our planet