Biomimicry is more than copying nature: its ethical principles

Yuma Soares Langenbach shines her light on ethically good biomimicry.

Learning from nature does not explicitly lead to sustainable or regenerative solutions. We need to be intentional with our designs to make sure that they actually do support nature as well as our needs.

Ethically good biomimicry includes all three seeds of biomimicry: 

  1. Emulate: the copying of nature’s forms, recipes, processes and systems
  2. Reconnection: the interdisciplinarity and connecting between humans and the rest of life
  3. Ethos: the conscious practice of creating conditions conducive to life

Many researchers, philosophers and educators have identified that biomimicry is more than just copying nature, it is an ethical practice shaped by sustainability, humility, systems thinking, and pedagogy (Estadieu et al., 2025; Linder & Huang, 2022; , 2024). Really “good” biomimicry necessitates reciprocity with nature, through mutuality, bioinclusion, and coexistence.

Biomimicry is still an emerging field, and in an attempt to develop our shared values, intentions and vision, I’ve started collecting some ethical principles we must consider in order to truly create conditions conducive to life.

The 10 Ethical Biomimicry Principle Guiding Questions

1. Are we solving the right problems?
Is the focus on societal and environmental challenges, not novelty alone? (Estadieu et al., 2025; Linder & Huang, 2022; Dhamdar et al., 2024)

2. Are we using nature as measure?
Do we evaluate our designs against ecological standards for what works, lasts, and fits planetary limits? (Dicks, 2017; Estadieu et al., 2025; Paniagua et al., 2024)

3. Do our designs favour regenerative outcomes?
Are we aiming for low or zero ecological footprint and positive social & environmental effects, not reduced harm alone? (Paniagua et al., 2024; , 2024; N., 2021)

4. Do we treat nature as mentor, not a mine to be extracted?
Do we draw insight without reinforcing anthropocentric mastery over nature?(Estadieu et al., 2025; McCormick & Thaddeus, 2025; Mead & Landrum, 2020)

5. Do we respect organism and ecosystem integrity?
Are we avoiding disrupting habitats, life cycles, or natural balances while studying or emulating biology? (Ersanli & Ersanlı, 2023; Estadieu et al., 2025)

6. Are we reconnecting and cultivating the right relationships with nature? 
Are we practising biomimicry as belonging within nature? (N., 2021; MacKinnon et al., 2020; , 2024).

7. When we teach biomimicry, are we explicitly teaching about sustainability/regenerativity?
Do we always include sustainability and ethical responsibility, or clearly state when a course does not provide them? (Linder & Huang, 2022)

8. Do we practice interdisciplinary rigor?
Do we combine biology, design, and systems thinking so biomimicry goes beyond superficial imitation? (Moheb, 2025; Stevens et al., 2022)

9. Do we share knowledge and benefits justly?
Do we communicate findings clearly, collaborate openly, and orient projects toward social benefit and justice? (Ersanli & Ersanlı, 2023; Gopan & S, 2025)

10. Do we use humility and reflexivity?
Do we reflect on motives, likely harms, and whether what is possible is actually useful or responsible? (MacKinnon et al., 2020)

Reference list

Ontdek meer van BiomimicryNL

Abonneer je nu om meer te lezen en toegang te krijgen tot het volledige archief.

Lees verder