This profound and accessible book details how science is studying nature's best ideas to solve our toughest 21st–century problems.

If chaos theory transformed our view of the universe, biomimicry is transforming our life on Earth. Biomimicry is innovation inspired by nature – taking advantage of evolution's 3.8 billion years of R\'9126D since the first bacteria. Biomimics study nature's best ideas: photosynthesis, brain power, and shells – and adapt them for human use. They are revolutionising how we invent, compute, heal ourselves, harness energy, repair the environment, and feed the world.

Science writer and lecturer Janine Benyus names and explains this phenomenon. She takes us into the lab and out in the field with cutting–edge researchers as they stir vats of proteins to unleash their computing power; analyse how electrons zipping around a leaf cell convert sunlight into fuel in trillionths of a second; discover miracle drugs by watching what chimps eat when theyᱥ sick; study the hardy prairie as a model for low–maintenance agriculture; and more.

Nature does many other wonderful things we would do well to learn from. Arctic fish and frogs freeze solid and then spring to life, having protected their organs from ice damage. Black bears hibernate all winter without poisoning themselves on their urea, while their polar cousins stay active with a coat of transparent hollow hairs covering their skins like the panes of a greenhouse. Chameleons and cuttlefish hide without moving, changing the pattern of their skin to instantly blend with their surroundings. Bees, turtles, and birds navigate without maps, while whales and penguins dive without scuba gear. How do they do it? How do dragonflies outmaneuver our best helicopters? How do hummingbirds cross the Gulf of Mexico on less than one tenth of an ounce of fuel? How do ants carry the equivalent of hundreds of pounds in a dead heat through the jungle? How do muscles attach to rock in a wet environment? The answers to these questions may seem like trivia to non-expert, but "The difference between what life needs to do and what we need to do is another one of those boundaries that doesn't exist. Beyond mattes of scale, the differences dissolve."

Like every other creature, humans cause a lot of commotion in the biosphere: creating, moving, and consuming. But our species is the only one that creates more waste than nature can safely and efficiently recycle. Ours is only one that ignores ecological limits, exceeds the carrying capacity of the land, and consumes more energy than nature can provide. The ideology that allowed us to expand beyond our limits was that the world -- never-ending in its bounty -- was put here exclusively for our use. But after the topsoil blows away, the oceans go lifeless, the oil wells go dry, and the air and water we depend on are utterly fouled, what will we do? Will we be able to survive? Unlike the impact of a car, is crisis is cumulative. The mounting effects of this ideology are rising temperatures, decreasing grain yields, rising cancer rates, falling fish harvests, dwindling forests, worsening air pollution, and rising oil and water prices. A most resilient creature, I believe we (or some of us) will survive this ecololgical "bottle-neck" squeeze, to use Harvard scientist E.O. Wilson's phrase. But the questions this book seeks to answer is, can we flourish?

As mentioned by other reviewers, some parts were overly technical. However, much of it is written with the layperson in mind. Moreover, the book is rich in philosophy, like that of Wes Jackson, Bill Mollison, Masanobu Fukuoka, and writers Thomas and Wendell Berry (unrelated). And the main point of the book is simple enough for a child to understand. Does it run on sunlight? Does it use only the energy it needs? Does it fit form to function? Does it recycle everything? Does it reward cooperation? Does it bank on diversity? Does it utilize local expertise? Does it curb excess from within? Does it tap the power of limits? And is it beautiful? In order to right our wasteful and dangerously dysfunctional relationship with nature, these ten questions should serve as guiding principles for design and human interaction.

Although some of the science is now dated (e.g., hydrogen fuel cells are now a reality), this book will remain pregnant with philosophical and practical insights for years to come. It is far, far ahead of the times. My only criticism is that, much of the scientific history and intrastructure this book depends on actually helped create the eco-predicament we currently find ourselves in. The labratories she visits (not to mention the cars she uses to visit them) are not exactly eco-friendly. In other words, the author supposes more technology and "progres" will eventually help us out of this predicament.

This book is a landmark - and one hell of a good read. Dssential for anyone interested business, philosophy, ecology, science or engineering. And when combined with other books, like Lester Brown's ECO-ECONOMY, David Korten's WHEN CORPORATIONS RULE THE WORLD, Paul Hawkins' NATURAL CAPITALSIM, Hildur Jackson and Karen Svensson's ECOVILLAGE LIVING, and perhaps something on eco-education, it would fit well into my dream eco-philosophy course. Unfortunately, I'm not a teacher and very few universities have funding for such programs anyway.


Set cynicism aside, and hope can arise....   September 17, 2005
 27 out of 30 found this review helpful

Let me begin by saying I have a BS in chemical engineering and an MSPH in environmental engineering, so I am not some sort of uneducated, naive, "new-age" dreamer, who has no concept of what is practical and what is not. Morover, I have now worked for over 16 years at various industrial facilities (chemical, textile, and other manufacturing) as a process engineer and an environmental consultant. I've seen what's out there in the industrial landscape.

With that said this is simply the BEST non-fiction book I have ever read. It is chock full of fascinating "earth-friendly" ideas that are simply crying out to be implemented. It is written in a very "personal" tone, which I believe amplifies the book's message. In fact, don't let this tone make you think the book's technical depth is lacking. On the contrary, this book delves into some very complex concepts, but does so in a manner that a non-technical person can follow.

For those areas where I have specific knowledge (such as elements within industry who actually WANT to comply with all environmental requirements and WANT be "GREEN"), the author is on target and displays an excellent grasp of what's going on. Thus, for those ideas and concepts in the book that were new to me, I have no reason to beleive that the same does not hold true.

As long as you are able to set asise the cynicism that seems to have risen to such high levels nowadays, this book will make you THINK about better ways of doing things. Just two simple examples include: (1) Designing a perennial "community" for agriculture mimicking the natural plant community that otherwise would be there, rather than planting a non-diverse, single species, requiring annual reseeding, fertilization, insecticides, herbicides, etc.; and (2) Developing industrial processes that mimic what nature has already evolved over millions of years (i.e. photosynthesis) rather than relying on the old-style of "heat, treat, and beat" to make the various products and materials that we now are so reliant upon.

This books speaks to the incredible and imperative need of the "human species" to transform beyond the ideas of the industrial revolution into an ecologically-appreciative mindset that treasures the planet we ALL live upon. If you want a book that is well-written and full of practical ideas and solutions for the future, I heartily recommend Biomimicry by Janine M. Benyus.


Unqualified Author   November 11, 2005
 27 out of 41 found this review helpful

Benyus' degree is in natural resource management and all her previous work has been with wildlife. She isn't qualified to write about many of the topics in this book. At one point she attempts to describe things like the conversion of sunglight energy into ATP in plants and obviously she doesn't understand it so the reader understands even less. Additionally she admits to not understanding and not trusting gene transfection. How can you write about something that you don't understand and don't trust? I was halfway through the book when she started getting stuff wrong about molecular biology (my specialty). At that point I asked myself how much other stuff did she get wrong that I didn't catch? Finally, the author spent too long talking about the scientists and places she visited. How nice they were, what their labs look like, how much wheat is growing outside, and in general a lot of fluff that does little to excite someone about the science.

That aside I have to agree with another review who said this would have been a great book in the hands of a different author. There are a lot of great ideas in here but they're not hers; they're the scientists' and they should have collectively written the book instead.


Interesting science, silly writer   September 2, 2005
 24 out of 34 found this review helpful

This could have been such a good book had it been written by someone else!The usefulness of research into natural models for technologically useful devices is self-evident. The science that Ms Benyus describes is fascinating - research into edible perennial grasses, improved solar cell technology, the ongoing study of pharmacologically useful plants and so on. The book is certainly worth reading as an interesting layman's introduction to this field.

Unfortunately, readers will also have to negotiate Ms Benyus' style and tone of voice, which never rise above sanctimonius sentimentality, and on occasion descend into open intellectual dishonesty. This is most obviously demonstrated by her attempt to make a distinction, entirely fallacious, between good "biomimicry" (respectful of Nature, holistic, fuzzy, warm, spiritually superior) and evil "biotechnology", such as genetic manipulation (too digital, hard-edged and arrogant - though why, she never bothers to explain, beyond the fact that it makes her feel uneasy. Though there are certainly arguments to be made for care in the use of genetic modification technology, Ms Benyus does not trouble to make them, apparently considering that her personal discomfort is a sufficient reason to condemn it.

Her attitude is fundamentally unscientific, or even anti-scientific. At no point in the book does she appear to understand that none of the research she lauds would be possible without the very technological civilisation and scientific method that she decries. The botanical wisdom of the Amazonian tribesperson does nothing to help people outside the Amazon without external intervention, for instance; nor, so far as I am aware, has it imparted any notable superiority in terms of lifespan, maternal mortality or morbidity or other concrete measures of human well-being.

For the reader who wishes to persevere, I suggest that you mine the book for paragraphs descriptive of actual science, and do your best to ignore the commentary in which it is stickily and regrettably embedded.


Overzealous and poorly planned   July 16, 2001
 22 out of 39 found this review helpful

When I bought this book I had high hopes for what I would be reading. I thought this book would give many examples of varied uses (and future uses) of biological processes. This book should have been a description of what new and exciting developments are occurring in biology, and how these are being applied to make environmentally friendly alternatives to current technology. What the reader gets is an extremely enthusiastic, repetitive description of one paradigm per chapter. The descriptions are poorly planned however, as they contain too much jargon for the non-specialist reader, and not enough details for a science-educated reader. Many of the descriptions make it clear that the author never understood what she was writing about. Her enthusiasm is admirable, but it translates into extremely long-winded rants. I look forward to a good book written on this topic. This one isn't it.