The Big Picture

Humans today have become inextricable with natural resources, so much so that they take from nature what they want and demand it to replenish itself.  The concept of biomimicry demands that humans learn to mimic the biological systems of nature. This concept gives way to nature’s principle that waste equals food in that “the very concept of waste does not exist.” (McDonough) From this notion, comes two proposed metabolisms – the biological metabolism (cycles of nature) and the technical metabolism (cycles of industry.)

Cradle-to-cradle is a related concept that opposes the traditional cradle-to-grave production cycle. Cradle-to-cradle works within either a biological metabolism or a technical metabolism and doesn’t consider the life of a product to end with one use. In discussing these concepts, the Roehner video argues that the question isn’t growth or no growth, the question is, can we follow nature’s laws?

I propose that instead of considering one product’s life-cycle, or one company’s product, we challenge the entire manufacturing industry to create a cradle-to-cradle approach. This concept could be considered more biomimetic in that it will mimic an entire ecosystem’s life-cycle, instead of just one individual. For example, as a tree cycles through its stages over the seasons, it is not self-reliant, it instead creates and utilizes the resources of other animals or plants cycles. The manufacturing industry should resemble a thriving ecosystem by working together to fuel each other through its outputs so that nothing goes to waste. This concept incorporates both metabolisms instead of separating the two because the natural outputs and the technical outputs can both be captured and sold to another factory needing the resource.

While designing cradle-to-cradle products themselves is important, on a larger scale it is vital to consider the entire production industry as a cyclical. Competition for resources is traditional, but cooperation is the future.

For Lease

Industrial Ecology is closely related to biomimicry in that it mimics nature’s processes on an industrial scale. Building on last week’s concept of efficacy in design, this week I the concept of leasing programs. Instead of selling garments to consumers with no control over the full life-cycle, companies should implement programs where they take back the clothes when the consumer is “finished.” “The unspoken assumption of all textile practice is that it results in a finished product,” adds Bradey Quinn in Textile Futures. Returned garments will be rewarded with a discount on their next purchase. This would require from stores “substantial changes from retailers, redesigning their manufacturing expertise to also include repair, etc.” claims Kate Fletcher in Fashionable Fashion and Textiles. This concept can be supported by nature’s principles of using waste as a resource and using materials sparingly. As materials come back into the supply chain, less materials are consequently used and waste in the landfill diverted.

"We are surrounded by genius," Janine Benyus, Biomimicry

"What if our economy were to deliberately look and function like the natural world in which it is embedded?" (Benyus) A not so new concept, biomimicry, could be the answer to sustaining life on Earth, however its wide-spread application is, as always, the problem. Her concept of biomimicry calls us to draw on nature’s multi-billion-year-old investment in research and development of how to not only survive, but flourish. Having read Benyus’ book, Biomimicry, she defines the concept as the imitation of life using nature as model, as a measure, and as a mentor. Biomimicry and Industrial Ecology, another aspect of this approach, have similar principles. In Industrial Ecology, Gradeal clarifies this concept to be an “approach to industry-environment interactions to aid in evaluating and minimizing impacts.” In short, whereas biomimicry generally pertains to product design, IE is the mimicking of nature on a process/production related scale. For a simple and further illustration of Industrial Ecology, see the video below.

In chapter seven of her book, Benyus discusses how human separation from nature was the outcome of the Industrial Revolution. “The farther removed we became from nature in our attitudes, lifestyles, and spirituality, the more dependent we became on the products of [the Industrial Revolution] transformation,” she states. The planet has suffered as a result of our irresponsibility and dependence on consumer products. Indeed much can be learned from nature that could unite and sustain human life on Earth. As inhabitat.com websites slogan claims, “design can save the world,” a large amount of change can take place if design processes revered sustainable approaches. A potentially useful design concept to promote a sustainable future would be a focus on efficacy by producing products of true worth.  Efficacy in design mirrors nature’s principle of optimizing versus maximizing. “The lesson is to slow down the throughput of materials, emphasizing the quality rather than quantity of new things,” clarifies Benyus. She later references how companies focus primarily on product turnover, creating products with a short life cycle - on purpose. This short life-cycle means those products end up in the landfill at a relatively fast rate. Instead, designs should focus on functionality of the product. If a product is functional, its longevity will increase. For example, the dress below can be worn twelve different ways, and utilizes only one piece of fabric.

An argument against producing garmets that have longer and more fuctional lifespans may be that the designer will sell less over a period of time. This elongated turnover process, however, can be offset through utilizing hand-made processes. This adds more value to the product, and thus each is worth more and can be priced higher. Hand-made products eliminate high environmental impacts related to industrial manufacture and require significantly less production resources.

The Three R’s – reduce, reuse, recycle, are in an order for a reason. While reuseing and recycling do have an affect on our impact, they are reactionary approaches. However, reducing our use of products is a proactive approach to a sustainable future. Steps to an overall consumption reduction can begin with a focus on creating functional, lasting, and well-made products. As consumers, we should begin demanding quality over quantity.