Differences between biomimesis and formal imitation in architectural design practices

Abstract

Although biomimesis, which has been gaining popularity from the 21st century onward among the diversified architectural discourses following the industrial revolution offers an innovative perspective on the relationship between nature and architecture in the design dimension; its principles are not always fully reflected in theory and practice due to various personal, environmental, economic, political, and other reasons. When biomimesis fails to express its basic principles, distinguishing it from formal imitation becomes challenging, and the boundaries between the concepts becomes blurred. The primary aim of this study is to clarify the features that obscure the distinction between biomimicry and formal imitation, while enhancing the theoretical and practical efficacy of nature-centered designs specific to biomimicry. In order to clarify the boundaries between formal imitation which is a result-oriented approach, and biomimesis which is a process and observation-oriented approach, evaluation criterias that make a difference in terms of concepts have been determined and this vague boundary has been analyzed in line with the parameters of perception, dynamism, interior-exterior relationship, energy and resource efficiency and harmony with the environment through 12 different building examples where the living form can be clearly reflected in the building envelope. The findings indicate that, in cases where natural processes are insufficiently examined or understood during the design phase, the transfer of the natural forms into the design cannot go beyond formal imitation, animalistic and vegetal formations are the most appropriate approaches to the design principles of biomimesis furthermore biomimesis and formal imitation can be clearly differentiated through the factors of observation, process, repetition, integrity and harmony. © 2025 Gazi Universitesi. All rights reserved.