Biyomimikri Yaklaşımının Sürdürülebilir Orman Yönetimine Entegrasyonu: İlke, Uygulama Alanları ve Ölçülebilir Bir Çerçeve

Öz

Sürdürülebilir orman yönetimi (SOY), ekolojik bütünlüğü korurken sosyo-ekonomik faydaları dengelemeyi amaçlayan çok boyutlu bir yaklaşımdır. Ancak geleneksel üretim odaklı ormancılık uygulamaları, çoğu zaman doğal ekosistem süreçlerini göz ardı etmiş; bu durum biyolojik çeşitlilik kaybı, toprak bozulması ve iklim değişikliğine karşı kırılganlığın artması ile ilişkilendirilmektedir. Biyomimikri, doğadaki yapı, süreç ve ekosistem ilişkilerini model alarak sürdürülebilir çözümler geliştiren disiplinlerarası bir yaklaşım olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, biyomimikri ilkelerinin SOY’ne entegrasyonu kavramsal olarak incelenmiş; silvikültür, toprak ve besin döngüsü yönetimi, yangın yönetimi ve su-erozyon kontrolü boyutlarında uygulanabilirliği sistematik olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Sonuçlar, biyomimikri temelli yaklaşımların ekosistem direncini artırabileceğini, karbon depolama kapasitesini güçlendirebileceğini ve iklim değişikliğine uyum sağlayan daha dayanıklı orman peyzajları oluşturabileceğini göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Biyomimikri
• Sürdürülebilir orman yönetimi
• Ekosistem temelli yönetim
• Doğaya yakın ormancılık

Integration of the Biomimicry Approach into Sustainable Forest Management: Principles, Application Areas, and a Measurable Framework

Öz

Sustainable forest management is a multidimensional approach that aims to balance socio-economic benefits with the preservation of ecological integrity. However, traditional production-oriented forestry practices have often overlooked natural ecosystem processes, resulting in biodiversity loss, soil degradation, and increased vulnerability to climate change. Biomimicry has emerged as an interdisciplinary approach that develops sustainable solutions by modeling the structures, processes, and ecological relationships found in nature. In this study, the integration of biomimicry principles into sustainable forest management is examined conceptually, and its applicability is discussed in the context of silviculture, soil and nutrient cycle management, fire management, and water–erosion control. The findings indicate that biomimicry-based approaches can enhance ecosystem resilience, strengthen carbon storage capacity, and promote more climate-resilient forest landscapes.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Biomimicry
• Sustainable forest management
• Ecosystem-based management
• Near natural forestry

Kaynakça

1. Benyus, J.M. (1997). Biomimicry: Innovation inspired by nature (Vol. 688136915). New York: Morrow.
2. Biggs, R., Schlüter, M., Biggs, D., Bohensky, E. L., BurnSilver, S., Cundill, G., & West, P. C. (2012). Toward principles for enhancing the resilience of ecosystem services. Annual review of environment and resources, 37, 421-448. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-051211-123836
3. Bumgardner, M.S., & Nicholls, D.L. (2020). Sustainable practices in furniture design: A literature study on customization, biomimicry, competitiveness, and product communication. Forests, 11(12), 1277. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11121277
4. Chaudhary, A., Burivalova, Z., Koh, L.P., & Hellweg, S. (2016). Impact of forest management on species richness: global meta-analysis and economic trade-offs. Scientific reports, 6(1), 23954. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep23954
5. Churkina, G., Organschi, A., Reyer, C.P., Ruff, A., Vinke, K., Liu, Z., & Schellnhuber, H. J. (2020). Buildings as a global carbon sink. Nature Sustainability, 3(4), 269-276. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0462-4
6. Dicks, H. (2016). The philosophy of biomimicry. Philosophy & Technology, 29(3), 223-243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-015-0210-2
7. Fadok, R.A. (2022). In Life's likeness: biomimicry and the imitation of nature (Doctoral Thesis). Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
8. FAO. (2018). The State of the World's Forests 2018: Forest Pathways to Sustainable Development. UN.

9. Folke, C., Carpenter, S.R., Walker, B., Scheffer, M., Chapin, T., & Rockström, J. (2010). Resilience thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability. Ecology and society, 15(4). http://www.jstor.org/stable/26268226
10. Gallan, A.S., Alkire, L., Teixeira, J.G., Heinonen, K., & Fisk, R.P. (2025). Biomimicry for sustainability: upframing service ecosystems. AMS Review, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-024-00296-4
11. Gamfeldt, L., Snäll, T., Bagchi, R., Jonsson, M., Gustafsson, L., Kjellander, P., & Bengtsson, J. (2013). Higher levels of multiple ecosystem services are found in forests with more tree species. Nature Communications, 4(1), 1340. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2328
12. Gunderson, L.H., & Holling, C.S. (2002). Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island Press, Washington.
13. Holling, C.S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. 4, 1-23.
14. Imeraj, G., Hoxha, J., & Ali, M. (2021). Risk assessment of forests probed using UAV integrated computing. In 2021 International Conference on Computing, Electronics & Communications Engineering (iCCECE) (pp. 41-47). IEEE.
15. IPBES, W. (2019). Intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Summary for policy makers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services. IPBES Secretariat, Bonn, Germany.
16. ISO 18458. (2015). Biomimetics—Terminology, concepts and methodology. BSI Standards Publication: London, UK.
17. Kroone, N. (2023). Exploring the potential of biomimicry in life sciences: towards interdisciplinary collaboration and a paradigm shift (Master Thesis). Utrecht University, Netherlands.
18. Kuuluvainen, T. (2009). Forest management and biodiversity conservation based on natural ecosystem dynamics in Northern Europe: the complexity challenge. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment, 38(6), 309-315. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40390241
19. Lindenmayer, D.B., & Franklin, J.F. (2013). Conserving forest biodiversity: a comprehensive multiscaled approach. Island Press.
20. Mazziotta, A., Borges, P., Kangas, A., Halme, P., & Eyvindson, K. (2023). Spatial trade-offs between ecological and economical sustainability in the boreal production forest. Journal of Environmental Management, 330, 117144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.117144
21. McInerney, S.J., & Niewiarowski, P.H. (2022). Biomimicry training to promote employee engagement in sustainability. Biomimetics, 7(2), 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics7020071
22. Messier, C., Puettmann, K.J., & Coates, K.D. (Eds.). (2013). Managing forests as complex adaptive systems: building resilience to the challenge of global change. Routledge.
23. Nehizena, O. (2022). Lessons from the forest to improve urban water management and biodiversity (Doctoral Dissertation). Aeres Hogeschool.
24. Nocentini, S., Buttoud, G., Ciancio, O., & Corona, P. (2017). Managing forests in a changing world: the need for a systemic approach: a review. Forest Systems, 26 (1), eR01. https://doi.org/10.5424/fs/2017261-09443
25. Noss, R.F. (1999). Assessing and monitoring forest biodiversity: a suggested framework and indicators. Forest Ecology and Management, 115(2-3), 135-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(98)00394-6
26. OECD. (2025). Scaling up Biodiversity-Positive Incentives: Delivering on Target 18 of the Global Biodiversity Framework. OECD Publishing, Paris.
27. Oguntona, O.A., & Aigbavboa, C.O. (2023). Nature inspiration, imitation, and emulation: biomimicry thinking path to sustainability in the construction industry. Frontiers in Built Environment, 9, 1085979. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2023.1085979
28. Puettmann, K.J., Messier, C., & Coates, K.D. (2013). Managing forests as complex adaptive systems: introductory concepts and applications. In Managing Forests as Complex Adaptive Systems (pp. 3-16). Routledge.
29. Raman, R., Sreenivasan, A., Suresh, M., & Nedungadi, P. (2024). Mapping biomimicry research to sustainable development goals. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 18613. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-69230-9
30. Scheffer, M., Brock, W., & Westley, F. (2000). Socioeconomic mechanisms preventing optimum use of ecosystem services: an interdisciplinary theoretical analysis. Ecosystems, 3(5), 451-471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s100210000040
31. Seidl, R., Spies, T.A., Peterson, D.L., Stephens, S.L., & Hicke, J.A. (2016). Searching for resilience: addressing the impacts of changing disturbance regimes on forest ecosystem services. Journal of Applied Ecology, 53(1), 120-129. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12511
32. Sharma, S., & Sarkar, P. (2019). Biomimicry: exploring research, challenges, gaps, and tools. In Research into Design for a Connected World: Proceedings of ICoRD 2019 Volume 1 (pp. 87-97). Singapore: Springer Singapore.
33. Snell-Rood, E. (2016). Interdisciplinarity: bring biologists into biomimetics. Nature, 529(7586), 277-278. https://doi.org/10.1038/529277a
34. Tate, W.L., Bals, L., Bals, C., & Foerstl, K. (2019). Seeing the forest and not the trees: learning from nature’s circular economy. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 149, 115-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.05.023
35. Tengö, M., Hill, R., Malmer, P., Raymond, C.M., Spierenburg, M., Danielsen, F., Elmqvist, T., & Folke, C. (2017). Weaving knowledge systems in IPBES, CBD and beyond—lessons learned for sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 26, 17-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2016.12.005
36. Turner, M.G. (2010). Disturbance and landscape dynamics in a changing world. Ecology, 91(10), 2833-2849. https://doi.org/10.1890/10-0097.1
37. Vincent, J.F., Bogatyreva, O.A., Bogatyrev, N.R., Bowyer, A., & Pahl, A.K. (2006). Biomimetics: its practice and theory. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 3(9), 471-482. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2006.0127
38. Walters, C.J. (1986). Adaptive management of renewable resources. Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
39. Wissa, A., Alleyne, M., Barley, W.C., & Suarez, A.V. (2022). Best practices of bioinspired design: key themes and challenges. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 62(5), 1147-1152. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/icac143