Social Biomimicry: what do ants and bees tell us about organization in the natural world?
- 687 Downloads
The social insects serve as exemplars for social biomimicry, the search for social design inspiration from the natural world. Although their group members are individually much simpler than humans, social insect colonies provide elegant tutorials on the large-scale outcomes that can be achieved by social interactions and self-organizational processes. These range from complex physical structures built by collective effort; to exemplars of flexible work organization; to effective consensus building in group decisions. This special issue highlights examples of the lessons to be learned from the bees and ants, providing ways to think about how humans can (and in some cases should not) borrow from social insect rules of organization and their collective outcomes.
KeywordsSocial biomimicry Social insects Self-organization Collective behavior
- Ben-Alon, L., Sacks, R., & Grobman, Y. J. (2014). Similarities and differences between humans’ and social insects’ building processes and building behaviors. In: Construction Research Congress 2014: Construction in a Global Network (pp. 51–60). American Society of Civil Engineers. doi:10.1061/9780784413517.006.
- Benyus, J. M. (1997). Biomimicry. New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar
- Bonabeau, E., Dorigo, M., & Theraulaz, G. (1999). Swarm intelligence: From Natural to Artificial Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Bourke, A. F., & Franks, N. R. (1995). Social evolution in ants. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Camazine, S., Deneubourg, J., Franks, N. R., Sneyd, J., Theraulaz, G., Bonabeau, E. (2001). Self-Organization in Biological Systems. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Cassill, D. L., Casella, A., Clayborn, J., Perry, M., & Lagarde, M. (2015). What can ants tell us about collective behavior during a natural catastrophe? Journal of Bioeconomics, 2015, 1–16. doi:10.1007/s10818-015-9195-2.
- Charbonneau, D., & Dornhaus, A. (2015). When doing nothing issomething. How task allocation strategies compromise betweenflexibility, efficiency, and inactive agents. Journal of Bioeconomics. doi:10.1007/s10818-015-9205-4.
- Chevallereau, C., Bessonnet, G., Abba, G., & Aoustin, Y. (2013). Bipedal robots: Modeling, design and walking synthesis. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Ensminger, J., & Henrich, J. (2014). Experimenting with social norms: Fairness and punishment in cross-cultural perspective. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
- Franks, N. R., Dornhaus, A., Marshall, J. A. R., & DeChaumeMoncharmont, F.- X. (2009). The dawn of a golden age in mathematical insect sociobiology. In J. Gadau & J. H. Fewell (Eds.), Organization of Insect Societies: From Genome to Sociocomplexity (pp 437–459). Cambridge, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Garnier, S., Jost, C., Jeanson, R., Gautrais, J., Asadpour, M., Caprari, G., et al. (2005). Aggregation behaviour as a source of collective decision in a group of cockroach-like-robots. In W. Banzhaf, T. H. Christaller, P. Dittrich, J. T. Kim, & J. Ziegler (Eds.), Advances in artificial life (pp. 169–178). Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Grüner, S., Fietz, A., & Jantsch, A. (2015). Float like a butterfly, decide like a bee. Journal of Bioeconomics. doi:10.1007/s10818-015-9204-5.
- Harcourt, A. H., & De Waal, F. B. (1992). Coalitions and alliances in humans and other animals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Hölldobler, B., & Wilson, E. O. (2009). The superorganism: The beauty, elegance, and strangeness of insect societies. New York: WW Norton & Company.Google Scholar
- Jeanson, R., & Deneubourg, J. L. (2009). Positive feedback, convergent collective patterns and social transitions in arthropods. In J. Gadau & J. H. Fewell (Eds.), Organization of insect societies: From genome to socio-complexity (pp. 460–482). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Passino, K. M. (2005). Biomimicry for optimization, control, and automation. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
- Şahin, E. (2005). Swarm robotics: From sources of inspiration to domains of application. In E. Şahin & W. M. Spears (Eds.), Swarm robotics (pp. 10–20). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Sasaki, T., & Pratt, S.C. (2011). Emergence of group rationality from irrational individuals. Behavioral Ecology, arq198.Google Scholar
- Seeley, T. D. (2003). Consensus building during nest-site selection in honey bee swarms: The expiration of dissent. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 53, 417–424.Google Scholar
- Seeley, T. D. (2009). The wisdom of the hive: The social physiology of honey bee colonies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Seeley, T. D. (2010). Honeybee democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Simon, H. A. (1982). Models of bounded rationality: Empirically grounded economic reason (Vol. 3). Cambridge: MIT press.Google Scholar
- Tschinkel, W. R. (2015). The architecture of subterranean ant nests: beauty and mystery underfoot. Journal of Bioeconomics. doi:10.1007/s10818-015-9203-6.