Biocentric Principle: the human as part of the biome, not its master

When I say “biocentric principle”, I’m not inventing a fashionable word.
I’m trying to correct a mistake that runs deep in our culture:

we were educated to see the human as above the living world,
when in fact we are only one organ inside a much larger body: the biome.

Forest, ocean, desert, city, river, glacier:
each one is not just “landscape”.
Each one is a metabolic unit that breathes, circulates water and energy,
hosts minds and cultures, and sustains our nervous systems.

From this perspective:

• there is no such thing as “environment” outside us;
  
  

• there is only biome – and we are inside it, like cells in a lung.
  
  

The biocentric principle, for me, is simple and radical:

every human right is also a duty towards the biome that sustains that right.
If the biome collapses, “rights” become empty words.

The focus I want to light

Among everything I could say about ecology and philosophy, I choose one focus:

stop treating nature as scenery and start treating biomes as living subjects
whose health is inseparable from our mental, emotional and political health.

This means:

• the Constitution cannot speak only of “the citizen”;
  
  

• it must also speak of the biome where that citizen exists;
  
  

• it must protect biocentric cycles – water, soil, climate, biodiversity –
  as the very condition for any freedom, any economy, any democracy.
  
  

From anthropocentrism to biocentrism

Modern law has slowly tried to move away from strict anthropocentrism:

• in 2008, Ecuador’s Constitution became the first to recognize rights of nature,
  elevating Pachamama (Mother Earth) to the status of subject of rights and linking this to Buen Vivir (Sumak Kawsay).
  
  

This was called a “biocentric spin” in constitutional law:

• nature is no longer only a resource;
  
  

• it becomes a legal subject with the right to exist, persist and regenerate.
  
  

But even this important step still tends to:

• keep humans at the center of decision-making,
  
  

• treat biomes as “protected objects”, not political agents.
  
  

The biocentric principle I defend goes one step further:

biomes are not only subjects of rights;
they are also the basic political units of a metabolic democracy.

Biophilia and the nervous system of the biome

Biology and psychology have long hinted that our relationship with nature is not just aesthetic; it is structural.

The biophilia hypothesis proposes that humans have an innate tendency to seek connections with other forms of life and natural environments.

This “love of life” is not just poetry:

• it helped our species survive,
  
  

• it shaped our perceptual preferences,
  
  

• it supports our capacity for meaning and hope.
  
  

Recent research is confirming that:

• contact with nature is not only “nice to have”;
  
  

• it modulates brain activity, stress responses and cognitive development.
  
  

An fMRI study showed that just one hour of walking in a forest can decrease activity in the amygdala, a key region for processing stress and fear, compared with walking in an urban environment.

Large population studies indicate that growing up with more green space around the home is associated with a lower risk of psychiatric disorders later in life.

Birth-cohort work with twins suggests that residential green space is beneficial for children’s intellectual and behavioral development, especially in urban areas.

In other words:

the biome is literally part of our nervous system.
Destroying it is a form of neurocide.

When I say “the human is part of the biome, not its master”, I am taking this seriously:
our brain is a local product of a local biome.

DANA and the biocentric State

Here I connect the biocentric principle with DANA.

For me, DANA is:

• the intelligence of DNA,
  
  

• recognized by a secular State as a common ground of life,
  
  

• without turning it into a religion or dogma.
  
  

A DANA State is biocentric because:

• it understands that DNA did not evolve in isolation;
  
  

• it evolved inside ecosystems – forests, rivers, mountains, coasts;
  
  

• the “genius” of DNA only works if biocentric cycles (water, soil, climate, biodiversity) are preserved.
  
  

So the question is no longer:

• “How can we exploit this biome without breaking the law?”
  
  

But:

“How can the State guarantee that every decision
reinforces the metabolic health of the biome and the DNA it carries?”

This changes everything:

• budgets,
  
  

• infrastructure,
  
  

• agriculture,
  
  

• urban planning,
  
  

• energy,
  
  

• education.
  
  

Body, brain and biome: one continuous metabolism

From a neuroscientific angle, the biocentric principle can be seen as:

extending interoception (sensing the internal body)
to an extended body: the biome.

Interoception studies show that:

• the insula cortex integrates internal bodily signals (heart, lungs, viscera) and participates in emotional awareness and decision-making;
  
  

• better interoceptive awareness is associated with more rational choices in economic games and less susceptibility to purely emotional noise.
  
  

When we cut people off from green spaces, rivers, clean air and sky, we are:

• degrading not only physical health,
  
  

• but also the informational field that the brain uses to regulate stress and decision-making.
  
  

Nature exposure studies show that time spent in natural environments can:

• reduce stress-related brain activity,
  
  

• improve cognitive performance,
  
  

• support emotional regulation.
  
  

So a biocentric Constitution is not romantic environmentalism.
It is public neuroscience:

protect the biome → protect nervous systems → protect judgment, empathy and democracy.

From “environmental policy” to biocentric architecture of the State

Under the biocentric principle:

• “environmental policy” is no longer a ministry at the edge of government,
  
  

• but a foundational architecture of the State.
  
  

This implies:

• biome-based planning – budgets and infrastructure designed by biomes, not only by regions or electoral districts;
  
  

• biome health indicators – ecological and mental health metrics as constitutional variables, not annexes to reports;
  
  

• biome councils – with indigenous peoples, local communities and scientists participating in binding decisions, not only consultations.
  
  

Human dignity and rights are affirmed,
but always in relation to the living system that makes them possible.

Draft constitutional article (in Spanish)

Artículo X – Principio Biocéntrico y Protección de los Biomas

1. El Estado reconoce a los biomas que integran el territorio nacional —incluyendo sus componentes físicos, biológicos, culturales y espirituales— como unidades vivas indispensables para la existencia y el desarrollo pleno de las personas y comunidades.
   
   

2. Toda interpretación de los derechos fundamentales y de las políticas públicas se realizará de acuerdo con el principio biocéntrico, entendiendo que la vida humana es parte, y no centro, de los sistemas ecológicos de los cuales depende.
   
   

3. Los biomas serán objeto de protección reforzada, garantizando su integridad, regeneración y continuidad, y siendo considerados sujetos de derechos en lo relativo a su existencia, persistencia y restauración, de conformidad con la Constitución y la ley.
   
   

4. El Estado incorporará indicadores de salud ecológica y de salud mental vinculados a cada bioma en la planificación económica, social y territorial, priorizando decisiones que preserven los ciclos de agua, suelos, clima y biodiversidad como condición del Buen Vivir Metabólico.
   
   

5. La ley establecerá mecanismos de participación efectiva de pueblos originarios, comunidades locales y entidades científicas en la gestión de los biomas, incluyendo el derecho a veto en proyectos que impliquen daños irreversibles para sus sistemas de vida.
   
   

Suggested references (up to 8, with comments – ≥3 neuroscientific)

1. Neto, J. S. (2016). “Rights of Nature: the ‘Biocentric Spin’ in the 2008 Constitution of Ecuador.” Veredas do Direito.
   Analyzes how Ecuador’s 2008 Constitution redefined nature as a subject of rights, explicitly linking this to Buen Vivir. It is a key legal reference for biocentric constitutional thinking.
   
   

2. EcoJurisprudence Project (summary on Ecuador Constitution, 2008).
   Describes how Ecuador recognizes ecosystems as rights-bearing entities with the right to exist, persist and regenerate, placing rights of nature alongside human rights. Supports the idea of biomes as legal subjects.
   
   

3. Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia. Harvard University Press.
   Introduces the biophilia hypothesis: humans have an innate tendency to connect with other forms of life. Provides a deep evolutionary and psychological foundation for a biocentric view of human existence.
   
   

4. Barbiero, G. (2021). “Biophilia as evolutionary adaptation: an ontopoietic hypothesis.” Frontiers in Psychology.
   Argues that biophilia is a hereditary trait and an integral part of human nature. Strengthens the idea that our affinity with biomes is not just cultural, but biological.
   
   

5. Sudimac, S. et al. (2022). “A one-hour walk in nature reduces amygdala activity in women, but not in men.” Molecular Psychiatry.
   Shows that a one-hour walk in a natural environment can reduce activity in the amygdala, a stress-related region, supporting the claim that biomes act directly on brain circuits of stress and emotion.
   
   

6. Engemann, K. et al. (2019). “Residential green space in childhood is associated with lower risk of psychiatric disorders from adolescence into adulthood.” PNAS.
   Large-scale study showing that growing up with more green space around the home is associated with reduced risk of a wide range of psychiatric disorders. It empirically links biome quality to mental health.
   
   

7. Bijnens, E. M. et al. (2020). “Residential green space and child intelligence and behavior: A longitudinal birth cohort study of twins.” PLOS Medicine.
   Finds that residential green space is beneficial for children’s cognitive and behavioral development, especially in urban settings. It supports the argument that brain development is co-produced by biomes.
   
   

8. Kirk, U., Downar, J., & Montague, P. R. (2011). “Interoception drives increased rational decision-making in meditators playing the Ultimatum Game.” Frontiers in Neuroscience.
   Shows that better interoceptive awareness is linked to more rational economic decisions. This provides a bridge between bodily awareness, decision-making and the need to keep bodies embedded in healthy biomes.
   
   

Chile – 12 Fundamentos para una Nueva Constitución

Libertad de Expresión del ADN y Estado Laico DANA

Principio Biocéntrico: el ser humano como parte del bioma, no su señor

Estado Plurinacional y Cuerpo-Territorio: pueblos originarios como guardianes del ADN de la Tierra

Comunicación Viva: enfrentando el poder de los 01s sobre medios, deuda y narrativas

Buen Vivir Metabólico: economía al servicio de la vida, no de la ganancia de los 01s

Democracia de Quorum Sensing Humano: otra forma de decidir en sociedad

DREX CIUDADANO CHILENO: moneda metabólica para distribuir existencia y proteger el bioma

Créditos de Carbono, Ciudadanía Climática y DREX INMIGRANTE: pertenencia más allá de las fronteras

Soberanía de Datos DANA: tributación de la minería de datos humanos por los municipios

Centros de Datos Ecológicos Municipales y Red de Pagos Local: cuando el PIX no se apaga

Democracia Metabólica de los Biomas: cuando la Constitución deja de ser promedio y se vuelve territorio vivo

Jiwasa y Sistemas Complejos: liderazgo orgánico por pautas y biomas

 
Una Nueva Constitución Chilena  - Politica Decolonial

Chile - 12 Fundamento para uma Nova Constituição

Liberdade de Expressão do DNA e Estado Laico DANA

Princípio Biocêntrico: o humano como parte do bioma, não senhor

Estado Plurinacional e Corpo-Território: povos originários como guardiões do DNA da Terra

Comunicação Viva: enfrentando o poder dos 01s sobre mídia, dívida e narrativas

Bem-Viver Metabólico: economia a serviço da vida, não do lucro dos 01s

Democracia de Quorum Sensing Humano: outra forma de decidir em sociedade

DREX CIDADÃO CHILENO: moeda metabólica para distribuir existência e proteger o bioma

Créditos de Carbono, Cidadania Climática e DREX IMIGRANTE: pertencimento para além das fronteiras

Soberania de Dados DANA: taxação da mineração de dados humanos pelos municípios

Datacentros ecológicos municipais e rede de pagamentos local: quando o PIX não desliga

Democracia Metabólica de Biomas: quando a Constituição deixa de ser média e vira território vivo

Jiwasa e Sistemas Complexos: liderança orgânica por pautas e biomas

Chile – 12 Foundations for a New Constitution

Freedom of Expression of DNA and the DANA Secular State

Biocentric Principle: the Human as Part of the Biome, Not Its Master

Plurinational State and Body-Territory: Indigenous Peoples as Guardians of the Earth’s DNA

Living Communication: Confronting the Power of the 01s over Media, Debt and Narratives

Metabolic Well-Being: An Economy at the Service of Life, Not of the 01s’ Profit

Democracy of Human Quorum Sensing: Another Way of Deciding in Society

Chilean DREX Cidadão: Metabolic Currency to Distribute Existence and Protect the Biome

Carbon Credits, Climate Citizenship and DREX Immigrant: Belonging Beyond Borders

DANA Data Sovereignty: Taxing Human Data Mining Through Municipalities

Municipal Ecological Datacenters and Local Payment Networks: When PIX Never Turns Off

Metabolic Democracy of Biomes: When the Constitution Stops Being an Average and Becomes Living Territory

Jiwasa and Complex Systems: Organic Leadership by Issues and Biomes