What is Bioregionalism?
Bioregionalism is an ecological philosophy and grassroots movement proposing that human communities organize themselves politically, economically, and culturally around bioregions—areas defined by natural characteristics such as watersheds, soil types, climate zones, native flora and fauna, and landforms—rather than arbitrary political boundaries. At its core, bioregionalism holds that aligning human activity with the ecological realities of a specific place enables sustainable resource use, cultural resilience, and restored ecosystems. The philosophy encompasses both physical geography and what Peter Berg and Raymond Dasmann termed “a terrain of consciousness”—the ideas and practices that emerge from living attentively within a place.
A bioregion is typically centered on a watershed, though boundaries remain intentionally fluid, determined by the confluence of geological features, living systems, and human cultures shaped by those conditions. Bioregionalists advocate for “reinhabitation”—the process of learning to live responsibly in places disrupted by industrial extraction, restoring natural systems while meeting human needs through local, renewable means. This involves developing what Berg called “bioregional identity”: intimate knowledge of one’s home terrain, seasonal patterns, native species, and the carrying capacity of local ecosystems.
Origins & Lineage
The term “bioregionalism” was coined by Allen Van Newkirk in 1975, appearing in his article “Bioregions: Towards Bioregional Strategy for Human Cultures” published in Environmental Conservation. Van Newkirk founded Nova Scotia’s Institute for Bioregional Research, though his early definition focused primarily on ecological zones without fully incorporating human cultures.
The concept gained philosophical depth through environmental activist Peter Berg (1937-2011) and ecologist Raymond F. Dasmann. After attending the 1972 United Nations Conference on the Environment in Stockholm, Berg—a former member of San Francisco’s Diggers movement—began developing bioregionalism as a proactive alternative to what he saw as the reactive, protest-based environmental movement. In 1973, Berg founded Planet Drum Foundation in San Francisco, which became the primary institutional vehicle for disseminating bioregional ideas through publications like the newspaper Raising the Stakes.
The seminal articulation came in 1976-1977 when Berg and Dasmann published “Reinhabiting California” in The Ecologist, defining bioregion as referring “both to geographic terrain and a terrain of consciousness—to a place and the ideas that have developed about how to live in that place.” They introduced core concepts including “living-in-place” and “reinhabitation”—the latter described as “learning to live in an area that has been disrupted and injured through past exploitation.”
Bioregionalism emerged from a confluence of 1970s movements along North America’s West Coast: the back-to-the-land movement, the Diggers, Beat poets like Gary Snyder, and critiques of centralized environmental policy. Key figures included Kirkpatrick Sale, whose 1985 book Dwellers in the Land: The Bioregional Vision became a foundational text, along with Judy Goldhaft, David Haenke, and Stephanie Mills.
In 1976, Berg issued a call for a “Continent Congress” to help North Americans “become inhabitants.” David Haenke responded by organizing the first North American Bioregional Congress (NABC) in 1984 in the Ozark region, attended by 217 people who formed committees on agriculture, education, deep ecology, and watershed restoration. Subsequent congresses met biennially through the 1980s and 1990s in locations from British Columbia to Maine, establishing a decentralized network of regional bioregional groups.
Intellectual precursors include Scottish planner Patrick Geddes’s early 20th-century advocacy for designing cities within their bio-geographical context, landscape architect Ian McHarg’s Design with Nature (1969), and Lewis Mumford’s regionalist writings.
How It’s Practiced
Bioregional practice centers on developing “sense of place” through direct, embodied relationship with one’s home terrain. This begins with observation: learning to identify native plants and animals, understanding seasonal cycles, tracing watershed boundaries, studying local geology and weather patterns, and exploring the human history of a place—including Indigenous peoples’ relationships to the land.
Practitioners engage in ecological restoration work specific to their bioregion: restoring salmon runs in northern California’s Shasta Bioregion, replanting native prairie grasses in the Kansas Area Watershed, or remediating urban waterways. Community-supported agriculture, seed saving adapted to local conditions, and permaculture design aligned with bioregional realities form the agricultural dimension.
Governance practices include bioregional congresses—gatherings using consensus decision-making to address local ecological challenges—and watershed councils that organize political action around natural rather than municipal boundaries. Economic experiments include local currencies, bioregional craft traditions using local materials, and renewable energy systems scaled to regional resources.
Bioregional mapping, distinct from conventional cartography, represents natural features—salmon migration routes, old-growth forest remnants, aquifer recharge zones—alongside human infrastructure. Storytelling, place-based art, and poetry that emerges from intimate knowledge of a specific landscape constitute the cultural expression of bioregionalism.
Educational initiatives teach “where you are” literacy: asking questions like “Where does your water come from?” and “What grew here before settlement?” to cultivate ecological awareness.
Bioregionalism Today
Bioregionalism persists as a decentralized network of regional groups and organizing frameworks rather than a centralized movement. Active bioregional congresses continue meeting, including the Ozark Area Community Congress (OACC), which has gathered annually since 1980, and the Kansas Area Watershed Council, founded in 1982.
The Cascadia bioregion—spanning the Pacific Northwest from northern California through British Columbia—represents one of the most developed bioregional identities, with ongoing organizing around ecological restoration, local governance, and cultural expression tied to the coastal temperate rainforest ecosystem.
Contemporary manifestations include permaculture guilds that organize by watershed, local food movements emphasizing regional diets, community resilience initiatives responding to climate change through bioregional adaptation strategies, and Indigenous land stewardship partnerships that honor original bioregional knowledge systems.
Bioregional principles influence green political parties, watershed protection organizations, urban forestry projects that “rewild” cities, and educational programs teaching place-based ecology. Recent initiatives like the Bioregional Learning Alliance and Department of Bioregion promote bioregional regeneration as a response to ecological crisis.
Common Misconceptions
Bioregionalism is not primitivism. While it draws on Indigenous land stewardship practices, it explicitly addresses how contemporary urban populations can align with bioregional realities. Berg and Dasmann emphasized “greening cities” rather than abandoning them.
It is not separatism or isolationism. Bioregionalists recognize global ecological interdependence while advocating for place-based solutions. The concept of “Turtle Island” (North America) acknowledges continental-scale Indigenous geography.
Bioregionalism is not a rigid mapping exercise. Boundaries remain fluid and overlapping, determined by multiple factors—geological, hydrological, biological, cultural—that vary by context. As David Haenke noted, “Bioregional boundaries are never ‘hard.’”
Critical scholarship has identified problematic dimensions: Berg and Dasmann’s phrase “becoming native” has been criticized as appropriating Indigenous identity. Scholar Sarah Wiebe and others argue that bioregionalism’s rhetoric can erase ongoing Indigenous struggles for sovereignty. Bioregionalism historically emerged from predominantly white settler scholars and activists, and contemporary practice requires honest reckoning with this lineage and active decolonial ethics.
Bioregionalism is not inherently progressive. Critics note that “sense of place” can devolve into reactionary localism or exclusionary identity politics. Without explicit commitment to justice and inclusion, bioregional organizing risks reinforcing rather than challenging colonial land relations.
How to Begin
Start with direct observation. Walk your watershed by following streams to their source. Learn ten native plants in your area and when they bloom. Discover what bioregion you inhabit—many regions have established bioregional identities and maps available online.
Read foundational texts: Kirkpatrick Sale’s Dwellers in the Land (1985) provides philosophical grounding. Gary Snyder’s A Place in Space: Ethics, Aesthetics, and Watersheds (1995) offers poetic-practical wisdom. Home! A Bioregional Reader, edited by Van Andruss and others (1990), anthologizes key writings and reports from early bioregional congresses.
Connect with existing groups. Search for watershed councils, native plant societies, or bioregional congresses in your area. Planet Drum Foundation’s website archives resources on bioregional practice.
Ask bioregional questions: What soil series do you live on? Where does your drinking water originate and where does your wastewater go? What foods can be grown within 100 miles year-round? Who are the Indigenous peoples of your area, and what is their current relationship to the land? What were the dominant ecosystems before industrial development?
Practice reinhabitation through restoration work: join stream cleanups, native plant restoration projects, or community gardens emphasizing regional seed varieties. Let knowledge of your place inform how you live within it.