风景园林学：未来的发展前景与责任

撰文：（美国）尼尔·柯克伍德翻译：萧蕾

风景园林学：未来的发展前景与责任

撰文：（美国）尼尔·柯克伍德翻译：萧蕾

“我认为风景园林是一个‘脑、心、手’合一的职业。我们用头脑发现、探究、和理解自然世界，组织并构建事物。我们通过心灵创造艺术、认知、感受和付出。我们用双手组装并感知景观材料，无论是常用的还是少见的材料，都会激发完美制作后的愉悦。因而风景园林全面发挥了人类的才能。”——尼尔·柯克伍德

今天的风景园林教育者有责任引领大家直面当今不断变化发展的学科边界，并坚持本领域的追寻拷问和艺术探索。我坚信上述观点，尽管全球环境的不利因素众多，行业内部也有不同声音——景观都市主义的追随者们认为风景园林师是环境领域专业的领导者；有些人却认为在日趋复杂和矛盾的世界里，在各国肆意挥霍森林和农田资源、流域生态环境危机重重的情况下，在城市社区和私人企业争夺有限的公共开放空间资源之际，风景园林师的作用是次要的，或是中规中矩的。尽管如此，我还是乐观地相信当前的大环境和社会问题有助于风景园林学科发力，并是设计领域发挥智慧、研究学术和该专业学生毕业后工作实践被雇佣的方向所在。

全球和本土对环境资源的竞争似乎是当下的新秩序，这就要求该领域心智强健、政治精明、财政稳健。我乐观地相信，当下环境与社会的痼疾正适合风景园林学科发挥实力，因为这正是目前设计行业关注的热点，正是风景园林学科研究加强投入的方向，也是专业学生毕业后在实践中需要解决的问题。

目前风景园林规划与设计的挑战十分艰巨——全球随处可见大规模的自然破坏，发达国家和发展中国家人口中心的不断扩张，水和矿物资源开采对偏远而脆弱土地的冲击，战争、人口迁移、污染、疾病、生态敏感区的持续毁坏，这些将日渐影响大型风景园林企业的特征以及相对本土化的填入式开发模式。但我们不要忘记，风景园林学过去曾经高效地、务实地、艺术地迎接过类似的挑战。19世纪下半叶至20世纪初期，人们曾面临与现在类似的困境，当时风景园林师们以宽广的视野和惊人的创造力处理问题，为国家景观奠定了基础、构建了框架。我认为风景园林学不能也不应脱离这段历史来讨论未来展前景。

作为教育工作者，我主要关注如何培养学生的基本知识和技能。过去20年中，风景园林规划与设计公司主导着以项目为驱动的研究工作，在设计实践与技术领域取得了开拓性的成果。但这些成果往往因权属问题而保留在主导研究的公司里，未能公开共享。而现在是时机扭转这一趋势了，让我们广泛地联合学术界和业界共同研究、共享成果。因此，我认为未来风景园林发展前景有如下几种可能性：

首先，专业研究应紧密结合现实问题，更直接、更正式地在全球尺度和区域尺度上探讨环境问题。为何业界有时不能直面一些风景园林师应该探索的议题？其次，应明确并探讨一系列专业知识和教育的焦点问题，以推动创造独特的知识空间，让各类构想和信息在不同主题、不同师生研究成果之间传递——可以考虑的3个主题是：风景园林与城市、风景园林设计与修复，以及宏观尺度的环境领域议题。

探讨风景园林发展前景的前提是作为一个设计行业，思想上必须清晰地认知以下问题——我们的基本工作是什么？我们思考的内容是什么？最重要的是，我们作为风景园林师所生产的产品是什么以及与之关联的基本思考和训练是什么？也就是说，我们如何在不同尺度上进行风景园林规划设计？这就是学术资本的延续性所在，能促进设计实践智慧与大学卓越的资源相结合，推动风景园林领域与学科发展。无论我们多么相信风景园林师有强大的能力调整和规划物质空间的扩张，我们都需要重视不断地为设计积累和发展新工具及新应用技术。同时要注意风景园林学基本知识体系的构成内容——什么是核心知识？什么可能成为专业学习和研究的新兴领域？

要完成以上任务，风景园林领域必须努力创造、全情投入、并全力支持良好的研究氛围，并邀请全体风景园林专业学生和实践者参与。这要求不懈的设计探索：追寻植物、土壤、地形、水系统、基础设施、建筑的表现潜能，并结合其他领域和学科的相关信息——如环境工程、材料科学、公共健康、数字化媒体设计，以及气候控制等。我认为风景园林的未来趋势将是持续关注本领域传统议题和交叉学科议题，并紧密结合当下的环境议题。

尽管大多数传统风景园林实践关注物质或视觉要素的完善和保护，但我们更急需理解并关注建成环境目前和未来的健康问题。首先，需要了解自然世界，了解人类发展如何利用自然过程。其次，需要了解人类文化如何演变并产生人类所珍视的习惯、知识和场所。让我回到本文的目标，描绘风景园林未来工作的路线图，展现专业发展中的陡峭顶峰和漫长等高线。

其中的核心就是前文提及的3个关注点：风景园林与城市，风景园林设计与修复，和环境领域议题。

（一）风景园林与城市

作为第1个关注点，风景园林与城市是一个适时的主题，它展现了人类社会与自然过程在人口高密度聚集的城市景观中的联合作用。尽管风景园林领域对都市议题的研究兴趣已持续了相当长的一段时间（并非仅仅是近来流行的景观都市主义，一个即将终结的话题），近期该领域已显示出对城市形态塑造的兴趣。我们能看见并了解现代都市景观规划设计的视觉形态，这些形态并非少数设计师的突发奇想或外行人不计代价地追求关注和创新的结果，而是设计与当时环境、社会、文化、经济、技术条件密切结合的必然产物。

（二）风景园林设计与修复

作为第2个关注点，风景园林设计与修复探讨了人类与自然的分离，例如衰退的工业和水道。对致力于宏观国家景观修复再生的设计师来说，曾有两种源于20世纪初进步时期的并行倡议：一种是保护主义运动，致力于保护和强化美国的开放空间及野生物种等自然环境特色；另一种是公共健康与卫生改革，致力于清理污秽的城市环境，尤其是密集的工人聚居区。这2种倡议均源于19世纪晚期毫无节制的工业化。今天，风景园林师终于意识到公共健康与卫生改革的问题是当代建成环境不可或缺的议题，而不仅仅是过去常强调的环境和野生物种保护问题。风景园林师将在过去5年所完成的几个提案基础上，重点关注建立再生策略和技术的应用知识的议案，以及在发达国家和发展中国家之间可转让风景园林领域相关技术的议案。

（三）环境领域相关议题

最后的关注点在环境领域议题，一个在全球背景下关于大尺度景观开发的前瞻性概念。这个议题关注复杂的景观，例如都柏林至贝尔法斯特的经济走廊，深入推动相关地区打破国家、文化、政治和历史边界；又如中东和阿拉斯加的输油管或是墨西哥北部的新建工业中心，关注特性、生态和发展模式，与区域景观边界的重构相关联。风景园林领域所面临的一个核心问题是发展一个合理的、灵活的、多焦点的途径，去探讨当代风景园林所需要的宽广知识，因为当代风景园林无法用任何一个单一逻辑去理解。

综上所述，与心灵和思想相关的事物是最恒久的。未来风景园林师将继续创造性地思考、教学、和研究，以此作为有效的工具去揭示、表达、延续风景的现实与氛围。通过风景园林艺术、科学和文化研究，包括设计专业课、历史与理论、自然系统、表现与技术，我们将拥有接触并影响世界的迅速而明确的方法。

“I believe that we are concerned ultimately in our work with what you can call 'Head， Heart and Hands'. From the head，finding out and study， understanding the natural world， organizing and structuring，From the heart， the creative art， the knowing，the feeling， the giving， and the hands， the putting together， the sensing of landscape materials， whether living or inert， the pleasure of making， of a thing well made. Thus landscape architecture brings all the human faculties together.”

Niall Kirkwood

It is the responsibility of landscape educators to lead in confronting the changing boundaries ofour current world while continuing the intellectual pursuit and artful exploration of the landscape architectural field. I will not be discouraged by the apparently adverse conditions of much of what constitutes the current global environment or by contradictory concerns expressed， often from within our own profession， that the landscape architect is either the leader of the environmental professionals as expressed by landscape urbanism followers or has a somewhat secondary or lets say more normative role to play in this increasingly complex and often contradictory world where countries squander forests and farm-land， regions fail to protect watersheds， and city neighborhoods and private corporations compete for access to the limited resources of public open space. Global and local competition for and in the environment may be seen as the order of the day， and the situation demands intellectually strong， politically smart， and fiscally sound responses from this field. I believe optimistically that this broad current environmental and social malaise plays to the strength of the landscape discipline， it is where a good part of the current intellectual life of the design field lies， where the landscape architect is increasingly engaged academically， and where our current landscape students will be employed to work in practice after graduation.

Today’s landscape design challenges are formidable- severe levels of large-scale natural disturbance are to be found world-wide， population centers in industrialized and developing countries continue to need to expand， new sources of energy， water and minerals will be sought opening up remote large and fragile land areas， and war，population displacement， pollution， disease and the ongoing destruction of sensitive ecological areas will increasingly influence the nature of large-scale landscape enterprises as well as more localized patterns of infill development. But lest we all forget， landscape architecture has risen to this challenge before- and with great effectiveness，functionality and artfulness. The second half of the nineteenth century and the early part of the twentieth century can boast a similar litany of global woes but landscape architects with breadth of vision and striking creativity addressed them and in doing so laid the foundations and structure of national landscapes. Indeed I believe landscape architecture cannot and should not operate in a vacuum， separated from the issues of the time.

As an educator I am primarily concerned with building students essential knowledge and skills. Over the last twenty years professional landscape design and planning offices have led the way in developing project driven-research. Groundbreaking in areas of technology and design practice but often proprietary in its nature， this information has， not unexpectedly， stayed within the host offices. It is appropriate at this time that this trend is reversed and we can bridge the academic world and broader professional context with which it coexists. That being said there are a number of future prospects that I want to address.

The initial prospect is to engage the concerns of the contemporary world. This enables the landscape field to more directly and formally engage with problems of the environment both at the global and local levels. I have always been slightly mystified when the field has side-stepped what seem to me to be the issues in which landscape architects clearly must be engaged. The second is to articulate and exploit a series of specific areas of intellectual and educational foci. The intention is to create a distinct intellectual space where ideas and information can flow across and between subject areas and groups of faculty and student investigations-three topics to be considered are Landscape and the City， Landscape Design and Regeneration and Environmental Territories which is concerned with developing large-scale landscapes.

The premise und erlying Landscape Architecture’s future is the need to be intellectually clear as a design field - in short， to be precise about what we fundamentally do， what we think about，most importantly about what we make as landscape architects and the intellectual engagement and training that is necessary to carry it out. By this I mean more specifically how we plan and design at differing scales of operation. This is where the continuity of academic capital lies and where the intellect of landscape architects working with the outstanding resources of universities can best advance the landscape field and discipline. No matter how much we may believe in the endless ability of landscape architects to adapt and plan for physical growth there is the need to be vigilant to continue to accumulate or develop new tools and applied technologies to be applied in design. Hand in hand with this is the need to clarify what constitutes the dimensions of basic knowledge in landscape architecture- where the core knowledge lies， along with conversely， what may constitute new and emerging areas of specialized study and research.

To achieve this will require the landscape field to initiate and fully engage in and support a cultureof research and to engage all landscape students and practitioners at all stages of their careers here in these activities. This will require the ceaseless design exploration of the expressive potentials of plants， soil， landform， water systems， infrastructure and architecture allied with information from other fields and disciplines such as environmental engineering， material science， public health， digital media design， and climate control among others. I consider that this coming period will be marked by a continuity with traditional problems in the landscape field as well as more interdisciplinary and thorough re-engagement of landscape design with the current environment.

While much of traditional landscape practice is about the development and/or conservation of the physical and visual aspects of the landscape，there is more at stake than aesthetics in our need to understand and be concerned with the present and future health of built environments. There is a need to understand first the natural world and how development utilizes natural processes and second，how our particular culture has evolved to produce the habits， knowledge and places we hold dear. I want to continue by returning to my goals for landscape architecture that will serve as a 'roadmap' of how the long contours and sharp peaks in the fields development will appear as we work through the coming years.

Central to this are the three foci in Landscape and the Urban， Landscape Design and Regeneration， and Environmental Territories.

Landscape and The Urban

The first focus， -Landscape and the Urban is a timely subject in demonstrating the possibility of human society and natural processes jointly working together in a densely populated city landscape. The field has demonstrated recent interest in the shaping of city form， although it has been engaged in issues of an urban nature for some considerable time- （not just for the recent fashion of landscape urbanism now almost over）. We are in a position to see and know that the visible forms of what can be called modern urban landscape architecture and planning are not the whim of a few designers and interlopers hungry for attention and innovation at all costs， but the inevitable result of working with the environmental， social， cultural， economic and technical conditions of the time.

Landscape Design and Regeneration

The second focus， -Landscape Design and Regeneration addresses the disconnect between humanity and nature as evident in for example degraded industrial land and waterways. For the designer involved with the restoration and regeneration of the larger national landscape， there were two parallel strands that had their roots in the progressive era at the beginning of the 20thcentury. One was the conservation movement dedicated to preserving and enhancing Americas open spaces and wildlife， the other was public health or sanitary reform， dedicated to cleaning up squalid urban conditions particularly in mass housing. The two strands however， were born during the late 19thcentury in reaction to unbridled industrialization. Today landscape architects are finally recognizing the latter， public health or sanitary reform， as the missing link in an approach to the contemporary built environment that has often favored the former- the conservation of spaces and wildlife. Here landscape architects will build on a number of initiatives that have been carried out over the last five years. In particular， focusing on building applied knowledge of regeneration strategies and technologies along with initiatives in the field in transferable technologies between industrial and developing countries.

Environmental Territories

The third and final focus is on Environmental Territories- a forward looking notion of large scale landscape development in the international context. Here we are focused on complex landscapes such as the proposed Dublin-Belfast Economic Corridor crossing deeply forged national， cultural， political and historical boundaries， the oil pipelines of the Middle East and Alaska or the new industrial centers of Northern Mexico where issues of identity， ecology and development patterns intersect with the restructuring of regional landscape boundaries. One of the central questions facing the field is in developing a reasoned， flexible and multifocused means with which to address the breadth of knowledge necessary for these contemporary landscapes that are not accountable by any single logic.

In closing， believing， as we must that things of the heart and mind are the most enduring， in coming years landscape architects will continue creative thinking， teaching， and research as a potent instrument of revelation， expression， and perpetuation of the landscapes actualities and moods. Through the art， science and culture of landscape architecture- in studio design， and history/theory， natural systems， representation and technology， each no less than the other， we possess a swift and sure means of touching and affecting the greater world.

Landscape Architecture： Future Prospects and Responsibilities

Text by： Niall G. KIRKWOOD （US）Translation： XIAO Lei

尼尔·柯克伍德/美国哈佛大学设计研究生院风景园林系教授、博士/美国风景园林协会会士（FASLA）

译者简介：

萧蕾/1975年生/女/广东人/亚热带建筑科学国家重点实验室、广州市景观建筑重点实验室、华南理工大学建筑学院副教授（广州510641）

About the Translator：

XIAO Lei， born in 1975， is a Deputy Professor of the School of Architecture in South China University of Technology.

Biography：

Niall G. Kirkwood has a doctor degree and is a Professor at the Department of Landscape Architecture of Graduate School of Design in Harvard University， US. He is also a Director of FASLA.