杨经文访谈_参考网

杨经文访谈

2016-07-19路培采访InterviewedbyLUPei徐知兰TranslatedbyXUZhilan

世界建筑 2016年6期

关键词：经文建筑师绿色

路培采访/Interviewed by LU Pei徐知兰译/Translated by XU Zhilan

杨经文访谈

路培采访/Interviewed by LU Pei
徐知兰译/Translated by XU Zhilan

2016年4月，2016吸碳建筑研讨会在京召开。以此次会议为契机，本刊通过电子邮件对与会嘉宾杨经文先生进行了采访。

WA：绿色建筑的概念在当今比20年前更为流行（甚至更时尚）。每位建筑师都在谈论生态学，都在做“绿色”设计。可“什么是绿色建筑”的问题仍具开放性。作为该领域的先驱，您究竟如何定义“绿色建筑”？

杨经文：绿色设计与传统设计的区别在于绿色设计必须在设计过程中更多地考虑如何适应自然环境的额外标准。设计的这一方面不可避免，而我们也无法再忽略这一设计要素。简单地说，绿色设计是对人类创造的所有事物和人类改造自然的行为进行良性生态整合的过程。

WA：您曾说自己首先是一位生态学家，其次才是建筑师。那么您如何评价在一个所有领域都日趋专业化的世界里，这两个角色之间的关系呢？

杨经文：生态学与建筑学并不直接相互协调，我们需要理解两者之间如何相互影响。永远都必须首先考虑生态学。人类是大自然的一部分，我们的建筑物则类似于蚁冢或蜂巢。但人类和蚂蚁以及蜜蜂的区别在于，相比起蚂蚁、蜜蜂和所有其他物种，人类对大自然显然具有更大的影响也更有力量，而非大部分人类活动都在与自然隔绝的真空中进行。正是这种否认的态度导致了我们今天见到的各种人类对自然的大规模破坏。

生态设计的难点在于，生态学是对自然现象进行的研究，并且被定义为对有机体及其环境的研究。然而，建筑学是有关创造的学科——手工艺、建成形式的营建、为人类的相关活动或功能提供围护结构，它们必须让建筑的使用者和居住者、以及公众获得欢乐、愉悦和满足感。建筑必须具有完善的功能，尽可能美观，并符合通常的结构标准（成为质量精良的构筑物、在有限的时间和预算内完成建设、满足当地的法规要求等等）。

“首先是一位生态学家，其次才是建筑师”的方式，在本质上意味着我的设计出发点着眼于项目所在环境中的各种生态属性（在地段的尺度、城市尺度、生物区域尺度、以及地球化学的生物圈尺度上），而它们又继而成为我进行建筑设计的背景，无论是在气候温和地区（如欧洲）还是在寒冷地区（如北京），是在热带地区（如新加坡）还是在沙漠地区（如海湾地区）。

WA：您自从职业生涯伊始就追求生态建筑的美学标准。您认为绿色建筑和生态设计总体规划是否有必要具有明确的视觉特点？如果是这样，它看起来应是怎样的？

杨经文：在我个人看来，生态建筑应该有其自身的美学标准，因为它的设计充分考虑了自然环境及其设计过程，因此与传统设计截然不同。

对具有自我意识的设计而言，绿色建筑和生态总规的生态美学或视觉特征并不是必不可少的。而是随着时间流逝，自然如此。

如果绿色建筑具有自身独特的美学标准，它将更好地推动全社会对人工制品与自然之间的关系的理解，并促进他们欣赏尊重自然的要求。“尊重自然”一直都是中国传统思想的组成部分，也是堪舆（“风水”）的方法，尤其是“风水”中注重峦头方位的形式派，而不是注重时运生克的理气派。

绿色建筑的美学不能被迫产生，它应该能够随时间变化自然发展。一座理想的绿色建筑应该看起来是一套具有生命力的系统——类似一座“建成的混杂生态系统”。它必须极力效仿大自然，并看起来生机勃勃，也许可以通过室外的植被来实现，而在严寒地区，也可以通过室内中庭的植被获得同样的效果。

WA：绿色建筑价值不菲。它们常常超出普通大众能够拥有或维护的预算范围。您如何看待这一问题？

杨经文：是的，绿色建筑更昂贵一些。通常我会要求业主在市场费率的基础上额外准备10％到15％的预算资金，以满足各种绿色系统和功能的要求；但它们通过节约能源和水资源获得的资金回收周期通常是8年，甚至更短，并且此后还将继续通过成本的节约回报业主。

根据《地产经纪人》的各项调查显示，一座绿色建筑增值的速度要比普通建筑更快。

WA：您如何看待当前的绿色建筑评价体系？

杨经文：并不是所有的评价体系都稳定一致。其中一些可能更侧重能源的节约，另一些则更注重室内空气质量（IAQ），或者还有一些更强调生物多样性等等。举例来说，获得美国绿色建筑评估体系（LEED）认证的建筑并不等同于获得CASBI、新加坡绿色建筑标志或英国建筑研究所环境评估法（BREAM）认可的建筑，因为每一种评价体系采用标准的侧重方面都不相同。

评价体系就像人类智商测试——它采用一套共同的标准衡量每一个人，却无法评价每个人的个性特征。

绿色建筑评价体系行之有效地向普通大众迅速地推广了各种绿色的概念，也有效地激发了当代建筑师争相进行绿色建筑的设计。大部分评价系统都有“既定规则”，而它们其实更应该 “基于绩效”进行评价，如在美国卡斯卡迪亚地区开发的“绿色建筑挑战”系统就是这样。

WA：您的大部分建筑都位于热带地区国家。您对于气候温和与寒冷地区的绿色建筑有什么设计策略？

杨经文：我们大部分的工作都在热带或热带附近的国家，是因为我的大部分业主都恰巧来自这一地区。

我们也在气候温和区域（如伦敦的大奥蒙德街儿童医院扩建项目）和寒冷地区设计和建成过一些作品。

每一种气候区都有其不同的生态和生物气候设计策略。例如，在北京这样的寒冷气候条件下，我们可以利用当地的环境热量，尤其是在过渡季节（春季和秋季）期间，通过使用生物气候或被动式的设计策略，减少能量消耗。每一个地区的动植物种也同样差别很大，因此对致力于融入整体建成环境的景观策略提出了不同的要求。

WA：您可否谈谈在中国的工作经历？在中国遇到的最大挑战是什么？

杨经文：有关在中国的工作是这样的：

（1）在中国，提供技术支持的工程师和生态学专家人才并不完备。

（2）中国的业主并不真正欣赏生态设计的本质——他们认为我们所做的只是毫无章法地在建筑物中加入植被而已，却并不欣赏我们在室内环境中营造多样的生物栖息地的工作，也不欣赏我们为增加生物多样性进行深入广泛的研究、挑选能够适应这些栖息地的本土动植物种的工作。

（3）中国的业主通常更强调建设速度、交付时间和最低成本，而对于绿色建筑的道德问题则不予考虑。绿色建筑意味着在道德上“为所应为”。

（4）似乎中国的投资者与开发商更偏好西方建筑，抱有“西方皆最佳”的想法，并且具有“文化谄媚”的普遍基础。这就是我时常面临的战斗局面——我在语言方面背景较为混杂，虽然年轻时学过中文，但我不会说中国大陆使用的普通话，可我的粤语和闽南语相当流利。我在12岁的时候离开马来西亚去香港学习，所以在香港度过了大部分的少年时期。

WA：您的建筑设计与其他人的不同之处在哪里？

杨经文：让我们的建筑实践与其他绿色建筑设计师不同的是，我们的建筑是本质上基于生态学方法的绿色建筑，而大部分绿色建筑师则倾向于采用“生态工程技术”的方法。

我们是世界上仅有的一些能在设计中完全实现绿色设计手法的建筑师，这种设计方法非常有可操作性，且同时有坚实的理论基础。

与此同时，我们设计的建筑和总体规划具有独特的审美，而大部分绿色建筑师却仍在采用传统样式或夸张的标志性风格进行设计。

WA：中国正在经历迅速的城市化进程，并面临前所未有的生态挑战。您对同时拥有极好（职业发展）机会和（对环境后果）肩负极大责任的中国建筑师有什么建议？

杨经文：长远来看，追求绿色建筑的设计是非常稳妥且正确的策略，然而它可能并不是非常高效的方式——在中国建成少数几座绿色建筑并不能拯救这个国家或拯救星球。它见效太慢，而地球上环境恶化的范围则过于庞大，以至于人类过去对这个星球所做的一切还将持续影响到未来。它现在是一项行星“拯救计划”。

更糟糕的是，预计中国在未来约30年内即将消耗的能源将呈指数增长，并将导致环境进一步恶化。

当前有效的绿色设计必须在宏观尺度上得到迅速开展，我的意思是，在跨城市、地区和基础设施的宏观尺度上进行设计。

如果我们能够重新设计城市的基础设施，并以绿色设计来替代，那么改善中国环境的任务将会更容易，也会更快得到实现。仅仅是在中国建几座孤立的绿色建筑，就像中国居民在家庭内部进行垃圾循环一样，它只能让居民自我感觉更好，对整体环境的改善却是杯水车薪。家庭废物循环的工作必须在城市尺度开展，而不是在为数不多的几户家庭内部进行。

The 2016 Conference for Carbon-absorbing Building was hold in April 2016 in Beijing. WA took this opportunity to have an e-mail interview with Ken Yeang after the conference.

WA: The concept of green buildings is more popular （even fashionable） now than two decades ago. Every architect is talking about ecology and doing some "green" design. Yet the question of "what is a green building" is still open. As a pioneer in this field， how would you defne a "green building" exactly？

Ken Yeang （KY）: Te difference between green design from conventional design is that green design has the added criteria of the natural environment to be taken into account in designing. This aspect of designing is inescapable and we can no longer negate this in designing. Simply stated， green design is the benign biointegration of everything that humans make and do with the natural environment.

WA: You said you were firstly an ecologist， and secondly an architect. How would you comment on the relationship between these two roles in a world where everything is getting more and more specialised？

KY: Ecology and architecture are not immediately compatible and we need to regard how each infuences the other. Ecology must always come first. Humans are part of nature and our buildings are like anthills or beehives， but the difference between humans and ants and bees is that humans are significantly more infuential and powerful over nature than ants or bees and that all， if not most of human activities have been carried out in a vacuum from nature， and it is this negation that had led to the extensive human-generated environmental impairment that we are facing today.

1 大奥蒙德街儿童医院扩建项目，伦敦/Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital Extension， London， 2012 （1-4图片版权/Photo Courtesy: ©T. R. Hamzah & Yeang Sdn. Bhd.）

Te difculty in ecological design is that ecology is the study of natural phenomenon， and is defned as the study of organisms and their environment. Whereas architecture is about making things - the crafting and making of built forms and enclosures for some human-related activity or function， that must give joy， pleasure and fulflment both the users who use and inhabit it， and to the public. It must also be functional， be as immensely beautiful as possible， meet the usual constructional criteria （be a high quality construction， be built within time and costs， meet local legislative requirement， etc.）.

By being "firstly an ecologist， and secondly an architect"， essentially means that my starting point is design is in looking at the attributes of the ecology of the project's environment （at the site scale， at the urban scale， at the bioregional scale and at the geochemical biospheric scale） and these becomes the subsequent context for my architectural design，whether at the temperate locations （e.g. Europe） or cold climate （e.g. Beijing） or tropical （e.g. Singapore）or desert locations （e.g. Gulf Region）.

WA: You have been pursuing eco-architecture aesthetics from the very beginning of your career. Do you think it is necessary for green buildings and eco-masterplans to have a clear visual identity？ If so， what should it look like？

KY: It is my personal opinion that eco-architecture deserves its own aesthetic， as its designing is very different from conventional design where the natural environment and its processes are taken into account. It is not vital to self-consciously devise an ecological aesthetic or a visual identity for green buildings and ecomasterplans. Tis will happen over time.

If green architecture has its own aesthetic it will facilitate a better understanding by society of the relationship between human-made artefact and nature， and appreciate the need for respect for nature. "Respect for nature" has always been part of the traditional Chinese ethos and approach to geomancy （Feng Shui）， especially the morphological school of Feng Shui but not the astrological school.

The green aesthetic cannot be forced and it should be enabled evolve naturally over time. An ideal green building should look a living system - like a "constructed hybrid ecosystem". It must emulate nature and look like alive， perhaps with vegetation on the exterior， but in the case of cold climates， the vegetation can be inside atriums.

WA: You have to pay for green buildings. Sometimes they are too expensive for common people to own/ maintain. What's your take on that？

KY: Yes a green building costs more. Usually I ask the client to budget an extra 10％ to 15％ over the market construction rate， to allow for green systems and functions， but the monetary pay-back in energy and water savings is achieved over about 8 years or less， after which the costs savings continue to beneft the owners. Studies by Estate Agents indicate that a green building appreciates in value faster than a non-green building.

WA: What do you feel about the current rating systems of green buildings？

KY: Not all rating systems are equable. Some may place greater emphasis on energy， another may place greater emphasis on Indoor Air Quality （IAQ）， or another on biodiversity， etc. For example， a LEED rated building is not equivalent to the CASBI or Green Mark or BREAMrated building， as each has different emphasis in its criteria.

Rating systems are like human Intelligence Tests （IQ tests） - it provides a common set of criteria to rate persons but it says nothing about the person's personality.

Rating systems have been effective in very quickly proselytising green concepts to the general public and in getting the existing generation of architects up to speed in green design. Most rating systems are "prescriptive" whereas they should be "performance based"， as in the US's "Green Building Challenge" system developed by the US Cascadia Region.

WA: Most of your buildings are in tropical countries. Do you have any strategy for green buildings in temperate and cold climates？

KY: Most of our work is in tropical and near tropical countries because most of my clients happen to be from there.

We have designed and built buildings in temperate climates （e.g. the Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital Extension in London） and in cold climates

Each climatic zone requires its own different ecological and bioclimatic design strategy. For instance cold climates such as in Beijing， we can make use of the ambient energies of the place particularly during the mid-seasons （spring and autumn） to reduce energy consumption using bioclimatic or passive-mode principles. The fauna and fora of each zone are also different and requires different landscaping strategy to integrate these into the built form.

WA: Can you talk about your experience of working in China？ What are the biggest challenges you have met here？

KY: Te issues of working China are as follows:

（1） The supporting engineering and ecological expertise are not readily available in China.

（2） Chinese Clients do not to really appreciate what is authentic ecological design - they think all we do is just put vegetation willy-nilly into our buildings but do not appreciate that we create a variety of habitats within our built form， do an enormous extent of research to select appropriate native species of flora and fauna to match the habitats to enhance biodiversity.

（3） Chinese Client tends to place more emphasis on speed of construction and delivery， and lowest cost， and not on green aspirations， which are ethical issues. Green building means ethically "doing the right thing".

（4） There seems to be a preference by Chinese Investors and Developers for Western architects in the belief that the "West is best"， and there is a prevalent underlying "cultural cringe". This is a battle I am constantly fighting - I am a hybrid in that I do not speak mainland Chinese although I studied it for a few years when I was younger， but I speak reasonably good Cantonese and Fukien. My upbringing was mostly in the UK， as I left Malaysia at 12 years old to study in the UK.

WA: What differentiates your practice from others'？

KY: What differentiates our practice from other green architects is that our architecture is authentically green architecture in an ecology-based approach， whereas most green architects tend to be 'eco engineering' based. We are the few green architects worldwide who have a fully worked-out green approach to designing， that is practically driven yet have a frm theoretical basis.

At the same time our building and masterplans have their own signature aesthetic， whereas most green architects are still doing conventional styles or aggrandising iconic styles.

WA: China is undergoing a period of rapid urbanization and facing unprecedented ecological challenges. What is your advice for Chinese architects who have great opportunities （for career developments） and responsibilities （for environmental consequences） at the same time？

KY: In the long term， seeking to do green buildings is all well and fne but it will not be effective - doing a handful of green buildings in China will not save the country nor the planet. It will be too slow and the environmental devastations on the planet is now too extensive that the action that humans have done on th planet in the past shall extend well into the future. It is now a planetary "rescue mission".

Worse - the projected energy consumption in China over next 30 years or so will exponentially accelerate and will create further devastations to the environment.

Green design to be effective has now to be rapidly carried out at the mega scale - by this I mean at the large scale of cities， regions and infrastructure.

If we can redesign and make all our urban infrastructures green， then making China environmentally benign will be easier and will happen much faster. Just doing the few individual isolated green buildings in China is much like the Chinese household dweller doing recycling at home - it just makes the house dweller feel better about himself， but the overall environmental benefit is minimal. Household recycling must be done citywide and not just in the few individual homes.