路培 采訪/Interviewed by LU Pei徐知蘭 譯/Translated by XU Zhilan

?

楊經(jīng)文訪談

路培 采訪/Interviewed by LU Pei
徐知蘭 譯/Translated by XU Zhilan

2016年4月，2016吸碳建筑研討會(huì)在京召開。以此次會(huì)議為契機(jī)，本刊通過(guò)電子郵件對(duì)與會(huì)嘉賓楊經(jīng)文先生進(jìn)行了采訪。

WA：綠色建筑的概念在當(dāng)今比20年前更為流行（甚至更時(shí)尚）。每位建筑師都在談?wù)撋鷳B(tài)學(xué)，都在做“綠色”設(shè)計(jì)。可“什么是綠色建筑”的問題仍具開放性。作為該領(lǐng)域的先驅(qū)，您究竟如何定義“綠色建筑”？

楊經(jīng)文：綠色設(shè)計(jì)與傳統(tǒng)設(shè)計(jì)的區(qū)別在于綠色設(shè)計(jì)必須在設(shè)計(jì)過(guò)程中更多地考慮如何適應(yīng)自然環(huán)境的額外標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。設(shè)計(jì)的這一方面不可避免，而我們也無(wú)法再忽略這一設(shè)計(jì)要素。簡(jiǎn)單地說(shuō)，綠色設(shè)計(jì)是對(duì)人類創(chuàng)造的所有事物和人類改造自然的行為進(jìn)行良性生態(tài)整合的過(guò)程。

WA：您曾說(shuō)自己首先是一位生態(tài)學(xué)家，其次才是建筑師。那么您如何評(píng)價(jià)在一個(gè)所有領(lǐng)域都日趨專業(yè)化的世界里，這兩個(gè)角色之間的關(guān)系呢？

楊經(jīng)文：生態(tài)學(xué)與建筑學(xué)并不直接相互協(xié)調(diào)，我們需要理解兩者之間如何相互影響。永遠(yuǎn)都必須首先考慮生態(tài)學(xué)。人類是大自然的一部分，我們的建筑物則類似于蟻?；蚍涑?。但人類和螞蟻以及蜜蜂的區(qū)別在于，相比起螞蟻、蜜蜂和所有其他物種，人類對(duì)大自然顯然具有更大的影響也更有力量，而非大部分人類活動(dòng)都在與自然隔絕的真空中進(jìn)行。正是這種否認(rèn)的態(tài)度導(dǎo)致了我們今天見到的各種人類對(duì)自然的大規(guī)模破壞。

生態(tài)設(shè)計(jì)的難點(diǎn)在于，生態(tài)學(xué)是對(duì)自然現(xiàn)象進(jìn)行的研究，并且被定義為對(duì)有機(jī)體及其環(huán)境的研究。然而，建筑學(xué)是有關(guān)創(chuàng)造的學(xué)科——手工藝、建成形式的營(yíng)建、為人類的相關(guān)活動(dòng)或功能提供圍護(hù)結(jié)構(gòu)，它們必須讓建筑的使用者和居住者、以及公眾獲得歡樂、愉悅和滿足感。建筑必須具有完善的功能，盡可能美觀，并符合通常的結(jié)構(gòu)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)（成為質(zhì)量精良的構(gòu)筑物、在有限的時(shí)間和預(yù)算內(nèi)完成建設(shè)、滿足當(dāng)?shù)氐姆ㄒ?guī)要求等等）。

“首先是一位生態(tài)學(xué)家，其次才是建筑師”的方式，在本質(zhì)上意味著我的設(shè)計(jì)出發(fā)點(diǎn)著眼于項(xiàng)目所在環(huán)境中的各種生態(tài)屬性（在地段的尺度、城市尺度、生物區(qū)域尺度、以及地球化學(xué)的生物圈尺度上），而它們又繼而成為我進(jìn)行建筑設(shè)計(jì)的背景，無(wú)論是在氣候溫和地區(qū)（如歐洲）還是在寒冷地區(qū)（如北京），是在熱帶地區(qū)（如新加坡）還是在沙漠地區(qū)（如海灣地區(qū)）。

WA：您自從職業(yè)生涯伊始就追求生態(tài)建筑的美學(xué)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。您認(rèn)為綠色建筑和生態(tài)設(shè)計(jì)總體規(guī)劃是否有必要具有明確的視覺特點(diǎn)？如果是這樣，它看起來(lái)應(yīng)是怎樣的？

楊經(jīng)文：在我個(gè)人看來(lái)，生態(tài)建筑應(yīng)該有其自身的美學(xué)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，因?yàn)樗脑O(shè)計(jì)充分考慮了自然環(huán)境及其設(shè)計(jì)過(guò)程，因此與傳統(tǒng)設(shè)計(jì)截然不同。

對(duì)具有自我意識(shí)的設(shè)計(jì)而言，綠色建筑和生態(tài)總規(guī)的生態(tài)美學(xué)或視覺特征并不是必不可少的。而是隨著時(shí)間流逝，自然如此。

如果綠色建筑具有自身獨(dú)特的美學(xué)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，它將更好地推動(dòng)全社會(huì)對(duì)人工制品與自然之間的關(guān)系的理解，并促進(jìn)他們欣賞尊重自然的要求?！白鹬刈匀弧币恢倍际侵袊?guó)傳統(tǒng)思想的組成部分，也是堪輿（“風(fēng)水”）的方法，尤其是“風(fēng)水”中注重巒頭方位的形式派，而不是注重時(shí)運(yùn)生克的理氣派。

綠色建筑的美學(xué)不能被迫產(chǎn)生，它應(yīng)該能夠隨時(shí)間變化自然發(fā)展。一座理想的綠色建筑應(yīng)該看起來(lái)是一套具有生命力的系統(tǒng)——類似一座“建成的混雜生態(tài)系統(tǒng)”。它必須極力效仿大自然，并看起來(lái)生機(jī)勃勃，也許可以通過(guò)室外的植被來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)，而在嚴(yán)寒地區(qū)，也可以通過(guò)室內(nèi)中庭的植被獲得同樣的效果。

WA：綠色建筑價(jià)值不菲。它們常常超出普通大眾能夠擁有或維護(hù)的預(yù)算范圍。您如何看待這一問題？

楊經(jīng)文：是的，綠色建筑更昂貴一些。通常我會(huì)要求業(yè)主在市場(chǎng)費(fèi)率的基礎(chǔ)上額外準(zhǔn)備10％到15％的預(yù)算資金，以滿足各種綠色系統(tǒng)和功能的要求；但它們通過(guò)節(jié)約能源和水資源獲得的資金回收周期通常是8年，甚至更短，并且此后還將繼續(xù)通過(guò)成本的節(jié)約回報(bào)業(yè)主。

根據(jù)《地產(chǎn)經(jīng)紀(jì)人》的各項(xiàng)調(diào)查顯示，一座綠色建筑增值的速度要比普通建筑更快。

WA：您如何看待當(dāng)前的綠色建筑評(píng)價(jià)體系？

楊經(jīng)文：并不是所有的評(píng)價(jià)體系都穩(wěn)定一致。其中一些可能更側(cè)重能源的節(jié)約，另一些則更注重室內(nèi)空氣質(zhì)量（IAQ），或者還有一些更強(qiáng)調(diào)生物多樣性等等。舉例來(lái)說(shuō)，獲得美國(guó)綠色建筑評(píng)估體系（LEED）認(rèn)證的建筑并不等同于獲得CASBI、新加坡綠色建筑標(biāo)志或英國(guó)建筑研究所環(huán)境評(píng)估法（BREAM）認(rèn)可的建筑，因?yàn)槊恳环N評(píng)價(jià)體系采用標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的側(cè)重方面都不相同。

評(píng)價(jià)體系就像人類智商測(cè)試——它采用一套共同的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)衡量每一個(gè)人，卻無(wú)法評(píng)價(jià)每個(gè)人的個(gè)性特征。

綠色建筑評(píng)價(jià)體系行之有效地向普通大眾迅速地推廣了各種綠色的概念，也有效地激發(fā)了當(dāng)代建筑師爭(zhēng)相進(jìn)行綠色建筑的設(shè)計(jì)。大部分評(píng)價(jià)系統(tǒng)都有“既定規(guī)則”，而它們其實(shí)更應(yīng)該 “基于績(jī)效”進(jìn)行評(píng)價(jià)，如在美國(guó)卡斯卡迪亞地區(qū)開發(fā)的“綠色建筑挑戰(zhàn)”系統(tǒng)就是這樣。

WA：您的大部分建筑都位于熱帶地區(qū)國(guó)家。您對(duì)于氣候溫和與寒冷地區(qū)的綠色建筑有什么設(shè)計(jì)策略？

楊經(jīng)文：我們大部分的工作都在熱帶或熱帶附近的國(guó)家，是因?yàn)槲业拇蟛糠謽I(yè)主都恰巧來(lái)自這一地區(qū)。

我們也在氣候溫和區(qū)域（如倫敦的大奧蒙德街兒童醫(yī)院擴(kuò)建項(xiàng)目） 和寒冷地區(qū)設(shè)計(jì)和建成過(guò)一些作品。

每一種氣候區(qū)都有其不同的生態(tài)和生物氣候設(shè)計(jì)策略。例如，在北京這樣的寒冷氣候條件下，我們可以利用當(dāng)?shù)氐沫h(huán)境熱量，尤其是在過(guò)渡季節(jié)（春季和秋季）期間，通過(guò)使用生物氣候或被動(dòng)式的設(shè)計(jì)策略，減少能量消耗。每一個(gè)地區(qū)的動(dòng)植物種也同樣差別很大，因此對(duì)致力于融入整體建成環(huán)境的景觀策略提出了不同的要求。

WA：您可否談?wù)勗谥袊?guó)的工作經(jīng)歷？在中國(guó)遇到的最大挑戰(zhàn)是什么？

楊經(jīng)文：有關(guān)在中國(guó)的工作是這樣的：

（1）在中國(guó)，提供技術(shù)支持的工程師和生態(tài)學(xué)專家人才并不完備。

（2）中國(guó)的業(yè)主并不真正欣賞生態(tài)設(shè)計(jì)的本質(zhì)——他們認(rèn)為我們所做的只是毫無(wú)章法地在建筑物中加入植被而已，卻并不欣賞我們?cè)谑覂?nèi)環(huán)境中營(yíng)造多樣的生物棲息地的工作，也不欣賞我們?yōu)樵黾由锒鄻有赃M(jìn)行深入廣泛的研究、挑選能夠適應(yīng)這些棲息地的本土動(dòng)植物種的工作。

（3）中國(guó)的業(yè)主通常更強(qiáng)調(diào)建設(shè)速度、交付時(shí)間和最低成本，而對(duì)于綠色建筑的道德問題則不予考慮。綠色建筑意味著在道德上“為所應(yīng)為”。

（4）似乎中國(guó)的投資者與開發(fā)商更偏好西方建筑，抱有“西方皆最佳”的想法，并且具有“文化諂媚”的普遍基礎(chǔ)。這就是我時(shí)常面臨的戰(zhàn)斗局面——我在語(yǔ)言方面背景較為混雜，雖然年輕時(shí)學(xué)過(guò)中文，但我不會(huì)說(shuō)中國(guó)大陸使用的普通話，可我的粵語(yǔ)和閩南語(yǔ)相當(dāng)流利。我在12歲的時(shí)候離開馬來(lái)西亞去香港學(xué)習(xí)，所以在香港度過(guò)了大部分的少年時(shí)期。

WA：您的建筑設(shè)計(jì)與其他人的不同之處在哪里？

楊經(jīng)文：讓我們的建筑實(shí)踐與其他綠色建筑設(shè)計(jì)師不同的是，我們的建筑是本質(zhì)上基于生態(tài)學(xué)方法的綠色建筑，而大部分綠色建筑師則傾向于采用“生態(tài)工程技術(shù)”的方法。

我們是世界上僅有的一些能在設(shè)計(jì)中完全實(shí)現(xiàn)綠色設(shè)計(jì)手法的建筑師，這種設(shè)計(jì)方法非常有可操作性，且同時(shí)有堅(jiān)實(shí)的理論基礎(chǔ)。

與此同時(shí)，我們?cè)O(shè)計(jì)的建筑和總體規(guī)劃具有獨(dú)特的審美，而大部分綠色建筑師卻仍在采用傳統(tǒng)樣式或夸張的標(biāo)志性風(fēng)格進(jìn)行設(shè)計(jì)。

WA：中國(guó)正在經(jīng)歷迅速的城市化進(jìn)程，并面臨前所未有的生態(tài)挑戰(zhàn)。您對(duì)同時(shí)擁有極好（職業(yè)發(fā)展）機(jī)會(huì)和（對(duì)環(huán)境后果）肩負(fù)極大責(zé)任的中國(guó)建筑師有什么建議？

楊經(jīng)文：長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)來(lái)看，追求綠色建筑的設(shè)計(jì)是非常穩(wěn)妥且正確的策略，然而它可能并不是非常高效的方式——在中國(guó)建成少數(shù)幾座綠色建筑并不能拯救這個(gè)國(guó)家或拯救星球。它見效太慢，而地球上環(huán)境惡化的范圍則過(guò)于龐大，以至于人類過(guò)去對(duì)這個(gè)星球所做的一切還將持續(xù)影響到未來(lái)。它現(xiàn)在是一項(xiàng)行星“拯救計(jì)劃”。

更糟糕的是，預(yù)計(jì)中國(guó)在未來(lái)約30年內(nèi)即將消耗的能源將呈指數(shù)增長(zhǎng)，并將導(dǎo)致環(huán)境進(jìn)一步惡化。

當(dāng)前有效的綠色設(shè)計(jì)必須在宏觀尺度上得到迅速開展，我的意思是，在跨城市、地區(qū)和基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施的宏觀尺度上進(jìn)行設(shè)計(jì)。

如果我們能夠重新設(shè)計(jì)城市的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施，并以綠色設(shè)計(jì)來(lái)替代，那么改善中國(guó)環(huán)境的任務(wù)將會(huì)更容易，也會(huì)更快得到實(shí)現(xiàn)。僅僅是在中國(guó)建幾座孤立的綠色建筑，就像中國(guó)居民在家庭內(nèi)部進(jìn)行垃圾循環(huán)一樣，它只能讓居民自我感覺更好，對(duì)整體環(huán)境的改善卻是杯水車薪。家庭廢物循環(huán)的工作必須在城市尺度開展，而不是在為數(shù)不多的幾戶家庭內(nèi)部進(jìn)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

1 大奧蒙德街兒童醫(yī)院擴(kuò)建項(xiàng)目，倫敦/Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital Extension， London， 2012 （1-4圖片版權(quán)/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.

2

2 Solaris，新加坡/Solaris， Singapore， 2016

3

3 DIGI 技術(shù)操作中心，吉隆坡，馬來(lái)西亞/DIGI Technology

4

4 法國(guó)留尼旺島總體規(guī)劃/Masterplan for La Reunion Island，

Interview with Ken Yeang