著：（比利時(shí)）布魯諾·德·梅爾德 （比利時(shí)）凱利·香農(nóng) 譯：周尤美

在全球范圍內(nèi)，無(wú)論是在城市還是農(nóng)村地區(qū)，氣候變化問(wèn)題的迅速加劇及生態(tài)環(huán)境危機(jī)的日益突出，給全球人居環(huán)境帶來(lái)巨大的挑戰(zhàn)。這些問(wèn)題迫使我們從根本上重新審視為了應(yīng)對(duì)不斷變化的自然環(huán)境及適應(yīng)周?chē)坝^，人類(lèi)應(yīng)該選擇何種居住方式，以及如何居于景觀之上。近幾十年來(lái)，人們開(kāi)始高度重視生態(tài)與風(fēng)景園林學(xué)科。當(dāng)代景觀都市主義的概念正是在常規(guī)規(guī)劃（一般特指土地利用、總體規(guī)劃或藍(lán)圖規(guī)劃）和學(xué)科劃分方面效果不佳的背景下提出的[1-2]。隨著風(fēng)景園林在更寬泛的建成環(huán)境領(lǐng)域中的興起，大量的“明星”風(fēng)景園林師進(jìn)入了大眾的視野，他們多數(shù)人不斷地復(fù)制已有設(shè)計(jì)構(gòu)件及一系列項(xiàng)目，并將其大量剪切、粘貼到各種環(huán)境中。近二三十年中，強(qiáng)調(diào)兼具適應(yīng)性和建筑彈性的景觀和都市主義受到了諸多抨擊。筆者認(rèn)為這些建議共同構(gòu)成了一系列現(xiàn)已被廣泛接受的原則和應(yīng)對(duì)措施的“工具箱”（toolkit）。事實(shí)上這種幾乎普遍存在的應(yīng)對(duì)挑戰(zhàn)的發(fā)展既令人信服，又令人不安。令人信服，是因?yàn)槿藗冋J(rèn)識(shí)到了新干預(yù)措施的迫切必要性；而令人不安，是因?yàn)橥ㄓ玫目?jī)效為基礎(chǔ)的應(yīng)對(duì)方式所帶來(lái)的威脅——其不顧任何環(huán)境的特殊性而展開(kāi)的肆意地對(duì)全世界地毯式的覆蓋。假設(shè)在景觀設(shè)計(jì)和城市設(shè)計(jì)的層面上需要抵抗這種同質(zhì)化發(fā)展，那么如果不是解決方案的工具包（在全球范圍內(nèi)由數(shù)量有限的公司傳播），就是要提供一種基于當(dāng)?shù)丨h(huán)境的特殊性而創(chuàng)建策略的方法。

幸運(yùn)的是，在新自由主義市場(chǎng)不加批判和放松管制壓力的推動(dòng)下，人們對(duì)同質(zhì)化城市和企業(yè)架構(gòu)的失效提出了很多批評(píng)。在半個(gè)多世紀(jì)中，恰恰是“明星”建筑師（無(wú)論他們追求何種形式主義自我滿足）和開(kāi)發(fā)商（最終損害市場(chǎng)規(guī)則的囚徒）為世界各地帶來(lái)了一定程度的相似性和互換性。盡管社會(huì)文化習(xí)俗、經(jīng)濟(jì)、生態(tài)條件或氣候有所差異，但高度同質(zhì)性開(kāi)始盛行，特別是在城市地區(qū)。平面鋪裝、外立面、材質(zhì)的可替換性確保了這些設(shè)計(jì)在全球市場(chǎng)化時(shí)代的任何地方都可以實(shí)現(xiàn)?；旧嫌猩唐穼傩缘奈锲肪鸵馕吨哂锌蓮?fù)制性。建筑歷史學(xué)家Kenneth Frampton認(rèn)為，建筑環(huán)境專(zhuān)業(yè)人員有責(zé)任通過(guò)重新認(rèn)識(shí)景觀來(lái)抵制文化和場(chǎng)所的扁平化趨勢(shì)。他在幾十年前明確提出的批判立場(chǎng)仍適用于當(dāng)下，當(dāng)時(shí)在頗受惡評(píng)的《走向批判性地域主義：抵制體系的6個(gè)要點(diǎn)》一文中寫(xiě)道：“普世文明戰(zhàn)勝了地方傳播的文化……”，并論述批判性地域主義是一種“參與‘培育’場(chǎng)所的行為……（其中）場(chǎng)所特質(zhì)在不喪失感性的條件下得到表現(xiàn)”[3]17,26。1995年，F(xiàn)rampton深刻批評(píng)了建筑與規(guī)劃之間的鴻溝，在他看來(lái)也就是“環(huán)境規(guī)劃的藝術(shù)被削弱到?jīng)]有價(jià)值，取而代之的是土地利用和交通管理學(xué)科。在這種形態(tài)下，占據(jù)主要位置的規(guī)劃策略變成了組織和管理……想必是為了最大限度地實(shí)現(xiàn)地區(qū)經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展”[4]83-84。Frampton后來(lái)提出一種補(bǔ)救景觀的構(gòu)想，可以對(duì)長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)人造商品化造成的破壞性起到很好的補(bǔ)償作用。建筑必須在最廣泛的意義上表現(xiàn)出一種生態(tài)立場(chǎng)（在原文中強(qiáng)調(diào)）[4]92。為了延伸他提出的“理想都市環(huán)境發(fā)展的無(wú)情形態(tài)”的替代方案，并特別提及亞洲大陸，F(xiàn)rampton得出結(jié)論認(rèn)為，巨構(gòu)形態(tài)（megaform，作為地貌、生態(tài)）“是一種能夠改變周?chē)坝^，并賦予特定方位和特性的要素，具體取決于規(guī)模、內(nèi)容和方向”[5]39-40。他指出回歸“地面營(yíng)造”①“可能是當(dāng)今僅有的仍然可用于實(shí)際調(diào)節(jié)隨機(jī)特大都市的正式遺產(chǎn)之一”，它是從錨定發(fā)展到地理特性的反復(fù)迭代[5]40。

現(xiàn)在到了Frampton針對(duì)風(fēng)景園林本身提出敏銳批判的時(shí)候，風(fēng)景園林不應(yīng)再被視為都市主義的救世主，其面臨著新的同質(zhì)化形態(tài)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。2011年，景觀設(shè)計(jì)師兼學(xué)者Richard Weller既準(zhǔn)確又諷刺地回答了這個(gè)問(wèn)題：“隨著全球化的淡出和場(chǎng)所精神被認(rèn)定為古希臘的騙人把戲時(shí)，風(fēng)景園林不再是國(guó)家或當(dāng)?shù)赜∠蟮拇朕o，而是近乎完全成為全球各地城市增強(qiáng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力的附加值。”[6]176他進(jìn)而批判性地剖析了2個(gè)新流行詞，即場(chǎng)所營(yíng)造（新都市主義對(duì)于建筑而言，正如場(chǎng)所營(yíng)造之于風(fēng)景園林）和生態(tài)系統(tǒng)服務(wù)（就像是一個(gè)銀行收費(fèi)的新項(xiàng)目）。他提倡風(fēng)景園林項(xiàng)目應(yīng)更多關(guān)注結(jié)構(gòu)，而不是僅關(guān)注形態(tài)。與此同時(shí)，在《保持美麗。外觀性能：一份分為三部分的宣言》一文中，Elizabeth Meyer強(qiáng)調(diào)了可持續(xù)風(fēng)景園林必須“不僅實(shí)現(xiàn)功能或生態(tài)性，還應(yīng)實(shí)現(xiàn)社會(huì)和文化要素”[7]16。

盡管全球充斥著關(guān)于可持續(xù)性、氣候變化和無(wú)數(shù)環(huán)保政策的言論，但筆者主張的是只有通過(guò)細(xì)致分析周?chē)坝^的場(chǎng)域特性和自然邏輯（這一邏輯與其生態(tài)基礎(chǔ)及社會(huì)、文化形成密不可分）[8]，才能為應(yīng)對(duì)氣候變化的緊迫性制定非廣普的設(shè)計(jì)策略，同時(shí)抵制晚期資本主義市場(chǎng)化的均一性。筆者將著重介紹OSA/RUA（都市主義與建筑研究組）在越南開(kāi)展的最新設(shè)計(jì)研究工作，尤其是與越南政府機(jī)構(gòu)合作開(kāi)發(fā)以及受?chē)?guó)家和（或）地方市政委托的項(xiàng)目。筆者提出六大主題以彌合經(jīng)濟(jì)與生態(tài)、文化與自然、城市主義與景觀之間的分歧。

1 加強(qiáng)農(nóng)業(yè)生態(tài)區(qū)建設(shè)

Alexander von Humboldt（1769—1859）認(rèn)為偉大的博學(xué)者將自然科學(xué)和人文科學(xué)融會(huì)貫通，自然是各種現(xiàn)象的整體相互作用結(jié)果。他通過(guò)一系列全球考察，對(duì)植物區(qū)域作為全球互連的網(wǎng)絡(luò)有了深入的了解。他系統(tǒng)性編制了人類(lèi)如何通過(guò)農(nóng)作物、谷物和蔬菜干預(yù)景觀的文化、生物和物理模式。Stephen Jackson認(rèn)為Humboldt編寫(xiě)的《植物地理手記》“相當(dāng)于一份提倡將植物視為景觀科學(xué)、實(shí)踐和美學(xué)的首要考量的聲明”[9]150。Humboldt認(rèn)為植物學(xué)取決于一些因素，包括氣候、緯度、海拔、地形、大氣條件、地質(zhì)學(xué)和地貌學(xué)，他還強(qiáng)調(diào)“世界各地對(duì)于自然特征的認(rèn)知與人類(lèi)歷史和文化有著最密不可分的聯(lián)系”。Humboldt的研究工作為當(dāng)代生態(tài)（體系）思想奠定了基礎(chǔ)。

在20世紀(jì)60—70年代，德國(guó)植物學(xué)家Heinrich Walter發(fā)表了大量研究成果，強(qiáng)調(diào)植被、土壤和氣候是生態(tài)系統(tǒng)最重要的組成部分。他構(gòu)建了一個(gè)生態(tài)單位系統(tǒng)，將世界劃分為九大氣候生物群區(qū)和許多子區(qū)[10]。自20世紀(jì)80年代中期以來(lái)，為了預(yù)估農(nóng)業(yè)如何面向21世紀(jì)發(fā)展，并著重發(fā)現(xiàn)存在食品問(wèn)題隱患的地區(qū)，聯(lián)合國(guó)糧農(nóng)組織（the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations，簡(jiǎn)稱FAO）與國(guó)際應(yīng)用系統(tǒng)分析研究所（International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis，簡(jiǎn)稱IIASA）合作開(kāi)發(fā)了一些項(xiàng)目。他們制定了一種農(nóng)業(yè)生態(tài)區(qū)（agroecological zones，簡(jiǎn)稱AEZ）方法體系，該方法基于土地資源清單以及對(duì)生物物理局限性和潛力的評(píng)估，實(shí)現(xiàn)了合理化土地管理。他們建立了一個(gè)由氣候參數(shù)、測(cè)繪地貌、土壤和地形、土地覆被以及人口分布情況組成的開(kāi)放源代碼和動(dòng)態(tài)數(shù)字全球數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)，其中包括AEZ計(jì)算方案[11]。

1 農(nóng)業(yè)生態(tài)區(qū)的印象引導(dǎo)下的適應(yīng)性景觀、新定居類(lèi)型以及基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施的概念重構(gòu)Identification of agro-ecological zones led to an adaptive landscape, areas for new settlement types and a reconceptualization of infrastructure

近10年來(lái)，RUA在越南當(dāng)?shù)亻_(kāi)展的研究工作系統(tǒng)性闡述了上述農(nóng)業(yè)生態(tài)區(qū)的概念。事實(shí)上湄公河三角洲區(qū)域規(guī)劃方案以上述概念為基礎(chǔ)進(jìn)行后續(xù)開(kāi)發(fā)：檢測(cè)當(dāng)?shù)厍闆r的變化，包括土壤、海拔、洪水淹沒(méi)模式等，掌握當(dāng)前發(fā)展的趨勢(shì)并預(yù)測(cè)氣候變化的影響，從而找出具有特征性的子區(qū)域。曾經(jīng)巨大的沼澤不斷地調(diào)節(jié)著水流，改變著地貌和濕度變化（潮濕的土壤和飽和的淤泥之間的變化），成為一個(gè)嵌入生態(tài)位經(jīng)濟(jì)的豐富而有活力的生態(tài)系統(tǒng)。然后，在過(guò)去2個(gè)世紀(jì)中，越南經(jīng)歷了嚴(yán)酷的功利主義轉(zhuǎn)變，歷經(jīng)多年動(dòng)蕩后最終實(shí)現(xiàn)全國(guó)統(tǒng)一，向糧食安全問(wèn)題宣戰(zhàn)。此后，湄公河三角洲成為一個(gè)龐大的單一文化產(chǎn)品的廣泛融合之地。盡管如此，由此形成的低價(jià)值景觀仍很大程度上指向區(qū)位、土質(zhì)、海拔、水位等持續(xù)變化的潛在地理環(huán)境。這里有大片連續(xù)的苗圃、果園、花卉、棕櫚樹(shù)、各種蔬菜、水產(chǎn)養(yǎng)殖和隨處可見(jiàn)的稻田。這一地區(qū)的盲目擴(kuò)張和開(kāi)發(fā)顯然已經(jīng)到了毀滅絕大部分自然環(huán)境、扼殺磅礴的湄公河生態(tài)分支的地步。這種“開(kāi)發(fā)模式”無(wú)異于走入一個(gè)死胡同，迫切需要恢復(fù)平衡。因此，生態(tài)重構(gòu)是非常必要的，它的本質(zhì)不是“反發(fā)展”，而是尋求去創(chuàng)造一個(gè)植根于當(dāng)?shù)氐母迂S富的生物多樣性與結(jié)構(gòu)，以及多樣化經(jīng)濟(jì)體，在工業(yè)化大規(guī)模生產(chǎn)與熱帶水果和藥用植物等特色產(chǎn)品之間取得平衡?；谧匀坏慕鉀Q方案（例如作為自然海岸保護(hù)系統(tǒng)的紅樹(shù)林）增加了重新引入生態(tài)結(jié)構(gòu)的觀點(diǎn)，這些生態(tài)結(jié)構(gòu)同時(shí)為生態(tài)恢復(fù)和生態(tài)自我更新，多樣化（和更高價(jià)值）的生產(chǎn)提供了機(jī)會(huì)。關(guān)于六大農(nóng)業(yè)生態(tài)區(qū)的界定，每個(gè)生態(tài)區(qū)挑戰(zhàn)的任務(wù)是重新定義生態(tài)與經(jīng)濟(jì)、單一文化和混合物之間的平衡，這構(gòu)成了湄公河三角洲區(qū)域計(jì)劃的基本依據(jù)。開(kāi)發(fā)策略以現(xiàn)有區(qū)位資產(chǎn)為基礎(chǔ)，實(shí)現(xiàn)了土壤適宜性和生態(tài)完整性之間的平衡（圖1）。

RUA與越南城鄉(xiāng)規(guī)劃研究所（Vietnamese Institute for Urban and Rural Planning，簡(jiǎn)稱VIUP）受邀參加中部高地林同省保祿縣競(jìng)賽，合作開(kāi)展了不同規(guī)模的類(lèi)似活動(dòng)。由于地質(zhì)和地形原因產(chǎn)生了一個(gè)急劇斷裂層，短距離內(nèi)海拔從850 m降至750 m。區(qū)段差異較大，這清晰地表明該地帶適宜居?。何挥谝撵`高原上的城市和農(nóng)業(yè)是由池塘和山谷（北向）組成的人工鏈系統(tǒng)，無(wú)數(shù)丘陵（南向和西北向）上有桑樹(shù)、茶和咖啡農(nóng)場(chǎng)，山脈陡坡上（北部，西部和南部）有特殊防護(hù)林，許多山上有瀑布和保護(hù)區(qū)。但是，從當(dāng)前總體規(guī)劃方案可以明顯看出，預(yù)計(jì)城市開(kāi)發(fā)將忽略該地區(qū)的地理和場(chǎng)域特定條件，引入與越南多數(shù)城市相類(lèi)似的一般城市化模型。RUA-VIUP聯(lián)合發(fā)布的“2040年總體規(guī)劃”指出在改善自然環(huán)境和社會(huì)文化認(rèn)同的同時(shí)，發(fā)展都市化和經(jīng)濟(jì)。新都市化集中在夷靈高原上，而沖積平原作為一個(gè)保護(hù)性干預(yù)，為城市致密區(qū)域變換的影響提供了緩沖。高質(zhì)量城市發(fā)展的特定形態(tài)是在核心城市北部和南部的重點(diǎn)地形上創(chuàng)建的，形成優(yōu)勢(shì)互補(bǔ)的城市居住區(qū)，豐富了居住環(huán)境，并主動(dòng)嵌入到退耕還林區(qū)中。在物種豐富和植被繁茂的環(huán)境中建立一種情境相關(guān)的高價(jià)值生態(tài)/農(nóng)業(yè)旅游和休閑養(yǎng)護(hù)/健康開(kāi)發(fā)項(xiàng)目，為周?chē)h(huán)境提升品質(zhì)，而不是隨著單調(diào)的大規(guī)模開(kāi)發(fā)消散（并且永遠(yuǎn)喪失）。這種經(jīng)濟(jì)模式有力補(bǔ)充了構(gòu)成景觀的農(nóng)業(yè)和林業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì)。該項(xiàng)目還將沿著夷靈高原南緣建立一個(gè)長(zhǎng)近10 km的觀景公園，該公園將作為城市外觀，設(shè)有咖啡館、餐廳和專(zhuān)門(mén)設(shè)計(jì)的建筑物；這些區(qū)域靠近市中心，景觀海拔高度差達(dá)100 m，游客可俯瞰壯麗全貌。作為一處重要景觀，觀景公園可以清晰地表現(xiàn)城市形態(tài)以及城市與特定地理和地形的關(guān)聯(lián)（圖2）。

2 水都市主義

從歷史上來(lái)看，世界上許多城市與水有著密不可分的聯(lián)系。海岸、內(nèi)陸河流和沿海三角洲可提供各種發(fā)展機(jī)會(huì)，便捷的地理位置帶來(lái)的是低成本的交通運(yùn)輸，極為富饒的土地提供寶貴的資源。定居點(diǎn)意味著需要進(jìn)行水管理[12]4。尤其是在亞洲，復(fù)雜的水管理不僅與社會(huì)文化和政治組織交織在一起，而且可以提供伴水而居——即字面上，定居的構(gòu)造以及應(yīng)對(duì)水的不確定性本質(zhì)的處理[13]。然而，隨著時(shí)間推移，以水為基礎(chǔ)的定居點(diǎn)被以道路為基礎(chǔ)的定居點(diǎn)取代。隨著水道被填滿、不透水表面成倍擴(kuò)增以及工農(nóng)業(yè)污染盛行，水被視為一種有限而珍貴的資源的同時(shí)，更應(yīng)被視為一種威脅。而這種危險(xiǎn)的情況，如果加上氣候變化的后果（尤其是洪水、干旱、海平面上升和鹽漬化），顯然迫切需要新方法處理水的問(wèn)題。水都市主義提供了一個(gè)新的可能性。

RUA所有的越南項(xiàng)目中，整個(gè)挖填過(guò)程都有明確的防洪設(shè)計(jì)。精心設(shè)計(jì)的水系和泛濫平原為水提供更多空間。哪里可以建設(shè)與哪里不可以建設(shè)的決定同樣重要，這取決于微地貌的清晰度。在一次應(yīng)邀參加胡志明市（Ho Chi Minh City，簡(jiǎn)稱HCMC）“高度互動(dòng)創(chuàng)新區(qū)”（Highly Interactive Innovative Districts，簡(jiǎn)稱HIID）東部延伸競(jìng)賽中（與VIUP合作），RUA巧妙地利用該地區(qū)的物理特征將西貢河與同奈河之間的河間區(qū)域轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)闅夂蜃兓舾械貛?。西貢河與同奈河（以及Vam Co Dong河、Soai Rap河、Long Tai河）的寬廣流域是巨大的泛濫平原，形成了相當(dāng)錯(cuò)綜復(fù)雜的水系統(tǒng)，覆蓋HCMC 70%以上的大都市地區(qū)?！皻夂蜃兓瘧?yīng)對(duì)國(guó)家目標(biāo)計(jì)劃”（the National Target Program for Climate Change，簡(jiǎn)稱NTPCC）對(duì)于HCMC的所有方案都顯示，該區(qū)域的大部分地區(qū)會(huì)不可避免地定期出現(xiàn)洪水（2100年之前最高可達(dá)海平面上4 m）。東部地區(qū)已經(jīng)進(jìn)行了大規(guī)模填埋，地形發(fā)生了巨大變化。之后的規(guī)劃開(kāi)發(fā)將在大部分地區(qū)填入2 m（6 500 hm2）或3 m（另外6 500 hm2）的沙子。RUA項(xiàng)目終止了這個(gè)州現(xiàn)有的土地操作，將城市發(fā)展集中在較高的土地或者樁基/高腳支撐的建筑上，只用于高密度地區(qū)。城市發(fā)展變成了在多數(shù)濕潤(rùn)的自然環(huán)境中打造綠化群島（其中有些區(qū)域重新引入原生植被和紅樹(shù)林）。傳統(tǒng)城市化模型取代了自然環(huán)境，并將城市穿插在自然環(huán)境之中，具有自我更新和復(fù)原（加以凈化）的特質(zhì)。為HCMC的HIID創(chuàng)新區(qū)帶來(lái)了一種全新的城市化形式：密集與分散共存，固體和流體同在。HIID是一個(gè)水上城市，水決定了城市化的結(jié)構(gòu)，也是主要交通模式，并且引入一種以治理水為主的景觀方式（圖3）。

3 森林都市主義

3 水是西貢河和同奈河之間區(qū)域的DNA。阻斷和掩埋逐漸改變了其流域（2003年，2018年以及根據(jù)2018年暫停法案提出）Water is the DNA of the area between the Saigon and Dong Nai Rivers.Cut and fill has progressively changed the territory (2003, 2018, proposed based on freezing condition of 2018)

城市森林于20世紀(jì)60年代在北美興起，涉及從街邊樹(shù)木到郊區(qū)林地的所有森林和樹(shù)木資源的多學(xué)科設(shè)計(jì)和管理。其逐步甚至激進(jìn)地把植被帶回到城市環(huán)境中。當(dāng)然，這個(gè)新領(lǐng)域建立在自然（尤其是樹(shù)木）與城市交織在一起的悠久傳統(tǒng)的基礎(chǔ)之上[14]。在亞洲數(shù)千年的歷史中，樹(shù)木已經(jīng)在國(guó)境范圍內(nèi)被系統(tǒng)種植，起初由皇帝直接組織，之后由中央政府進(jìn)行組織[15]。著名的《周禮》（公元前1100—770年）就證實(shí)，指定官員沿城墻的護(hù)城河種植和養(yǎng)護(hù)樹(shù)木是必須的。該書(shū)還記錄了沿河走廊的樹(shù)木種植，涉及防洪、土壤流失以及中國(guó)城市街道植樹(shù)的深厚傳統(tǒng)。最初，首都的街道和御用官道開(kāi)始植樹(shù)，提供獨(dú)立的御用通道、避風(fēng)遮陰，防止洪水沖垮道路，以及提供特定的視覺(jué)效果。樹(shù)木死亡后必須迅速更換[16]。俞孔堅(jiān)及其合作者認(rèn)為：“在城市街道和鄉(xiāng)村道路植樹(shù)被視為良好的道德行為，是對(duì)當(dāng)?shù)厝嗣竦囊环N庇佑，人們總會(huì)因?yàn)檎賳T對(duì)綠道建設(shè)做出的貢獻(xiàn)而紀(jì)念他們。”[16]230人們歷來(lái)就認(rèn)為在熱帶地區(qū)，植被（特別是樹(shù)木）是非常必要的，可以緩解惡劣氣候（直到現(xiàn)在，在日常生活的主要戶外的環(huán)境中依然是如此）、改善健康狀況并創(chuàng)造令人愉悅的環(huán)境。即使在過(guò)分強(qiáng)調(diào)基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施和建筑形式的殖民都市主義中，無(wú)論是英國(guó)、荷蘭還是法國(guó)，植被（尤其是喬木）被認(rèn)為是城市規(guī)劃的主要組成部分。在西貢的案例中，后者展示出規(guī)劃更多是通過(guò)種植創(chuàng)造令人滿意的環(huán)境（疏影花園、林蔭大道等），而不是傳統(tǒng)上的物理規(guī)劃。熱帶城市規(guī)劃從定義上就意味著城市森林占主導(dǎo)地位。盡管如此，目前盛行的城市發(fā)展的暢想僅僅是以城市的道路、車(chē)輛和一般意義上的所謂的“智能”高科技商業(yè)園區(qū)為主導(dǎo)對(duì)象的發(fā)展。

RUA-VIUP針對(duì)HCMC的HIID的提案重新結(jié)合了這種明顯的熱帶城市森林傳統(tǒng)，同時(shí)為適應(yīng)氣候變化的要求對(duì)其進(jìn)行了擴(kuò)展。這一點(diǎn)通過(guò)一般措施來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)，例如未來(lái)人居人均至少擁有一棵樹(shù)，以對(duì)抗城市生活不可避免的污染并增加固碳，抵消城市熱島效應(yīng)，豐富棲息地和生物多樣性。此類(lèi)措施還可以提供更多的公共空間和休閑空間（兩者都是目前HCMC極其匱乏的）。樹(shù)木確實(shí)是使熱帶城市的氣候更加宜人的關(guān)鍵，也帶來(lái)令人愉悅的氛圍和提升宜居性。由于HCMC的宜居性排名落后（122/140，經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)人智庫(kù)，2016年最佳城市排名報(bào)告）[17]，必須大量增加自然和公共空間。這就要求新區(qū)開(kāi)發(fā)過(guò)程中自然和公共空間的獲取更加容易——在某種程度上與水系統(tǒng)融合，把整個(gè)城市變成了一個(gè)巨大（有人居?。┑乃瞎珗@。

除了增加城市林木的舉措之外，這一計(jì)劃還根據(jù)特定地形和條件指定特定區(qū)域（例如，保護(hù)同奈河河床中的紅樹(shù)林并延伸發(fā)展，與鄰近的Can Gio生物圈保護(hù)區(qū)連接起來(lái)）。原始村莊（歷史上曾出現(xiàn)在略高的陸地上）的城市綠化策略不同于過(guò)去垃圾填埋場(chǎng)密集植樹(shù)方案（已在Cat Lai工業(yè)區(qū)和Tan Cang港口實(shí)現(xiàn)），也不同于近期幾個(gè)垃圾填埋場(chǎng)上建造Cat Lai橋。新的城市形態(tài)并不意味著填埋，而是嵌入到現(xiàn)有的環(huán)境特色中，與加強(qiáng)林業(yè)穩(wěn)固性同步進(jìn)行。因此，這些新的城市林業(yè)策略是西貢歷史上的城市林業(yè)模式（例如殖民時(shí)期種植的林蔭大道系統(tǒng)）的一種補(bǔ)充。它們產(chǎn)生了一種新的城市林業(yè)形態(tài)，交織于中等密度和高密度開(kāi)發(fā)之中。這個(gè)提案整體的基本前提是2種都市主義自然系統(tǒng)的集約化、多樣化和密集化（圖4）。

4 移動(dòng)性轉(zhuǎn)移

根據(jù)德國(guó)國(guó)際合作協(xié)會(huì)（Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit，簡(jiǎn)稱GIZ）的一份報(bào)告，2014年，運(yùn)輸業(yè)占全球能源相關(guān)二氧化碳排放量的23%左右，其中，公路運(yùn)輸（貨運(yùn)和客運(yùn)）占運(yùn)輸能源使用總量的73%左右。此外，公路運(yùn)輸占全球石油消耗量的47%[18]6-7。值得慶幸的是，后汽油時(shí)代即將到來(lái)。盡管多國(guó)政府堅(jiān)持修建新型多車(chē)道高速公路，但許多跡象表明，交通基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施正在發(fā)生翻天覆地的轉(zhuǎn)變。技術(shù)創(chuàng)新（電動(dòng)汽車(chē)、智能基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施和新型個(gè)人移動(dòng)設(shè)備），加上不斷發(fā)展的社會(huì)文化偏好，為城市設(shè)計(jì)帶來(lái)了一系列新機(jī)遇。大量的指南和項(xiàng)目將城市植被、雨水管理、公共共享交通以及復(fù)興的公共領(lǐng)域結(jié)合在一起，提供了引人注目的街道重塑功能。除重新規(guī)劃之外，水基城市交通的再投資還存在尚待開(kāi)發(fā)的潛力。亞洲的許多地區(qū)尤其如此，而如前所述，在三角洲、沿海地區(qū)、大型洪泛區(qū)都有大量的城市集中區(qū)域。從經(jīng)濟(jì)和物流的角度來(lái)看，在這種情況下，水運(yùn)遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過(guò)了路運(yùn)，公路運(yùn)輸昂貴且建設(shè)工期長(zhǎng)，因此需要聰明地轉(zhuǎn)變基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施交通政策，以尋找最有效、經(jīng)濟(jì)的方式達(dá)到相同的跨區(qū)域可及的方法。即將投資從公路轉(zhuǎn)向水路。

在越南南部，尤其是湄公河三角洲地區(qū)，水路是幾個(gè)世紀(jì)以來(lái)的自然運(yùn)輸方式。三角洲高度發(fā)達(dá)的水系統(tǒng)包括無(wú)數(shù)河流、7 000 km一級(jí)運(yùn)河、4 000 km二級(jí)運(yùn)河的廣闊網(wǎng)絡(luò)[19]19②。傳統(tǒng)意義上，人們定居于天然的河道堤壩上，從而形成了一種流域文明，而河流的流域政權(quán)更替決定了定居點(diǎn)位置。水路和平行道路網(wǎng)絡(luò)將多種功能及意義捆綁在一起，壯麗的藍(lán)色網(wǎng)絡(luò)仍然是工業(yè)大規(guī)模生產(chǎn)的最適合的運(yùn)輸方式。在擬議的“湄公河三角洲區(qū)域規(guī)劃”中，亞洲開(kāi)發(fā)銀行和越南政府資助的一些公路計(jì)劃將被取消，因其位于預(yù)計(jì)未來(lái)幾十年將發(fā)生嚴(yán)重洪水的地區(qū)。與此同時(shí)，除修建新運(yùn)河外，對(duì)現(xiàn)有水道的疏浚將為更多的貨物、客流重新注入具有歷史意義和環(huán)保意義的運(yùn)輸方式。

在HIID項(xiàng)目中，擬建的水上交通系統(tǒng)將建立在城市的地理基礎(chǔ)之上。西貢城市建在西貢河西岸的同奈沙伊拉普河三角洲，與雄偉的湄公河三角洲匯合成一個(gè)面積約78 000 km2的廣闊而平坦的泥質(zhì)平原。這一廣袤區(qū)域是以HCMC為金融中心的經(jīng)濟(jì)實(shí)體。自1790年建立以來(lái)（作為城塞），這座城市便由水系組成，它是該國(guó)的主要港口。區(qū)域間、區(qū)域性、地方性的運(yùn)河和溝渠與河流系統(tǒng)交織在一起，形成了基本的水網(wǎng)，同時(shí)也是該地區(qū)的空間標(biāo)志。修建運(yùn)河的目的是引水、交替排水、灌溉土地以及運(yùn)輸。宏偉的植被、寬闊的林蔭系統(tǒng)補(bǔ)充了水系，并在嚴(yán)酷的熱帶陽(yáng)光下形成可接受的微氣候。林蔭大道可以提供通往（花園）陸地的通道，并允許多種交通工具通行，包括馬、自行車(chē)、行人、汽車(chē)以及同樣重要的有軌電車(chē)。反觀之，有軌電車(chē)這種交通方式對(duì)于一座從一開(kāi)始就將廣袤與人口密度結(jié)合在一起的城市而言，具有重大意義。

新開(kāi)發(fā)項(xiàng)目位于西貢河和同奈河之間，是一個(gè)在自然環(huán)境下多水的群島。該項(xiàng)目將自然的水上交通（包括為電動(dòng)摩托車(chē)提供的起始與終點(diǎn)的場(chǎng)地）與智能技術(shù)的優(yōu)勢(shì)相結(jié)合。不同于傳統(tǒng)的固定線路和時(shí)間表，一支由各種規(guī)模的船只組成的船隊(duì)將按需工作（通過(guò)應(yīng)用程序）。浮標(biāo)平臺(tái)網(wǎng)絡(luò)允許廣泛地訪問(wèn)，水上地鐵（WETRO）不僅高效、經(jīng)濟(jì)、生態(tài)合理，而且是一個(gè)極其舒適的交通工具，它以創(chuàng)新而高效的方式跨越技術(shù)障礙，使得濕地生態(tài)系統(tǒng)可以隨著HIID的發(fā)展而不斷地演進(jìn)。在地勢(shì)較高的地區(qū)（主要是歷史悠久的HCMC和Thu Duc區(qū)南部、中部高地的丘陵地帶），有軌電車(chē)系統(tǒng)（一種新型智能系統(tǒng)）是最方便的公共交通工具，可與電動(dòng)摩托車(chē)形成互補(bǔ)（逐漸取代目前HCMC超850萬(wàn)輛的摩托車(chē)）。移動(dòng)的未來(lái)是基于自然解決方案與智能技術(shù)的結(jié)合（圖5）。

4 跨尺度上，建議利用當(dāng)?shù)刂参镂锓N創(chuàng)建公園，提升生物多樣性，作為對(duì)應(yīng)碳排放和空氣污染的渠道Across scales, local vegetal species are proposed to create public parks, expand bio-diversity and work as carbon and air pollution sinks

5 沿海退耕還林

沿海地區(qū)，尤其是三角洲，既有明顯的濕潤(rùn)梯度，也有相應(yīng)的動(dòng)植物自然變化。隨著時(shí)間的推移，景觀功能退化，過(guò)渡為滿足人類(lèi)活動(dòng)和耕種的干濕區(qū)劃。運(yùn)河、堤壩和溝渠等堅(jiān)固的工程在很大程度上消除了曾經(jīng)豐富的干濕梯度。聯(lián)合國(guó)資料顯示，目前全世界37%的人口生活在海岸線100 km以內(nèi)[20]。這個(gè)比例在低海拔沿海地區(qū)（LCEZ，指沿海岸且海拔低于10 m的水文相連區(qū)域的陸地）甚至更高。中國(guó)、印度、孟加拉國(guó)、印度尼西亞和越南是世界上沿海人口最多的國(guó)家[21]。同時(shí)，這些地區(qū)極易受到氣候變化、鹽堿灘和海平面上升以及風(fēng)暴潮和異常天氣事件強(qiáng)度和頻率增加的影響。迫切需要從根本上對(duì)沿海地區(qū)的發(fā)展進(jìn)行徹底改革。除了新的水都市主義類(lèi)型之外，人們對(duì)恢復(fù)自然動(dòng)力和生態(tài)系統(tǒng)的認(rèn)識(shí)越來(lái)越多，而對(duì)于這一點(diǎn)最根本的就是沙丘的動(dòng)態(tài)發(fā)展演變和重新造林，以及紅樹(shù)林和沿海濕地的再生和延伸。沿海植被對(duì)固碳有著非常重要的作用，同時(shí)能夠緩沖氣候變化帶來(lái)的海平面上升和波浪沖擊的影響。在海岸線及沿海通過(guò)森林重塑和重新造林達(dá)到的智能空間重構(gòu)的背后蘊(yùn)含著巨大的機(jī)會(huì)，其中包括提供帶有棲息地保護(hù)功能的生活生產(chǎn)性景觀、休閑方面的新的可能性。沿海再造林與造林策略可以逆轉(zhuǎn)濕度梯度的馴化和固定化。將海岸視為一條線的主流觀點(diǎn)因而受到譴責(zé)，被認(rèn)為是一種站不住腳的“守住防線”的態(tài)度。相反，應(yīng)該將海岸視為一塊巨大的區(qū)域，其自然動(dòng)力會(huì)產(chǎn)生穩(wěn)固性和豐富性，這是海岸（線）智能空間重構(gòu)的關(guān)鍵所在。

5 現(xiàn)有的精制水系統(tǒng)是水運(yùn)網(wǎng)絡(luò)和應(yīng)用程序的基礎(chǔ)，結(jié)合WETRO，以及個(gè)人出行機(jī)制的以需求為基礎(chǔ)的交通系統(tǒng)The existing,fine-mazed water system is the basis for a water transport mesh and an app, on-demand based system of transport that combines WETRO, METRO and personal mobility mechanisms

在承天順化省（Thua Thien Hue）60 km長(zhǎng)Tam Giang-Cau Hai潟湖的空間發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略（由RUA與VIUP合作）里，重新定義了沙丘岸線生態(tài)的原動(dòng)力。香河（Perfume River）河口，東南亞最大的潟湖位于順化下游20 km處。受伊恩·麥克哈格（Ian McHarg）著名的《設(shè)計(jì)結(jié)合自然》（DesignwithNature）[22]中關(guān)于沙丘部分的啟發(fā)：我們重新建構(gòu)一個(gè)深層的沙丘和潟湖景觀，為重構(gòu)動(dòng)態(tài)景觀和定義發(fā)展策略提供了基礎(chǔ)。提議將潟湖視為一個(gè)“保護(hù)區(qū)”、一個(gè)重要而脆弱的自然保護(hù)生態(tài)環(huán)境，在其中重新種植本地植被。這種脆弱的動(dòng)態(tài)系統(tǒng)，大部分脆弱及有生機(jī)的棲息地建議選在“后沙丘”上以及老沙丘的部分區(qū)域。同時(shí)，一種新的林冠開(kāi)放式林木結(jié)構(gòu)將“逝者之城”（一種奇特的墓葬文化景觀）[23]聚集為一系列生態(tài)基石，標(biāo)記為一個(gè)較大的文化嵌合體，與正在形成的定居點(diǎn)交織在一起。與傳統(tǒng)的土地利用規(guī)劃相反，這個(gè)重新配置的沙丘區(qū)內(nèi)產(chǎn)生的每個(gè)環(huán)境體系都具有多種作用（例如，綠化墓葬景觀同時(shí)也具有生態(tài)和保護(hù)的功能以及墓地的功能，圖6）。

6 利用本地可再生材料

最后，在大多數(shù)情況下，越南鄉(xiāng)土建筑與其地域環(huán)境及當(dāng)?shù)貧夂蛴兄烊坏钠鹾隙?。Bernard Rudofsky稱之為鄉(xiāng)土建筑，是從其適應(yīng)環(huán)境中演變而來(lái)的[24]。它關(guān)注地形、土壤和植物環(huán)境、光線和社會(huì)文化習(xí)俗；而氣候與當(dāng)?shù)刭Y源的可用性推動(dòng)了以低技術(shù)為主的建筑實(shí)踐。在MOMA著名展覽Architecture without Architects目 錄中，Rudofsky強(qiáng)調(diào)建筑與城市化是一種文化建構(gòu)和公共事業(yè)概念。他引用了Pietro Belluschi的言論：“這是一種公共藝術(shù)，它不是由少數(shù)知識(shí)分子或?qū)＜覄?chuàng)造的，而是由具有共同財(cái)產(chǎn)的全體人民在共同經(jīng)驗(yàn)下自發(fā)持續(xù)地活動(dòng)產(chǎn)生的”，他們“展示了一種令人欽佩的天賦，使其建筑與自然環(huán)境相互適應(yīng)”[24]3-4。如前所述，在20世紀(jì)80年代，F(xiàn)rampton、Tzonis和 Lefaivre[25]在1990年提出了受到廣泛關(guān)注的批判性地域主義。他們重新審視了主流現(xiàn)代主義建筑的替代性以及更具時(shí)代感的建筑實(shí)例。有趣的是，歷史學(xué)家Lewis Mumford早在20世紀(jì)40年代就警告說(shuō)，“地域主義并不是指最大量地使用當(dāng)?shù)夭牧?，也不是照搬祖先在一兩個(gè)世紀(jì)前為了優(yōu)化而使用的某些簡(jiǎn)單建筑形式。地域形式是最符合實(shí)際生活條件的形式，也是最能使人們?cè)谒幁h(huán)境中有賓至如歸之感的形式：它不僅利用了土壤，而且反映了該地區(qū)當(dāng)前的文化狀況”[26]30。

6 通過(guò)采用建筑師伊恩·麥克哈格開(kāi)發(fā)的深層景觀部分，重建了潟湖的生態(tài)The lagoon’s ecology is reconstituted by adopting a deep landscape section developed by architect Ian McHarg

7 現(xiàn)代熱帶批判區(qū)域主義是由大量巧妙利用的當(dāng)?shù)夭牧纤鶈l(fā)的“高蹺型”創(chuàng)意A contemporary tropical critical regionalism is created by a stilt typology inspired by the existing clever adoption of abundant local materials

雖然RUA項(xiàng)目并沒(méi)有直接涉及建筑規(guī)模，但所有的區(qū)域性及城市規(guī)模的項(xiàng)目都應(yīng)采用適應(yīng)氣候與環(huán)境的新類(lèi)型。顯然，重新審視樁基/高腳支撐及漂浮是必要的，以應(yīng)對(duì)預(yù)計(jì)的洪水急劇上升。此外，還須大幅降低能源依賴——尤其是空調(diào)消耗的能源——并轉(zhuǎn)向可再生能源。對(duì)古代建筑低技術(shù)的重新詮釋可以實(shí)現(xiàn)自然通風(fēng)和微氣候的融合。同時(shí)，越南的材料創(chuàng)新，特別是交叉層壓木材（CLT）具有巨大潛力，全國(guó)大部分地區(qū)都有木材資源。木材質(zhì)量的大幅降低同時(shí)降低了地基的成本（在土壤承載能力極低的三角洲地區(qū)，這一成本過(guò)高）。這個(gè)國(guó)家的大部分地區(qū)利用太陽(yáng)能和雨水收集是大有可為的。太陽(yáng)能可用于個(gè)人移動(dòng)、街道照明、公共交通系統(tǒng)和大型建筑構(gòu)件。此外，屋頂雨水收集可與重力供水配置配合使用，用于廁所、灌溉與建筑冷卻系統(tǒng)。更普遍地，使用局部材料和透氣材料可以減少冷卻的能量負(fù)荷。

如今，眾多的越南建筑事務(wù)所，包括西澤建筑師事務(wù)所（Nishizawa Architects）、a21studio、Vo Tring Nghia Architects，正在開(kāi)發(fā)各種非凡建筑，企圖創(chuàng)造出一種新式當(dāng)代地域性建筑。例如，西澤建筑師事務(wù)所在Chau Doc（湄公河三角洲與柬埔寨交界處的一座城市）建造了一座三代人居住的房屋，使用當(dāng)?shù)亓畠r(jià)的材料、木工技術(shù)和建筑方法創(chuàng)造出一個(gè)既適合環(huán)境又具有獨(dú)創(chuàng)性的結(jié)構(gòu)——包括使用3個(gè)倒置蝶形屋頂和可移動(dòng)的立面和內(nèi)部隔板，達(dá)到改變采光、通風(fēng)和使用條件的目的。它的架空建筑和通道樓梯是對(duì)洪水的應(yīng)對(duì)和對(duì)當(dāng)?shù)貥?gòu)造的智能適應(yīng)（圖7）。

7 適應(yīng)與抵抗

正如已揭示的，RUA在（設(shè)計(jì)）研究和干預(yù)之間迭代重復(fù)。越南的RUA項(xiàng)目在適應(yīng)氣候變化的同時(shí)，抵制本土的普遍同質(zhì)化，它們根植于各自的地理位置與社會(huì)文化實(shí)踐中。創(chuàng)建設(shè)計(jì)方案、咨詢本地專(zhuān)家及利益相關(guān)者的調(diào)整過(guò)程，應(yīng)遵循歸檔工作和密集的實(shí)地工作。所有項(xiàng)目都是與當(dāng)?shù)爻鞘屑耙?guī)劃?rùn)C(jī)構(gòu)合作進(jìn)行的。這些提案解決了嚴(yán)峻的全球挑戰(zhàn)，同時(shí)有意識(shí)地從根本上抵制通用解決方案。社會(huì)所面臨的危機(jī)——特別是氣候變化——須采取適用于具體情況的方法，這種方法在使用一般技術(shù)（例如實(shí)地調(diào)查、設(shè)計(jì)研究、合作生產(chǎn)程序）、思考和方法（例如上文強(qiáng)調(diào)的六大主題）的同時(shí)，不斷尋找當(dāng)?shù)氐奶厣?，并?yīng)深入了解當(dāng)?shù)貍鹘y(tǒng)、特征與特性、內(nèi)在優(yōu)勢(shì)與能力以及場(chǎng)地資源。

總之，作為城市與干預(yù)行為的科學(xué)，城市化必須大膽地發(fā)展成為順應(yīng)自然的局部反映性適應(yīng)系統(tǒng)。它不能歸入眾多基于性能的“修復(fù)”中的任何一個(gè)，因?yàn)樗鼈儾豢杀苊獾厥箙^(qū)域、景觀具有通用性。健康的社會(huì)生態(tài)系統(tǒng)需要所有類(lèi)型的異質(zhì)性和多樣性?？紤]到地球的脆弱性，我們還必須注意奧爾多·利奧波德的《土地倫理》——被稱為環(huán)境經(jīng)典的《沙郡年鑒》（1949年）[27]的最后一卷。土地倫理是一種超越人類(lèi)中心主義的道德與生態(tài)世界觀。根據(jù)利奧波德的說(shuō)法，“我們?yōu)E用土地是因?yàn)槲覀冋J(rèn)為土地是屬于我們的商品……土地倫理只是擴(kuò)大了社區(qū)邊界，包括土壤、水、植物和動(dòng)物，或?qū)⑵浣y(tǒng)稱為土地”[27]203-4。城市規(guī)劃者與風(fēng)景園林師不僅對(duì)人類(lèi)同胞負(fù)有道德義務(wù)，對(duì)土地本身也負(fù)有道德義務(wù)。

注釋?zhuān)?/p>

① 這一概念是指Vittorio Gregotti在1966年出版的《建筑領(lǐng)域》（Ilterritoriodiarchitectttura）一書(shū)中提出的人類(lèi)地理景觀概念。

② 來(lái)自農(nóng)業(yè)和農(nóng)村發(fā)展部（Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development，簡(jiǎn)稱MARD）。

圖片來(lái)源：

圖 1?RevisionoftheMekongDeltaRegionalPlan2030and Vision2050[由建設(shè)部和SIUP委任，2014—2018年：RUA（B.De Meulder, K.Shannon, C.Rojas Bernal）]；圖 2?BaoLoc Until2030[邀請(qǐng)賽，與VIUP合作，2019—2020年：RUA（B.De Meulder, K.Shannon, Nguyen Q.M.）]；圖 3～5?Highly

Adaptation & Resistance:Vietnamese Context-Specific Responses to Climate Change

Authors: (BEL) Bruno De Meulder, (BEL) Kelly Shannon Translator: ZHOU Youmei

Globally, the rapidly accelerating consequences of climate change and the impeding ecological crisis present huge challenges to the human occupation of the world, regardless of whether in urban or rural territories.They also demand a radical re-envisioning of how to settle—in both the sense of how to deal with an ever-changing nature and how to settle in, how to inhabit landscapes.In the past decades, there has been an overwhelming and renewed focus on the disciplines of ecology and landscape architecture.The very notion of contemporary landscape urbanism was a response to the failure of business-as-usual in terms of planning (conventionally with an emphasis on land-use, master or blueprint planning) and the separation of disciplines[1-2].The ascendance of landscape architecture into the broader realm of the built environment has brought with it a plethora of star landscape architects, many who themselves endlessly replicate formal design components and a host of projects that are cut and pasted into various contexts.Over the past two to three decades, there has been on onslaught of landscape and urbanism proposals that offer both ways forward in terms of adaption and building resilience.This paper claims that collectively these proposals comprise of a now widely accepted series of principles and “toolkit” of responses.The fact that there has been the development of nearuniversal “fixes” to the challenges is simultaneously compelling and disturbing—compelling because the urgent necessity of new interventions is recognized and disturbing since there is the danger of a generic, performance-based typologies that begin to indiscriminately blanket the world regardless of any context specificity.It hypothesizes that there needs to a resistance to such homogenous development at the level of landscape architecture and urban design.Instead of a toolkit of solutions(disseminated across the entire world by a limited number of corporations), if offers an approach to creating strategies that build on the specificity of locational assets.

Fortunately, there has been a great deal of criticism leveled on the failures of the generic city and corporate architecture, driven by uncritical and deregulated neo-liberal market pressures.For more than a half century, it was star architects (regardless of their formalistic ego-trips) and developers(ultimately prisoners of debilitating market conformity) who brought a degree of similarity and exchangeability to everyplace.A huge degree of homogeneity began to reign, particularly in cities,despite various socio-cultural practices, economies,ecological conditions or climates.An exchangeable palette of floor plans, facades and materials confirmed particular sites in the interconnected,global marketplace.Commodification of almost everything evidently implies replicability.For architecture historian Kenneth Frampton, the professions of the built environment had a responsibility to resist the flattening out of cultures and places through re-engagement with landscape.His precise critical stance remains as valid today as decades ago when, in his infamous essay,‘Towards a Critical Regionalism: Six Points for an Architecture of Resistance’ Frampton wrote of ‘the victory of universal civilization over locally infected culture …’ and pled for a critical regionalism as an ‘engagement in the act of “cultivating” the site … (where) the idiosyncrasies of place find their expression without falling into sentimentality’[3]17,26.In 1995, Frampton directed his poignant criticism to the split between architecture and planning,which according to him as well ‘entailed reducing the art of environmental planning to the valuefree, applied science of land-use and transport management.In this form, the dominant planning strategy became logistical and managerial …presumably to maximize the economic development of the region’[4]83-84.Frampton then made a call ‘to conceive of a remedial landscape that is capable of playing a critical and compensatory role in relation to the ongoing, destructive commodification of the man-made world.Architecture must assume an ecological stance in the broadest possible sense’(emphasis in the original text[4]92).Furthering his assertion for an alternative to the ‘ruthless forms of motopian development,’ and with specific reference to the Asian continent, Frampton concludes that the megaform (as landform, as ecology) ‘a(chǎn)s an element which due to its size, content and direction has the capacity to inflect the surrounding landscape and give it a particular orientation and identity’[5]39-40.He claims that a return to the ‘making of the ground’①… ‘may be one of the only formal legacies that remain available for the realistic mediation of the random megalopolis as an iterated form’ anchoring development to the specificities of geography[5]40.

It is by now high time that variants of Frampton’s astute criticism are directed to landscape architecture itself which must no longer be viewed as the savior of urbanism, but risks to become a new form of homogeneity.In 2011,landscape architect and academic Richard Weller accurately and satirically addressed the issue: ‘As the bogey man of globalization fades and genius loci is recognized for the ancient Greek hocus pocus it is, landscape architecture is no longer couched in terms of national or even local identity but almost exclusively in terms of adding value to cities that are competing globally with one another’[6]176.He went on to critically dissect the new buzzwords of ‘place-making’ (what new urbanism is to architecture, place-making is now to landscape architecture) and ‘ecosystems services’ (as a new bank charge).He called for landscape architecture projects which are more engaged with structure and less preoccupied with mere form.Meanwhile,Elizabeth Meyer in her essay, ‘Sustaining beauty.The performance of appearance: A manifesto in three parts’, underscored the need for sustainable landscape design to ‘do more than function or perform ecologically; it must also perform socially and culturally’[7]16.

Although the world abounds in rhetoric of sustainability, climate change and innumerable variations of green politics, the claim of this article is that only through a careful reading of the site-specific and innate logics of landscapes—inextricably tied to their ecological foundation and social and cultural formation[8]—can nongeneric design strategies be developed to respond to the urgencies of climate change while simultaneously resisting uniformity of late-capitalist market.The article will focus on recent design research by OSA/RUA (Research Urbanism and Architecture) in Vietnam, focusing on projects codeveloped with Vietnamese government agencies and commissioned by national and/or local municipalities.It distills six major themes which work to bridge the divide between the dichotomies of economy and ecology, culture and nature and urbanism and landscape.

1 Accentuating Agro-ecological Regions

For Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859),the great polymath who combined the fields of natural science and humanities, nature was a holistic interplay of phenomena.He developed a sophisticated understanding of vegetal zones as a global interconnected web.For Humboldt,botany was dependent upon climate, latitude,altitude, topography, atmospheric conditions,geology and physiognomy, but he also stressed that ‘the knowledge of the natural character of different parts of the world is connected in the most intimate way to the history of humanity and to that of its culture’[9]150.Humboldt’s work laid the foundation for contemporary ecological(systems) thinking.In the 1960s and 1970s, the German botanist and academic Heinrich Walter published a number of works which underscored vegetation, soil and climate as the most important components of ecological systems[10].Since the mid-1980s, a collaboration between the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations(FAO) and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) develop programs to estimates how agriculture would develop toward the 21st century and highlight problematic regions with regards to food security.They developed an agro-ecological zones (AEZ) as an open-source and dynamic digital global databases of climatic parameters, topography, soil and terrain, land cover,and population distribution which includes AEZ calculation procedures[11].

Over the past decade, the work of RUA in Vietnam has systematically elaborated the concept of agro-ecological zones.In fact, for the Mekong Delta Regional Plan, it was the foundation for future development: detecting the variations in locational assets such as soils,elevations, inundation patterns, etc.hand-inhand with current development tendencies and predicted climate change effects in order to define characteristic subregions.The once gigantic quagmire had continuously adapting water flows, shifting landforms and wetness variations(between humid soil and silt saturated water).It was a rich and dynamic ecological system in which niche economies nested.However, it underwent draconian utilitarian transformation during the last two centuries, with the conquering and subsequent occupation of the delta by Vietnamese emperors,the French colonization, the decolonization and American war, and finally a unification and food security battle after ages of turmoil.Subsequently,the Mekong Delta became an extensive patchwork of vast monocultural productions.Nonetheless,the resulting low-value landscapes remain largely anchored on the varying underlying geographies,defined by location, soil qualities, elevations, water regimes, etc.There are large contiguous surfaces of areas with tree nurseries, orchards, flowers,palm trees, various vegetables, aquaculture and surely omnipresent rice.It is however clear that the merciless expansion and exploitation of the territory has come to the point of obliterating almost all natural environments and ecologically killing the branches of the monumental Mekong River.Such “development” is literally a dead end.Rebalancing is urgently required.The reconstitution of ecologies is necessary; it is not inherently“anti-development,” but seeks to create more biodiversity and structure locally-embedded, yet diverse economies, balancing industrial-scale mass production with specialty products, such as tropical fruit and medicinal plants.Nature-based solutions(such as mangroves as natural coastal protection systems) add to the argument for the reintroduction of ecological structures that simultaneously offer opportunities for ecological restoration and diversified (and higher value) production.The definition of six agro-ecological zones, each with a task challenged to redefine balances between ecology and economy, monocultures and mixtures,form the fundamental basis for the Mekong Delta Regional Plan.Development strategies are anchored on inherent locational assets, balancing soil suitability and ecological integrity (Fig.1).

A similar exercise, on a different scale,was done by RUA in cooperation with VIUP(Vietnamese Institute for Urban and Rural Planning)(through an invited competition) for Bao Loc in (the Lam Dong Province of) the Central Highlands.The geology and topography define a sharp rupture,where the altitude falls from 850 to 750 meters over a short distance.The strong sectional difference articulates occupation and settlement: the city and agriculture on the Di Linh plateau, a system of man-made chains of ponds and valleys (to the north) with mulberry, tea and coffee farms on the innumerable hillocks (to the south and northwest),protected and special forests on the steep slopes of the mountain ranges (north, west and south) and waterfalls and sanctuaries in various mountains.However, the projected present-day urban development neglects the region’s geographic and site-specific conditions, introducing a generic form of urbanization similar to many Vietnamese cities.The RUA-VIUP proposed plan to 2040 develops urbanization and the economy in a manner that simultaneously strengthens its natural environment and socio-cultural identity.New urbanization is concentrated on the Di Linh plateau, while flood plains are safeguarded as productive interruptions that give articulation to the alternating sequence of densified urban districts.Particular forms of high-quality urban development are created on the accentuated topography north and south of the core city offers complementary urban quarters that add to the variety of residential environments and are consciously embedded within figures of reforestation.A context-responsive, high-value eco- / agro-tourism and retreat / wellness development is set within the rich and lush environment and adds qualities to the landscape instead of consuming it (and losing it forever)with mundane mass development.This economy complements the agricultural and forestry economy that structures the landscape.The project also creates a nearly 10 km-long belvedere park front as the city facade along the southern edge of the Di Linh plateau with areas for cafes, restaurants and special-programmed buildings; they benefit from both proximity to city center and spectacular panoramas across the landscape’s hundred meters altitude difference.As a strong landscape figure,the belvedere park, articulates the city’s form and its relationship to its particular geography and topography (Fig.2).

2 Water Urbanism

Historically, many of the world’s cities had an inextricable connection to water.Seacoasts,rivers inland and coastal deltas were magnets for development, providing geographies easily amenable to cheap transportation, extremely productive territories and offered valuable resources.Settlement inherently implied water management[12]4.Particularly in Asia, complex water management not only intertwined social-cultural and political organization, but also afforded the settling with water—literally the construction of settlement as well as settling with (dealing with)water’s unpredictable nature[13].Nonetheless, over time, water-based settlements gave way to roadbased ones.As waterways were filled, impervious surfaces exponentially expanded and industrial and agricultural pollution reigned, water simultaneously came to be viewed as a finite, precious resource and more of a threat than an asset.Once the consequences of climate change—particularly flood, drought, sea level rise and salination—are added to the perilous situation, it is clear that new ways of settling with water are urgently required.There is a renewed possibility for water urbanism.

In all of RUA’s projects in Vietnam, there is the explicit design of space for flooding through the process of cut-and-fill.Water lines and flood plains are choreographed to give more space to water.The decision of where to build is as important as where tonotbuild, which is determined by the articulation of micro-topographies.In an invited competition for the Highly Interactive Innovative Districts’ (HIID) large eastern extension of Ho Chi Minh City (in cooperation with VIUP)the intelligent use of the region’s physical characteristics transforms the interfluvial area between Saigon and Dong Nai rivers into a climate change responsive territory.The wide river basins of the Saigon and Dong Nai rivers (as well as the Vam Co Dong, Soai Rap, Long Tai rivers) are vast flood plains.The system results in a territory of an amazingly fine-mazed water system that covers more than 70 % of the metropolitan area of HCMC.All scenarios for HCMC of the National Target Program for Climate Change (NTPCC)indicate that substantial parts of the area will inevitably regularly flood (up to 4 meters above sea level by 2100).The eastern area has already had dramatic transformation of its topography with extensive land-filling.Subsequent and planned development will fill vast areas by 2 (6,500 hectares)or 3 (another 6,500 hectares) meters of sand.The RUA project freezes the land manipulation in the state it is now and concentrates urban development on higher land or buildings onpilotis/ stilts and opts for only high density.The urban development becomes an afforested archipelago in a mostly wet natural environment (in which native vegetation and mangroves are reintroduced where possible).The conventional model of urbanization that replaces natural environments is inverted into a system where the urban is inserted within the natural—which is acknowledged for its self-renewing and healing (and hence sanitizing) qualities.For the HIID of HCMC,this results in a radically new form of urbanity:simultaneously dense and distributed, solid and fluid.HIID is a water city where water structures urbanization, is primary mode for movement and introduces a way of settling with water-dominated landscapes (Fig.3).

3 Forest Urbanism

As a field, urban forestry emerged in the 1960s in North America.It entails the multidisciplinary design and management of all forest and tree resources—from street trees to periurban woodlands[14].It gives rise to progressively,and sometimes even radically, bring vegetation back into urban environments.The new field,of course, builds on long-standing traditions of the intertwining of nature, and particularly trees,into the city.For millennia in Asia, trees have been systematically planted on national scales and directly organized first by emperors and later by central and municipal governments[15].The famous book,RitualsoftheZhouDynasty(1100-770 BC)verifies that tree planting and maintenance by designated officials along moats of city walls was obligatory.The book as also documents tree planting along riparian corridors in relation to flood protection and soil erosion as well as the strong tradition of street planting in Chinese cities.Initially, capital city streets and imperial highways were planted to provide separated royal passage, shelter against wind, provide shade,protect roads from flooding, and perform specific visual functions.Whenever trees died, they had to be quickly replaced[16].According to Kongjian Yu and collaborators, ‘Tree plantings along city streets and country roads were considered as good moral behavior and a blessing to the local people,and state officials were always memorialized for their contribution to the construction of greenways’[16]230.In tropical contexts, vegetation,and trees in particular, were historically recognized as an evident necessity.They mitigate the harsh climate (in an environment where, until recently,daily life mainly took place outside), improve health conditions and generate a pleasant environment.Even in colonial urbanism, with its overemphasis on infrastructure and built form, vegetation, and specifically tree planting, was a main component of urban planning, regardless the colonial power—English, Dutch or French.The latter, in the case of Saigon, demonstrated that planning was more about creating an agreeable environment by planting (shadowed gardens, tree lined boulevards,etc.) than conventional physical planningperse.Tropical city plans, by definition, imply a dominant urban forestry layer.Nonetheless, the currently prevailing urban development imaginary orients cities solely to roads, cars and generic, supposedly“smart” high-tech business parks.

The RUA-VIUP proposal for HCMC’s HIID,however, reconnects with this evident tropical urban forestry tradition and expands it as climate change adaptation requires.It does this with general measures, such as the provision of at least one tree per future inhabitant—countering the inevitable pollution of urban life and increasing carbon sequestration, offsetting the urban heat island effect and enriching habitats and biodiversity.Such a measure would also provide more public and recreational spaces (both of which the current HCMC is dramatically lacking).Trees are indeed key to humanizing the climate of a tropical city, they are also responsible for its pleasant atmosphere, hence livability.Since HCMC is at the bottom of the livability rankings (122/140 Economist Intelligence Unit, 2016 Best Cities Ranking Report)[17], the drastic increase of nature and public space is a necessity.It goes without saying that this required provision of nature and public space is much easier to obtain in the development of the new district,that in a certain way becomes, together with the water system, a large (inhabited water) park for the entire mega-city.

Besides the general measures to increase urban forestry, the plan consequently designates specific areas (such as preserving and expanding mangrove across in the bed of the Dong Nai River, continuing the adjacent Can Gio biosphere reserve) that are anchored on exceptional landscape morphologies and conditions.Urban afforestation strategies in the original villages (that historically emerged on slightly higher land) are indeed different than intense tree planting schemes on historical landfills as realized for the Cat Lai Industrial Zone and Tan Cang Port, as well as for recently added landfills for the landing of the Cat Lai Bridge.New urban typologies that do not imply land-filling but are rather embedded in the existing environmental qualities go hand-in-hand with strengthening forestry robustness.As such, these new urban forestry strategies complement historical urban forestry patterns in Saigon such as the colonial planted boulevard system.They generate a new urban forestry typology that is woven into mediumand high-density developments.The base premise of the entirety of the proposal is that there is an intensification, diversification and densification of both urbanism and natural systems (Fig.4).

4 Mobility Shift

In 2014, according to a Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) Report,the transportation sector accounted for about 23% of global energy related CO2emissions and road transport (both freight and passenger) represents around 73% of total transport energy use.Road transportation accounts for 47% of global oil consumption[18]6-7.That is the bad news.The good news is that a post-petrol age is clearly approaching.Despite many governments’ insistence building of new multi-lane highways, there a number of indications that there is a fundamental mobility shift underway.Technological innovation (electric vehicles,smart infrastructure and new personal mobility mechanisms), coupled with evolving socio-cultural preferences, opens an array of new opportunities for urban design.There are a proliferation of guidebooks and projects that offer compelling street re-profiling—combining urban vegetation,stormwater management, public and shared mobility and a revived public realm.In addition to re-profiling, there is an untapped potential in the reinvestment of water-based urban transport.This is particularly true in many parts of Asia, whereas previously mentioned, there are extensive urban concentrations in deltas, along coasts and in large flood plains.Economically and logistically, in such contexts, the logics of water-based transportation far outpaces that of road-based, where obtaining building stability is expensive and a timely undertaking.There must be strategic infrastructure provision which entails the wise shift of generic transport policies that seek equal accessibility across territories towards the most effective and efficient means.It is clear that there should be a shift in investment from roads to waterways.

In the south of Vietnam, and specifically in the Mekong Delta region, waterways have been the natural mode of transport for centuries.The delta’s highly developed water management system includes innumerable rivers and an extensive network of 7,000 km of main canals, 4,000 km of secondary canals[19]19②.Populations traditionally settled on the natural levees of waterways, creating a river-water civilization and the rhythms of the rivers’ water regimes determined the location of settlements.The waterways, along with parallel road networks, bundled multiple functions and meanings.The majestic blue network remains the most appropriate mode of transportation for agricultural mass produce.In the proposed Mekong Delta Regional Plan, a number of planned, Asian Development Bank and Vietnamese governmentfunded highways are proposed to be cancelled since they are in areas that are predicted to have severe inundation in the coming decades.At the same time, the dredging of existing waterways,in addition to the creation of new canals, would reinvigorate the historic and environmentallylogical mode of transport, for both more goods as well as for passengers.

In the HIID project, a proposed watertransport system builds on the city’s geography.Saigon was founded on the western bank of the Saigon River in the Dong Nai-Soai Rap River Delta that merges with the monumental Mekong Delta into one vast and flat mud plain of approximately 78,000 km2.The vast area operates as an economical entity with HCMC as its financial center.Since its earliest establishment (as citadel) in 1790, the city was organized by water and it was (and remains)the primary harbor of the country.Interregional,regional, local canals and ditches, intertwined as warp and woof with the river systems, define the base water structure that is simultaneously the spatial register of the territory.Canals were constructed to divert water, alternatingly draining and irrigating land and for transport.A system of majestically planted and wide boulevards complemented the water system and generated a bearable microclimate under the harsh tropical sun.The boulevards accommodated access to (gardened) plots and allowed transport for a multitude of mobility means,including as horses, bicycles, pedestrians, cars and,last but not least, tramways.In hindsight, the trams were a transport mode that that makes a lot of sense in a city that from the onset combined vastness with population density.

The new development is proposed as an archipelago in a mostly wet natural environment in the territory between the Saigon and Dong Nai rivers.The project combines the naturally evident water transport (with places for e-motorbikes,essential for the first and last mile) with the advantages of smart technology.A fleet of various sized boats will work “on demand” (via an app) as opposed to the more traditional system of fixed lines and timetables.A web of buoyed platforms will allow extensive accessibility.The WETRO (a water metro) will not only be highly efficient, cost effective and ecologically sane, but also an extremely comfortable mobility system that leapfrogs technology in a very innovative and performative manner.The WETRO system can be built iteratively and organically evolve with the development of the HIID.On higher lands(predominantly historical HCMC and at the foothills of southern mid-highlands in Thu Duc District)a (new smart type of) tramway system is the most evident mass transport system to complement e-motorbikes (that gradually replace the more than 8.5 million motorbikes currently in HCMC).The future of mobility is in the combination of naturebased solutions and smart technology (Fig.5).

5 Coastal Re-afforestation

Coasts, and particularly deltas, have both blatant and subtle gradients of wetness with corresponding natural variations of fauna and flora.Over time, the domestication of the landscape led to the shift from a gradual transition between water and land towards a categorical division between wet and dry to allow cultivation and human occupation.The once-rich gradient was largely eliminated through the hard-engineering of canals, dykes and ditches.Today, according to the UN, 37% of the world’s population lives within 100 kilometers of a coastline[20].There are even higher percentages in territories identified as lowelevation coastal zones (LCEZ)—defined as the contiguous and hydrologically connected zone of land along the coast and below 10 m of elevation.China, India, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Vietnam are predicted to have the world’s highest coastal population exposure[21].At the same time, coastal areas are extremely vulnerable to the consequences of climate change, primarily sea level rise, salination and increased strength and frequency of storm surges and exceptional weather events.There is an urgent need to fundamentally overhaul coastal development.In addition to new water urbanism typologies there is the growing recognition to restore natural dynamics and ecological systems.Fundamental to this is the reforestation and evolution of the dynamic development of dunes and regeneration and extension of mangroves and coastal wetlands.Coastal vegetation contributes significantly to carbon sequestration and buffers the impacts of sea level rise and wave action that are associated with climate change.There is an enormous opportunity in the intelligent spatial reconfiguration of coastlines and their reforestation and afforestation, which can include new living, productive landscapes, recreational possibilities with habitat preservation.Coastal re- and afforestation strategies can reverse the colonization and domestication of the wetness gradient.Recognizing the coast—in opposition to the prevailing belief that conceptualizes it as a line and hence is condemned to an untenable hold-theline-defense attitude—as a vast area, which natural dynamics generate a robustness and richness, is key to intelligent spatial reconfiguration of coast(line)s.

For the spatial development strategy of the 60 km long Tam Giang-Cau Hai Lagoon in Thua Thien Hue Province (by RUA in cooperation with VIUP), requalification of dune coastal ecology was a primary motive.The lagoon is the largest Southeast Asia, an estuary of the Perfume River and located 20 km downstream from Hue.Reconstructing a deep section of the dune and lagoon landscape, inspired by the dune section in Ian McHarg’s well-knownDesignwithNature[22],provides the basis for reconstituting the dynamic landscape and defining a development strategy.The lagoon is proposed to become a “reserve”,a naturally protective, essential and vulnerable ecological environment that is replanted with indigenous vegetation.Most habitation of the fragile and dynamic system is proposed to be on the “back dune” (of the primary dune) and selective parts of the old dune.At the same time, a new open-canopy forest structure clusters the “city of the dead”—an extra-ordinary cultural landscape of tombs[23]—as a series of ecological stepstones and demarcates a larger cultural mosaic that is systematically intertwined with the settlement-inthe-making.In opposition to conventional land-use planning, each of the environments generated within this reconfigured dune section performs a multitude of roles (for example, the afforested tomb landscape simultaneously performs ecological and protective functions while offering cemeteries, Fig.6).

6 Use of Local and Renewable Materials

Finally, as in most contexts, Vietnamese vernacular architecture was innately attuned to its regional context and local climate.Vernacular architecture, termed by Bernard Rudofsky[24],evolved from a patient adjustment to circumstances.It was attentive to topography, soil and vegetal contexts, light and socio-cultural practices;climate and availability of local resources drove building practices that were primarily low-tech.In the MOMA catalogue to the well-known exhibitArchitecturewithoutArchitects, Rudofsky underscored the notion of architecture and urbanism as a cultural construct and communal enterprise.He quoted Pietro Belluschi on this point‘a(chǎn) communal art, not produced by a few intellectual or specialists but by the spontaneous and continuing activity of a whole people with a common heritage,acting under a community of experience’ and goes on to say that they ‘demonstrate an admirable talent for fitting their buildings into the natural surroundings’[24]3-4.In the 1980s, as mentioned earlier, Frampton and Tzonis and Lefaivre[25], in 1990, built the case for a critical regionalism which received widespread attention.They revisited alternative responses to main-stream modernist architecture and as well as more contemporary examples that were contextually-embedded.It is also interesting to note that already in the 1940s,historian Lewis Mumford warned that ‘Regionalism is not a matter of using the most available local material, or of copying some simple form of construction that our ancestors used, for want of anything better, a century or two ago.Regional forms are those which most closely meet the actual conditions of life and which most fully succeed in making a people feel at home in their environment:they do not merely utilize the soil but they reflect the current conditions of culture in the region’[26]30.

Although RUA’s projects do not directly address the scale of architecture, in all the territorial and urban-scale projects, there is a call for new typologies that are climate and context-responsive.Clearly there is the necessity to revisit stilt/pilotisas well as floating in order to address the predicted dramatic rise in inundation.As well, there is a need to drastically reduce energy dependence—particularly as consumed by air-conditioning—and move towards renewable energy.Natural ventilation and the integration of micro-climates can be accomplished through the reinterpreting ancient typologies and low-tech construction techniques.At the same time, material innovation,specifically CLT (cross laminated timber) has huge potential in Vietnam.Wood resources are largely available throughout the country.The substantial lower weight of wood simultaneously reduces the expensive costs of foundations (which are excessive in deltaic areas where there is very low load bearing capacities of soil).In most of the country, there is the great promise to employ solar energy and rainwater harvesting.Solar energy can obviously be used for personal mobility, street lighting, public transport systems and large building components.As well, roof top rainwater harvesting can work with gravity-fed configurations to be reused for toilets, irrigation and building cooling systems.More generally, the use of local materials and breathable materials can reduce the energy load for cooling.

Today, numerous Vietnamese architecture offices, amongst which Nishizawa Architects,a21studio, Vo Tring Nghia Architects, are developing a great diversity of extraordinary buildings that create a new contemporary regional architecture.For example, a house in Chau Doc (a city along the Hau River in the Mekong Delta at the border with Cambodia) for three generations by Nishizawa Architects uses local and inexpensive materials, carpentry techniques, and construction methods to create a structure that both fits into its context and capitalizes on ingenuity—including the use of three inverted, butterfly-shaped roofs and movable fa?ade and interior partitions to allow inhabitants to modify the light, ventilation and use.Itspilotisand access stairway are flood responsive and intelligent adaptations of local tectonics (Fig.7).

7 Adaptation and Resistance

As has been revealed, RUA iterates between(design) research and intervention.The RUA projects in Vietnam simultaneously adapt to the consequences of climate change and resist the generic homogenization of the territory.They are embedded in their respective local geographies and socio-culture practices.The iterative process of creating design scenarios and consultation with local experts and stakeholders, follows archival work and intensive fieldwork.All projects are made in collaboration with local urban and planning institutions.Proposals address acute global challenges, while, at the same time, intentionally and radically resist generic solutions.The crises facing society—particularly climate change—necessitate a contextually immersed approach that, while using general techniques (as for example fieldwork,research by design, co-production procedures),insights and methods (for example, the six themes underscored above), continuously seek local specificity.There needs to be a deep understanding of local traditions, characters and identity,endogenous strengths and capacities, and site assets.

In conclusion, urbanism—as the science of the city and the act of intervening—must boldly be developed as locally-response adaptive systems that bend to natural forces.It cannot fall into any of the many performance-based “fixes” which inevitably render territories and landscapes as generic.Heterogeneity and diversity of all types are required for healthy social and eco-systems.For the sake of the vulnerability of the planet, it is also imperative to heed Aldo Leopold’s ‘Land Ethic’—the finale toASandCountyAlmanac(1949)[27], known as an environmental classic.The land ethic was a moral and ecological worldview that went beyond anthropocentricism.According to Leopold, “We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us....The land ethic simply enlarges the boundaries of the community to include soils,waters, plants and animals, or collectively: the land”[27]203-4.Urbanists and landscape architecture have ethical obligations not just to fellow human beings but to the land itself.

Notes:

① Referring to Vittorio Gregotti’s concept of anthrogeographic landscape as described in his 1966 bookIlterritoriodi architectttura.

② Coming from MARD (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development).

Sources of Figures:

Fig.1?RevisionoftheMekongDeltaRegionalPlan2030and Vision2050[(commission by Ministry of Construction and SIUP) 2014-18: RUA (B.De Meulder, K.Shannon, C.Rojas Bernal)]; Fig.2?BaoLocUntil2030[(invited competition,collaboration with VIUP) 2019-20: RUA (B.De Meulder,K.Shannon, Nguyen Q.M.)]; Fig.3-5?HighlyInteractive InnovationDistrict(HIID)Vision[(invited competition,collaboration with VIUP) 2019:RUA (B.De Meulder, K.Shannon, V? M.P., V? T.P.L.) and atelier horizon (A.De Nijs,N.Hubert)]; Fig.6?TamGiang-CauHaiLagoonComplex Masterplan[(commission, VIUP) 2018-ongoing: RUA (B.De Meulder, K.Shannon, Nguyen Q.M.)]; Fig.7?House in Chau Doc, An Giang Province (Mekong Delta)[Nishizawa Architects (S.Nishizawa, Nguyen D.H.Q., Luong T.T.)]。