撰文 （葡萄牙）路易斯 · 勞瑞斯 翻譯 狄帆 校對(duì) 楊云峰

風(fēng)景園林是一門(mén)跨越了科學(xué)、技術(shù)以及藝術(shù)等諸多領(lǐng)域的學(xué)科。從這一角度上看，每一個(gè)園林師都應(yīng)該能夠創(chuàng)造出可持續(xù)、同時(shí)又能夠保護(hù)環(huán)境、自然和文化的景觀，并且提升人們的生活質(zhì)量。不幸的是，有時(shí)情況并非如此。

這篇論文中的研究是在我輾轉(zhuǎn)于三所大學(xué)——葡萄牙阿爾加維大學(xué)（University of Algarve）、美國(guó)密歇根州立大學(xué)（Michigan State University）和加拿大多倫多大學(xué)（University of Toronto）完成博士學(xué)業(yè)過(guò)程中的一部分成果，它們是在阿爾加維大學(xué)托馬斯·帕那古浦羅斯教授（Thomas Panagopoulos）、密歇根州立大學(xué)喬·布雷教授（Jon Burley）、多倫多大學(xué)建筑學(xué)院副院長(zhǎng)查爾斯·瓦爾德海姆教授（Charles Waldheim）的指導(dǎo)下完成的。在國(guó)外留學(xué)的機(jī)會(huì)是我職業(yè)生涯中的重大突破，是難以從書(shū)本中學(xué)來(lái)的一段經(jīng)歷，必須真實(shí)體驗(yàn)才會(huì)有所感觸。

海外留學(xué)使得我能夠接觸風(fēng)景園林師并一起工作，我學(xué)習(xí)他們的書(shū)籍及研究，雖然一開(kāi)始我認(rèn)為我?guī)缀鯖](méi)有與他們共事——比如邁克爾·霍克教授（Michael Hough，圖01中右二），他的著作《城市與自然過(guò)程》（Cities and Natural Processes, 1995）是在我研究生期間時(shí)常閱覽的一本書(shū)。如果說(shuō)求學(xué)期間是否一切都如意？答案很明確，絕對(duì)沒(méi)有！文化差異、經(jīng)濟(jì)壓力、遠(yuǎn)離親人……，這些都是難以接受的現(xiàn)實(shí)。然而，在積極的態(tài)度之上，建立起簡(jiǎn)單而直接的問(wèn)題解決方法，樂(lè)觀的人總能看到事物美好的一面。如果我有機(jī)會(huì)，我愿意重溫這段海外求學(xué)的美妙經(jīng)歷。學(xué)習(xí)、研究、講座，這一切都令人愉悅不已！

此外，這些研究經(jīng)歷使我意識(shí)到城市規(guī)劃與空間保護(hù)、再發(fā)展與設(shè)計(jì)是同一過(guò)程的不同部分；景觀改造新策略與方法是后工業(yè)景觀改造的重要工具，并能催進(jìn)城市再發(fā)展與振興。也許基于這點(diǎn)，在過(guò)去十年中眾多研究者都投身于景觀改造的理論發(fā)展之中，這些通常由設(shè)計(jì)師的主觀意志所決定，而這又是其中的缺陷所在。

然而，關(guān)于后工業(yè)景觀改造的方法論研究依然不多，不僅是可能的框架，并且是原則的結(jié)合?；诖耍疚乃岢龅姆椒ū徽J(rèn)為是一個(gè)可行的方法，以解決城市擴(kuò)張問(wèn)題，及其衍生出來(lái)的包括社會(huì)、經(jīng)濟(jì)和環(huán)境等問(wèn)題導(dǎo)致的城市土地利用的矛盾。

作為一個(gè)興趣在城市規(guī)劃的風(fēng)景園林師，在我短暫的職業(yè)生涯中我的主要關(guān)注在于通過(guò)設(shè)計(jì)滿足現(xiàn)代生活的種種需求，解決社會(huì)、自然、文化遺產(chǎn)以及經(jīng)濟(jì)等諸多方面存在的問(wèn)題。在哲學(xué)層面，我對(duì)于風(fēng)景園林和城市規(guī)劃的理解與很多當(dāng)代學(xué)者不同，認(rèn)為它們需要綜合考慮景觀設(shè)計(jì)的不同要素，并且須對(duì)規(guī)劃設(shè)計(jì)過(guò)程中生態(tài)、文化和社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)問(wèn)題進(jìn)行廣泛研究。

我的方法目標(biāo)是在個(gè)人感受的基礎(chǔ)上使風(fēng)景園林師及其他規(guī)劃設(shè)計(jì)專(zhuān)家收集可供構(gòu)思整體概念和重建總體規(guī)劃的數(shù)據(jù)，從而創(chuàng)造出新穎的設(shè)計(jì)形式以供深化設(shè)計(jì)。

我相信，我們始終在學(xué)習(xí)，對(duì)于我來(lái)說(shuō)最好的方法就是通過(guò)經(jīng)驗(yàn)、嘗試和失敗來(lái)學(xué)習(xí)。因此，我選擇案例研究作為我的研究方法，并認(rèn)為它是一個(gè)收集信息，使得設(shè)計(jì)師能越來(lái)越關(guān)注設(shè)計(jì)本身，減少個(gè)人的評(píng)判意志的有效途徑，并設(shè)計(jì)越來(lái)越多反映大眾需求、場(chǎng)地特性并對(duì)自然和人類(lèi)雙方都有益的項(xiàng)目。這并不是說(shuō)我想要勾勒出能使任何人都能提出景觀倡議的靈丹妙藥。我的目標(biāo)是建立某種方針來(lái)在設(shè)計(jì)過(guò)程中幫助設(shè)計(jì)師，確保普羅大眾是設(shè)計(jì)過(guò)程中最重要的考慮因素。

雖然案例研究法并非完美無(wú)缺，但它被眾多研究者看作為重要的研究策略（Yin, 1994;Agranoff and Beryl, 1991; George, 1979; and Lucas,1974)，它不僅能進(jìn)行相似案例間的比較分析，還能引導(dǎo)減少主觀預(yù)判的系統(tǒng)的分析。案例研究法的特點(diǎn)使得它能被廣泛的運(yùn)用于各個(gè)學(xué)科（醫(yī)學(xué)研究、社會(huì)學(xué)、工程、規(guī)劃、建筑和風(fēng)景園林）。此外，根據(jù)弗朗西斯（Francis,1990 & 2001）還認(rèn)為，利用案例研究法分析已建成的案例非常有效。

在本研究中所設(shè)想的方法適用于創(chuàng)建后工業(yè)景觀改造規(guī)劃和設(shè)計(jì)的原則，而這些原則能提高相似景觀改造設(shè)計(jì)的設(shè)計(jì)質(zhì)量。通過(guò)分析研究超過(guò)100個(gè)成功的后工業(yè)景觀改造項(xiàng)目（圖02-03），我們能得出一系列原則用以創(chuàng)建特點(diǎn)的設(shè)計(jì)策略。

雖然這一方法的應(yīng)用仍屬探索階段，我相信其應(yīng)用與發(fā)展將幫助設(shè)計(jì)師提高設(shè)計(jì)技巧，同時(shí)提高設(shè)計(jì)質(zhì)量。我會(huì)盡可能地繼續(xù)完善相關(guān)數(shù)據(jù)的質(zhì)量和數(shù)量，并將繼續(xù)整理相關(guān)成果以供發(fā)表，目前圍繞這項(xiàng)研究我已發(fā)表論文20余篇。

路易斯·勞瑞斯/博士/葡萄牙阿爾加維大學(xué)空間與組織動(dòng)力學(xué)研究中心/葡萄牙波塔萊格雷理工學(xué)院農(nóng)業(yè)與自然資源系教師

譯者簡(jiǎn)介：

狄帆/1986年生/男/南京林業(yè)大學(xué)城市規(guī)劃與設(shè)計(jì)碩士/哈佛大學(xué)設(shè)計(jì)學(xué)院風(fēng)景園林學(xué)系碩士生

校對(duì)簡(jiǎn)介：

楊云峰/1981年生/博士/南京林業(yè)大學(xué)風(fēng)景園林學(xué)院講師/美國(guó)密歇根州立大學(xué)訪問(wèn)學(xué)者/本刊特約編輯/YouthLA核心編輯（南京 210037）

圖01參與邁克爾·霍克教授一起室外講座。我依然記得他對(duì)Brick Works場(chǎng)地提議的富有激情的闡述。

Fig.01 Outdoor Lecture with Professor Michael Hough. I still remember the passionate way he explained to me some particularities regarding the proposal developed for the Brick Works site.圖02克利夫蘭工業(yè)景觀——沿凱霍加河，因催生了1960年代環(huán)保運(yùn)動(dòng)而聞名。

Fig.02 Industrial Cleveland – alongside the Cuyahoga River, also known as river that caught fire helping to give incentive to the environmental movement in the late 1960s.

圖03 酒廠街區(qū)——位于多倫多市中心，由散落在10條街的40余座歷史建筑組成，是北美地區(qū)最大的維多利亞時(shí)代建筑集群。

Fig.03 Distillery District-located in Toronto's Downtown, this redevelopment is known as the largest collection of Victorian-era industrial architecture in North America, comprising more than 40 heritage buildings distributed along 10 streets.

Landscape architecture is generally described as a multi-disciplinary field which incorporates several branches of knowledge considering at the same time science, technology and arts. In this scenario each and every single landscape architect should be perceived as someone who is able to promote the creation of landscapes that ensure sustainable development, while protecting the environment, preserving natural and cultural assets, and improving people's quality of life. Still,unfortunately, sometimes this is not true.

The research presented in this paper is part of the study developed during my Ph.D. program which enabled me to study at three great universities- University of Algarve (UAlg), the Michigan State University (MSU) and the University of Toronto(UofT)-under the supervision of my Ph.D.Coordinators: Professor Thomas Panagopoulos at UAlg, and Professor Jon Burley, at MSU, and also Professor Charles Waldheim, Dean at the Faculty of Architecture, Landscape and Design at UofT. The opportunity to study abroad was, in fact, a great achievement in my academic career,an experience that cannot be learned in books,something that you have to feel in order to describe.This opportunity allowed me to get in touch and sometimes work together with several landscape architects, whose books and research I followed very closely and who I supposed to be unreachable,as is the case of Professor Michael Hough (Fig.01),whose bookCities and Natural Processesfrom 1995, was one of my preferred readings throughout my grad studies. Still, if one ask me if these were easy times? The answer is prompt and clear. No,they were not! Cultural adaptation, financial support, missing the ones you love…, are not pleasant realities, However, applying a very simple and direct problem solving approach, based on a positive attitude, enabled me to see that "the glass is not half empty, it is half full".

If I had the opportunity, I would do it all over again, because this has been a wonderful experience. Learning, researching, and lecturing are really pleasant things to do! Maybe I just feel this way, because I truly believe that as mentioned by Confucius, a Chinese philosopher who lived in the VII century b.C. "Those who work in what they love, pass their entire life without working…"

Additionally this research journey enabled me to realize that urban planning and open space preservation, redevelopment and design are part of the same process, and that the development of new strategies and methodologies for landscape transformation constitute very important tools towards post-industrial landscape redevelopment,while fostering urban redevelopment and revitalization. Maybe for this reason, throughout the last decades several researchers and academics have been committed with the development of strategies to enable the creation of better landscape transformation projects, which are normally excessively subjective and dependent on the designer's determination, fact that is considered to be a limitation. Indeed, new frameworks and methodologies are required.

However, considering that there is still little research regarding post-industrial landscape transformation and redevelopment methodologies,envisioning not only possible frameworks, but also the principles they integrate, the approach proposed in the present research may be considered a proficient approach to address urban sprawl,increasingly viewed as significant and growing landuse problem that encompass a wide range of social,economic and environmental issues.

As a landscape architect which research interests are deeply related with the field of urban planning, my main concerns throughout my short career have been connected to fitting design to the needs and desires of contemporary life, addressing in equal measure society, the natural landscape,heritage and culture, and economic issues. My vision of landscape architecture and urban planning differs from many contemporaries in its philosophical grounding in the social as well as creative matrices, calling for a comprehensive view of the different components of landscape design,acknowledging the need for an interrelated analysis of the ecologic, cultural and socioeconomic issues in planning and design processes.

In this regard in the aforementioned paper I present a specific methodology envisioned with the objective to enable landscape architects and other planning and design specialists to collect data from which they might conceive the overall concept and prepare redevelopment master plans,based on more than their personal tastes and beliefs,generating innovative forms of design from which detailed drawings and technical specifications may be prepared.

I believe we are always learning, and to me,the best way of doing it, is by experience, by trial and error. For this reason, learning by experience,using case study research was the method I've selected, since I consider it to be a proficient tool to collect information that will enable designers to strengthen the quality of design, converting each and every single project less and less the result of designers' beliefs and more the result of people's needs, site specificities and the spirit of the place,factors which coupled with individual expertise might result in better projects both to people and landscapes. This is obviously not to say that I intend to define a recipe according to which anyone may develop a design proposal. The objective is to establish some guidelines that might influence and help designers throughout the design process,assuring that people are the most important factor on the design equation.

Like any other theoretical stance, the presented method-case study research-was never as fixed as its challengers believed it to be. In fact, the case study research method is considered by several authors a very important research strategy (Yin,1994; Agranoff and Beryl, 1991; George, 1979; and Lucas, 1974), which allows not only the analysis and comparison among similar case studies, but also the development of a systemic analysis, where the subjectivity may be reduced significantly. Its characteristics enable the use of this method in various fields of knowledge (e.g. medical research,sociology, engineering, planning, architecture and landscape architecture). Moreover, this method is, according to Francis (1999 and 2001), a very useful tool to study and analyse existing projects and the way in which specific problems and design constraints were solved and which strategies should be followed or avoided.

In the present investigation the envisioned method was applied in order to enable the creation of a set of post-industrial landscape redevelopment planning and design principles that may inform the establishment of a specific theoretical basis to increase the quality of similar redevelopment proposals- i.e. by researching and analysing the practical principles applied in more than 100(Fig.02-03) successful post-industrial landscape reclamation projects, it was possible to ascertain and propose a set of principles that will inform the creation of specific design theory.

Though the application of this method is still an on-going process, I do believe that its application and refinement might help designers to improve their design skills, while strengthening design quality. As far as possible I will continue to improve the quality and the amount of data related to this subject, and I will continue to publish the findings of this journey, which so far counts with more than 20 papers.

Agranoff, R. and Beryl A., 1991. The Comparative Case Study Approach in Public Administration. Research in Public Administration, 1: 203-231.

Francis, M., 1999. A case study method for landscape architecture.The Landscape Architecture Foundation, Washington DC.Francis, M., 2001. A Case Study Method for Landscape Architecture. Landscape Journal, 19(2): 15-29.

George, A., 1979. Case Study and Theory Development: The Method of Structured, Focused Comparison. In: Lauren, P. (Eds.),Diplomacy: New Approaches in History, Theory and Policy. Free Press, New York.

Lucas, W., 1974. The Case Survey Method. RAND Corporation,Santa Monica.

Yin, R., 1994. Case Study Research: design and methods. Sage Publications, London.