我們討論國土景觀遺產(chǎn)系統(tǒng)，源于一個基本求知問題：將景觀作為國土空間的人工介入方法，除了景觀設(shè)計(jì)（landscape design）、景觀規(guī)劃（landscape planning）之外，是否還有另一視野—景觀保護(hù)（landscape conservation）尚待更多探索？而這樣設(shè)問，又建立在如下的基本認(rèn)知之上：國土景觀并不簡單地等同于地表可視景象，更重要的是其中蘊(yùn)含的人地關(guān)系，且這個人地關(guān)系是變動不居的。

國土景觀的形成源于宏觀的地質(zhì)運(yùn)動與中微觀的地表塑造力量。在地球46億年的演進(jìn)史中，我們今天看到的地表景觀是相對新近的結(jié)果。距今300萬年，隨著“喜馬拉雅造山運(yùn)動”的結(jié)束，劇烈的地質(zhì)運(yùn)動才趨向穩(wěn)定，全球景觀（特別是中國的國土景觀）的地貌格局基本形成，這一時期在非洲出現(xiàn)了古猿向原始人類的演化。距今11 000年，第四紀(jì)冰川期結(jié)束，全球氣候回暖，動植物的全球分布逐漸接近現(xiàn)代，當(dāng)今全球景觀的中微觀地物形態(tài)分布得以最終呈現(xiàn)，人類也開啟了農(nóng)業(yè)時代，地球歷史進(jìn)入了持續(xù)至今的地質(zhì)時代——全新世（Holocene）。然而，自18世紀(jì)工業(yè)革命以來，技術(shù)的變革大大提升了人類改變地球環(huán)境、地表景觀的能力，并且這種改變能力甚至是決定性的。在哲學(xué)、人類學(xué)、地理學(xué)等學(xué)科的研究中，將我們現(xiàn)在所處的，以人類為中心的時代命名為一個超越了地質(zhì)學(xué)意義的最新地質(zhì)時代—人類世（Anthropocence）。

在“人與天調(diào)”的時代，傳統(tǒng)農(nóng)業(yè)社會中的“人”通常是與土地、自然緊密連接在一起的。具體族群生活在有著明確邊界的地域環(huán)境之中，人們所感知的地形、地貌、地物、氣候，與農(nóng)林牧漁生產(chǎn)活動，加之非物質(zhì)的生活習(xí)俗、信仰等共同構(gòu)成一處地方的風(fēng)土環(huán)境。人地依存中產(chǎn)生的國土景觀既包括進(jìn)入社會禮制中的“五岳四瀆”、寄托人文情感的“山水名勝”，以及承托精神信仰的“圣山圣地”，也包括具體地方中人們?nèi)粘Ｉ畹膱鼍?，是上述風(fēng)土環(huán)境中物質(zhì)和非物質(zhì)要素耦合而成的地方的總體事實(shí)。

在當(dāng)下的人類世時代，工業(yè)和信息社會中“人”與土地、自然的關(guān)系漸行漸遠(yuǎn)?，F(xiàn)代產(chǎn)業(yè)分工、愈加發(fā)達(dá)的工業(yè)和信息技術(shù)讓人類生產(chǎn)、定居活動擺脫自然環(huán)境束縛，人類活動能夠改變區(qū)域地形、地貌、氣候，甚至創(chuàng)造一個高度人工化的城市生態(tài)系統(tǒng)。原本依托于地方風(fēng)土環(huán)境而存在的國土景觀不再被當(dāng)作一個地方人、地、物相協(xié)調(diào)的總體事實(shí)，而成為單純意義上的生產(chǎn)資料或單純供人游憩的場所。人與土地、自然間交織的國土景觀完成了“祛魅”（disenchantment）的過程。我們現(xiàn)在知道，人類世中的技術(shù)帶來的不完全是對未來的美好憧憬，更隱藏著人與土地間關(guān)系割裂后的種種隱憂。人成為“技術(shù)人”，而非“自然人”，與土地、自然依存的詩意棲居離我們越來越遠(yuǎn)，被現(xiàn)代技術(shù)性概念區(qū)隔、驅(qū)動的人類活動所塑造的國土空間日益機(jī)械、趨同與不可持續(xù)。

19 世紀(jì)中葉，人類世開啟后不久，為應(yīng)對伴隨工業(yè)革命而來的自然風(fēng)景、傳統(tǒng)田園風(fēng)光的破壞，英國先鋒環(huán)保主義者開展了景觀運(yùn)動，讓人親近自然和鄉(xiāng)村環(huán)境，排遣日益同質(zhì)化、呆板的城市生活帶來的壓抑情緒。時至今日，歐洲大陸、美國、日本等都以立法形式建立了各自的國土景觀保護(hù)體系，中國也自1982年開始建立風(fēng)景名勝區(qū)保護(hù)體系，并于近年啟動了對國家公園的保護(hù)探索。此外，我們也看到了如泰山、黃山、廬山、五臺山、西湖文化景觀、哈尼梯田文化景觀、花山巖畫文化景觀等因傳統(tǒng)人地關(guān)系蘊(yùn)含的價值而陸續(xù)申報(bào)成功的世界遺產(chǎn)。與此同時，全國重要農(nóng)業(yè)文化遺產(chǎn)、工業(yè)遺產(chǎn)、灌溉工程遺產(chǎn)等保護(hù)體系正在成為遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)的新熱點(diǎn)。以此為契機(jī)，我們希望進(jìn)一步探索國土景觀遺產(chǎn)系統(tǒng)保護(hù)實(shí)踐的可能，重拾國土景觀遺產(chǎn)中所蘊(yùn)含的人地關(guān)系、人與自然關(guān)系的傳統(tǒng)智慧。這不同于業(yè)已存在的生態(tài)保護(hù)、生物多樣性保護(hù)行動，也不同于單純的物質(zhì)、非物質(zhì)遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)，甚至也不完全等同于新興的文化景觀遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)。國土景觀遺產(chǎn)系統(tǒng)的研究與保護(hù)，應(yīng)以留存、見證、解析傳統(tǒng)人地關(guān)系可持續(xù)經(jīng)營的智慧為主旨，以彰顯其遺產(chǎn)價值為手段，以最終消解“人類世”時代人地之間疏離性張力為目的。

在人類世的當(dāng)下，技術(shù)化文明裹挾中的人地失衡問題，更應(yīng)在對“賦魅”（enchantment）的國土景觀遺產(chǎn)系統(tǒng)的研究和保護(hù)中尋求破解途徑，重拾人與土地、自然和諧的詩意棲居智慧，而這也正是我們探索“景觀保護(hù)”方法的應(yīng)有之意。

Regaining the Wisdom of Poetic Dwelling in the Anthropocene

Our discussion of the national landscape heritage system roots in a fundamental question of knowledge: Is there another perspective, that is,landscape conservation, to be explored more than landscape design and landscape planning when landscape is used as an artificial intervention method of national land space? Such a question is based on the following basic knowledge: The national landscape does not simply equal to the visual scene on the earth’s surface. What is more important is the manland relationship contained therein, which is in flux.

The national landscape was formed by macroscopic tectonic motion and meso-microscopic surface shaping power. In the 4.6-billion-year history of the Earth’s evolution, the landscape we see today is a later-day product. Following the end of the Himalayan orogeny 3 million years ago, the intense geological activities tended to stabilize and the landform pattern of the global landscape (especially the national landscape of China) basically took shape. Africa began to transit from fossil anthropoid to primitive humans during this period. With the end of the glacial epoch in the quaternary period 11,000 years ago, the global climate began to warm up. The distribution of plants and animals in the world gradually approached that in the modern times. The shapes of meso-microscopic ground objects for the present global landscape were finally distributed.Humans started the agricultural stage and the Earth’s history entered the Holocene, a geological age that continues to this day. However, with the arrival of the Industrial Revolution in the 18th century, technological changes greatly improved man’s ability to change the Earth’s environment and surface landscape. Such ability sometimes worked conclusively. In the new research on philosophy, anthropology and geography, Anthropocene is used to name the anthropocentric age in which we now live, a newest geological age that transcends the geological significances.

In the era of “man and nature in harmony”, “man” in the traditional agro-society usually fayed with land and nature. The specific ethnic groups lived in the clearly-demarcated geographical environment.The sensed terrain, landform, ground objects and climate, together with producing activities in agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry and fishery,as well as immaterial living customs and beliefs, jointly form the endemic environment of a place. In the national landscape generated by the dependence of man and land are incorporated the “five mountains and four rivers” that are included in the social set of etiquette, the “places of interest” that repose humanistic emotions, and the “sacred mountains and sacred places” that bear spiritual beliefs. It is also inclusive of the scenes of people’s daily life in specific places. It is the general fact combined by the material and immaterial elements of the above-mentioned endemic environment.

In the current Anthropocene era, “man” in the industrial and information society is growing away from land and nature. Modern industrial division of labor, together with increasingly advanced industry and information technology, has freed human production and settlement from the constraints of the natural environment. Human activities can change regional terrain, landform and climate, and even create a highly artificialized urban ecosystem. The national landscape existed originally on the local endemic environment. Now such a landscape is no longer seen as a general fact that locals, land and objects are harmonized with one another, but has turned into a mere means of production or a place for recreation. The national landscape interwoven by man, land, and nature has gone through the “disenchantment”. As far as we now know,what technology has produced in the Anthropocene is not totally a beautiful vision of the future, but the pitfalls after the separation of man from land. Man has become “techno-man” instead of “natural man”.The poetic habitats of dependence on land and nature are receding further and further away from us. Modern technical conception divides and drives human activities. The national land space shaped thereby is becoming increasingly mechanical, convergent and unsustainable.

In the mid-19th century, British pioneer environmentalists launched a landscape campaign soon after the beginning of the Anthropocene. This aimed to protect the natural scenery and traditional idyllic surroundings from being destroyed along with modern industrialization, while allowing people to relieve the depression from the increasingly homogeneous and stagnant urban life by approaching nature and the countryside. To date,Europe, the United States, Japan and other countries have developed their own systems of national landscape conservation in the form of legislation. China, in addition to building a system for protection of scenic areas in 1982, has started to explore national park protection in recent years. Moreover, we have seen such world heritage sites as Mount Tai,Mount Huang, Mount Lu, Mount Wutai, West Lake Cultural Landscape,Hani Terraces Cultural Landscape, Huashan Cliff Painting Cultural Landscape and others. Their successful application for being included in the world heritage list is based on the value of traditional man-land relationship. Meanwhile, the heritage conservation system concerning nationally important agricultural sites, industrial sites and irrigation works is becoming a new hot spot for heritage conservation. It is our hope to grasp this opportunity to explore the feasibility of systematically protecting the national landscapes as heritages, and regain the traditional wisdom of man-land relationship and man-nature relationship contained in national landscape heritage. This differs from the existing ecological conservation and biodiversity conservation, from the conservation of purely tangible and intangible heritage, and even from the conservation of emerging cultural landscape heritages. The research and conservation of national landscape heritage system should be based on the objective of preserving, witnessing and analyzing the traditional wisdom of sustainable management of man-land relationship. Also, such research and protection should take highlighting its heritage value as the means to finally dispel the alienation tension between man and land in the Anthropocene era.

In the current Anthropocene, it becomes imperative for us to seek ways to redress the imbalance between man and land in technological civilization in the study and conservation of the national landscape heritage system of “enchantment”, and regain the wisdom of poetic dwellings in harmony among man, land and nature. This is exactly what we should do to explore the method of “l(fā)andscape conservation”.

Acquiring editor of the current issue: XU Tong

March 18, 2022