Alejandro Aravena: My architectural philosophy? Bring the community into the process

翻译人员: Zichen Bai 校对人员: Peipei Xiang

If there's any power in design,

如果说设计有任何力量的话，

that's the power of synthesis.

那就是整合的力量。

The more complex the problem,

问题越复杂，

the more the need for simplicity.

就越需要简化。

So allow me to share three cases

请允许我分享三个案例，

where we tried to apply

我们尝试在其中运用

design's power of synthesis.

设计的“整合力”。

Let's start with the global challenge of urbanization.

[案例一：城市] 让我们从城市化这个全球性的挑战说起。

It's a fact that people are moving towards cities.

事实是人们在向城市迁移，

and even if counterintuitive, it's good news.

也许有悖常理，但其实这是好消息。

Evidence shows that people are better off in cities.

证据表明人们在城市中生活得更好。

But there's a problem that I would call

但这里有一个问题，

我将它称之为“3S威胁“：

the "3S" menace:

The scale, speed, and scarcity of means

规模，速度和资源匮乏，

with which we will have to respond to this phenomenon

即在城市化过程中，我们面对的这三个威胁

has no precedence in history.

是史无前例的。

For you to have an idea,

这是什么概念呢？

out of the three billion people living in cities today,

在今天居住在城市的三十亿人中，

one billion are under the line of poverty.

有十亿人是生活在贫困线以下的。

By 2030, out of the five billion people

到2030年，预计有五十亿人

that will be living in cities,

会居住在城市，

two billion are going to be under the line of poverty.

在他们中，有二十亿会生活在贫困线以下。

That means that we will have to build

这意味着，在未来的十五年内，

a one million-person city per week

我们必须每周建造一座

能容纳一百万人的城市，

with 10,000 dollars per family

平均每个家庭投入一万美元。

during the next 15 years.

A one million-person city per week

每周一座百万人口的城市，

with 10,000 dollars per family.

每个家庭一万美元。

If we don't solve this equation,

如果我们不解决这个问题，

it is not that people will stop coming to cities.

人们并不会因此不来城市，

They will come anyhow,

他们还是会来，

but they will live in slums, favelas

但他们会住在棚户区，贫民窟

and informal settlements.

和不正规的定居点中 。

So what to do? Well, an answer may come

那么我们该怎么办？

棚户区和贫民窟本身或许可以给我们答案。

from favelas and slums themselves.

A clue could be in this question we were asked

在我们十年前被问到的一个问题中 可能就含有答案。

10 years ago.

We were asked to accommodate 100 families

我们被要求为100个家庭提供住所，

that had been occupying illegally

他们非法占据了

half a hectare in the center

半公顷的在智利北部的伊基克的市中心土地。

of the city of Iquique in the north of Chile

using a $10,000 subsidy

我们有一万美元的补助，

with which we had to buy the land,

用这些钱，我们必须购买土地，

provide the infrastructure,

提供基础设施

and build the houses that, in the best of the cases,

和建造住房，

这些住房最多也就大约四十平米。

would be of around 40 square meters.

And by the way, they said,

“对了”，他们说，

the cost of the land,

“土地的价格——由于在市中心——

because it's in the center of the city,

is three times more

可能会比一般社会住房可承担的价格贵三倍。”

than what social housing can normally afford.

Due to the difficulty of the question,

因为这个问题的复杂性，

we decided to include the families

我们决定把那些家庭也包括进来

in the process of understanding the constraints,

并一起了解这些限制，

and we started a participatory design process,

我们启动了一个用户参与式设计流程

and testing what was available there in the market.

并且检验了市场上可以购买到的房屋。

Detached houses,

独栋房屋

30 families could be accommodated.

可以容纳三十个家庭；

Row houses, 60 families.

排屋，六十个。

["100 families"] The only way to accommodate all of them

[一百个家庭] 唯一能容纳所有人的方法

was by building in height,

就是增加高度，

and they threatened us

但是他们用绝食来威胁我们，

to go on a hunger strike

if we even dared to offer this

如果我们敢把这当作一个解决方案的话，

as a solution,

because they could not make the tiny apartments

因为他们不能扩建这些狭小的公寓。

expand.

So the conclusion with the families —

[结论？我们遇到麻烦了] 所以，我们一起得出的结论——

and this is important, not our conclusion —

这一点是重要的，这不是我们的结论，

with the families, was that we had a problem.

这是我们一起得出的结论——就是我们遇到麻烦了。

We had to innovate.

我们必须创新

So what did we do?

那我们是怎么做的呢?

Well, a middle-class family

一个中产阶级的家庭

lives reasonably well

在一间大约八十平米的房子里会生活得不错。

in around 80 square meters,

but when there's no money,

但当资金不足时，

what the market does

市场会把房子的面积

is to reduce the size of the house

to 40 square meters.

缩减到四十平米。

What we said was,

我们的想法是

what if,

如果

instead of thinking of 40 square meters

我们不把一间四十平米的房子

as a small house,

视作一间狭小的房子，

why don't we consider it

为什么不将它当作

half of a good one?

一间好的房子的一半？

When you rephrase the problem

当你把这个问题说成半间好房子

as half of a good house

instead of a small one,

而不是一间小房子时，

the key question is, which half do we do?

问题就变成了，我们要建造哪一半？

And we thought we had to do with public money

我们想，我们必须用公共资金

the half that families won't be able to do individually.

建造那些家庭无法单独建造的那一半。

We identified five design conditions

我们确认了五个设计条件，

that belonged to the hard half of a house,

它们都属于建造一座房子中困难的那部分，

and we went back to the families to do two things:

然后我们回头找到那些家庭去做两件事：

join forces and split tasks.

联合力量和分派任务。

Our design was something in between

我们的设计是一个

介于一栋楼和一个房子之间的东西。

a building and a house.

As a building, it could pay

作为一栋楼，它可以承担

for expensive, well-located land,

昂贵的，地段良好的土地的价格，

and as a house, it could expand.

作为一个房子，它可以扩展。

If, in the process of not being expelled

这些家庭不用到城市边缘寻求房子，

to the periphery while getting a house,

families kept their network and their jobs,

如果他们保持他们原有的的社交关系和工作，

we knew that the expansion would begin right away.

我们知道扩建很快就会开始。

So we went from this initial social housing

所以我们从起初的社会住房

to a middle-class unit achieved by families themselves

发展成了由那些家庭自己打造的中产阶层单元房，

within a couple of weeks.

就在几周的时间内。

This was our first project

这是我们第一个项目，

in Iquique 10 years ago.

十年前在伊基克。

This is our last project in Chile.

这是我们在智利的最近一个项目，

Different designs, same principle:

不同的设计，相同的原则。

You provide the frame,

你提供框架，

and from then on, families take over.

然后由家庭接手。

So the purpose of design,

所以，设计的目的，

trying to understand and trying to give an answer

试图理解和解决“3S”威胁，

to the "3S" menace,

scale, speed, and scarcity,

即规模（scale），速度（speed） 和匮乏（scarcity），

is to channel people's own building capacity.

就是启发人们自身的建造的能力，

We won't solve the one million people per week equation

如果我们不利用人们自己的力量，

unless we use people's own power for building.

我们就无法解决这个每周为一百万人提供住房的问题。

So, with the right design,

所以，有了正确的设计，

slums and favelas may not be the problem

贫民窟和棚户区可能就不再是问题了，

but actually the only possible solution.

而是唯一可能的解决方案。

案例二：CO2（二氧化碳）

The second case is how design can contribute

第二个案例体现了设计是如何

to sustainability.

对可持续性起到帮助的。

In 2012, we entered the competition

在2012年，我们参与了安杰利尼创新中心的竞标，

for the Angelini Innovation Center,

and the aim was to build

我们的目标是为知识的创造提供合适的环境。

the right environment for knowledge creation.

It is accepted that for such an aim,

有一点是公认的，

那就是对于知识创造这样一个目标来说，

knowledge creation,

interaction among people, face-to-face contact,

人与人之间面对面的交流和互动是很重要的，

it's important, and we agreed on that.

But for us, the question of the right environment

我们也同意这点。

但对于我们，合适的环境

was a very literal question.

其实就是一个表面的问题。

We wanted to have a working space

我们想打造一个有着合适光线和 适宜的温度和空气的工作空间。

with the right light, with the right temperature,

with the right air.

So we asked ourselves:

于是我们问自己，

Does the typical office building

典型的办公建筑

help us in that sense?

是否在这些方面对我们有帮助？

Well, how does that building look, typically?

这些建筑看上去一般是什么样的？

It's a collection of floors,

它是许多楼层的集合，

one on top of each other,

层层相叠，

with a core in the center

在中间有一个核心，

with elevators, stairs, pipes, wires, everything,

其中有电梯，楼梯，管道，线路等等，

and then a glass skin on the outside

外部有一层玻璃外墙，

that, due to direct sun radiation,

因为阳光的直射，

creates a huge greenhouse effect inside.

在内部制造了严重的温室效应。

In addition to that, let's say a guy

另外，

working on the seventh floor

就拿一个在七楼工作的人来说，

goes every single day through the third floor,

他每天都要经过三楼，

but has no idea what the guy on that floor

但他对在那层的人的工作一无所知。

is working on.

So we thought, well, maybe we have to turn this scheme

于是我们想，好吧，或许我们应该把这个设计反一下。

inside out.

And what we did was,

我们所做是

let's have an open atrium,

让我们建造一个开放的中庭，

a hollowed core,

一个空的中轴，

the same collection of floors,

同样的楼层的集合，

but have the walls and the mass in the perimeter,

但把外墙和其他东西安排在四周，

so that when the sun hits,

所以当阳光照射时，

it's not impacting directly glass, but a wall.

不直接照在玻璃上，而是在墙上。

When you have an open atrium inside,

当你在内部有了一个开放的中庭时，

you are able to see what others are doing

你就可以从内部看到别人在做什么，

from within the building, and you have

你也可以更好的控制光线，

a better way to control light,

and when you place the mass and the walls

另外当你把杂物和墙壁

in the perimeter,

放在外围时，

then you are preventing direct sun radiation.

你就可以阻止阳光的直射。

You may also open those windows

你也可以打开那些窗户

and get cross-ventilation.

让穿堂风通过。

We just made those openings

我们设计了这种大规模的开放空间，

of such a scale that they could work

它们成了整个建筑的空中广场和户外空间。

as elevated squares,

outdoor spaces throughout

the entire height of the building.

None of this is rocket science.

这些都不是什么尖端科技，

You don't require sophisticated programming.

你不需要做复杂的规划，

It's not about technology.

这些都无关技术，

This is just archaic, primitive common sense,

这只是一种古老的，原始的常识。

and by using common sense,

通过运用这些常识

we went from 120 kilowatts

我们把这座大楼用于降温的能耗

per square meter per year,

从一座传统的玻璃幕墙建筑的

which is the typical energy consumption

每平米每年120千瓦

for cooling a glass tower,

to 40 kilowatts per square meter per year.

降到了每平米每年40千瓦。

So with the right design,

所以，有了正确的设计

sustainability is nothing but the rigorous use

可持续性就不过是对常识的严格运用。

of common sense.

Last case I would like to share is how design

[案例三：海啸] 我想分享的最后一个案例

是关于设计可以如何为对抗自然灾害 提供一个全面的答案。

can provide more comprehensive answers

against natural disasters.

You may know that Chile, in 2010,

你们或许知道，智利在2010年

was hit by an 8.8 Richter scale

被一场里氏8.8级的地震和海啸袭击，

earthquake and tsunami,

and we were called to work

我们被叫去参与

in the reconstruction of the Constitución,

南部的孔斯蒂图西翁市的重建工作。

in the southern part of the country.

We were given 100 days, three months,

我们有100天时间，大约三个月，

to design almost everything,

来设计出几乎所有的东西，

from public buildings to public space,

从公共建筑到公共空间，

street grid, transportation, housing,

街道网络，交通，住房，

and mainly how to protect the city

以及最主要的——

保护城市抵御未来海啸的方法。

against future tsunamis.

This was new in Chilean urban design,

这在智利的城市设计中是前所未有的，

and there were in the air a couple of alternatives.

当时还有三个其他的选项。

First one:

第一，

Forbid installation on ground zero.

禁止在危险区域内的建设

Thirty million dollars spent mainly

如果这样做，政府需要花三千万美元在征地上。

in land expropriation.

This is exactly what's being discussed in Japan nowadays,

这个方案正是现在在日本被讨论的，

and if you have a disciplined population

如果你的民众像日本民众一样遵守秩序， 那这个方案或许可行。

like the Japanese, this may work,

but we know that in Chile,

但是我们知道，在智利

this land is going to be occupied illegally anyhow,

这些土地是无论如何都会被非法占据的，

so this alternative was unrealistic and undesirable.

所以，这个方案既不现实也不理想。

Second alternative: build a big wall,

第二个选项：修建一堵巨大的墙，

heavy infrastructure to resist

用坚固的结构来抵御洪水的力量。

the energy of the waves.

This alternative was conveniently lobbied

大型建筑公司极力游说此方案，

by big building companies,

because it meant 42 million dollars in contracts,

因为这能带来4200万美元的合同，

and was also politically preferred,

而且这在政治上也是首选的，

because it required no land expropriation.

因为它并不需要任何征地项目。

But Japan proved that trying to resist

但是日本的经验证明了

想要去抵抗自然的力量是徒劳的，

the force of nature is useless.

So this alternative was irresponsible.

所以这个方案是不负责任的。

As in the housing process,

就像在住房项目中一样，

we had to include the community

我们必须让社区参与到 为这个问题寻找方案的过程中来，

in the way of finding a solution for this,

and we started a participatory design process.

我们启动了一个参与式设计流程。

(Video) [In Spanish] Loudspeaker: What kind of city do you want?

（录像）[西班牙语] 扩音器：你们想要什么样的城市？

Vote for Constitución.

为孔斯蒂图西翁投票，

Go to the Open House and express your options.

参加开放日， 发表你的意见，

Participate!

参与进来！

Fisherman: I am a fisherman.

渔民：我是一个渔民，

Twenty-five fishermen work for me.

手下有二十五个人，

Where should I take them? To the forest?

我该带他们去哪里？去森林吗？

Man: So why can't we have a concrete defense?

男子：我们为什么不可以建水泥堤坝？

Done well, of course.

当然了，要修建好。

Man 2: I am the history of Constitución.

男子2：我祖上就住在这里，

And you come here to tell me that I cannot keep on living here?

而你们现在告诉我我不能继续住在这里？

My whole family has lived here,

我的全家都一直住在这里，

I raised my children here,

我在这里抚养我的孩子们长大，

and my children will also raise their children here.

我的孩子们也会在这里抚养他们的孩子，

and my grandchildren and everyone else will.

我的孙子们和后代所有人都会在这里，

But why are you imposing this on me?

但你们为什么要强迫我？

You! You are imposing this on me!

你！你们就是在强迫我！

In danger zone I am not authorized to build.

说什么在危险区，我不能盖房子，

He himself is saying that.

他，他自己就是这样说的。

Man 3: No, no, no, Nieves...

男子3：不，不，不，不是……

Alejandro Aravena: I don't know if you were able

演讲者：我不知道你们是否能看懂字幕，

to read the subtitles, but you can tell

但是你们可以从肢体语言判断

from the body language

that participatory design

这个参与式设计

is not a hippie, romantic,

不是一个嬉皮的，浪漫的

let's-all-dream-together-about- the-future-of-the-city

“大家一起梦想城市的未来”之类的事情，

kind of thing.

It is actually — (Applause)

它实际上 ——（掌声）

It is actually not even with the families

它实际上甚至不是要和那些家庭一起 尝试寻找正确答案，

trying to find the right answer.

It is mainly trying to identify with precision

而主要是要明确

what is the right question.

什么才是恰当的问题。

There is nothing worse than answering well

没有什么比正确回答一个错误的问题更糟糕的了。

the wrong question.

So it was pretty obvious after this process

很明显，在这之后

that, well, we chicken out here

我们应该畏缩离开，因为气氛太紧张了？

and go away because it's too tense,

or we go even further in asking,

还是我们更进一步

what else is bothering you?

去问“还有什么别的事情困扰你们吗？”

What other problems do you have

“你们还有什么其它问题？”

and you want us to take care of now that the city

“既然这座城市要从零开始重新规划，

will have to be rethought from scratch?

你们还有什么想让我们帮忙解决的吗？”

And what they said was,

他们说，

look, fine to protect the city against future tsunamis,

好，保护城市抵御海啸是好事，

we really appreciate, but the next one is going to come in, what, 20 years?

我们很感激这一点， 但是下一场海啸什么时候会来？二十年后？

But every single year, we have problems

但每一年，我们都会遇到由降雨带来的洪水，

of flooding due to rain.

In addition, we are in the middle

另外，我们处在这个国家的森林地区，

of the forest region of the country,

and our public space sucks.

我们的公共空间糟透了，

It's poor and it's scarce.

条件差而且非常有限。

And the origin of the city, our identity,

而且这座城市的根源，我们的认同感

is not really connected to the buildings that fell,

和那些倒掉的建筑并没有什么关系，

it is connected to the river,

而是和河流相连的，

but the river cannot be accessed publicly,

但河流是不对公众开放的，

because its shores are privately owned.

因为河岸是被私人所有的。

So we thought that we had to produce a third alternative,

所以我们认为我们必须想出第三个方案

and our approach was against geographical threats,

我们的想法是，应对地方性的威胁

have geographical answers.

需要有地方性的答案。

What if, in between the city

如果

在城市和海洋之间

and the sea

we have a forest,

有一片树林，

a forest that doesn't try to resist

这片树林并不是用来阻止

the energy of nature,

自然的力量的，

but dissipates it by introducing friction?

而是通过引入障碍来削弱它？

A forest that may be able to laminate the water

一片森林或许可以分开水流

and prevent the flooding?

并且避免洪水？

That may pay the historical debt of public space,

它或许也可以解决公共空间的历史问题，

and that may provide, finally,

并且最终

democratic access to the river.

为公众提供一条开放的河流。

So as a conclusion of the participatory design,

所以，作为参与式设计的结论，

the alternative was validated politically and socially,

这个方案在政治上和社会上都是可行的，

but there was still the problem of the cost:

但成本的问题依然存在，

48 million dollars.

4800万美元.

So what we did was a survey

我们对公共投资系统做了一个调查，

in the public investment system,

and found out that there were three ministries

我们发现这里有三个不同的部门

with three projects in the exact same place,

在同一个地方有三个彼此独立的项目，

not knowing of the existence of the other projects.

他们都不知道对方的存在，

The sum of them: 52 million dollars.

而这些项目的成本总和是：5200万美元。

So design's power of synthesis

所以，“设计的整合力”

is trying to make a more efficient use

就是尝试去高效地利用城市中稀缺的资源，

of the scarcest resource in cities,

which is not money but coordination.

这无关金钱，而是协调。

By doing so, we were able to save

通过这样做，我们能节省

four million dollars, and that is why the forest

四百万美元，这也是为什么

那片森林现在已经在种植了。

is today under construction.

（掌声）

(Applause)

So be it the force of self construction,

所以，自我建造的力量，

the force of common sense,

常识的力量，

or the force of nature, all these forces

或自然的力量，所有这些力量

need to be translated into form,

需要被转化成一种形式，

and what that form is modeling and shaping

而这种形式最终打造的

is not cement, bricks, or wood.

并不是水泥，砖块或木材，

It is life itself.

而是生活本身。

Design's power of synthesis

设计的整合力

is just an attempt to put

不过是一种

at the innermost core of architecture

把生命的力量注入建筑的灵魂的努力尝试。

the force of life.

Thank you so much.

谢谢！

（掌声）

(Applause)