首頁(yè)  /  發(fā)現(xiàn)   /  讀書   /  正文

  • 《景觀設(shè)計(jì)學(xué)》2020年第3期

    作 者：
    陳崇賢（CHEN Chongxian），夏宇（XIA Yu），楊瀟豪（YANG Xiaohao）等
    類 別：
    景觀
    出 版 社：
    高等教育出版社有限公司
    出版時(shí)間：
    2020年6月

俞孔堅(jiān)?兩種文明的斗爭(zhēng)：基于自然的解決方案——《景觀設(shè)計(jì)學(xué)》2020年第3期“主編寄語”


這里所講的“兩種文明的斗爭(zhēng)”有別于塞繆爾·亨廷頓所著《文明的沖突與世界秩序的重建》一書中的內(nèi)容，而特指生態(tài)文明在發(fā)展進(jìn)程中，與工業(yè)文明的世界觀、方法論和技術(shù)論之間的對(duì)抗——這是人類社會(huì)進(jìn)步過程中的一種搏斗與突圍。盡管人類走向生態(tài)文明是一種必然，但要實(shí)現(xiàn)這一目標(biāo)卻需要無數(shù)人、無數(shù)次的艱苦奮斗，從某種意義上來說，這是一場(chǎng)革命。人類終將通過尊重、保護(hù)、適應(yīng)和利用自然，以更加經(jīng)濟(jì)有效的方式回應(yīng)自身的社會(huì)和經(jīng)濟(jì)訴求，最終實(shí)現(xiàn)思想方法和技術(shù)手段的進(jìn)步。在應(yīng)對(duì)諸如氣候變化、洪澇災(zāi)害、水土污染等環(huán)境危機(jī)時(shí)，尤其應(yīng)當(dāng)借助自然力量來塑造城市的生態(tài)韌性[1]，而非依賴工業(yè)文明的工程技術(shù)手段。

 

2017年3月14日，野生動(dòng)物攝影師奚志農(nóng)突然打電話向我求助：“大理雙鴛溪的溪底正在‘抹水泥’，要建九道水泥壩，好慘吶！怎么才能救救她？”奚志農(nóng)已經(jīng)在這里居住了近10年，經(jīng)常帶女兒們到溪谷中感受清涼的溪水，閑坐于巨大的卵石之上，欣賞四季的野花。他無法容忍這一切的消失，也不愿看到心愛的溪流被鋼筋水泥所捆綁。透過他發(fā)來的視頻可以看到，河道治理工程就在他家門前進(jìn)行著，幾臺(tái)挖掘機(jī)正在粉碎他和女兒們經(jīng)常蹲坐的磐石，溪谷中的植被也已蕩然無存；他哽咽的聲音讓人感受到欲哭無淚的痛楚。

 

他之所以打電話向我求助，是因?yàn)槲覀冊(cè)?005年圓明園湖底防滲工程中的共同立場(chǎng)—讓自然呼吸。于是，我們分頭行動(dòng)，說服了大理市政府，并借助當(dāng)?shù)孛襟w的力量，使正在進(jìn)行中的河道治理工程得以暫停。然而遺憾的是，我們終究沒能成功解救這條河流——一年之后，工程再次啟動(dòng)，河道的硬化和渠化以更猛烈的方式卷土重來，雙鴛溪最終還是被九道水泥壩切割開了。相關(guān)部門以“保障人民生命財(cái)產(chǎn)安全”的名義聚集了諸多“專家”和行政力量，徹底無視了生態(tài)專家們的抗議。在此項(xiàng)工程中，上級(jí)政府完成了數(shù)百萬元的融資，當(dāng)?shù)卣畬?shí)現(xiàn)了GDP的增長(zhǎng)，工程公司則獲得了巨額收益。這一看似皆大歡喜的工程葬送了積累千萬年的自然資產(chǎn)，奚志農(nóng)和女兒們?cè)僖矡o法擁有蒼山溪谷的美好生態(tài)體驗(yàn)。

 

2020年4月20日，在世界地球日前夕，已三年未聯(lián)系的奚志農(nóng)再一次來電：“又來了！這回可不再是用幾百萬的投資去硬化一條溪流，而是要花將近三個(gè)億去硬化和渠化‘蒼山十八溪’的其中5條?？纯慈昵霸陔p鴛溪實(shí)施的硬化工程，不但原本的自然溪流被毀，后建的水壩基礎(chǔ)也逐漸被加速的水流掏空。快救救蒼山五溪吧！”而后，致力于守護(hù)自然的志愿者們?cè)俅伟l(fā)起了行動(dòng)。時(shí)至今日，這場(chǎng)關(guān)于如何治理洱海以及如何對(duì)待蒼山溪流的兩種文明間的搏斗仍處于膠著之中。但令人欣慰的是，相較20年前，這一次政府的態(tài)度謙遜且鼓舞人心。

 

對(duì)于20年前那場(chǎng)反對(duì)北京河流工程化的行動(dòng)，我記憶猶新：在那場(chǎng)對(duì)抗中，環(huán)保人士與學(xué)者的抗?fàn)幾罱K以被扣上“沖擊政府”的帽子而告終。在“防洪”“治污”“改善人居環(huán)境”等堂而皇之的口號(hào)下，北京城區(qū)幾乎無河不被裁彎取直、無河不被硬化渠化、無河不被設(shè)壩安閘。環(huán)保人士與學(xué)者只得無奈表示：你們一定會(huì)后悔的，屆時(shí)將要花費(fèi)更多的金錢來將它們拆掉。果不其然，不到10年時(shí)間，北京就開始了拆除硬化水泥河道的行動(dòng)—這看似是一項(xiàng)惠民工程，但令人匪夷所思的是，某些河道硬化工程卻仍在同步進(jìn)行著[2]。反觀這兩次行動(dòng)，河流工程化不但沒能實(shí)現(xiàn)洪澇防治、污染治理、美化環(huán)境等目標(biāo)，反而使城市原有的生態(tài)韌性消失了，水資源與環(huán)境問題愈發(fā)嚴(yán)重。

 

同樣的斗爭(zhēng)在2005年的“圓明園防滲大辯論”中再次上演。那場(chǎng)“大辯論”可以視作是對(duì)中國(guó)“基于自然的解決方案”（nature-based solutions）的一次啟蒙。當(dāng)年3月22日，我接到對(duì)環(huán)境保護(hù)情懷滿滿的生態(tài)學(xué)家張正春的電話，他心急火燎地告訴我，圓明園福海湖底被鋪上了防滲土工布，悲嘆之氣與奚志農(nóng)一模一樣。就此，我便參與到一場(chǎng)曠日持久的抵制防滲工程的斗爭(zhēng)中，同時(shí)參與這場(chǎng)斗爭(zhēng)的還有王如松（已故）、梁從誡（已故）、崔海亭等生態(tài)和環(huán)保領(lǐng)域的專家。3月28日，人民網(wǎng)率先就此事發(fā)聲，由此掀起了一場(chǎng)全民生態(tài)啟蒙運(yùn)動(dòng)[3]，并促使國(guó)家環(huán)境保護(hù)總局舉辦了圓明園遺址公園湖底防滲工程公眾聽證會(huì)，引發(fā)了全社會(huì)的廣泛關(guān)注。盡管最終圓明園管理處還是以折中的方式完成了防滲工程，但在這場(chǎng)運(yùn)動(dòng)中，官方部門（國(guó)家環(huán)境保護(hù)總局）和官方媒體（人民網(wǎng)等）幾乎都站到了生態(tài)環(huán)保人士的一邊，局部利益的代表人士遭到了強(qiáng)烈聲討和孤立。事件歷時(shí)數(shù)月，媒體報(bào)道鋪天蓋地，可以說是中國(guó)民間生態(tài)保護(hù)運(yùn)動(dòng)的一次大勝利。

 

2012年7月21日是一個(gè)值得銘記的轉(zhuǎn)折點(diǎn)。這天夜里，一場(chǎng)暴雨將北京市脆弱的城市韌性暴露無遺，79條鮮活的生命消逝在街道上、立交橋下、汽車?yán)?、河水中……治理了幾十年、在水利工程上堪稱銅墻鐵壁的首都，何以如此不堪一擊？這絕非學(xué)術(shù)問題，而是公眾意識(shí)，特別是決策者的意識(shí)問題。為此，4天后我便向相關(guān)決策者提交了題為《關(guān)于建立“綠色海綿”解決北京雨洪災(zāi)害的建議》的報(bào)告[4]，并借助大眾媒體以公開信的形式進(jìn)行了傳播[5]。

 

2012年8月25日，在中央電視臺(tái)編導(dǎo)胡勁草女士的推動(dòng)下，“新聞?wù){(diào)查”欄目播出了《會(huì)呼吸的河道》訪談節(jié)目，通過官方媒體的報(bào)道傳播了利用自然途徑建立“綠色海綿”來解決城市雨澇問題的正確方法，在某種程度上代表了“民間”聲音向“官方”聲音的轉(zhuǎn)變。這種聲音的轉(zhuǎn)變?cè)谝荒旰笤俅纬霈F(xiàn)：2013年12月12日，習(xí)近平總書記在《中央城鎮(zhèn)化工作會(huì)議》的講話中強(qiáng)調(diào)“在提升城市排水系統(tǒng)時(shí)要優(yōu)先考慮把有限的雨水留下來，優(yōu)先考慮更多利用自然力量排水，建設(shè)自然存積、自然滲透、自然凈化的海綿城市”[6]。

 

20年的時(shí)間對(duì)于個(gè)人來說是漫長(zhǎng)的，但對(duì)于推動(dòng)一種文明的發(fā)展來說卻是短暫的。從北京市的河流工程化抵制行動(dòng)，到全國(guó)性的海綿城市運(yùn)動(dòng)，保護(hù)自然和基于自然來解決中國(guó)城鎮(zhèn)化和工業(yè)化進(jìn)程中所產(chǎn)生的諸多環(huán)境問題（包括河湖污染、土壤毒化、棲息地消失等），將是一條布滿荊棘卻也充滿希望的光明之路，更會(huì)是保證中國(guó)城市健康發(fā)展的必由之路—這也許是中國(guó)可以為解決全球性生態(tài)環(huán)境問題所能做出的最大貢獻(xiàn)！

 

The conflict between ecological and industrial civilizations here, different from what was presented in Samuel Huntington’s The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, is about the methods, technologies, and world views. This is a tortuous struggle in which humans battle generation to generation for civilization to survive. The envisioned beautiful ecological civilization requires ideological reform and technological advance—a true revolution, in some sense, by solutions supported by the nature, which can respond to the social and economic demands of change more cost-effectively. That is to say, natural forces, instead of the engineering approaches symbolized by industrial civilization, may contribute to the urban resilience[1] in their ingenuity addressing crises such as climate change, flooding, and water and soil pollution.

 

On March 14, 2017, I got a sudden call from Xi Zhinong, a wildlife photographer for help: “They are cementing the riverbed of the Shuangyuan Stream in Dali. Nine concrete dams are to be built. It is cruel! How can I protect the stream?” Having lived near the stream for about ten years, Xi and his daughters enjoyed the cool water, rocks, and wildflowers that bloomed in different seasons. This cementing project would deprive them of the joy their beloved natural stream brought. I noticed in the video he sent that both the rocks and plants in the stream were being shattered and removed by excavators near his house. His choked voice made me feel the pain he was suffering.

 

Xi called me because in 2005 we had worked on an anti-seepage project for Yuanmingyuan Park in Beijing, and had shared similar feelings about “l(fā)etting nature breathe.” For the Dali case, we reached out the local press and persuaded the local government to halt the cementing project. Unfortunately, we failed to rescue the stream. A year later the project started again in a more violent way and the Shuangyuan Stream was finally cut apart by the nine concrete dams. The authorities had gathered many so-called “experts” and administrative forces in the name of “guaranteeing the safety of people’s lives and property,” yet they ignored the protests of ecological experts. From this project, higher-level government financed several million yuan and the local government achieved GDP growth, while engineering enterprises received huge profits. However, the economically beneficial project was achieved at the cost of natural ecosystems whose worth had accumulated for dozens of centuries. Xi and his daughters could no longer have access to the eco-experience in the beautiful valley of the Cangshan Mountains.

 

On April 20, 2020, the eve of World Earth Day, Xi called again. I had not heard from him for three years. “They come again!” he cried, “Instead of millions of RMB invested to the Shuangyuan Stream, they will channelize other five streams of ‘the Cangshan Eighteen Streams’.” This time, the project would cost three hundred million yuan. “Did not they notice the loss of natural resource and the accelerated water flow speed due to the dam construction three years ago? We must act at once to save these five streams!” He sounded desperate. Shortly afterwards, volunteers who dedicated themselves to nature protection launched an effort to save the river. So far, the conflict between the industrial civilization and ecological civilization about how to approach the Erhai Lake and the streams of the Cangshan Mountains are at a deadlock. Today, the authority’s response to nature protection is unassertive and inspiring, compared with 20 years ago.

 

I still remember the conflict 20 years ago between the government and environmentalists and scholars who opposed Beijing’s project on river management. That standoff ended in failure and was labelled as an interference in public affairs. Almost all the rivers through the downtown of Beijing were cutoff, channelized, or dammed in the name of “flood mitigation,” “pollution control,” and “improvement of living environment.” Environmentalists and scholars had warned that they would pay for this recklessness. Ironically, in less than ten years, Beijing began to dismantle the cement along rivers under a strategy of “bringing nature back,” but urban rivers keep getting channelized[2]. In the cases of both Dali and Beijing, no goals of flood control, pollution treatment, or environmental beautification were achieved. Instead, urban resilience was consumed while water and environmental problems were only becoming more severe.

 

A same conflict between ecology and industry occurred in 2005 over the anti-seepage project of Yuanmingyuan Park. This experience highlights a beginning of China’s “nature-based solutions.” On March 22, 2005, I received a call from Zhang Zhengchun, an ecologist. With the same emotion as Xi in the Dali case, he anxiously told me that the lakebed of Fuhai Lake in Yuanmingyuan Park was being covered with anti-seepage geotextile. Because of this call I joined in a prolonged protest against the project. Other experts in the fields of ecology and environmental protection, including Wang Rusong (deceased), Liang Congjie (deceased), and Cui Haiting, were also involved in this effort. On March 28, People.cn took the lead to speak on this matter which promoted the State Environmental Protection Administration to hold a public hearing on the lakebed anti-seepage project. This coverage brought wide-spread attention to the project and helped create a national ecological enlightenment movement.[3] Although the Administrative Office of Yuanmingyuan Park completed the anti-seepage project in a compromised way, the official departments of the State Environmental Protection Administration and the official media, such as People.cn, all stood with the environmentalists. This months-long effort ended up with a big win for the ecological protection movement led by the public.

 

The night of July 21, 2012 was also a moment to remember when a heavy storm exposed the fragile resilience of Beijing, as 79 lives were lost to flooding streets, underpasses, and cars. After decades of hydrological management, how did Beijing’s water flow become so volatile? This is by no means an academic issue, but a matter of public awareness—especially the one for the decision makers. To this end, four days later, I submitted a report entitled “Recommendations on the Establishment of a ‘Green Sponge’ to Solve the Flood Disaster in Beijing” to government official[4]. The report quickly spread in the form of an open letter through mass media[5].

 

On August 25, 2012, Ms. Hu Jincao, a television director at China Central Television, helped broadcast a program for the “Breathing River.” The segment interviewed several officials and landscape architects advocating for a “green sponge” approach to issues of urban waterlogging. This marked a leap from grassroots movement to official policy. Such a change appeared a year later. On December 12, 2013, President Xi Jinping spoke at the Central Working Conference of Urbanization on the need for upgrading urban drainage systems. President Xi emphasized that we should give priority to retaining rainwater and leveraging natural forces to drain water, so as to build Sponge Cities where stormwater can be naturally conserved, infiltrated, and purified[6].

 

Twenty years, though a long time for individual efforts, is short for the development of civilization. The road from protesting engineering projects in Beijing to implementing nationwide Sponge Cities will be a tough journey, also for developing nature-based solutions responding to other pressing environmental problems (water and soil pollution, habitat loss, etc.). But this work is needed. China must take this route to realize healthy development for all cities. This might also become China’s greatest contribution in tackling global ecological and environmental problems!

 

REFERENCES

[1] Faivre, N., Fritz, M., Freitas, T., De Boissezon, B., & Vandewoestijne, S. (2017). Nature-Based Solutions in the EU: Innovating with nature to address social, economic and environmental challenges. Environmental Research, (159), 509-518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.08.032

[2] Dong, Y. (2007, June 29). The hardened cement rivers in Beijing are being dismantled. Retrieved from http://zqb.cyol.com/content/2007-06/29/content_1809036.htm

[3] Zhao, Y. (2005, March 28). Remove anti-seepage geotextile to save Yuanmingyuan Park! People’s Daily Online. Retrieved from http://env.people.com.cn/GB/1072/3274122.html

[4] China News Network of the CPPCC. (2012, August 8). Address urban flooding cannot simply rely on the building of drainage pipe system with large invest. China News Network of the CPPCC. Retrieved from http://cppcc.people.com.cn/n/2012/0911/c34948-18976468.html

[5] Yu, K. (2012). Let flooding not be a disaster, but an opportunity: An open letter to city planners, builders and decision makers. Xin Xiang Ping Lun, (18), 38-39.

[6] People’s Daily. (2013, December 15). The Central Working Conference of Urbanization was held in Beijing. Communist Network. Retrieved from http://news.12371.cn/2013/12/15/ARTI1387057117696375.shtml


發(fā)表評(píng)論
您好，登錄后才可以評(píng)論哦！

熱門評(píng)論

相關(guān)圖書