邁向第四范式：智慧城市從高科技向人本科技的跨越

專題主持人：鄔峻

今天，隨著“第四次工業(yè)革命”帶來的根本變化及其對社會的深遠影響，移動通信、自動駕駛、大數據、機器學習、人工智能、虛擬現實、機器人技術、基因編輯、3D打印、量子計算、物聯(lián)網等最新技術是我們在設計中必須面對的新挑戰(zhàn)?！爸腔鄢鞘小笔怯有绿魬?zhàn)和利用新環(huán)境中技術潛力的最重要樞紐之一。正如歷史所證明的那樣，如果世界隨著新技術的變化而變革，那么傳統(tǒng)的都市主義是無法置身事外的。我們必須了解并適應新環(huán)境，主動尋求新的設計范式。

數字技術是新興范式的核心，這一期智慧城市專題邀請了學界、業(yè)界和非政府組織的精英人士來探討智慧城市如何塑造城市化景觀在“第四次工業(yè)革命”時代的地位和作用。新范式在我們的城市和環(huán)境中的新理論、新形態(tài)學、新設計方法論和新影響是什么？設計師根據物理、虛擬和生態(tài)系統(tǒng)的革命應該如何產生智慧城市的智慧設計案例和智能研究方法？很多老朋友百忙中欣然應邀參加本期討論并貢獻他們最優(yōu)秀的思想和實踐，在此我表示由衷的感謝！

在構建未來智慧城市的時候，我們不應忘記以人為本的智慧城市研究。荷蘭阿姆斯特丹大學規(guī)劃教授Maria Kaika指出在聯(lián)合國人居三大會的現有框架內追求新的智慧城市范式只能對公民和環(huán)境強行接種“智慧城市”疫苗，并迫使城市承擔所謂的韌性，社會承擔更大的不平等和退化風險。她認為，真正的智能解決方案和真正的社會創(chuàng)新不是在建立共識的實踐中找到，而是在某些持異議的做法中形成的，這些是當前智慧城市建設迫切需要解決的問題。荷蘭代爾夫特理工大學的Arjan van Timmeren教授指出“智慧城市”的3個基本要素是：城市+人+技術，每個要素都有自己的變化和發(fā)展步伐。為了解決這些要素間的矛盾，創(chuàng)新不能強加于城市，而需要在“生活實驗室”中形成和測試。一個關鍵的跨越是從智慧城市走向智慧公民，而后者才是韌性城市的必要條件。荷蘭未來城市基金會負責人Jan-Willem Wesselink則強調宜居性是智慧城市建設的出發(fā)點，為此我們應該從連接性、靈活性和富有意義的范式來設計以人為本的智慧城市。

在構建未來智慧城市的時候，我們不應忘記以人為本的設計實踐。UNStudio創(chuàng)始人Ben van Berkel教授主張，我們需要在知識的探索和生產上進行投資，以便朝著更加高效、更有關聯(lián)性和以人為本的設計轉變。這就是為什么UNStudio在2018年 成立了一家名為UNSense的姊妹公司的原因。用數據設計空間實際上是UNSense的本質。她通過在Helmond最新的設計實踐中證明了這一點：“世界上最智慧的社區(qū)”就是一個很好的例子。MVRDV創(chuàng)始人之一Winy Maas教授提出了一種自下而上的智慧城市設計范式。該范式將智慧城市探索為一個由智慧公民共同參與的包容性“實用設計游戲”。根據法規(guī)、經濟和現有城市結構，開發(fā)的軟件將所有智慧公民與城市的基本邏輯聯(lián)系起來。這樣，他們都可以將自己想要的東西融合在一起，將“自我”（Ego）變成“大我”（Wego）。

在構建未來智慧城市的時候，我們不應忘記藝術在設計實踐中的特殊角色。West 8的出色設計實踐——上海張江藝術公園，作為張江科學城的延伸，在智慧城市蓬勃發(fā)展浪潮中提醒我們，藝術是科學的孿生姐妹。他們設計的“綠框公園”實現了藝術與科學、新區(qū)與舊城、景觀與城市的完美結合。

在大西洋彼岸，來自美國的同行分享了相似的理念。Sasaki事務所首席設計師Dennis Pieprz通過他們在加拿大多倫多的設計項目，強調智慧城市不應始于大型科技而應始于智慧設計，因為城市千年不變的DNA其實是決定城市生活的基本框架，而非最新涌現的各種高科技。在智能設計中，人的尺度的基本城市框架、連接性和鄰里節(jié)點至關重要。正如Dennis Pieprz所總結的那樣：“好的城市設計首先是人本主義的追求，然后是技術上的追求！”

在構建未來智慧城市的時候，我們不應忽略城市形態(tài)作為集體文化表現的城市發(fā)展史。哈佛大學景觀系前系主任、“景觀都市主義”的締造者，Charles Waldheim教授提出新的“陽光都市主義”。他發(fā)現太陽朝向與城市化之間的關系是政體與項目之間和睦的一個潛在主題。這將建立生態(tài)功能與城市形態(tài)之間的一組新關系，使復興城市集體文化成為可能。最近在紐約的一些項目以及在哈佛大學GSD展開的設計研究驗證了“陽光都市主義”作為一種全新的都市主義的巨大潛力。Charles倡導的“陽光都市主義”提醒我們：這個星球的最大智慧其實來自太陽，她賦予我們集體文化的能量和可能的城市新形態(tài)。正如Charles所預計的：“通過解讀最新數字范式對都市主義的承諾，以及與太陽能相關的城市形式和城市模型的潛力，這些歷史案例將被發(fā)揚光大！”

盡管以人為本的智慧城市是基點，但是技術的建設性途徑無法忽視。我敬佩美國同行Bradley Cantrell在數字化和計算機化方面的獨特見解。有意思的是我的校友——Eric Terry（他曾在TU Delft航空航天系學習）， 他將航空動力學原理與最先進的大數據和軟件模擬結合，用來研究智慧城市的環(huán)境設計與形態(tài)優(yōu)化。在荷蘭這樣一個最早使用風車、風力塑造景觀有著悠久歷史的國家，顯得充滿了傳統(tǒng)智慧和現代科技。我還欣喜地看到國內同行在智慧城市技術方面的優(yōu)秀成果。我有足夠理由相信中國將在這一領域為人類發(fā)展做出自己獨特的貢獻。

本人也榮幸地介紹基于機器學習的荷蘭智慧城市宜居性預測模型研究的最新進展。它雖然使用了最前沿的“第四范式”的一些數據工程和AI機器學習算法，但使用這些高科技的目的是服務于人居環(huán)境的宜居性。因為我堅信：宜居性始終是以人為本的智慧城市設計的出發(fā)點和目的地。

最后，作為智慧城市專題的主持人，我想引用蘋果首席執(zhí)行官庫克在哈佛大學畢業(yè)典禮演講中的觀點來提醒未來智慧城市的設計師和建造者：“我不擔心人工智能使計算機具有像人一樣思考的能力。我更關心的是人們變得像沒有價值觀和同情心的計算機那樣去思考，且不計后果?！?/p>

（編輯/王亞鶯）

Today, with fundamental changes brought about by“The 4th Industrial Revolution” and its profound impacts on our society, we have to face new challenges in our design from the latest technologies, such as mobile communication, autonomous vehicles, big data, machine learning, artificial intelligence, virtual reality, robotics, gene editing, 3D printing, quantum computing and IoT. “Smart City” has become one of the most important hubs for meeting new challenges and exploring technical potentials for design in the new environment. As history shows, if the world changes with new technologies, the traditional urbanism has to be included. We must understand and adapt to the new circumstances and take the initiative to seek new design paradigms.

Digital technologies are at the core of the emerging paradigms. In this issue, we have invited elites from the academic circles, industries and NGOs(Non-Governmental Organizations) to discuss how smart city has reshaped the positions and roles of urbanism and landscape in the age of“The 4th Industrial Revolution”; what are the new applications, typologies, methodologies and impacts of the new paradigms on our cities and environment; what are the emerging opportunities and challenges to our discipline from the rise of AI in this new environment; how designers should generate smart design innovation and research theories regarding the revolution in physical, virtual and ecological complexities. Many old friends have gladly joined us in the discussion and contributed their best ideas and practices. Here, I’d like to express my heartfelt thanks to them.

In building smart city for the future, we should not forget about human-oriented academic insight for smart city. Maria Kaika, a professor of urban and regional planning from the University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pointed out that pursuing a new urban paradigm within the existing framework of UN-Habitat III could only act as immunology: It vaccinates citizens and environments to make them more resilient and bear greater inequality and degradation in the future. She argued that real smart solutions and social innovation were to be found in some dissenting practices rather than consensus-building practices. These are the urgent problems to be solved in the construction of smart cities at present. Prof. Arjan van Timmeren concluded that the three basic ingredients for“smarter cities” were: city+ people+ technology, each with its own pace of change and development. To resolve contradictions among the competing ingredients, innovation shall not be imposed on cities. It needs to be generated and tested within“l(fā)iving labs”. A key leap is to move from smart cities to smart citizens, and the latter is a necessary condition for building resilient cities. Mr. Jan-Willem Wesselink, the manager of Future City Foundation in The Netherlands, emphasized that livability was the starting point of smart city construction. To this end, we should design a human-oriented smart city from the new design paradigm of connectivity, flexibility and meaningfulness.

In building a smart city for the future, we should not forget the human-oriented design practice. Professor Ben van Berkel, the founder of UNStudio, advocated to invest in the exploration and production of knowledge, in order to shift towards more performative, relevant and anthropocentric design. This is why UNStudio founded the sister company UNSense in 2018. Designing space with data is actually the essence of UNSense. It was testified in the latest design practice in Helmond: “The smartest neighborhood in the world” is a great case. Professor Winy Maas, one of the founders of MVRDV, proposed a bottom-up design paradigm for smart city. The paradigm explored smart city as an inclusive“practical design game” participated by smart citizens. The developed software connects all smart citizens to the underlying logic of their city in terms of regulations, economy and existing urban structures. In this way, they can all get what they want together— turning“Ego” into“Wego”.

In building a smart city for the future, we should not forget the unique role of art in the design practice. Shanghai Zhangjiang Art Park, the excellent design practice of West 8, is an extension of the Zhangjiang Science City in Shanghai. It has reminded us that art is a twin sister of science in the booming of smart cities. The“Green Frame Park” designed by them has realized the perfect integration of art and science, new district and old city, landscape and city.

Across the Atlantic, our colleagues from the United States shared similar ideas. Mr. Dennis Pieprz, the chair of design in Sasaki, emphasized through their design projects in Toronto, Canada that smart cities should not start with large-scale technologies but should begin with smart design. Since the urban DNA that has been persistent for thousand years is actually the basic framework that determines the urban life, rather than the latest high technologies. In the smart design, the basic urban framework of human scale, connectivity, and neighborhood nodes are critical. As Dennis Pieprz concluded: “Good urban design is a humanist pursuit first, a technical one second.”

In building a smart city for the future, we should not ignore the history of urban development as an expression of collective culture. Professor Charles Waldheim, former head of Harvard’s Landscape Department and founder of“Landscape Urbanism,” recently proposed the“New” Heliomorphism. He argued that a rapprochement between the polity and the project might be found in the relationship between solar orientation and urbanism. The prospect of“Heliomorphism” affords a new set of relationships between ecological function and urban form, and makes the revival of urban collective culture possible. Recent projects in New York and the design research carried out at Harvard GSD have verified the great potential of“Heliomorphism” as a new era of urbanism. The“Heliomorphism” advocated by Charles reminds us that the greatest wisdom of our planet actually comes from the sun. It gives us the energy of our collective culture and the form of new urbanism. As Charles expected: “Those historical cases will be leavened by a reading of more recent commitments to digital paradigms for urbanism and the potentials of relational urban modeling of urban form in relation to solar performance.”

Although the human-oriented is the basis, the constructive approaches of technology cannot be ignored. I admire Bradley Cantrell’s unique insights on digitization and computerization. Interesting is my alumni, Eric Terry(he once studied at the Department of Aerospace in TU Delft), he combines the principles of aerodynamics with the most advanced big data and software simulation to study the environmental design and morphological optimization of smart cities. In a country with a rich history of using windmills, such as The Netherlands, to shape landscapes with wind is a traditional wisdom and now is enhanced with modern technology. I am also glad to see the excellent achievements of my Chinese colleagues in smart city technology. I have every reason to believe that China will make its own unique contribution to human development in this area.

I was honored to introduce my latest research on a predictive model of livability based on machine learning for smart city in The Netherlands. Although it employs some of the cutting-edge technologies as the“4th paradigm” of data-intensive investigation and AI machine learning algorithms, the purpose of using these high technologies is to explore the livability for human settlements. I believe that livability is both the departure and destination of the smart design for a human-oriented smart city.

Finally, as the moderator of this special issue over Smart City, I would like to cite the speech of Apple CEO Cook in the Harvard graduation ceremony to remind the designers and builders of smart cities in the future: “I’m not worried about artificial intelligence giving computers the ability to think like humans. I’m more concerned about people thinking like computers without values or compassion, without concern for consequences.”