Oculus / Santiago Calatrava. Image © Photo by gdtography from Pexels

未来的建筑是否会成为奢侈品？
Will Architecture in the Future Be a Luxury Service?

由专筑网李韧，杨帆编译

本文最初发表于“Common Edge”，标题为“在人工智能时代，建筑是否会成为一项工艺？”

在当下这个年代，建筑就如同穿衣吃饭一样必不可少，即使是最普通的建筑也需要经过设计才能实施建造。建筑之于城市就如同粮食之于农场，在这个科技飞速发展的新纪元，建筑能为人们带来珍贵的体验。

经过调查，美国的建筑师有23.3万名，而注册建筑师则有1.13万名，比去年同期增长了3%。另外，创纪录获得资格许可的设计师在今年超过了5000名，这个数字几乎与有着专业学位的毕业生人数相同。也就是说，在美国，每2900人中就有1名是建筑师。

我认为，农业的发展让我们对未来有了更加清晰的认识，1900年，美国人口大约有7600万，其中农民大约有600万，大约占了总数的十分之一，而在今天，美国人口大约为3亿，而农民的人数则仅有200万。

这其中到底发生了什么呢？机械化和技术逐步成为粮食产量的首要元素。美国的人口增长了400%，农场从业人员反而从600万减少至200万，且所需的耕地面积并没有发生很大的改变。从而我们得出结论，这个社会通过少量的工作者，在少量的土地上产出了更多的食物。

科技确实具有神奇的力量。

同样地，这种状况也很有可能出现在建筑行业中。大多数情况下，技术能够推进建筑的发展，这就如同上世纪的农业一样，同样的事情可能再次发生。

在今年的两篇文章中，建筑师杂志发出了一些警告，虽然这些文章中仍然没有抓住重点。1月份时，AIA经济学家Kermit Baker发表了一篇名为“在当前经济状况下，社会需要多少建筑师？”的文章，他认为，大约只有45%的毕业生能够留在建筑行业。其实这个数字已经相对乐观。

而在接下来，Mimi Kirk开始主张教学的改革，目的是让学生们意识到设计的重要作用，同时大力提倡建筑的文化教育价值。这种做法是非常正确的，但这些建议主要是为了呼应建筑学院的号召，因为在过去的5年内，建筑院校的入学率下降了10%。

如果没有充足的就业机会，那么想要在这个专业领域学习研究的人相对也会变少，结合投入的成本和时间，这种现象的产生也十分正常。

This article was originally published by Common Edge as "In the Era of Artificial Intelligence, Will Architecture Become Artisanal?"
Like food and clothing, buildings are essential. Every building, even the most rudimentary, needs a design to be constructed. Architecture is as central to building as farming is to food, and in this era of rapidly advancing technological change farming may offer us valuable lessons.
At last census count there were 233,000 architects in the United States; the 113,000 who are currently licensed represent a 3% increase from last year. In addition there’s a record number of designers who qualify for licensure: more than 5,000 this year, almost the same number as graduates with professional degrees. There is now 1-architect-for-every-2,900 people in the US. A bumper crop, right?
Well, I’d argue that the evolution of farming gives us a clearer picture of our future. In 1900, there were about 76 million people in the US, and six million farmers; almost ten-percent of all Americans farmed. Today there are more than 300 million people in the U.S. and two million farmers.
What happened? Mechanization and technology became central to growing food. The acreage needed to farm has remained pretty much unchanged, even though our population has grown by 400% and the number of farms has gone from 6 million to 2 million. We produce significantly more food from fewer places, using far fewer people.
Technology is miraculous.
This paradigm is likely to be replicated in my profession. By most accounts technology will change architecture in the next generation as much as it has changed farming in the last century. The signs are here, now.
In two articles this year, Architect magazine offered long range warning signs, even though their articles seemed to miss their most provocative points. In January, Kermit Baker, the AIA’s economist, in an article titled “How Many Architects Does Our Economy Need?” noted that only 45% of those graduating from architecture school will have a job working in the profession. That number meant more than all of the other statistics cited in the piece.
The following month, Mimi Kirk argued for a revamping of pre-college education to both expose children to the importance of design and to encourage the value of architecture in our culture and education. Nothing wrong with that. But this call was in response to the stat from the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture that architecture school enrollment had dropped 10% in the last five years.
If there are not enough jobs available for graduates to work in the profession that their degrees prepared them for, it stands to reason that fewer people would want those degrees. Given the cost, time, and expected return involved, this is a logical response from the marketplace of higher learning.


克莱姆森大学建筑学院｜Clemson University College of Architecture / Thomas Phifer + Partners. Image © Scott Frances

而令人望而生畏的是，这两篇文章都没有对人工智能对建筑界的影响进行研究，因为这一领域对人类世界来说还尚属新型行业。在建筑界，新技术的出现也许意味着投资商和承包商对建筑师的需求减少，当然，也不乏一些专门仰慕建筑师大名而来的客户。但就目前来说，当前状况对于建筑师的需求逐步减少，一些数据一旦成为一种模式，那么设计便会显得更加公式化，从而也没有了成本、人员责任等顾虑。

正如拖拉机、联合收割机、化学品以及基因工程的出现已经减少了人们对于农场的需求，结合目前建筑师就业率不高的现象，低收入、无兼职、就业保障的缺乏这些状况在未来都有可能出现。

随着技术的进步，人们也许仍然喜爱种植粮食和设计建筑。通过更快、更经济、更完善的技术策略，人们对于文化意识形态的需求也会越来越少，但是人们所能接触到的价值空间也许重新明晰了包括建筑在内的产品和服务的范畴。

在住宅设计中，理论与实践的结合从来都是建筑设计不可分割的一部分，但作为一名职业建筑师来说，他们也许无法与经济廉价的样板房相抗争，这也是只有极少部分的家庭住宅真正经过设计的原因。在人类的发展过程中，总有更加经济、快速、简单的建造计划来满足人们的需求。

More daunting, still: neither article dealt with the profound changes that Artificial Intelligence will have on all professions—especially architecture. This development is uncharted territory for our entire world. In architecture, new technologies will inevitably mean that building consumers and contractors will have more ability to bypass architects entirely. Of course, some clients have always prescribed a design and the architects responded to their directives. But now, the next generation of software will respond directly, with even less need for an architect’s input. Data, once coordinated by architects, will be made seamlessly accessible and useful without the cost, pretense and liability of humans, especially those with a design-based education.
Just as tractors, combines, chemicals and genetic engineering have reduced the need for people in farming, the present underemployment of architects that we now accept—the low pay, part time usefulness, and lack of job security—may eventually evolve into a larger number of us becoming desirable because of our humanity.
Despite technological advances, people still love growing food and making buildings. Faster, cheaper, easier solutions, via technology, may minimize the human hand in making things in all aspects of our culture, but the value of the human touch may redefine the range of products and services offered in many areas, including architecture.
In home design, this hands-on ethic has been part of architectural design forever. But as a profession architects have not successfully competed with the cheaper alternatives at every level of residential design. It’s why only 2% of home designs are created by architects. For generations there have been cheaper, quicker stock plans, rote drafted designs, or simply builder-drawn options for housing consumers.


Students in the Rural Studio Program at Auburn University build one of their 20K Houses. Image © Timothy Hursley

BIM和 Revit是建筑设计与施工方式转变的衍生产物，科技的发展让一切变得更快更高效，同时它也为每个人带来更多力量，但它始终无法取代人类。

在食品生产中我们就能发现这个基本事实，我居住在英格兰，在20世纪年代，这里的农产业向西部扩展，而就现在来说，真正耕种的人数甚至达不到2%。但是，人们都需要成长，人们也离不开食物。Mammoth农场生产着大量的经济廉价产品，但却无法生产出一些精致特殊的美食，即使在超市里人们也无法了解这些食物的种植方式。

这种手工艺农场已经愈发受到欢迎，从而形成了农场到餐桌、农贸市场、社区农业项目之间相互联系的文化，在其中，合作方主要负责供应种子和费用，而作物也是预先准备好，然后你可以直接从种植人员手中购买食物。这些食物的售价相较于商场要高很多，但是在新英格兰，如果没有这些手工艺农场就没有那些食物。

快餐热量较高，在超市中有很多满足人们生理需求的食物，他们往往只知道食物能够给自己的身体带来营养。而如果技术能够改变建筑师的工作，那么手工艺食物生产就如同大规模农业生产的可行性替代品，这也许能为建筑师的发展指明方向。

建筑师能够为人们在瞬息万变的世界中带来一些联系，设计自己的住宅是一件非常人性化的事情，在未来的人工智能世界中，具有匠人精神的建筑师仍然必不可少。

BIM and Revit are just the launching pads for the complete transformation of how buildings are designed and constructed. Technology makes everything faster and more efficient—it gives power for everyone to do more—but it cannot replace humanity.
Proof of that basic truth can be found in food production. I live in New England. The farming industry moved west in the 20th century. Less than 2% of us are now needed to farm here. But some love to grow, and everyone loves to eat. Mammoth farms hundreds, even thousands, of miles away produce huge amounts of cheap food—and yet some idiosyncratic and delicious food is not part of that corporate system, and no one in the supermarket knows who grew it or how it came to be.  
It is not surprising artisanal farming has exploded in popularity, creating a sub-culture of farm-to-table dining, farmer’s markets, and Community Supported Agriculture programs, where cooperatives provide seed money, crops are pre-bought, and you buy your food from the people who made it, with a known provenance. It’s sold at a much higher price than Stop and Shop, but there would not be much farming in New England without artisanal farming.
Fast food has calories, so does your grocery bag filled in the supermarket aisles, but there are those who are nourished by the experience of knowing how their food came to be. If technology changes the way architects work, then the emergence of hands-on food production as a viable alternative to mass-produced agribusiness might provide a model for architects moving forward.
Living, breathing architects can offer that human connection in the coming shift. Nothing is more human than building our places, and there may be a place for the artisanal architect in the emerging world of Artificial Intelligence.