七、20 世纪下半叶后半期绿色意识的增 强 事实上，早在 20 世纪 70 年代，人们 就开始广泛接受绿色设计背后的思想以及 因此产生的绿色运动的非激进化。然而， 这种新的思维模式却花了很长时间才得以 在社会中立足生根。有一件事情足以证明 这些新思想得以普及的重要性，即由所谓 的“罗马俱乐部”委托发表了一份报告。“罗 马俱乐部”由西方的政治家和知识分子组 成，它虽然是一个非正式的团体，但是在 国际上享有盛誉，是一个有影响力的智囊 团。1972 年，这个俱乐部发表了报告《增 长的极限》。（图 39） 罗马俱乐部曾委托享有世界声誉的麻 省理工学院（M I T）利用经济仿真的方法 来研究人类长远的未来。由此杰伊 · 福 年代后半期，它们的重要性日益显著，被 提上了西方国家的政治议程。 还 有 一 位 科 学 家、 医 学 博 士 詹 姆 士 · 洛弗拉克（图 43）（1919），他的工 作也对那些年“绿色意识”的培养产生了 巨大的影响。 他在帮助 N A S A（美国国家航空航天 局）确定如何探测轨道中其他行星上有无 生命可能的过程中，也为自己基本思想的 形成开辟了一条道路，即和其他只能维持 静态平衡的“死亡”星球正好相反，地球 是唯一能够保持动态化学平衡的星球。它 成为洛弗拉克盖亚假说的起点，即这样一 种思想，地球可以看作是一个巨大的、内 部协调的有机体，具有天然的、自我调节 功能，但也有一个缺点，那就是一些特殊 的变化，本身可能微不足道，但会带来严 雷斯特教授（图 40）和丹尼斯 · 梅多斯 教授（图 41）建立了模型，其结论引起 了公众的广泛关注。令人惊讶的是，它预 测在 21 世纪中叶前夕，将爆发全球性的、 典型的马尔萨斯危机。（图 42）[20] 如果经济和全球人口都继续以现有的 速度增长，那么它将不可避免地导致自然 资源的全面枯竭，工业的严重污染和全球 粮食的极度短缺。这场危机可能会导致第 三次世界大战，而且很可能会利用核武器， 从而最终将真正看到人类文明的终结。 《增长的极限》能够有如此大的影响 力，不仅是因为预测本身的悲剧性，而且 也因为预测来源的权威性——麻省理工学 院一直以来都毫无疑问是现代科技的麦加 圣地。此前仅为少数的激进绿色设计内行 们所有的思想逐渐变得普及。20 世纪 80
7 The Growing of a Green Consciousness in the last quarter of the 20th Century
Actually, the broad acceptation of ideas on which Green Design is based – and thus, the deradicalisation of the Green Movement – had started as early as the 1970s. However, it had taken a long time before the new mindset had taken root in society. One single event had been of defining importance for the new ideas to become commonplace, namely the publication of a report commissioned by an informal but highly prestigious and influential think tank consisting of Western politicians and intellectuals, the so-called “Club of Rome”. In 1972, the Club published its report The Limits to Growth. (figure 39)
The Club of Rome had commissioned the world famous Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to use an economic simulation in order to research the long-term future of mankind. The results, based on a model created by MIT professors Jay Forrester (figure 40) and Dennis Meadows
the second half of the 1980s they appeared on the political agenda of the Western world, becoming gradually more important.
An other scientist whose work exerted a strong influence on the development of a "green awareness" of those years was medical doctor and scientist James Lovelock (figure 43) (1919).
His research for NASA, aimed at determining how to detect the possibility of life on other planets in orbit, paved the way for his fundamental idea that Earth, as opposed to other - “dead”- planets which had a static balance, was the only planet with a dynamic chemical balance. This idea became the starting point for his so-called Gaia hypothesis, i.e. the concept that planet Earth may be considered as one huge, internally coherent organism with naturally self-regulating behavior, with the drawback that certain changes, in themselves small, may have profound and possibly irreparable destabilising consequences. His first book (figure 41), raised tremendous public
attention. Amazingly, it predicted a worldwide, classically Malthusian crisis that would strike shortly before the middle of the 21st century (figure 42) [20].
If economic growth would continue at the current rate and the world population also would continue to grow at an unchanged rate, this would inevitably lead to total depletion of natural resources, a considerable increase of industrial pollution and acute, global food shortages. This crisis might lead to a third world war, probably fought using nuclear weaponry, and thus would ultimately virtually herald the end of human civilisation. It was not only the sinister nature of the forecast itself, but also the source – the MIT was and is undoubtedly the undisputed Mecca of modern technology – that lent Limits to Growth its enormous influence. Ideas that had until then been the sole property of the very small circle of radical green design adepts gradually became commonplace. In
（荷）J．W．德鲁克、阿瑟 · 奥 · 埃格尔、马乔林 · 凡 · 维尔森 翻译：李 丹
绿色之根：设计何时、为何转向绿色（3）
J.W
. D
ru
kk
er
, A
rt
hu
r
O
. E
ge
r
&
M
ar
jo
le
in
v
an
V
el
ze
n
U
ni
ve
rs
it
y
of
T
w
en
te
, T
he
N
et
he
rl
an
ds
G
re
en
R
oo
ts
: W
he
n
an
d
W
hy
D
es
ig
n
Tu
rn
ed
G
re
en
II
I
T
ra
ns
la
to
r:
L
i D
an
（接 2010 年第 10 期第 55 页）重的后果，而且这些后果也许是无法弥补 的，并会破坏稳定性。洛弗拉克第一部关 于这个主题的著作是《盖亚：新地球生命 观》（图 44），其中包括了一个来源于混沌 理论的概念，它为几乎所有当代生态和气 候学模型提供了灵感和基础。 事实上，在 20 世纪后期，绿色设计 就已经从处于社会边缘的反抗运动发展成 为一种备受世人瞩目的现象。这一方面， 事实胜于雄辩，在联合国的支持下以及在 挪 威 前 首 相 格 伦 · 哈 莱 姆 · 布 伦 特 兰 （1939）（图 45）的主持下，世界环境与发 展委员会起草并发表了报告《我们共同的 未来》（1987）（图 46）。 在这份报告当中，首次提出了可持续 发展的概念，而且它是避免《增长的极限》 中所预测的全球性马尔萨斯灾难的唯一可 能途径。 所谓的“布伦特兰报告”对国际政治 议程产生了巨大影响，例如，1992 年，在
about this topic, GAIA, A New Look at Life on Earth (1979) (figure 44) contained the concept that was to be the inspiration and the basis, rooted in chaos theory, of nearly all modern-day ecological and climatological models.
Indeed, in the last decades of the 20th century Green Design developed from a counter movement on the fringes of society into a phenomenon receiving top priority all over the world. In this respect the publication of the Our Common Future (1987) report (figure 45) under the auspices of the United Nations and drawn up by the World Commission on Environment and Development under presidency of former Norwegian prime minister Gro Harlem Brundtland (1939) (figure 46), is more than eloquent.
In this report, the notion of sustainable development was presented for the first time as the only possible escape from the global Malthusian disaster that had been forecast in The Limits to Growth.
The so-called ‘Brundtland Report’ was of tremendous influence on the international political agenda, as is illustrated for instance by the establishment of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) during the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, informally known as the “Earth Summit” in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, and of the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change in 1997. Since the mid-1990s until today the UN organises yearly follow up Conferences of the Parties in order to attempt to obtain binding agreements among the 192 member states, aimed at control of climate changes. The lack of success of these meetings so far is due to the intractability of the subject matter rather than the mentality inspiring these attempts. At the end of the 20th century, green design and sustainability were everywhere at the top of the international political agenda. Gratifying in itself as this might be, it left a very important question unanswered, namely: how can you
measure sustainability?
For, if you want to promote sustainable design, you need to have at least some vague idea in what direction you have to move in order to become more sustainable.
In other words - with apologies to George Orwell - if all designs are more or less unsustainable, you need to know what designs are less - and preferably: how much less - unsustainable then the others.
From a macro viewpoint, the first bold attempt to answer these fundamental questions, came from William Rees, (figure 47)[ 2 1 ] who introduced the concept of
“Ecological Footprint” as a global measure of sustainability. The reasoning behind it, is that both all our natural resources, and the capacity to renew them are to be found in the biosphere of our planet. This axiom allows us to estimate the maximum “amount of biosphere”, measured in global hectares per person, that each person on earth can ‘use’ without diminishing its regenerative capacity.
里约热内卢召开的联合国环境与发展大会 （俗称“地球峰会”）上，通过了《联合国 气候变化框架公约》（UNFCCC）；1997 年， 通过了关于气候变化的《京都议定书》。 自 20 世纪 90 年代中期至今，为了控制气 候变化，联合国每年都组织召开缔约方的 补充会议，努力在 192 个成员国之间达成 具有约束力的协议。但迄今为止，这些会 议的结果都不尽如人意，原因在于论题的 棘手，而不在于这些尝试的动机。 39 40 41 42
20 世纪末期，绿色设计和可持续性已 俯拾皆是，且跃居国际政治议程之首。尽 管这一点本身让人感到欣慰，但是仍留下 了一个悬而未决的问题：如何衡量可持续 性？因为如果想要推动可持续设计的发 展，起码要大致知道朝哪个方向努力会变 得更加可持续。换言之，恐怕我们要对乔 治 · 奥威尔说声抱歉，如果所有的设计 几乎都是非可持续的，那么，就需要知道 哪些设计的非可持续性程度更低，而且最 好是要弄清楚低了多少。 宏观地来看，第一位大胆尝试回答这 些基本问题的是威廉 · 里斯（图 47）[21]， 他提出用“生态足迹”的概念来作为全球 衡量可持续性的标准。它的依据是，无论 是我们的自然资源总量，还是更新它们的 能力，都可以在地球的生物圈中找到它们 其资源再生产能力的情况下，能够养活多 少人口。 里斯的学生马蒂斯 · 瓦格纳格尔（图 48）计算出了生态足迹这个概念，并于 1994 年作为其博士论文发表。[22]1996 年， 里斯和瓦格纳格尔联袂出版了专著《我们 的生态足迹：减少人类对地球的影响》（图 49），这本书旋即成为可持续设计界最有 影响力的研究成果之一。 同样有意思的是，正如我们预料的那 样，人类福利水平的高低和生态足迹的大 小之间呈正相关，从图 50[23]中就可以看出。 比如说，像美国，澳大利亚，加拿大和挪 威这样的发达国家，是地球上所有的国家 中生态足迹最高的，而最不发达的国家（如 塞拉利昂）相应也是生态足迹最低的。但 情况并非完全如此。 的痕迹。通过这个公理，我们可以估算出 “生物圈容量”的最大值，它是通过人均 全球公顷，即地球上的每个人都可以在不 降低其再生产能力的情况下所“使用”的 公顷数来进行衡量的。有了这个依据，我 们就能够计算出每个国家的“生态足迹”。 人们认为，生态足迹超过人均约 2.1 公顷 这个极限的，就不是具有可持续设计经济 的国家，而生态足迹低于这个界限的，便 是有着可持续经济的国家。分析生态足迹 高的国家和生态足迹低的国家之间的差 异，便可以让我们清楚，朝着哪个方向前 进，能够变得更加可持续。 有趣的是，正是“生态足迹”这个概念， 在 20 世纪末回答了托马斯 · 罗伯特 · 马 尔萨斯于 1798 年提出的“人口论”背后 所隐含的一个问题，即地球在不完全损害
Based on this reasoning, it is possible to calculate the “biological footprint” for each and every country. Countries whose biological footprint exceeds this limit of approximately 2,1 hectares per person, can be labelled as having an unsustainable designed economy, while countries with a biological footprint below this threshold can be viewed as having a sustainable economy. Analyzing the differences between countries with a high ecological footprint with those that are characterized as having a low ecological footprint, can give us an indication in what direction to proceed in order to become more sustainable.
It is interesting to note that the very concept of “ecological footprint” is a late-20th century answer to the question that was
Advanced countries, like the US, Australia, Canada and Norway, for instance, have the highest ecological footprint of all countries on earth, and the most underdeveloped countries (Sierra Leone, for instance) are characterized by the lowest ecological footprint. However, that is not the whole story.
When human welfare is interpreted in a broader meaning - and thus, not in its strict economic sense as Real Gross Domestic Product per Capita - a very interesting pattern emerges from Graph (figure 50). Note that on the vertical axis the Human Development Index - as commonly used by the UN - is scaled, which is indeed a broader measure of human welfare than RGDP per capita, and, moreover, very similar to the concept of Biological Standard of Living, that we behind Thomas Robert Malthus’ Principle
of 1798, namely, how many people can the earth sustain, without ruining ultimately the regenerative capacity of its own resources. The concept of ecological footprint was worked out by Rees’ student Mathis Wackernagel (figure 48) and published as his PhD-dissertation in 1994.[22] In 1996 Rees
and Wackernagel together published Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth (figure 49), that became almost instantly one of the most influential studies in sustainable design.
It is interesting to note in this respect, that there is, as expected, a distinct positive relation between the level of human welfare and the size of the ecological footprint, as can be seen from Graph (figure 50) [23] .
46 45 44 43 注释： [20] 关于福雷斯特和梅 多斯模型早期仿真结果 的记载。请注意原始的 打印部分和手绘箭头。 [21] William E Rees, "Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban e c o n o m i c s l e a v e s out". Environment and Urbanisation, 4 (1992, October No.2), pp.121 - 130.
当我们不是从严格的经济意义（如人 均实际国内生产总值）上来理解人类福利， 而是从一个更为广阔的视角来对它进行分 析，那么，我们就会从图 50 中发现一个 非常有趣的现象。请注意联合国普遍采用 的人类发展指数所在的纵轴，它被划分了 等级。实际上，和人均实际国内生产总值 相比，人们更多地采用人类发展指数来衡 量人类福利水平。此外，它和我们前文中 所介绍的“生物性的生活水平”概念有着 惊人的相似。 首先，从图 50 中可以看出，总的来说， 科技高度发达的国家，生态足迹趋高，这 是我们意料之中的，前文也已经提到。除 此之外，图中还暗藏玄机：在地球生态承 载力线的左侧，是观察结果的垂直分布， 这种分布就很明显地表明，相对较高的人 类发展指数是可以与相对较低的生态足迹 共生的！比如，古巴就是一个例子。人们 普遍认为，从广义的角度（如人类发展指 数）来看人类福利水平，那么，生态足迹 的减少总是必然与人类福利水平的降低联 系在一起的，而现在，这个观点却受到了 质疑。 另外一点在认识可持续性中起到了最 重要的作用！生态足迹这个概念是通过人 均全球公顷来衡量的，这个认识富有启发 性。可它背后还蕴含了一个极其简单却又 意义深远的道理：有一个非常有效的（事 实上是最有效的）方法，它能够减轻人类 活动给自然资源带来的负担，即减少人口 数量，换言之，努力控制人口增长。这个 结论再次把我们直接带回文章开头，因为 早在 1798 年，托马斯·罗伯特·马尔萨
introduced earlier in this paper.e
In the first place, Graph (figure 50) shows, apart from the fact that - as was to be expected, and as we mentioned already, above - in general, technically highly developed countries tend to have high ecological footprints, but it shows something more, which is more interesting and more surprising: the vertical scatter of observations left of the line of Earth’s biocapacity, suggests strongly that a relatively high score on the human development index can be obtained with a relatively small ecological footprint!. See, for instance, the example of Cuba. This undermines the commonly held attitude that a reduction of ecological footprint is always and necessarily associated with a decrease in the level of human welfare, defined in a broad sense, such as is measured for instance by
the Human Development Index.
In the second place - but, of prime importance in realizing sustainability! - it is illuminating to realize that the concept of ecological footprint is measured in global hectares per capita. The surprisingly simple but far reaching implication of this is that there is a very - in fact: most - effective way of reducing the burden on natural resources, caused by human activity, and that is: reduce the number of humans, in other words: try to control population growth. Again, this conclusion brings us straight back to the beginning of this paper, because it was exactly this what Thomas Robert Malthus advocated in 1798 already in order to avoid a Malthusian catastrophe in the future. It is apt, we think, to stress in this context, that, whatever sort of criticism one may hold against the Chinese government,
that it was exactly the government of the People’s Republic of China, that is, to our best knowledge, the only government in the world - and, add to that: the government of the nation with the highest number of inhabitants - that was highly successful in this. We do not want to underestimate that the successful population policy of the Chinese government may have asked a serious sacrifice of the Chinese population, but no one should ever forget that this sacrifice did more to realize a sustainable future for mankind than the sum of all other political measures of all the countries in the world taken together, during the last decennia.
The influence of the changed attitude toward green design was during the 1990s also felt within the official curricula in industrial design. Papanek, who had been adulated
斯就已经倡导，为了避免未来的人口灾难， 应该减少人口数量。我们认为在这一点上 应该强调的是，无论人们将何种批判的矛 头指向中华人民共和国政府，但据我们所 知，这个拥有世界上最多人口国家的政府， 是世界上唯一在这一点上取得极大成功的 政府。我们不愿意低估，在中国政府采取 的人口政策走向成功的过程中，中国人民 为此所付出的巨大牺牲，但是人们永远都 不会忘记，这种牺牲对于人类可持续未来 的实现所做出的贡献，比世界上所有其他 国家在过去的十年中所采取的政治措施的 总和还要大。 20 世纪 90 年代，人们向绿色设计观 念转变所带来的影响，也可以在工业设计 的正式课程中得到体现。帕帕纳克在 20 世纪 70 年代受到学生们的追捧，但却被 47 48 49 50 [22] Mathis Wackernagel, Ecological Footprint and Appropriated Carrying C a p a c i t y : A T o o l f o r P l a n n i n g T o w a r d S u s t a i n a b i l i t y ( P h . D. Thesis), School of Community and Regional Planning, The University o f B ri t i s h C o l u mb i a: Vancouver, 1994. [23] 来源：2008 年全球 足迹网络报告 (2005 年 数据 )；联合国人类发 展指数 2007 年 8 月。
官方学术权威拒之门外，后来，他成为世 界各地的大学会议中最抢手的主讲人之 一，而且还是设计方面最有影响力的思想 家之一。20 世纪 90 年代以后，关于可持 续设计的大学教授的职位和研究机构遍布 全球。这里有一些例子：1992 年，荷兰代 尔夫特理工大学环保产品开发系设立了大 学教授的职位（汉·布雷泽特）（图 51）； 1995 年前后，意大利米兰理工综合学院成 立了可持续设计与创新研究机构并设立了 相应大学教授的职位（埃齐奥·曼齐尼）（图 52）；同时，克里斯·瑞恩（图 53）成为 球最大的石油公司之一——皇家荷兰壳牌 集团。一家公司曾在《金融时报》上刊登 了一则题为“掩盖事实还是面对真相”（
“Cloud the Issue or Clear the Air”）的广告，
值得一提的是，这家公司声称：“……去年， 我们重申了我们的承诺，这不仅是为了达 到《京都议定书》中减少温室气体排放的 目标，而且还要超越这个目标”，“我们正 努力提供更多更清洁的燃料天然气……”。 （图 54、55） 2002 年，德国科学家迈克尔·布朗嘉 特（图 56）和美国的建筑师威廉·麦克唐 生态创新专业的教授和澳大利亚墨尔本大 学维州生态创新实验室的主管。 八、21 世纪：资本主义企业走向绿色以 及绿色走向高科技 2007 年，埃格尔的产品进化模型[24] 新鲜出炉，它预测道，在产品的最后发展 阶段（被称作：“意识阶段”），道德关怀 将作为产品的一种区分性的价值，其重要 性日益显著。21 世纪初期，许多重要的全 球性资本主义企业动向的变化，验证了这 个理论的准确性。最显著的例子莫过于全
by students in 1970s but shunned by official academic authorities, became one of the most wanted key note speakers at university conferences all over the world and one of the most influential thinkers on design. From the 1990s onwards, chairs and institutes of sustainable design were established all over the world. A few examples: Delft University of Technology in The Netherlands founded a chair in Environmental Product Development in 1992 (Han Brezet) (figure 51); at Milan Polytechnic, Italy, both a professorship and a research institute in Design and Innovation for Sustainability was established around 1995 (Ezio Manzini) (figure 52); at the same time Chris Ryan (figure 53) became professor in Eco-Innovation and director of the Victorian Eco-Innovation Lab at the University of Melbourne, Australia.
8 21st Century: Capitalist Companies Go Green and Green Goes High-Tech
Eger’s model of product evolution[24], published
Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things (figure 56) by German scientist Michael Braungart (figure 57) and American architect William McDonough (figure 58).
As we have demonstrated earlier in this paper, all through history Green Design had been mainly focused on small-scale and ‘primitive’ technology (“Low Tech”). Braungart and McDonough made a clean break with this viewpoint and claimed that the use of state-of-the-art technology was eminently suitable for completely closing ecological cycles and thus reducing wastage and pollution to zero. Modern technology would allow manufacturers to base their economic activities on other, ultramodern technology instead of reducing the impact on natural resources and pollution by reducing economic activities. In a very short time, Braungart's and McDonough's ideas became highly influential, as is illustrated by the fact that sustainability was the sole theme of the World’s Fair in Hannover in 2000, as based on the principles in 2007, predicts that ethical considerations
become important as a discerning product value in the last phase (called: “Awareness”) of a product. The accuracy of this theorem was illustrated by a change in the behavior of a number of important and global capitalist corporations, as manifested in the first years of the 21st century. The most striking example was given by one of the biggest oil companies in the world, Royal Dutch Shell. In an advertisement captioned "Cloud the Issue or Clear the Air", published in The Financial Times, among others, the company claimed that “…last year, we renewed our commitment not only to meet the agreed Kyoto targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but to exceed them’ and ‘we're working to increase the provision of cleaner burning natural gas...’ (figure 54, 55).
A second revolutionary change in the ideas concerning Green Design took place in the early years of the 21st century and was caused by the 2002 publication of Cradle to
51 52 53 54 [ 2 4 ] A r t h u r O E g e r , E v o l u t i o n a i r e productontwikkeling: Productfasen beschrijven de meest waarschijnlijke l e v e n s l o o p v a n e e n p r o d u c t, L e m m a
Publishers: The Hague, 2007. Arthur O Eger, E v o l u t i o n a r y P r o d u c t D e v e l o p m e n t : H o w Product Phases Can Map the Status Quo and Future of a Product, Lemma Publishers: The Hague, 2007.
纳（图 57）共同出版了专著《从摇篮到摇 篮：循环经济设计之探索》（图 58），在它 的影响下，21 世纪前期又发生了一次关于 绿色设计理念的革命性变化。 正如前文中我们证实的那样，在整个 的绿色设计史中，人们关注的焦点主要是 小规模和“原始的”技术（“低技术”）。 而布朗嘉特和麦克唐纳的观点却与此 南辕北辙，他们宣称，尖端科技非常适用 于完全封闭的生态循环，因此，可以将损 耗和污染降低为零。现代科技并不是让制 造商们通过减少经济活动来降低对自然资 源和环境污染的影响，而是让制造商们将 其经济活动建立在其他超现代科技的基础 之上。短期内，布朗嘉特和麦克唐纳的思 想产生了重要的影响，正如在 2000 年汉 诺威的世界博览会上，可持续性是唯一的 主题，而该主题的思想是基于两年后出版 的《从摇篮到摇篮》中的原理。[25] 九、结语 因此，在 21 世纪的头十年，绿色设 计的范式发生了一个根本的转变。至少可 以这样说，绿色运动的头号宿敌——跨国 资本主义企业，已经变成了绿色，而且， 在绿色舞台上同样长期扮演反面角色的家 伙——现代科技，也出乎意料地成为了正 面人物的典型，起码，它在实现可持续方 面，有一些独到之处。[26]同样，这些变化 此时正深刻地改变着绿色设计的研究和教 育特征。 今后几年的研究重点，不仅是要沿着 里斯和瓦格纳格尔所开辟的道路，进一步 改善可持续性的衡量标准，还要发展新科
in Cradle to Cradle, i.e. two years before these ideas were even published in a book![25]
9. Conclusion
So, during the first decade of the 21st century a fundamental paradigmatic shift took place in Green Design. Internationally operating capitalist companies, the age old arch-enemy of the Green Movement turned green - or at least, said so -, and the equally age old villain in the Green stageplay, modern technology, turned out unexpectedly to be the good guy par excellence, or, at least, in realizing sustainability, the guy that has some clever tricks at his disposal that other guys miss.[26]
These changes are at this very moment
deeply changing the character of research and education in green design.
In research the focus for the coming years will be on the further refinement of measuring sustainability, following the tracks set out by Rees and Wackernagel, and on the development of new technologies, aimed at the closing of ecological systems, building on the foundations laid out by Braungart and Mc Donough.
In design education green - and so, by implication: sustainable design - is added everywhere in the world as an additional -fifth - fundamental pillar supporting the discipline of industrial design engineering (The other four being: ergonomics; construction, design
proper, in the sense of form giving; and design management).
Whether these changes will only cloud the issue, or really will clean the air, remains a question that can only be answered in a not too distant future.
技，并使之服务于以布朗嘉特和麦克唐纳 的理论为基础的生态系统的封闭性。 在全球的设计教育中，绿色设计（言 下之意，即可持续设计）变得随处可见， 它已成为工业设计工程学科中第五门主要 课程（其余四门分别为：人类工程学、建 筑学、造型设计以及设计管理）。 这些变化究竟会将问题复杂化还是真 的会将问题明了化，还是一个值得商榷的 问题，只能由不远的将来予以解答。
J.W. Drukker, Arthur O. Eger & Marjolein van Velzen University of Twente, The Netherlands
J．W．德鲁克、阿瑟 · 奥 · 埃格尔、 马乔林 · 凡 · 维尔森 荷兰特温特大学 55 56 57 58 [25] 麦克唐纳给 2000 年 汉 诺 威 世 博 会 组 织 者 们最早的咨询报告见： William McDonough, The Hannover Principles: Design for Sustainability, Report, prepared for EXPO 2000, T h e W o r l d’s Fair Hannover, Germany, William McDonough & Partners: Charlottesville (VA),1992。 [26] 观点上转变最显著 的莫过于人们对核能的 态度：20 世纪 70 年代， 人们认为核能是非绿色 能源；但近年来，人们 却认为它起码比其他一 些产生二氧化碳的能源 要清洁。
