[雙語翻譯]--（節(jié)選）環(huán)境設(shè)計(jì)外文翻譯--自然的平衡室內(nèi)設(shè)計(jì)、人和可持續(xù)發(fā)展（英文）

1、P E R S P E C T I V EA Natural Balance: Interior Design, Humans, and SustainabilityLinda Sorrento, M.A., Sorrento Consulting, LLCOnce we believe in ourselves, we can risk curiosity, wonder, spontaneous delight, or any ex

2、perience that reveals the human spirit.E.E. CummingsIntroductionWe are at a crossroads in the built environment. On April 22, 1970, noted anthropologist and outspoken environmentalist Margaret Mead inaugurated the first

3、Earth Day, an event that continues to work toward increasing public awareness of the world’s environmental problems, which is reflected in the following speech by Dr. Mead (2012):No society has ever yet, been able to han

4、dle the temptations of technology to mastery, to waste, to exuberance, to exploration and exploitation. We have to create something new, something that’s never existed on the world before. We have to learn to cherish thi

5、s earth and cherish as it is something that is fragile, that’s the only one, that’s all we have. And, we have to set up a system that’s sufficiently complex, to continue to monitor the whole. We have to use our scientifi

6、c knowledge to correct the dangers that have come from science and technology.Forty-two years after the first Earth Day, our planet, our home, continues to be neglected. Global demand for energy continues to increase sub

7、stantially in the short and long term. Our earth is overheating with 7 billion people burning through fossil fuels at an alarming rate. In our haste for progress, we have caused all sorts of resource shortages and ‘‘ecol

8、ogical’’ challenges, principally through the buildings and places we inhabit.At the same time there is hope. The leading edge of sustainability1 is poised to move beyond green building strategies associated with a ‘‘mech

9、anistic’’2 view to the idea that buildings should mitigate environmental degradation through technology. Some influential thinkers are arguing for an ‘‘ecological’’ approach that emphasizes a coevolutionary, partnered re

10、lationship between humans and the natural environment. This approach is based on strategies of adaptation, resilience, and regeneration that build, rather than diminish, social and natural capital (du Plessis, 2012). The

11、 intention is that the built environment would contribute more than it consumes. To encourage people to engage with and respond to environmental issues more urgently, Raymond Cole (2012, p. 2) argues that reframing our a

12、pproach to a ‘‘positive vision of human values as more effective in creating change than presentation of alarming facts.’’ The resulting transformation, ‘‘embodies traces from prior conditions’’ of conventional and quant

13、ifiable green/high-performance technical systems, but is ‘‘infused with new aspirations and possibilities’’ for the quality of living systems of enhancing life for human, other species, and ‘‘ecological’’ systems (Cole 2

14、012, p. 1).As a result of the demands of reducing energy consumption for the earth to remain fit for human habitation, a new story is quickly unfolding for interior designers. This sustainability and human story has at l

15、east two parts, both of which must involve interior designers. The first is upgrading building infrastructures to improve© Copyright 2012, Interior Design Educators Council, Journal of Interior Design ix Journal of

16、Interior Design 37(2), ix–xxiiiP E R S P E C T I V EQualitative data about the actual operational performance and its association with design intentions, specific green strategies, and human’s physical, neurocognitive, a

17、nd psychosocial response to buildings were, and still are, lacking.Clearly, both sides have admirable goals in mind, but are not talking to each other in many cases. This disconnection puts buildings and humans at odds w

18、ith one another. And, it is something that the interior designer could help to prevent and/or ameliorate, if only more of the stakeholders, including interior designers, would recognize and act on this fact.Differing Per

19、spectives Applied to High Performing BuildingsPeople are the legitimate barometer for the built environment; however, our perception of our environment is complex, unrecorded and not analyzed.Chris Pyke, Ph.D., Vice Pres

20、ident of Research U.S. Green Building CouncilEfforts in green building community in the United States have been led by broad interdisciplinary, practitioner- led coalitions seeking to advance design, construction, and op

21、eration of built environments to promote human health, well-being, and the protection and restoration of the environment (Pyke, 2012). One discipline that is often underemphasized here, however, is interior design. Many

22、early practitioners believed that market interventions could permanently shift distributions across practices toward higher performance and greater achievement. Certain groups and areas, such as real estate, insurance, a

23、nd governmental regulations, con- nected early with green building processes of valuing green performance through quantitative data and analysis. However, qualitative data about the actual operational performance and its

24、 association with design intentions, specific green strategies, and human’s physical, neurocognitive, and psychosocial response to buildings were, and still are, lacking.Figure 1 shows today’s different practice perspect

25、ives across the green building industry as applied to high- performance buildings. High-performance buildings must fulfill a number of, at times, competing technical (objective) and human (subjective) requirements. Figur

26、e 1 can be used as a lens for seeing the complexity of these agents. It demonstrates that the green building environment consists of many heterogeneous agents with independent goals, which make sustainability difficult t

27、o navigate and progress.An important goal for green building practice would be to interrelate these diverse agents in a whole system. The application of the sum of all parts from diverse agents with cohesive interactions

28、 can lead to rapid coevolution toward good high-performance building structures that do not ignore the users. Currently, the building bubbles in Figure 1 are driven by quantitative statistics, which, without qualitative

29、perspectives from the occupant bubbles, can reveal misleading tendencies about performance. These agents are maturing at different rates as sized by bubble sizes (a larger circle indicates robust activity and the smaller

30、 indicates lesser activity). It appears that the objective, quantitative realm is overtaking qualitative, subjective interpretation. In addition, engineering and technology practices are overtaking architecture, interior

31、 design, and humans.The key in the upper left of Figure 1 will be used as an underlying theme for Figures 1 to 3. The ‘‘Environment’’ mechanisms are deployed by the physical elements of the building; ‘‘Behavioral’’ mecha

32、nisms are devised by individual cognitive and overt behaviors; and ‘‘Social’’ mechanisms are devised by individual cognitive and overt behaviors. Conceived by Virginia Kupritz (2000), these elements represent one model t

33、o provide human resources professionals with a template to examine a range of human factors pertinent to their particular situation. Notice that the behavioral and social key bubbles are shown in gray, symbolizing inacti