In less than a decade, architect Ping Jiang, the founder and design principal of Atelier Ping Jiang | EID Arch, a dynamic collective of 40 professionals based in Shanghai and Hong Kong, has amassed an impressive portfolio of unique buildings. They range from community, cultural and commercial centres to infrastructure, urban developments and residential towers across China. The architect’s Panda Pavilions, an extension of a major national research and breeding centre, a new home for giant pandas, was completed in Chengdu in 2021. Arranged in four large undulating ring structures with enclosed gardens, all sensibly merged with the landscape and interconnected by a system of meandering footpaths, this bold futuristic complex is a remarkable work by an imaginative designer deeply concerned with expressing architecture’s relationship with the land in ways that are at once engaging, iconic and lyrical.

Like many leading independent Chinese architects, Jiang was educated in China and the West—first at Tsinghua University in Beijing and then earning his Master of Architecture from Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. Except in his case, both influences are more balanced, diffused, and referenced in ways that are transformative and refined. This has to do with the fact that Jiang feels equally at home in China and the United States. Following his graduation from Tsinghua, he immigrated to Canada. Between Canada and the US, where the family eventually moved, he spent as much time in the West as in China; he carries dual Canadian and American citizenship.

Jiang was born in Sichuan Province in Southwestern China in 1969. His father, an electrical engineer, worked at a power station and his mother taught philosophy and political science in high school and college. He showed early interest in drawing, film, and theatre and chose to study architecture. After university and a short apprenticeship in Vancouver, he moved to Chicago, where he spent nearly a decade working at SOM, becoming a studio head. In our video conversation, he told me that SOM attracted him because of the variety and complexity of their projects and their extensive scale. He describes his professional experience there as “a journey of learning the craft.”

In 2009, Jiang returned to China to join Ma Yansong's MAD in Beijing as the firm’s partner. After managing MAD’s several ambitious projects in Beijing, Harbin and Toronto, the architect felt ready in 2015 to start his practice. He told STIR, “I was looking to work on more regionally sensitive and culturally relevant projects. I wanted to pursue my interests in architecture. I felt ready.” Curiously, his first independent project, the Medog Meteorological Center in Tibet, became one of his career's smallest in scope and budget. It was challenging to find economical ways to build it. That climate-responsive design for the project, a modern take on vernacular architecture, brought the first media attention and put the architect on the path of acquiring ever more complex commissions in China. Lately, he has been working on potential projects internationally. 

Vladimir Belogolovsky: Formally, materially and programmatically, you often work with dualities. Such design strategies are employed in your LAND Community Center and Ao’jiang Community Cultural Center. Could you offer insights into your design process and where you typically begin?

Ping Jiang: I agree that these two projects share some key ideas, particularly integrating architecture and landscape and blurring the boundary between the two. In the LAND Community Center, most programmes are located in the upper part of the building, which freed up space for public and civic use below. The idea was to form a building as if growing out of the ground. You are right about the interplay of dualities in my architecture. One of them is natural versus artificial. I am interested in the tension between different forces. In the case of the Ao’jiang Community Cultural Center, we pushed the way architecture engages with landscape even further.

Design is never linear for me. Social, economic, cultural, contextual and other circumstances drive different projects in specific ways. Each place makes a difference. Every time, it is about identifying the character of the site and the project’s unique potential. I call it—identifying architectural opportunities. I start with sketching right away and then we quickly move to making physical and digital models.

I was looking to work on more regionally sensitive and culturally relevant projects. I wanted to pursue my own interests in architecture. I felt ready. – Ping Jiang

VB: What are some of the primary sources of your inspiration?

PJ: I am fascinated with art, music, theatre and other art forms. But more often than not, it has to do with the site itself, geology, and climate. Sometimes, you bring ideas to the project and sometimes, you develop them as you start working. Combining architecture, landscape and urbanism is our most recurring idea. To me, architecture is an ongoing negotiation with the surrounding environment. In our projects, we try to engage with whatever surrounds them—the city, environment and architecture. Regardless of scale or building type, we focus on engaging our projects with the public. 

VB: You have said, “The interplay of natural and artificial elements and the juxtaposition of rationality and sensibility have always been evident in our work.” Could you elaborate?

PJ: If you look at traditional Chinese architecture, you will find mostly repetitive rectilinear volumes. But it is typically integrated intricately with nature. Together, they work very organically and complement each other well. It is that kind of tension that I look for in my work. That inspires us and we try to express such qualities in our work.

VB: When you talk about your architecture, you use such words and phrases as accessible, inclusive, open spaces, quiet urbanity, maximisation of public space and juxtaposition of rationality and sensibility. How else would you describe your work, and what are you trying to achieve with your architecture?

PJ: We try to bring architecture and nature and add meaning to the environments we create. Another thing is that architecture should be identifiable. It should create a sense of place and a sense of community and bring a positive impact on the environment around it. We try to be contextually sensitive and environmentally responsible. Formally, I don’t think I have a prescribed language that I bring with me to different projects. There is a methodology I try to follow. We approach our projects similarly by identifying opportunities and potential of a place.

Earlier, we talked about duality. That’s the approach that I find very interesting. I also like the idea of ever-evolving. I like it when a project can adapt to future growth. Some of our projects are very simple, but our urban projects articulate the complexity of their conditions. I also like the idea of iconic buildings. Yet, they don’t have to scream about being iconic. That’s what I mean by quiet urbanity, buildings that are understated, calm, and elegant. I favour simple forms and complex facades. We like manipulating our buildings’ surfaces, creating depth and introducing insertion cuts to produce unique expressions.

VB: Many of your high-rise projects indeed share almost basic geometry and complex, fluid facades. Could you expand on that?

PJ: The reason is to bring buildings closer to a human scale and thus, to humanise the urban condition. This is how we can break down and scale down very large buildings. I also like to introduce voids and interstitial spaces, especially in the south of China, where shaded areas are much more appreciated. Introducing pedestrian areas to projects is another way to humanise urban spaces. The fluid facades also reference the complexity and dynamism of the evolving urban conditions.

VB: Your architecture doesn’t seem concerned with regional sensibilities, which many Chinese architects are interested in exploring. For example, Zhang Ke said, “We can invent the future without forgetting history.” In your work, the differences between China and the West are blurred. What do you think about working with regional qualities?

PJ: We intend to address the regional condition. However, I treat it from the point of view of culture, not symbolism. I pay attention to how people are accustomed to using spaces. Climate is another condition that I pay a lot of attention to. Geology is another factor. Choosing appropriate local construction methods is also important. Our project in Tibet addressed that. The same is true with Panda Pavilions. Sustainability, resourcefulness and materiality are all part of our design approach. It is not about being regional per se but choosing an organic and specific approach. I look for possibilities in every place. It is like finding that spark that makes each place unique. I also look for different solutions. It is more interesting that way. We particularly pay attention to building typologies. We try to find a unique solution and voice. It doesn’t always happen, but we try.

VB: When I talked to Zhu Pei, he said, “As an architect, you need to create the experience that people know; then you need to try to create the experience that people don’t know.” What place does innovation have in your work?

PJ: I like that. We try to push innovation as well. In the past, we turned down many projects for which we did not see good potential. Clients usually approach us because they are interested in finding unique solutions for their projects Our projects are unique and they continue in a certain direction, although, I would not say we have a signature style or that we even aim at that. Yet, we do have a language within which we operate. Spatial experience is very important for our projects. Our formal language comes naturally by following our design process. 

I pay attention to how people are accustomed to using spaces. Climate is another condition that I pay attention to. Geology is another. Choosing appropriate local construction methods is also important. – Ping Jiang

VB: What is a good building for you? How do you know when you are there when you try to achieve one?

PJ: I don’t know. We never seem to want to drop the pen. [Laughs.] We always think about how to improve our projects and make them better. We also try to find beautiful and poetic relationships between various parts. Good architecture should try to achieve that. Good buildings are memorable and they offer unique and meaningful experiences.

I like architecture that’s relevant to its place. I like to fight the generic.