自然之后的环境政治:冲突的社会生态未来

B. Mansfield, Christine Biermann, K. McSweeney, Justine Law, C. Gallemore, L. Horner, D. Munroe
{"title":"自然之后的环境政治:冲突的社会生态未来","authors":"B. Mansfield, Christine Biermann, K. McSweeney, Justine Law, C. Gallemore, L. Horner, D. Munroe","doi":"10.1080/00045608.2014.973802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article is about the logic and dynamics of environmental politics when the environment at stake is profoundly socioecological. We investigate the socioecological forests of the coalfields of Appalachian Ohio, where once decimated forests are again widespread. Conceptualizing forests as power-laden relationships among various people, trees, and other nonhumans, we identify multiple distinct forest types that currently exist as both material reality and future vision. Each forest is characterized by antagonistic ideas about ideal species composition, structure, and function and about specific actions and actors deemed necessary and threatening for the forest's persistence. Each forest represents a very different vision for how socioecological relationships should be fostered. We argue, first, that broad acceptance that the environment is fundamentally socioecological does not mark the end of environmentalism. Rather, urges to environmentalism proliferate as people aim to foster the social natures they envision—and do so through interventions that are internal to what the forest is and does. Second, the proliferation of environmentalisms generates new forms of environmental conflict, which manifests over what sorts of social natures can and should exist (i.e., what they should do and for whom) and which interventions are beneficial or harmful to the survival and proliferation of the forest in the future. Ultimately, we demonstrate that socioecological futures are being shaped today through political struggle not over naturalness but over what should be done, by whom, to bring about which social natures, and to the benefit of whom (human and nonhuman).","PeriodicalId":80485,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the Association of American Geographers. Association of American Geographers","volume":"105 1","pages":"284 - 293"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00045608.2014.973802","citationCount":"45","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Environmental Politics After Nature: Conflicting Socioecological Futures\",\"authors\":\"B. Mansfield, Christine Biermann, K. McSweeney, Justine Law, C. Gallemore, L. Horner, D. Munroe\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00045608.2014.973802\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article is about the logic and dynamics of environmental politics when the environment at stake is profoundly socioecological. We investigate the socioecological forests of the coalfields of Appalachian Ohio, where once decimated forests are again widespread. Conceptualizing forests as power-laden relationships among various people, trees, and other nonhumans, we identify multiple distinct forest types that currently exist as both material reality and future vision. Each forest is characterized by antagonistic ideas about ideal species composition, structure, and function and about specific actions and actors deemed necessary and threatening for the forest's persistence. Each forest represents a very different vision for how socioecological relationships should be fostered. We argue, first, that broad acceptance that the environment is fundamentally socioecological does not mark the end of environmentalism. Rather, urges to environmentalism proliferate as people aim to foster the social natures they envision—and do so through interventions that are internal to what the forest is and does. Second, the proliferation of environmentalisms generates new forms of environmental conflict, which manifests over what sorts of social natures can and should exist (i.e., what they should do and for whom) and which interventions are beneficial or harmful to the survival and proliferation of the forest in the future. Ultimately, we demonstrate that socioecological futures are being shaped today through political struggle not over naturalness but over what should be done, by whom, to bring about which social natures, and to the benefit of whom (human and nonhuman).\",\"PeriodicalId\":80485,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of the Association of American Geographers. Association of American Geographers\",\"volume\":\"105 1\",\"pages\":\"284 - 293\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00045608.2014.973802\",\"citationCount\":\"45\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of the Association of American Geographers. Association of American Geographers\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2014.973802\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the Association of American Geographers. Association of American Geographers","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2014.973802","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 45

摘要

这篇文章是关于环境政治的逻辑和动态,当环境处于危险之中是深刻的社会生态。我们调查了俄亥俄州阿巴拉契亚煤田的社会生态森林,那里曾经被摧毁的森林再次广泛分布。将森林概念化为各种人、树木和其他非人类之间充满权力的关系,我们确定了多种不同的森林类型,它们既存在于物质现实中,也存在于未来的愿景中。每个森林的特征都是关于理想的物种组成、结构和功能,以及被认为对森林的持久性有必要和威胁的特定行为和行动者的对立观点。每一片森林都代表了如何培养社会生态关系的不同愿景。我们认为,首先,环境基本上是社会生态学的广泛接受并不标志着环境主义的终结。更确切地说,当人们致力于培养他们所设想的社会性质时,环境保护主义的冲动就会激增——并且通过干预森林的本质和作用来实现。其次,环保主义的扩散产生了新形式的环境冲突,这体现在什么样的社会性质可以和应该存在(即,他们应该做什么和为谁),以及哪些干预措施对未来森林的生存和繁殖有益或有害。最终,我们证明,社会生态的未来是通过政治斗争塑造的,而不是关于自然性,而是关于应该做什么,由谁来做,带来什么样的社会性质,以及谁(人类和非人类)的利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Environmental Politics After Nature: Conflicting Socioecological Futures
This article is about the logic and dynamics of environmental politics when the environment at stake is profoundly socioecological. We investigate the socioecological forests of the coalfields of Appalachian Ohio, where once decimated forests are again widespread. Conceptualizing forests as power-laden relationships among various people, trees, and other nonhumans, we identify multiple distinct forest types that currently exist as both material reality and future vision. Each forest is characterized by antagonistic ideas about ideal species composition, structure, and function and about specific actions and actors deemed necessary and threatening for the forest's persistence. Each forest represents a very different vision for how socioecological relationships should be fostered. We argue, first, that broad acceptance that the environment is fundamentally socioecological does not mark the end of environmentalism. Rather, urges to environmentalism proliferate as people aim to foster the social natures they envision—and do so through interventions that are internal to what the forest is and does. Second, the proliferation of environmentalisms generates new forms of environmental conflict, which manifests over what sorts of social natures can and should exist (i.e., what they should do and for whom) and which interventions are beneficial or harmful to the survival and proliferation of the forest in the future. Ultimately, we demonstrate that socioecological futures are being shaped today through political struggle not over naturalness but over what should be done, by whom, to bring about which social natures, and to the benefit of whom (human and nonhuman).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信