东南亚的政治生态与社会生态冲突

Q1 Social Sciences
M. Pichler, A. Brad
{"title":"东南亚的政治生态与社会生态冲突","authors":"M. Pichler, A. Brad","doi":"10.14764/10.ASEAS-2016.1-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTIONFrom July 2015 onwards, forest and peat fires raged once again in Indonesia, mainly on the remaining forests in Sumatra and Kalimantan. By the end of the year, acrid haze extended to the neighboring countries of Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand, releasing CO2 emissions equivalent to the annual emissions in Germany and driving a public health emergency across the region. Under the Haze Wave, everyday life in Indonesia was brought to a standstill, thousands of people were evacuated, and offices and schools were closed. Land clearance through slash and burn practices for industrial plantations that feed a massive global demand for palm oil and pulpwood were reported as the root cause of the fires (Balch, 2015; Osborn, Torpey, Franklin, & Howard, 2015).The appropriation and control of land for these patterns of resource-based development - along with selective industrialization processes and rapid urbanization - have significantly contributed to economic growth in Southeast Asia. At the same time, the region - and especially marginalized groups - face the environmental and social costs of centuries of resource extraction (e.g., deforestation, water pollution, flooding, biodiversity loss, eviction of indigenous people or ethnic minorities, surge in urban poor) that give rise to resistance and conflicts against these forms of economic development. This special issue features a focus on such socio-ecological conflicts from a political ecology perspective. It brings together an interdisciplinary collection of expressions of conflict over land, forests, water, mining, and environmental assets, and discusses the power relations underlying these forms of contestation as well as the strategies of different actors to deal with the unequal outcomes of environmental and resource politics.POLITICAL ECOLOGY, POWER RELATIONS, AND SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL CONFLICTSIn contrast to debates about natural scarcities, political ecology highlights the societal and political character of resource extraction and environmental impacts (Robbins, 2012). The interdisciplinary research agenda analyzes the appropriation of nature and the distribution and consumption of natural resources as an explicitly political process that is linked to social relations of ownership and control (Bryant & Bailey, 1997; Neumann, 2005; Robbins, 2012). Society-nature relations hence evolve in historically and geographically embedded constellations that are linked to power, domination, and inequalities. Based on a political economy understanding, Bryant and Bailey (1997) conceptualize power as the \"ability of an actor to control\" (p. 39) the access to nature and natural resources as well as the access of other actors to these resources. Power is, then, the control that one person, social group, or state has over the access to and the distribution of natural resources of another person, social group, or state, both in material (e.g., control of access to land, natural resources, and environmental risks) and symbolic terms (e.g., control of access to knowledge systems and environmental discourses) (Pichler, 2016). Hence, the appropriation and transformation of nature is shaped by social relations of power and domination and the associated actors who control the access to natural resources (Wissen, 2015). As Blaikie and Brookfield (1987) put it: \"one person's degradation is another's accumulation\" (p. 14).Focusing on the political character of environmental problems implies taking related conflicts into account. Conflicts serve \"as a prime form and expression of politics\" (Le Billon, 2015, p. 602) where underlying relations of power and domination, and (contradictory) interests are revealed. Whereas mainstream environmental research often strives for the prevention of conflicts, political ecologists challenge the depoliticization of environmental issues and highlight the emancipatory potential of contestation and conflict.Over the last three decades, political ecology research has developed diverse conceptions of socio-ecological conflicts. …","PeriodicalId":37990,"journal":{"name":"Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Political Ecology and Socio-Ecological Conflicts in Southeast Asia\",\"authors\":\"M. Pichler, A. Brad\",\"doi\":\"10.14764/10.ASEAS-2016.1-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"INTRODUCTIONFrom July 2015 onwards, forest and peat fires raged once again in Indonesia, mainly on the remaining forests in Sumatra and Kalimantan. By the end of the year, acrid haze extended to the neighboring countries of Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand, releasing CO2 emissions equivalent to the annual emissions in Germany and driving a public health emergency across the region. Under the Haze Wave, everyday life in Indonesia was brought to a standstill, thousands of people were evacuated, and offices and schools were closed. Land clearance through slash and burn practices for industrial plantations that feed a massive global demand for palm oil and pulpwood were reported as the root cause of the fires (Balch, 2015; Osborn, Torpey, Franklin, & Howard, 2015).The appropriation and control of land for these patterns of resource-based development - along with selective industrialization processes and rapid urbanization - have significantly contributed to economic growth in Southeast Asia. At the same time, the region - and especially marginalized groups - face the environmental and social costs of centuries of resource extraction (e.g., deforestation, water pollution, flooding, biodiversity loss, eviction of indigenous people or ethnic minorities, surge in urban poor) that give rise to resistance and conflicts against these forms of economic development. This special issue features a focus on such socio-ecological conflicts from a political ecology perspective. It brings together an interdisciplinary collection of expressions of conflict over land, forests, water, mining, and environmental assets, and discusses the power relations underlying these forms of contestation as well as the strategies of different actors to deal with the unequal outcomes of environmental and resource politics.POLITICAL ECOLOGY, POWER RELATIONS, AND SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL CONFLICTSIn contrast to debates about natural scarcities, political ecology highlights the societal and political character of resource extraction and environmental impacts (Robbins, 2012). The interdisciplinary research agenda analyzes the appropriation of nature and the distribution and consumption of natural resources as an explicitly political process that is linked to social relations of ownership and control (Bryant & Bailey, 1997; Neumann, 2005; Robbins, 2012). Society-nature relations hence evolve in historically and geographically embedded constellations that are linked to power, domination, and inequalities. Based on a political economy understanding, Bryant and Bailey (1997) conceptualize power as the \\\"ability of an actor to control\\\" (p. 39) the access to nature and natural resources as well as the access of other actors to these resources. Power is, then, the control that one person, social group, or state has over the access to and the distribution of natural resources of another person, social group, or state, both in material (e.g., control of access to land, natural resources, and environmental risks) and symbolic terms (e.g., control of access to knowledge systems and environmental discourses) (Pichler, 2016). Hence, the appropriation and transformation of nature is shaped by social relations of power and domination and the associated actors who control the access to natural resources (Wissen, 2015). As Blaikie and Brookfield (1987) put it: \\\"one person's degradation is another's accumulation\\\" (p. 14).Focusing on the political character of environmental problems implies taking related conflicts into account. Conflicts serve \\\"as a prime form and expression of politics\\\" (Le Billon, 2015, p. 602) where underlying relations of power and domination, and (contradictory) interests are revealed. Whereas mainstream environmental research often strives for the prevention of conflicts, political ecologists challenge the depoliticization of environmental issues and highlight the emancipatory potential of contestation and conflict.Over the last three decades, political ecology research has developed diverse conceptions of socio-ecological conflicts. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":37990,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14764/10.ASEAS-2016.1-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14764/10.ASEAS-2016.1-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

摘要

从2015年7月开始,印度尼西亚的森林和泥炭火灾再次肆虐,主要是苏门答腊岛和加里曼丹的剩余森林。到年底,刺鼻的雾霾已蔓延至马来西亚、新加坡和泰国等邻国,释放的二氧化碳相当于德国一年的排放量,并在整个地区引发了公共卫生紧急事件。在雾霾浪潮下,印尼的日常生活陷入停顿,数千人被疏散,办公室和学校关闭。据报道,为满足全球对棕榈油和纸浆木材的巨大需求,工业种植园通过砍伐和焚烧方式清理土地是火灾的根本原因(Balch, 2015;奥斯本,鱼雷,富兰克林,&霍华德,2015)。为这些以资源为基础的发展模式而占用和控制土地- -以及选择性的工业化进程和迅速的城市化- -对东南亚的经济增长作出了重大贡献。与此同时,该区域- -特别是边缘群体- -面临着几个世纪以来资源开采所带来的环境和社会代价(例如,砍伐森林、水污染、洪水、生物多样性丧失、土著人民或少数民族被驱逐、城市穷人激增),这些代价引起了对这些形式的经济发展的抵制和冲突。本期特刊从政治生态学的角度关注这些社会生态冲突。它汇集了关于土地、森林、水、采矿和环境资产冲突的跨学科集合,并讨论了这些形式的冲突背后的权力关系,以及不同行为者应对环境和资源政治不平等结果的策略。政治生态学、权力关系和社会生态冲突与关于自然稀缺性的争论相反,政治生态学强调了资源开采和环境影响的社会和政治特征(罗宾斯,2012)。跨学科的研究议程分析了自然的占有和自然资源的分配和消费作为一个明确的政治过程,它与所有权和控制权的社会关系有关(Bryant & Bailey, 1997;诺依曼,2005;罗宾斯,2012)。因此,社会与自然的关系在历史和地理上嵌入的星座中演变,这些星座与权力、统治和不平等有关。基于政治经济学的理解,Bryant和Bailey(1997)将权力概念化为“一个行为者控制自然和自然资源的能力”(第39页),以及其他行为者对这些资源的获取。因此,权力是一个人、社会群体或国家对另一个人、社会群体或国家的自然资源的获取和分配的控制,无论是在物质上(例如,对土地、自然资源和环境风险的获取的控制)还是在符号上(例如,对知识系统和环境话语的获取的控制)(Pichler, 2016)。因此,对自然的占有和改造是由权力和统治的社会关系以及控制自然资源获取的相关行为者塑造的(Wissen, 2015)。正如Blaikie和Brookfield(1987)所说:“一个人的堕落是另一个人的积累”(第14页)。注重环境问题的政治性质意味着要考虑到有关的冲突。冲突是“政治的主要形式和表达”(Le Billon, 2015, p. 602),其中揭示了潜在的权力和统治关系以及(矛盾的)利益。虽然主流环境研究经常努力预防冲突,但政治生态学家挑战环境问题的非政治化,并强调争论和冲突的解放潜力。在过去的三十年中,政治生态学研究发展了不同的社会生态冲突概念。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Political Ecology and Socio-Ecological Conflicts in Southeast Asia
INTRODUCTIONFrom July 2015 onwards, forest and peat fires raged once again in Indonesia, mainly on the remaining forests in Sumatra and Kalimantan. By the end of the year, acrid haze extended to the neighboring countries of Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand, releasing CO2 emissions equivalent to the annual emissions in Germany and driving a public health emergency across the region. Under the Haze Wave, everyday life in Indonesia was brought to a standstill, thousands of people were evacuated, and offices and schools were closed. Land clearance through slash and burn practices for industrial plantations that feed a massive global demand for palm oil and pulpwood were reported as the root cause of the fires (Balch, 2015; Osborn, Torpey, Franklin, & Howard, 2015).The appropriation and control of land for these patterns of resource-based development - along with selective industrialization processes and rapid urbanization - have significantly contributed to economic growth in Southeast Asia. At the same time, the region - and especially marginalized groups - face the environmental and social costs of centuries of resource extraction (e.g., deforestation, water pollution, flooding, biodiversity loss, eviction of indigenous people or ethnic minorities, surge in urban poor) that give rise to resistance and conflicts against these forms of economic development. This special issue features a focus on such socio-ecological conflicts from a political ecology perspective. It brings together an interdisciplinary collection of expressions of conflict over land, forests, water, mining, and environmental assets, and discusses the power relations underlying these forms of contestation as well as the strategies of different actors to deal with the unequal outcomes of environmental and resource politics.POLITICAL ECOLOGY, POWER RELATIONS, AND SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL CONFLICTSIn contrast to debates about natural scarcities, political ecology highlights the societal and political character of resource extraction and environmental impacts (Robbins, 2012). The interdisciplinary research agenda analyzes the appropriation of nature and the distribution and consumption of natural resources as an explicitly political process that is linked to social relations of ownership and control (Bryant & Bailey, 1997; Neumann, 2005; Robbins, 2012). Society-nature relations hence evolve in historically and geographically embedded constellations that are linked to power, domination, and inequalities. Based on a political economy understanding, Bryant and Bailey (1997) conceptualize power as the "ability of an actor to control" (p. 39) the access to nature and natural resources as well as the access of other actors to these resources. Power is, then, the control that one person, social group, or state has over the access to and the distribution of natural resources of another person, social group, or state, both in material (e.g., control of access to land, natural resources, and environmental risks) and symbolic terms (e.g., control of access to knowledge systems and environmental discourses) (Pichler, 2016). Hence, the appropriation and transformation of nature is shaped by social relations of power and domination and the associated actors who control the access to natural resources (Wissen, 2015). As Blaikie and Brookfield (1987) put it: "one person's degradation is another's accumulation" (p. 14).Focusing on the political character of environmental problems implies taking related conflicts into account. Conflicts serve "as a prime form and expression of politics" (Le Billon, 2015, p. 602) where underlying relations of power and domination, and (contradictory) interests are revealed. Whereas mainstream environmental research often strives for the prevention of conflicts, political ecologists challenge the depoliticization of environmental issues and highlight the emancipatory potential of contestation and conflict.Over the last three decades, political ecology research has developed diverse conceptions of socio-ecological conflicts. …
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
Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies
Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
45 weeks
期刊介绍: The Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies (ASEAS) is an international, interdisciplinary and open access social sciences journal covering a variety of topics (culture, economics, geography, politics, society) from both historical and contemporary perspectives. Topics should be related to Southeast Asia, but are not restricted to the geographical region, when spatial and political borders of Southeast Asia are crossed or transcended, e.g., in the case of linguistics, diaspora groups or forms of socio-cultural transfer. ASEAS publishes two focus issues per year and we welcome out-of-focus submissions at any time. The journal invites both established as well as young scholars to present research results and theoretical and methodical discussions, to report about on-going research projects or field studies, to publish conference reports, to conduct interviews with experts in the field, and to review relevant books. Articles can be submitted in German or English.
×
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