首页> 外文期刊>Environment and Planning. A >Neoliberalising nature: the logics of deregulation and reregulation
【24h】

Neoliberalising nature: the logics of deregulation and reregulation

机译:新自由主义的本质:放松管制和重新管制的逻辑

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This and a companion paper examine a new and fast-growing geographical research literature about neoliberal approaches to governing human interactions with the physical environment. This literature, authored by critical geographers for the most part, is largely case study based and focuses on a range of biophysical phenomena in different parts of the contemporary world. In an attempt to take stock of what has been learnt and what is left to do, the two papers survey the literature theoretically and empirically, cognitively and normatively. They are written for the benefit of readers trying to make some sense of this growing literature and for future researchers of the topic. Specifically, they aim to parse the critical studies of nature's neoliberalisation with a view to answering four key questions posed, variously, in many or most of them: what are the main reasons why all manner of qualitatively different nonhuman phenomena in different parts of the world are being 'neoliberalised'?; what are the principal ways in which nature is neoliberalised in practice?; what are the effects of nature's neoliberalisation?; and how should these effects be evaluated? Without such an effort of synthesis, this literature could remain a collection of substantively disparate, theoretically informed case studies unified only in name (by virtue of their common focus on 'neoliberal' policies). Though all four questions posed are answerable in principle, in practice the existing research literature makes questions two, three, and four difficult to address substantively and coherently between case studies. While the first question can, from one well-established theoretical perspective, be answered with reference to four 'logics' at work in diverse contexts (the focus of this paper), the issues of process, effects, and evaluations are currently less tractable (and are the focus of the next paper). Together, the two pieces conclude that critical geographers interrogating nature's neoliberalisation will, in future, need to define their objects of analysis more rigorously and/or explicitly, as well as their evaluative schemas. If the new research into neoliberalism and the nonhuman world is to realise its full potential in the years to come, then some fundamental cognitive and normative issues must be addressed. These issues are not exclusive to the literature surveyed and speak to the 'wider' lessons that can be drawn from any body of case study research that focuses on an ostensibly 'general' phenomena like neoliberalism.
机译:这篇论文和一篇伴随论文研究了关于新自由主义方法的新的,快速增长的地理研究文献,这些方法用于控制人类与物理环境的相互作用。该文献大部分由重要的地理学家撰写,主要是基于案例研究,并且侧重于当代世界不同地区的一系列生物物理现象。为了评估已学到的知识和尚待完成的工作,这两篇论文从理论和经验,认知和规范两个方面对文献进行了调查。编写这些文章是为了使尝试从中受益的读者和对本主题的未来研究人员有所了解。具体来说,他们旨在解析自然界新自由主义的批判性研究,以期回答许多或大多数问题提出的四个关键问题:世界不同地区各种方式在性质上有不同的非人类现象的主要原因是什么?被“绝杀”了吗?在实践中自然新自由化的主要方式是什么?大自然的新自由化有什么影响?以及如何评估这些影响?如果不进行这种综合性的努力,那么这些文献将可能仍然只是名称上统一起来的大量完全不同的,理论上有根据的案例研究的集合(由于它们共同关注“新自由主义”政策)。尽管提出的所有四个问题原则上都是可以回答的,但在实践中,现有的研究文献使案例研究之间难以实质性和连贯地解决问题二,三和四。虽然可以从一个公认的理论角度来回答第一个问题,但可以参考在不同背景下工作的四种“逻辑”(本文的重点),但过程,效果和评估问题目前较难处理(并且是下一篇论文的重点)。这两部分共同得出结论,审讯自然新自由主义的重要地理学家将来将需要更严格和/或明确地定义他们的分析对象,以及他们的评估方案。如果对新自由主义和非人类世界的新研究要在未来几年中充分发挥其潜力,那么必须解决一些基本的认知和规范问题。这些问题并非被调查的文献所独有,而是在可以从任何案例研究中汲取的“更广泛的”教训中,这些案例研究集中于新自由主义等表面上看似“普遍”的现象。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号