首页> 外文期刊>Water Policy >Return of the Leviathan? 'Hydropolitics in the developing world' revisited
【24h】

Return of the Leviathan? 'Hydropolitics in the developing world' revisited

机译:利维坦回来了吗?再谈“发展中国家的政治”

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

The paper focuses on the evolution of water management regimes, water scarcity, and the transition to a new water legislation in South Africa that occurred with the passing of the 1998 National Water Act. It takes issue with the analysis offered by Turton & Meissner in their 2002 article 'The hydrosocial contract and its manifestation in society: A South African case study' (in Hydropolitics and The Developing World (2002), African Water Research Unit, Pretoria, pp. 37-60) who argue that the relations between resource users and the State may be conceived of as a 'hydrosocial contract', and that the nature of this relationship has changed from constituting a Hobbesian form of social contract where the State is all-powerful (the Leviathan), to a more Lockean form, where the emphasis is on individuals' willingness to cede some of their autonomy in order to be governed. The main argument against Turton & Meissner's analysis is that it ignores policy and legislative aspects, which, if included, would substantially alter their conclusion.
机译:本文着眼于水管理制度的演变,水资源短缺以及在1998年《国家水法》获得通过后向南非新水立法的过渡。它与Turton&Meissner在其2002年的文章“水社会契约及其在社会中的表现:南非案例研究”(《水政治与发展中世界》(2002年),非洲水研究股,比勒陀利亚,第(第37-60页),他认为资源使用者与国家之间的关系可以被认为是“水社会契约”,并且这种关系的性质已经从构成霍布斯形式的社会契约改变了,在这种形式中,国家是全民强大的(利维坦)(Leviathan),到更洛克式的形式,其中重点在于个人为让自己的自治权而被割让的意愿。反对Turton&Meissner分析的主要论点是,它忽略了政策和立法方面的内容,如果将其包括在内,将会大大改变其结论。

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