水—社会领域视角下的国际河流治理

doi:10.13959/j.issn.1003-2398.2022.02.006

摘要
图/表
参考文献(0)
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (2489 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要国际河流的经济、社会、生态等多重属性使之成为重要的地缘政治议题。现实主义和制度主义分析容易陷入“领域陷阱”，难以充分呈现中微观层面的多元主体互动以及权力结构和自然要素的相互塑造过程。本文在政治地理学辩证性和关系性的思维基础上，介绍“水—社会领域”概念框架的基本特征及其在国际河流治理中的运用。该框架从权力—空间关系的视角出发，包含多元尺度、多维空间、关系网络和领域建构等分析维度。研究认为，国际河流治理是领域（再）生产的过程，水资源是治理过程不可分割的组成部分，自然与社会具有相互建构的辩证关系。将政治地理学的核心概念“领域”运用于水治理研究中，重新建构本体论和认识论，对国际河流治理的地缘关系解析具有独特的地理学价值和意义。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	王雨
	张文雅
	刘晓凤

关键词 ：水&mdash, 社会领域, 国际河流, 自然&mdash, 社会, 辩证性, 地缘关系

Abstract：The governance of international river is an important geopolitical issue due to its economic, social and ecological attributes. Most existing research approaches this subject from the perspectives of realism and institutionalism, which mainly focus on water-related conflicts and cooperation among different sovereign nations. Hegemonic stability and hydro-hegemony are salient theoretical examples that were conceived and developed under realistic and institutional thinking. Based on the dialectical and relational thinking of political geography, this article reviews the theoretical discussions and controversies of international river governance. It introduces the conceptual framework of"hydrosocial territories"and its application in the geopolitical analysis of international rivers. This framework investigates the spatial deployment of power and explores the natural-society relationship from four previously underexamined analytical dimensions. First, power exercises apply at multiple scales and involve interconnections and interdependence across scales. Second, the deployment of power exists in physical, institutional, and representational spaces that jointly shape rules, narratives, and meanings of water. Third, the essence of water governance is defined by relationship networks that include and exclude different actors. Last, hydrosocial territories are fluid, constructed, and contested, encapsulating diverse forms of power exercises.

Key words： hydrosocial territories international river nature-society dialectics geopolitical relations

收稿日期: 2021-06-01

PACS:

K901.4

基金资助:国家自然科学基金项目（41801132）；教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目（17YJCZH183）；广东省自然科学基金项目（2018A030313964）

通讯作者: 张文雅（1995—），女，海南海口人，博士研究生，主要研究方向为环境政治和全球治理。E-mail:wenyazhang@link.cuhk.edu.hk。 E-mail: wenyazhang@link.cuhk.edu.hk。

作者简介: 王雨（1984—），男，河南洛阳人，研究员，博士生导师，主要研究方向为政治地理学和政治生态学。E-mail:wangy63@sustech.edu.cn。

引用本文:

王雨, 张文雅, 刘晓凤. 水—社会领域视角下的国际河流治理[J]. 人文地理, 2022, 37(2): 41-49,102. WANG Yu, ZHANG Wen-ya, LIU Xiao-feng. INTERNATIONAL RIVER GOVERNANCE THROUGH THE LENS OF “HYDROSOCIAL TERRITORIES”. HUMAN GEOGRAPHY, 2022, 37(2): 41-49,102.

链接本文:

http://rwdl.xisu.edu.cn/CN/10.13959/j.issn.1003-2398.2022.02.006 或 http://rwdl.xisu.edu.cn/CN/Y2022/V37/I2/41

[1]	何大明,刘昌明,冯彦,等.中国国际河流研究进展及展望[J].地理学报,2014,69(9):1284-1294.[He Daming, Liu Changming, Feng Yan, et al. Progress and perspective of international river researches in China[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2014,69(9):1284-1294.]
[2]	杜德斌,刘承良,胡志丁,等". 亚洲水塔"变化对中国周边地缘政治环境的影响[J].世界地理研究,2020,29(2):223-231.[Du Debin, Liu Chengliang, Hu Zhiding, et al. The impact of "Asian Water Tower" change on the geopolitical environment around China[J]. World Regional Studies, 2020,29(2):223-231.]
[3]	Gleick P H. Water and conflict:Fresh water resources and international security[J]. International Security, 1993,18(1):79-112.
[4]	Barua A, Vij S, Zulfiqur R M. Powering or sharing water in the Brahmaputra River basin[J]. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 2018,34(5):829-843.
[5]	刘晓凤,张文雅,程小兰,等.跨域水治理中的尺度重构:以东江为例[J].世界地理研究,2021,30(2):297-307.[Liu Xiaofeng, Zhang Wenya, Cheng Xiaolan, et al. Rescaling of inter- jurisdictional water governance:A case study of the Dongjiang River[J]. World Regional Studies, 2021,30(2):297-307.]
[6]	Tawfik R. Beyond the river:Elite perceptions and regional cooperation in the Eastern Nile basin[J]. Water Alternatives, 2019,12(2):655-675.
[7]	Conga K, Wu F S, Mei C G. Global regime formation or complex institution building? The principled content of International river agreements[J]. International Studies Quarterly, 2006,50(2):263-285.
[8]	王丰龙,胡志丁,刘承良,等.中国政治地理与地缘政治理论研究展望:青年学者笔谈[J].世界地理研究,2020,29(2):232-251.[Wang Fenglong, Hu Zhiding, Liu Chengliang, et al. A prospect on the theoretical studies of political geography and geopolitics in China:Viewpoints from some young scholars[J]. World Regional Studies, 2020, 29(2):232-251.]
[9]	Furlong K. Hidden theories, troubled waters:International relations, the 'territorial trap', and the Southern African Development Community's transboundary waters[J]. Political Geography, 2006,25(4):438-458.
[10]	Swyngedouw E. Modernity and hybridity:Nature, regeneracionismo, and the production of the Spanish waterscape, 1890- 1930[J]. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 1999,89(3):443-465.
[11]	Budds J, Hinojosa L. Restructuring and rescaling water governance in mining contexts:The co- production of waterscapes in Peru[J]. Water Alternatives, 2012,5(1):119-137.
[12]	Beach H L, Hamner J, Hewitt J J, et al. Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Resolution:Theory, Practice, and Annotated References[M]. Tokyo:United Nations University Press, 2000:39-41.
[13]	Warner J, Mirumachi N, Farnum R L, et al. Transboundary 'hydrohegemony':10 years later[J/OL]. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews:Water, 2017,4(6):e1242. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1242.
[14]	Lowi M R. Water and Power:The Politics of a Scarce Resource in the Jordan River Basin[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1993:10.
[15]	Mirumachi N. Transboundary Water Politics in the Developing World[M]. London:Routledge, 2015:1-7.
[16]	Ratner B D. The politics of regional governance in the Mekong river basin[J]. Global Change, Peace & Security, 2003,15(1):59-76.
[17]	Han H. China, an upstream hegemon:A destabilizer for the governance of the Mekong river?[J]. Pacific Focus, 2017,32(1):30-55.
[18]	Dinar S. Assessing side-payment and cost-sharing patterns in international water agreements:The geographic and economic connection[J]. Political Geography, 2006,25(4):412-437.
[19]	Gilpin R. War and Change in World Politics[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1981:186-210.
[20]	Lindemann S. Understanding water regime formation:A research framework with lessons from Europe[J]. Global Environmental Politics, 2008,8(4):117-140.
[21]	Zeitoun M, Allan J A. Applying hegemony and power theory to transboundary water analysis[J]. Water Policy, 2008,10(S2):3-12.
[22]	Zeitoun M, Warner J. Hydro-hegemony:A framework for analysis of trans- boundary water conflicts[J]. Water Policy, 2006,8(5):435- 460.
[23]	Allan T. The Middle East Water Question:Hydropolitics and the Global Economy[M]. London:IB Tauris, 2002:270.
[24]	Warner J. Plugging the GAP Working with Buzan:the Ilisu Dam as a security issue[Z/OL]. London Water Issues Paper, 2004:1- 21. https://www.academia.edu/download/40519150/Plugging_the_GAP_Working_with_Buzan_the_20151130-6171-10c10g.pdf.
[25]	Lustick I S. Hegemony and the riddle of nationalism:The dialectics of nationalism and religion in the Middle East[J]. Logos-Anales del Seminario de Metafisica, 2002,1(3):18-44.
[26]	Biswas A K. Cooperation or conflict in transboundary water Management:Case study of South Asia[J]. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 2011,56(4):662-670.
[27]	Daoudy M. Asymmetric power:Negotiating water in the Euphrates and Tigris[J]. International Negotiation, 2009,14(2):361-391.
[28]	Cascao A E. Ethiopia-Challenges to Egyptian hegemony in the Nile basin[J]. Water Policy, 2008,10(S2):13-28.
[29]	Scott J. Weapons of the Weak:Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance[M]. Connecticut:Yale University Press, 1995:304-350.
[30]	Zawahri N A, Hensengerth O. Domestic environmental activists and the governance of the Ganges and Mekong Rivers in India and China[J]. International Environmental Agreements- Politics Law and Economics, 2012,12(3):269-298.
[31]	刘晓凤,王雨,葛岳静.环境政治中国际非政府组织的角色:基于批判地缘政治的视角[J].人文地理,2018,33(5):123-132.[Liu Xiaofeng, Wang Yu, Ge Yuejing. Roles of international Non- Governmental Organizations in global environmental politics:A critical geopolitical perspective[J]. Human Geography, 2018,33(5):123- 132.]
[32]	Warner J, Zawahri N. Hegemony and asymmetry:Multiple- chessboard games on transboundary rivers[J]. International Environmental Agreements-Politics Law and Economics, 2012,12(3):215-229.
[33]	Warner J F. Of river linkage and issue linkage:Transboundary conflict and cooperation on the river Meuse[J]. Globalizations, 2016,13(6):741-766.
[34]	Ansink E, Weikard H P. Contested water rights[J]. European Journal of Political Economy, 2009,25(2):247-260.
[35]	赵旭,王桃,周巧琳.我国国际河流水路运输资源开发的外部性及治理途径:以澜沧江-湄公河为例[J].经济问题探索,2014(11):34- 39.[Zhao Xu, Wang Tao, Zhou Qiaolin. The externality and governance approaches of international water transportation resources development in China:A case study on Lancang-Mekong River[J]. Inquiry into Economic Issues, 2014(11):34-39.]
[36]	郭延军,任娜.湄公河下游水资源开发与环境保护:各国政策取向与流域治理[J].世界经济与政治,2013(7):136-154,160.[Guo Yanjun, Ren Na. Water resources development and environmental protection in lower Mekong basin:Policy options and basin governance[J]. World Economics and Politics, 2013(7):136-154,160.]
[37]	Dombrowsky I. Revisiting the potential for benefit sharing in the management of trans-boundary rivers[J]. Water Policy, 2009,11(2):125-140.
[38]	Biswas A K. Management of international waters:Opportunities and constraints[J]. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 1999,15(4):429-441.
[39]	Global Water Partnership Technical Advisory Committee. Integrated Water Resources Management[EB/OL].[2021- 04- 30]. https://hdl.handle.net/10535/4986.
[40]	Allan A. 'Virtual water':A long term solution for water short Middle Eastern economies?[EB/OL]. (1997-09-09)[2021-04-30]. https://www.soas.ac.uk/water/publications/papers/file38347.pdf.
[41]	Biro A. Water wars by other means:Virtual water and global economic restructuring[J]. Global Environmental Politics, 2012,12(4):86-103.
[42]	冯彦,何大明.国际水法基本原则技术评注及其实施战略[J].资源科学,2002(4):91-98.[Feng Yan, He Daming. Basic principles of international water law:Technical commentary and implementing strategy[J]. Resources Science, 2002(4):91-98.]
[43]	Giordano M, Drieschova A, Duncan J, et al. A review of the evolution and state of transboundary treshwater treaties[J]. International Environmental Agreements:Politics, Law and Economics, 2013,14(3):245-264.
[44]	何大明,Hsiang-te Kung,苟俊华.国际河流水资源分配模式研究[J]. 地理学报,1999,66(S1):47-54.[He Daming, Hsiang-te Kung, Gou Junhua. Study on allocation models of water resources in international rivers[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 1999,66(S1):47-54.]
[45]	何大明,杨明,冯彦.西南国际河流水资源的合理利用与国际合作研究[J].地理学报,1999,66(S1):29- 37.[He Daming, Yang Ming, Feng Yan. Study on reasonable utilization of water resources in international rivers and international region cooperation in southwest China[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 1999,66(S1):29-37.]
[46]	Ho S. 'Big Brother, Little Brothers':Comparing China's and India's transboundary river policies[J]. Water Policy, 2016,18(1):32-49.
[47]	Lopes P D. Governing Iberian rivers:From bilateral management to common basin governance?[J]. International Environmental Agreements-Politics Law and Economics, 2012,12(3):251-268.
[48]	Menga F. Reconceptualizing hegemony:The circle of hydro-hegemony[J]. Water Policy, 2016,18(2):401-418.
[49]	Castree N. Environmental issues:Relational ontologies and hybrid politics[J]. Progress in Human Geography, 2003,27(2):203-211.
[50]	Bakker K. The limits of 'neoliberal natures':Debating green neoliberalism[J]. Progress in Human Geography, 2010,34(6):715-735.
[51]	Heynen N. Urban political ecology I[J]. Progress in Human Geography, 2014,38(4):598-604.
[52]	Castree N. False antitheses? Marxism, nature and actor- networks[J]. Antipode, 2002,34(1):111-146.
[53]	Castree N. Commodity fetishism, geographical imaginations and imaginative geographies[J]. Environment and Planning A, 2001, 33(9):1519-1525.
[54]	Blaikie P. The Political Economy of Soil Erosion in Developing Countries[M]. London:Routledge, 1985:79-94.
[55]	Norgaard R. Development Betrayed[M]. London:Routledge, 1994:29-42.
[56]	Zimmer A. Urban Political Ecology:Theoretical concepts, challenges, and suggested future directions[J]. Erdkunde, 2010,64(4):343- 354.
[57]	Swyngedouw E, Heynen N C. Urban political ecology, justice and the politics of scale[J]. Antipode, 2003,35(5):898-918.
[58]	Angelo H, Wachsmuth D. Urbanizing urban political ecology:A critique of methodological cityism[J]. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 2015,39(1):16-27.
[59]	Swyngedouw E. Power, nature and the city:The conquest of water and the political ecology of urbanization in Guayaquil, Ecuador:1880-1980[J]. Environment and Planning A, 1997,29(2):311-332.
[60]	Swyngedouw E, Kaika M, Castro E. Urban water:A political-ecology perspective[J]. Built Environment, 2002,28(2):124-137.
[61]	Latour B. We have Never been Modern[M]. Cambridge:Harvard University Press, 1993:1-55.
[62]	Haraway D. Feminism and Technoscience[M]. New York:Routledge, 1997:1-12.
[63]	Schmidt A. The Concept of Nature in Marx[M]. London & New York:Verso, 1971:92.
[64]	Swyngedouw E. The city as a hybrid:On nature, society and cyborg urbanization[J]. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 1996,7(2):65- 80.
[65]	Smith N. Uneven Development:Nature, Capital, and the Production of Space[M]. Oxford:Basil Blackwell, 1990:33-36.
[66]	Haraway D. Simians, Cyborgs and Women:The Reinvention of Nature[M]. New York:Routledge, 1991:1-70.
[67]	Swyngedouw E. Social Power and the Urbanization of Water:Flows of Power[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 2004:2-7.
[68]	Tan-Mullins M. The state and its agencies in coastal resources management:The political ecology of fisheries management in Pattani, southern Thailand[J]. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 2007,28(3):348-361.
[69]	Molle F, Tira F, Philippe F. Introduction:Changing waterscapes in the Mekong region-historical background and context[M]//Molle F, Tira F, Mira K. Contested Waterscapes in the Mekong Region:Hydropower, Livelihoods and Governance. London:Routledge, 2012:23-42.
[70]	Urban F, Siciliano G, Nordensvard J. China's dam- builders:Their role in transboundary river management in South-East Asia[J]. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 2018,34(5):747-770.
[71]	Mirumachi N. Securitising shared waters:An analysis of the hydropolitical context of the Tanakpur Barrage project between Nepal and India[J]. Geographical Journal, 2013,179(4):309-319.
[72]	Wittfogel K A. Oriental Despotism:A Comparative Study of Total Power[M]. New Haven:Yale University Press, 1957:413-427.
[73]	Linton J, Budds J. The hydrosocial cycle:Defining and mobilizing a relational- dialectical approach to water[J]. Geoforum, 2014,57:170-180.
[74]	Boelens R, Hoogesteger J, Swyngedouw E, et al. Hydrosocial territories:A political ecology perspective[J]. Water International, 2016, 41(1):1-14.
[75]	刘云刚,王丰龙.政治地理学中的领域概念辨析[J].人文地理,2019, 34(1):14-19.[Liu Yungang, Wang Fenglong. Decomposing the concept of territory in political geography[J]. Human Geography, 2019, 34(1):14-19.]
[76]	胡志丁,王丰龙,安宁,等.洋能否为中用?西方政治地理与地缘政治发展的借鉴与反思[J].地理研究,2020,39(2):217-231.[Hu Zhiding, Wang Fenglong, An Ning, et al. Can foreign theories be used in China? Reflections and references on the development of western political geography and geopolitics[J]. Geographical Research, 2020,39(2):217-231.]
[77]	Agnew J. The territorial trap:The geographical assumptions of international relations theory[J]. Review of International Political Economy, 1994,1(1):53-80.
[78]	Romano T S. Democratizing discourses:Conceptions of ownership, autonomy and 'the state' in Nicaragua's rural water governance[J]. Water International, 2016,41(1):74-90.
[79]	Hommes L, Boelens R. Urbanizing rural waters:Rural-urban water transfers and the reconfiguration of hydrosocial territories in Lima[J].Political Geography, 2017,57:71-80.
[80]	Usher M. Territory incognita[J]. Progress in Human Geography, 2019,44(6):1019-1046.
[81]	Hommes L, Boelens R, Maat H. Contested hydrosocial territories and disputed water governance:Struggles and competing claims over the Ilisu Dam development in southeastern Turkey[J]. Geoforum, 2016,71:9-20.
[82]	Hirsch P. The shifting regional geopolitics of Mekong dams[J]. Political Geography, 2016,51:63-74.
[83]	Hoogesteger J, Boelens R, Baud M. Territorial pluralism:Water users' multi-scalar struggles against state ordering in Ecuador's highlands[J]. Water International, 2016,41(1):91-106.
[84]	Lin S, Grundy-Warr C. One bridge, two towns and three countries:Anticipatory geopolitics in the Greater Mekong Subregion[J]. Geopolitics, 2012,17(4):952-979.
[85]	Ioris A A R. Water scarcity and the exclusionary city:The struggle for water justice in Lima, Peru[J]. Water International, 2016,41(1):125-139.
[86]	Seemann M. Inclusive recognition politics and the struggle over hydrosocial territories in two Bolivian highland communities[J]. Water International, 2016,41(1):157-172.
[87]	Hommes L, Boelens R, Harris L M, et al. Rural-urban water struggles:Urbanizing hydrosocial territories and evolving connections, discourses and identities[J]. Water International, 2019,44(2):81-94.
[88]	Götz J M, Middleton C. Ontological politics of hydrosocial territories in the Salween River basin, Myanmar/Burma[J/OL]. Political Geography, 2020,78:102115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2019.102115.