热带地理 ›› 2021, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (5): 881-891.doi: 10.13284/j.cnki.rddl.003389

• 综述 •    下一篇

西方尺度研究进展:概念化框架、实践路径及启示

后雪峰a,b(), 陶伟a,b()   

  1. a.华南师范大学,地理科学学院,广州 510631
    b.华南师范大学,粤港澳大湾区村镇可持续发展研究中心,广州 510631
  • 收稿日期:2020-10-20 修回日期:2020-12-18 出版日期:2021-09-05 发布日期:2021-09-22
  • 通讯作者: 陶伟 E-mail:hxuefeng58@yeah.net;748954219@qq.com
  • 作者简介:后雪峰(1987— ),男,湖北随州人,博士生,主要从事社会文化地理学方向研究,(E-mail)hxuefeng58@yeah.net
  • 基金资助:
    国家社会科学基金重大项目(18ZDA161)

Progress of Western Scale Research: Conceptualization Framework, Practice Approach and Enlightenment

Xuefeng Houa,b(), Wei Taoa,b()   

  1. a.School of Geography, Greater Bay Area, South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510631, China
    b.Center for Sustainable Development of Villages and Towns in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao, Greater Bay Area, South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510631, China
  • Received:2020-10-20 Revised:2020-12-18 Online:2021-09-05 Published:2021-09-22
  • Contact: Wei Tao E-mail:hxuefeng58@yeah.net;748954219@qq.com

摘要:

通过梳理西方尺度研究的内涵和主要内容,发现尺度主要包含尺度本体论、尺度隐喻和尺度实践3个主要要素。尺度的本体论认为尺度是静态的等级化的物质实体,尺度的隐喻体现在尺度可通过话语进行多样化的解构和表达,尺度实践表示尺度通过不同行动者间的互动进行社会建构以实现尺度的再创造。尺度的3个要素之间既有统一性又有对立性:在统一性上,尺度本体论为尺度隐喻与尺度实践的实现创造了前提,尺度隐喻及尺度实践发展了尺度本体论;在对立性上,尺度本体论是实在论立场,尺度隐喻和尺度实践是建构论的产物。西方尺度研究主要经历了2个典型的阶段:将尺度物化为固定的空间实体;不同行动主体运用尺度进行社会实践或话语表达。这启示中国化的尺度研究需要将两者结合起来,既要承认物质空间实体的作用,也要接受行动者的能动性,将尺度看作是人、物相互作用的关系网络。文章展示了尺度概念化框架并实现了尺度的应用路径归纳,具体体现在尺度化、尺度解构及尺度政治3个方面。同时提出将资源配置效果纳入到尺度实践的分析要素之中以实现尺度的政治经济,这不仅扩充了尺度的理论内涵,还增加了尺度的实践应用效果和范围。

关键词: 尺度, 概念化框架, 尺度本体论, 尺度隐喻, 尺度实践, 尺度的政治经济

Abstract:

Scale is an important concept in geography. The evolution of scale connotation is closely related to the spatial organizational change in Western capitalist economic activities. With the scale shift of Western human geography, it has changed from being static and bounded by spatial entities to one characterized by process, evolution, dynamic social practices, and discourse representation. The Western scale has led to rapid developments in theory and practical applications. The conclusion of the Western scale is conducive to the dialog with Western scale research and is also of certain significance to formulating Chinese scale research . Taking Web of Science core data sets and Google academic literature as data sources, we retrieve keywords such as "scale" and "politics of scale," download relevant literature, and analyze and summarize it to obtain the background, focus, evolution process, and development direction of Western scale research. By clarifying the connotation and main content of Western scale research, it is found that 1) scale includes three main elements: theorizing scale, rhetoric of scale, and scales of praxis. The ontology of scale holds that it is a static hierarchical structure. The metaphor of scale is embodied in the fact that it can be deconstructed and expressed in a variety of ways through discourse. "Scales of praxis" means that scale is constructed in society through the interaction between different actors to re-create it. 2) There is unity and opposition between the three elements of the measure. In terms of unity, the theorizing scale creates the premise for the rhetoric of scale and the scales of praxis, and the rhetoric of scale and the scales of praxis develop the theorizing scale. In terms of opposites, the theorizing scale is the realist standpoint, while the rhetoric of scale and the scales of praxis are the products of constructivism. 3) The core of scale practice is scale politics, which focuses on the political game between different individuals or groups and emphasizes interests and efficiency, and easily causes negative social externalities and imbalances in resource allocation. It is necessary to introduce a third party to intervene, or regulate politics of scale, to realize the political economy of scale. Western scale research has experienced two typical stages, which have been fiercely debated: A. To materialize the scale into a fixed spatial entity; B. Different actors use scale to carry out social practice or discourse expression. In essence, the two stages are not completely separated in terms of time and main viewpoints. They mainly concentrate on the difference in focus, and there is a relationship between inheritance and complementarity. This indicates that the scale research of Sinicization needs to combine the two—to not only recognize the role of material space entities, but also accept the initiative of actors—and to regard scale as the relationship network of human and material interaction. In the specific application of scale, we should first divide the material spatial entity and scale it, subsequently analyzing the social facts shaped by it; then, one needs to analyze how the actors use discourse expression or political strategies to deconstruct and construct the scale, fully considering the possibility that individual interests infringe on social interests in the scale practice, and introduce the intermediary mechanism to intervene therein. This paper presents the conceptual framework of scale and realizes the induction of the application path of scale, which is embodied in three aspects: scale, scale deconstruction, and scale politics. At the same time, it proposes incorporating the effect of resource allocation into the analysis of scales of praxis to realize the political economy of scale, which not only expands the theoretical connotation of scale, but also increases the practical applicability and scope of scale.

Key words: scale, conceptualization framework, theorizing scale, rhetoric of scale, scales of praxis, political economy of scale

中图分类号: 

  • K901