地理科学进展 ›› 2017, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (12): 1500-1509.doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2017.12.005

• 专辑|尺度 • 上一篇    下一篇

尺度政治理论框架

王丰龙1,2(), 刘云刚3()   

  1. 1. 华东师范大学中国现代城市研究中心,上海 200062
    2. 华东师范大学城市发展研究院,上海 200062
    3. 中山大学地理科学与规划学院,广东省城市化与地理环境空间模拟重点实验室,广州 510275
  • 出版日期:2017-12-20 发布日期:2017-12-20
  • 作者简介:

    作者简介:王丰龙(1988-),男,内蒙古赤峰市人,博士,讲师、晨晖学者,主要从事政治地理学、幸福地理学、计量地理学等研究,E-mail: wfldragon@yahoo.com

  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(41271165,41571130,41601144)

Towards a theoretical framework of 'politics of scale'

Fenglong WANG1,2(), Yungang LIU3()   

  1. 1. The Center for Modern Chinese City Studies, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China
    2. Institute of Urban Development, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China
    3. School of Geography and Planning, Guangdong Key Laboratory for Urbanization and Geo-simulation, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China
  • Online:2017-12-20 Published:2017-12-20
  • Supported by:
    National Natural Science Foundation of China, No.41271165, No.41571130, No.41601144

摘要:

目前国内外对尺度及尺度政治的讨论十分热烈。本文在整合已有研究的基础上,基于主体与结构视角提出了一个三阶段的尺度政治理论框架,指出政治过程和权力结构的尺度化是尺度政治的前提,尺度重构是尺度政治的核心机制,权力关系重构是尺度政治的目的和结果。具体而言,尺度化涉及物质空间、组织空间和表达空间的大小、层级、范围等结构关系;尺度重构包含由尺度上推、下推、重组,以及上述不同尺度形式构成的3×3矩阵;不同政治主体会采用特定尺度重构策略改变权力关系,并造成一系列尺度关系和合法性的悖论。基于以上认识,本文进一步讨论了中西方关于尺度和尺度政治的认知差异和未来值得深入研究的课题。

关键词: 尺度化, 尺度重构, 尺度政治, 政治过程, 权力关系

Abstract:

Since Neil Smith initiated the arguments of "politics of scale" based on his studies of the homeless, scale has become a hot topic in political geography. However, it is a pity that a comprehensive theoretical model of "politics of scale" has still not been developed despite of a large number of debates on the concept of scale itself and various empirical studies conducted in different cultures. In this article, we propose a three-step theoretical model of "politics of scale" based on the existing literature, especially the structural and post-structural perspectives to power, the second-abstraction view of scale, and the large volume of empirical studies on scalar politics. We argue that "politics of scale" is pillared on the processes of scalization, rescaling, and articulation of scale with power relations. Specifically, in "politics of scale" power relations are embedded in various forms of scale that can be mainly decomposed into size in material space, level in organizational space, and scope in discursive space. The existing scale frames or scalar relations are reshaped or rearticulated by different political actors. A three by three matrix is developed to incorporate the dazzling strategies of rescaling in terms of scaling-up, scaling-down, and rescaling. Different political actors will adopt different rescaling strategies to transform the power relations and legitimate/problematize governmental rationality according to their own interests. Several basic laws and paradoxes of "politics of scale" are summarized. The specific characteristics of "politics of scale" in China compared with its Western counterparts are also summarized, including the dominance of administrative level, underdevelopment of scaled discourses, and decisive roles of the Internet and international intervention. We also point out some issues worth further exploration, such as the problem of political justice in "politics of scale" and extension of the "geographical meaning" of scale in political geography. This article may contribute to the growing literature on scale and Chinese political geographical studies.

Key words: scalization, rescaling, politics of scale, political process, power relations