地理研究

地理研究 ›› 2019, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (6): 1322-1332.doi: 10.11821/dlyj020181365

• 专栏：文化传承与空间治理 • 上一篇    下一篇

空间治理的社区实践与正当性建构——以浙江省永嘉县芙蓉村传统村落保护为例

翁时秀1,2(), 卢建鸣1,2   

  1. 1. 中山大学地理科学与规划学院,广州 510275
    2. 中山大学旅游发展与规划研究中心,广州 510275
  • 收稿日期:2018-12-13 修回日期:2019-02-25 出版日期:2019-06-20 发布日期:2019-06-12
  • 作者简介:

    作者简介：翁时秀（1984-）,男,浙江瑞安人,博士,副教授,硕士生导师,主要研究方向为地理学思想史、地理学理论与方法、旅游地理学。E-mail: wengshx8@mail.sysu.edu.cn

  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目（41201139）;国家社会科学基金重大项目（15ZDB118）

The local practices and legitimacy construction in spatial governance: A case study of traditional village protection in Furong village, Zhejiang province

Shixiu WENG1,2(), Jianming LU1,2   

  1. 1. School of Geography and Planning of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China
    2. Center for Tourism Planning & Research of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China;
  • Received:2018-12-13 Revised:2019-02-25 Online:2019-06-20 Published:2019-06-12

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

摘要：

空间治理是一个复杂的政治过程。以浙江省永嘉县芙蓉村的传统村落保护为例,通过叙事研究展示了地方特性对空间治理实践的影响,探讨了空间治理正当性建构的困难及可能的解决思路。研究认为：① 空间治理的宏观意义与被治理社区地方性知识之间的冲突可能引发政策和行政的正当性危机。② 不同政策措施对于正当性的建构有不同作用,对抗性措施必然引发正当性危机,调和性措施往往难以有效建立正当性,共赢性措施是最佳之选,但其对于正当性的调节效果受限于外部条件,各种政策措施在地方特性的影响下均面临失效风险。③ 空间治理正当性的建立首先需要正确把握地方性政治互动方式,理解正当性在地方特性作用下得以建立或趋于消解的原因,在此基础上根据情境适当调用对抗性政策措施、调和性政策措施和共赢性政策措施,从而建立良好的意义沟通和平等协商机制,使正当性得以长久维系。

关键词: 空间治理, 正当性, 地方特性, 传统村落保护

Abstract:

Through narrative research, by taking Furong village as a case, this paper probes into the influence of localities on the practices of spatial governance, the difficulties of the construction of the legitimacy of spatial governance and its possible solutions. The findings of this paper are: (1) From the perspective of political process, an important issue of spatial governance is how to pass on the meaning of policy to the residents in the governed space and other stakeholders. The meaning of policy is constructed by the policymakers on the basis of the overall optimization of the entire space they govern, so a complete understanding of policy implications requires a total viewport. However, it is difficult for ordinary residents who live in a specific space for a long time to understand the overall meaning of the policy, because their vision is often confined to very small living space. The mismatch between the two could trigger a legitimate crisis of administration and policy. (2) Different policy measures have different relations with the construction of legitimacy. Confrontational policy measures inevitably lead to a legitimate crisis; it is difficult for the harmonic policy measures to establish legitimacy effectively; and the effect of co-win policy measures is limited to the external conditions in the construction of legitimacy. Therefore, the construction of legitimacy of spatial governance may be difficult in reality, and all policy measures may be at risk of failure under the influence of local characteristics. (3) But in real politics, it is still possible to establish a good communication mechanism of meaning, so as to realize the local embedding of policy meaning. The correct understanding of the local political interaction mode is the premise; the appropriate call to the confrontational policy measures, the harmonic policy measures and the co-win policy measures in the specific situation is its means; and its ultimate goal is to correctly grasp the conditions between the local construction and dissolution of legitimacy, so that the construction of legitimacy can be sustained for a long time. Based on the discussion of localities and legitimacy construction in spatial governance in China's rural situation, this paper examines Habermas' legitimacy theory and its possible adjustment that needs to make in the application of Chinese countryside. And the analyses of the predicament of legitimacy construction from policy meanings and policy measures refined the research on the legitimation strategy.

Key words: spatial governance, legitimacy, locality, traditional village protection