【作者】 李华；

【导师】 叶敬忠；

【作者基本信息】 中国农业大学 ， 农村发展与管理， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 人类虽然能够利用技术手段增加水资源的获取量,但是无法增加水资源的自然总量,如何对有限的水资源进行分配关系到每个人的生存利益。本文通过人文主义方法论指导下的实地研究方式,对宋村场域内的水分配政治进行了研究,旨在揭示市场化背景下支配村庄水分配的机制和逻辑及其背后的价值和理念,最后对主流的水短缺叙事以及背后被遮蔽的水分配政治问题进行了反思。研究发现,在村庄生产用水界面,依托当地政府招商引资优惠政策进入村庄的选铁厂,作为新的用水主体在铁粉加工过程中对村庄水资源的圈占导致村庄水资源的分配结构出现了重组,选铁厂利用自己的政治经济优势地位获取了村民的水控制权,当地人的具体水权是被边缘化的。选铁厂在村庄的圈水行为实质是一种隐性水攫取。水资源攫取现象归根及底源于资本和村民之间不平等的权力关系,也正是这种迎合资本利益取向的不平等结构关系最终形塑了村庄的水资源分配格局以及地方招商式“发展”价值链中的赢家和输家。在村庄的生活用水界面,村民过去围绕水获取的合作传统出现了式微,钻井和抽水技术的排斥性以及水获取方式的商品化弱化了村庄的社群性合作并推动着村庄的水分化。个体化作为一种新的价值观念为村民之间的水分化提供了合理性。消费主义在村庄的兴起使得有经济条件且有稳定水源村民的用水量不断增加,挤压着无稳定水源村民的水获取空间,进一步强化了村庄的水分化。在关于水分配问题的探讨和表述中,水短缺往往作为不受质疑的前提和主导话语而出现,但水短缺并不必然意味着资源性短缺,其本质是一个关乎分配的政治问题。水短缺的“技术说”将水短缺问题化约为技术问题,但这种工具理性背后忽略的是技术本身所承载的价值、支配水分配的社会权力关系以及被形塑的水分配过程,因此是一种去政治化叙事。水短缺的“商品说”提倡通过市场来解决水分配问题,实质是资本借助水危机和水短缺叙事的遮掩,利用商品的概念框架通过对自然公共资源的圈占和掠夺以完成积累的需要。在由市场所主导的水分配格局中,作为商品的水只流向有支付能力的人,穷人容易被边缘化。作为一种生存权,水权的分配公平与否不仅关系到人的生计,更关乎人的生存。水资源关涉到的是公众的根本利益,水资源供应和分配问题应该放到公共空间中经由公众充分讨论再进行决策。政府在保证公众知情权的同时,应该赋予公众更多的话语权和参与决策权及监督权。保障每个公民享有平等的水权应被纳入政府水分配政策的理念之中。发展政策决策者需谨慎对待农村工业化的“双赢”期望以及作为解决表征性环境问题“药方”的生态补偿机制,不能切断作为农民生存之基的具体水权以享受GDP的狂欢。更多还原

【Abstract】 Although the access to water could be improved, the amount of water in nature is finite. The distribution of finite water does matter all the lives. This research is a qualitative study. Based on fieldwork in Song Village, this study aims to disclose the mechanism and values underlying the process of water distribution in the village and further reflect the narratives of water scarcity, trying to unveil the politics of water distribution behind those narratives.The research has found that:in the interface of water use for production, the mining factories, which enter into the village under the favor of preferential policies provided by local government for economic growth, have reshaped the structure of water distribution when enclosing water for iron power production. Due to the power asymmetry, mining factories become winners and grab water from local people with the latter marginalized in the restructured water distribution and being losers. In the interface of water use for daily life, the tradition of cooperation in water access has been weakened and resulted in water differentiation within the community driven by the exclusion of technology for pumps and well digging and the commodification of water access. The value of individualization has justified the water differentiation which is further reinforced by the wave of consumerism in the village.The discourse of water scarcity is seldom questioned in the debate around water distribution. In fact, water scarcity is a political matter concerning distribution. Hydraulic technology is hailed as a method to solve water scarcity. In this narrative, what is neglected is the value underlying the technology and the social relations reshaping water distribution. The other narrative of water commodification claims to let market dominate water distribution. Under pretexts of water scarcity and crisis, what water commodification meets is the demand of capital accumulation through the dispossession of nature.Water is closely related to public interest. How to distribute and provide water should be fully discussed in public. Government should not only guarantee the public’s access to information concerning water distribution and supply but also discursive and decisive power. As a part of right to life, whether water right is equally distributed matters both the life and livelihood of the public. Policy makers should be careful about the win-win expectation of rural industrialization which often presents the picture of winners and losers in practice. The concretized water rights of local people should be guaranteed to avoid being grabbed for economic growth under the name of development.更多还原