原文出處Beckert S, Bosma U, Schneider M,
Vanhaute E. Commodity frontiers and the transformation of the global
countryside: a research agenda. Journal of Global History. 2021;16(3):435-450.
doi:10.1017/S1740022820000455
|
The history of the making of the modern
world is a history of the expansion of commodity frontiers, a historical
process so spatially, socially and structurally all-encompassing that it
still awaits its persuasive analysis. Over the past 600 years, since the
inception of the capitalist revolution, these commodity frontiers – processes
and sites of the incorporation of resources (land, energy, raw materials,
knowledge and labour) – have moved at ever-accelerating speed across vast
areas of the globe, incorporating ever more land, labour and natural
resources. Flatlands, valleys, forests, marine spaces and mountains have been
farmed, logged, fished and quarried to provide raw materials and food for a
rapidly urbanizing and industrializing global economy, extractive processes
that have been crucial drivers of capitalism’s expansion. |
現代世界形成的歷史是一部商品邊界擴張的歷史，是一個在空間、社會和結構上包羅萬象的歷史過程，至今仍等待著令人信服的分析。過去六百年來，自資本主義革命開始以來，這些商品前沿——資源（土地、能源、原材料、知識和勞動力）融合的過程和地點——以不斷加速的速度跨越了廣闊的領域。全球範圍內，納入了越來越多的土地、勞動力和自然資源。平原、山谷、森林、海洋空間和山脈被耕種、伐木、捕魚和採石，為快速城市化和工業化的全球經濟提供原料和食物，而採掘過程是資本主義擴張的關鍵驅動力。 |
|
Consider a product as common and banal as
sugar. In Europe, it began its commodity life as a luxury product available
in small quantities to the very richest – the Parisian aristocracy or
Venetian merchants. By the fifteenth century, sugar production grew. As
European power expanded into the Atlantic, Italian and Iberian capitalists
turned the Canary Islands, Madeira and São Tomé into vast sugar estates,
drawing on dispossessed land and enslaved labour to set in motion a machinery
of accumulation. A century later, Flemish and Dutch capitalists moved this
slavery-sugar complex to Brazil and then the Caribbean, turning one island
after another into sugar-producing slave-labour camps. When
mid-seventeenth-century British traveller Richard Ligon looked at one such
island, Barbados, he was awed by the ‘vast Revenue this little spot of ground
can produce.’Footnote 1 So
much wealth had been accumulated, yet, as he noted, it had been accumulated
‘without the help of Magic or Enchantment.’Footnote 2 |
考慮像糖一樣常見且平庸的產品。在歐洲，它的商品生命始於一種奢侈品，僅向最富有的人——巴黎貴族或威尼斯商人——提供少量。到了十五世紀，糖產量有所增加。隨著歐洲勢力擴展到大西洋，義大利和伊比利亞資本家將加那利群島、馬德拉群島和聖多美變成了巨大的糖業莊園，利用被剝奪的土地和奴役勞動力啟動了累積機制。一個世紀後，佛蘭德斯和荷蘭資本家將這個奴隸製糖業複合體轉移到巴西，然後是加勒比地區，將一個又一個島嶼變成了生產糖的奴隸勞工營。當 17 世紀中葉的英國旅行家理查德·利貢(Richard Ligon)考察巴貝多島時，他對「這一小塊土地所能產生的巨額收入」感到敬畏。註腳 1 如此多的財富已經累積起來，然而，正如他所指出的，這些財富是在「沒有魔法或結界的幫助下」累積起來的。註腳 2 |
|
It was not magic that turned dense
forests into cane producing plantations at awe-inspiring speed, but enslaved
workers and capital-rich merchants and planters. After Barbados, the sugar
frontier moved to Jamaica, Saint-Domingue and Louisiana, with Cuba, by the
nineteenth century, the most productive sugar island in the world, the one
that married the most modern technologies, steam engines, to the most violent
system of labour mobilization, slavery. At the same
time, Dutch colonial administrators began turning Java into yet another major
sugar producer, just after Chinese capitalists had transformed their newly
acquired island of Taiwan into a significant source of sugar for its domestic
markets. Then, in the nineteenth century, as the
Caribbean sugar frontier faced the emancipation of its workers, new virgin
sugar territories such as Mauritius, Guyana, Réunion and Fiji arose, worked
by indentured Indian and Chinese labourers producing for global markets.
Later that century, beet sugar began being produced on yet another commodity
frontier in the temperate zones of Europe and North America, one that used
new systems of peasant labour. And the movement continues: huge sugar
frontiers are being created in western Brazil, powered by transnational
corporations, including giant German and French beet sugar producers, marked
by a high degree of vertical integration and deep entanglements with finance
capital. More than just a source of calories, the vastly increased sugar
supply is now being used to make ethanol, produced and sold as ‘green’ or
‘sustainable’ bio fuel. |
以令人驚嘆的速度將茂密的森林變成甘蔗種植園的並不是魔法，而是奴役了工人以及資本雄厚的商人和種植園主。繼巴貝多之後，製糖前緣轉移到了牙買加、聖多明哥和路易斯安那，到了十九世紀，古巴已成為世界上產量最高的製糖島，該島將最現代的技術、蒸汽機與最暴力的制度結合起來勞動力動員、奴役。同時，就在中國資本家將新收購的台灣島轉變為國內市場糖的重要來源之後，荷蘭殖民統治者開始將爪哇島變成另一個主要的糖生產國。然後，在十九世紀，當加勒比海糖業前線面臨工人的解放時，毛里求斯、圭亞那、留尼汪島和斐濟等新的糖業原始地區興起，由印度和中國的契約勞工為全球市場生產。在那個世紀後期，甜菜糖開始在歐洲和北美溫帶地區的另一個商品前沿生產，該前沿使用了新的農民勞動體系。這項運動仍在繼續：在跨國公司的推動下，巴西西部正在創建巨大的糖業前沿，其中包括德國和法國的大型甜菜糖生產商，其特點是高度的垂直一體化以及與金融資本的深度糾纏。糖的供應量大幅增加，不僅是卡路里的來源，現在也被用來製造乙醇，作為「綠色」或「永續」生物燃料生產和銷售。 |
|
Soy, another important contemporary
commodity frontier and source of plant-based fuels, has a shorter but no less
volatile history. In the past 60 years, global soy production has increased
by a stunning 1000%. By 2018/19, the world produced 360 million tons of soy
on more than 125 million hectares of land, or more than three times the
surface area of the Netherlands.Footnote 3 Of
ancient Chinese origins, soy exploded across the globe in the twentieth
century, led by state-sponsored agricultural policies and North
Atlantic-based transnational agribusiness firms, mainly in the USA, which
produced the majority of the world’s soy into the 1990s. Since then,
businesses have pushed new soy frontiers into the southern cone of Latin
America – Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil – where today collectively more than
half of all soybeans are grown. Vast areas of forest and cerrado (savannah)
have been ploughed under, and helped by chemistry, genetics and agricultural
machinery, turned into exceedingly productive fields. In the meantime, soy
consumption has pivoted to China, which now accounts for almost two-thirds of
the global soy trade. As elsewhere, soy in China is used principally as
livestock feed, powering an expansion in Chinese pork production and
underwriting a massive global increase in meat consumption. |
大豆是當代另一個重要的大宗商品領域和植物性燃料的來源，其歷史較短，但波動性卻同樣大。過去 60 年來，全球大豆產量增加了驚人的
1000%。截至 2018/19 年，全球在超過 1.25 億公頃的土地上生產了 3.6 億噸大豆，面積是荷蘭表面積的三倍多。註腳 3 大豆起源於中國古代，在國家農業政策和北大西洋跨國農業綜合企業（主要是美國）的引領下，二十世紀在全球範圍內爆發，進入 20 世紀 90 年代，美國生產了世界上大部分大豆。從那時起，企業將新的大豆領域推向拉丁美洲南錐體——阿根廷、巴拉圭和巴西——如今，這些地區種植的大豆總量佔總產量的一半以上。大片森林和塞拉多（草原）地區經過翻耕，並在化學、遺傳學和農業機械的幫助下，變成了生產力極高的田地。同時，大豆消費已轉向中國，目前中國佔全球大豆貿易量的近三分之二。與其他地方一樣，中國的大豆主要用作牲畜飼料，推動了中國豬肉生產的擴張，並支撐了全球肉類消費的大幅增長。 |
|
Soy and sugar are just two examples of
the many commodity frontiers that have moved across the globe in the past six
centuries. There are many more: coffee relocated from its ancient home on the
Arabian Peninsula to Java; from there to the Caribbean, then, in the
nineteenth century, to Brazil and Central and East Africa, where it is now
considered a ‘traditional’ crop. Cotton, the fuel of the Industrial
Revolution, migrated from its ancient homes in South Asia, Africa and Central
America first into the Caribbean and Brazil, through a period of wild
expansion in the USA, and then, coming full circle, back to Egypt, western
India, West Africa and Central Asia. When copper started to feed the Second
Industrial Revolution, its mining frontier travelled from Europe to Chile,
the Congo and Michigan. Palm oil moved from West Africa to Southeast Asia,
tea from China to India, wheat from its ancient homes in the Fertile Crescent
into the vast steppes of eastern Europe to Argentina and the American Midwest
and coal from Europe to North America, Russia, China, India and Australia.
Huge territories on all continents have seen their ecologies and societies
radically reconfigured by the incursion of new commodity frontiers, outside
capital, migrant workers and innovative technologies. Millions of people have
laboured on these commodity frontiers, often under coercion, and huge wealth
has streamed from fields and mines into the coffers of capital-rich
urbanites, while provisioning industrial workers with food, and machines with
supplies. In the process, native peoples have been dispossessed of land and
rights, and the countryside has been endlessly reconfigured into a source for
global capitalist growth. |
大豆和糖只是過去六個世紀中在全球範圍內移動的許多商品前沿的兩個例子。還有更多：咖啡從阿拉伯半島的古老故鄉遷移到爪哇；從那裡到加勒比海，然後在十九世紀，到巴西和中非和東非，現在它被認為是一種「傳統」作物。棉花作為工業革命的燃料，首先從南亞、非洲和中美洲的古老家園遷移到加勒比海和巴西，經歷了一段在美國的瘋狂擴張期，然後繞了一圈又回到了埃及，印度西部、西非和中亞。當銅開始為第二次工業革命提供動力時，其採礦前沿從歐洲轉移到智利、剛果和密西根州。棕櫚油從西非運往東南亞，茶葉從中國運往印度，小麥從新月沃地的古老故鄉運往東歐廣闊的草原，運往阿根廷和美國中西部，煤炭從歐洲運往北美、俄羅斯、中國、印度和澳洲。由於新商品前沿、外部資本、移工和創新技術的入侵，各大洲的廣大領土的生態和社會都發生了根本性的重組。數百萬人在這些商品前沿工作，往往是在脅迫下，巨額財富從田野和礦山流入資本豐富的城市居民的金庫，同時為產業工人提供食物，為機器提供物資。在這個過程中，原住民的土地和權利被剝奪，農村被不斷地重新配置為全球資本主義成長的來源。 |
|
Crucially, commodity frontiers are
variable in terms of place and commodity, and they change over time. In 1700,
for example, most cotton was grown by peasant producers on land they owned or
rented, then sold to merchant middlemen. In 1800, most cotton traded on
global markets was grown by enslaved cultivators on land taken from
indigenous inhabitants; enslavement and possession both funded by European
metropolitan capital. Another 100 years later, in 1900, sharecroppers and tenant
farmers drawing on European capital and enabled by massive state-directed
infrastructure projects and legal interventions produced cotton for global
markets. There was also significant diversity within given moments in time.
In 1800, for instance, sugar was produced in some regions of the world by
enslaved workers, in others by peasant cultivators and elsewhere by wage
workers. |
至關重要的是，商品前沿在地點和商品方面都是可變的，並且會隨著時間而變化。例如，在 1700 年，大多數棉花是由農民生產者在他們擁有或租用的土地上種植的，然後賣給商業中間商。 1800 年，全球市場上交易的大部分棉花都是由奴隸種植者在從原住民手中奪取的土地上種植的；奴役和占有都是由歐洲大都市資本資助的。又過了 100 年，即 1900 年，佃農和佃農利用歐洲資本，並在國家指導的大規模基礎設施項目和法律干預的支持下，為全球市場生產棉花。在特定時刻也存在著顯著的多樣性。例如，1800 年，世界上一些地區的糖是由奴隸工人生產的，其他地區則由農民生產，而其他地區則由僱用工人生產。 |
|
The concept of commodity frontiers is a
powerful lens through which to analyse capitalism’s history. It helps us
understand on an empirical and conceptual level how ongoing incorporations of
new reservoirs of labour, land and nature have constituted capitalism’s
extraordinary dynamics – especially its ability to produce ever more goods.
Focusing on the long history of these commodity frontiers allows us to
analyse how frontier expansion has generated shifting sets of seemingly
localized activities to secure access to labour, land and nature for
globalized commodity production, helping us come to terms with the diversity
of outcomes at any given moment and their shift over time. Seeing how
commodity frontiers have moved for centuries, taking on very different
characteristics – transitions marked by booms and busts, inherent ecological
and social limits including resistance, and altered by the very
contradictions they produced – let us better understand some of the
fundamental dynamics of capitalism and its connection to and subsumption of
new spaces, new countrysides and new forms of nature. And, crucially, looking
at commodity frontiers makes it strikingly clear that it is impossible to fully understand
capitalism without thinking just as much about the countryside as about
cities, about agriculture as about industry. |
商品前沿的概念是分析資本主義歷史的有力鏡頭。它幫助我們在經驗和概念層面上理解新的勞動力、土地和自然資源的不斷融合如何構成了資本主義的非凡動力——尤其是其生產更多商品的能力。關注這些商品邊界的悠久歷史使我們能夠分析邊界擴張如何產生一系列看似本地化的活動，以確保全球化商品生產獲得勞動力、土地和自然，幫助我們接受任何時候結果的多樣性。給定的時刻及其隨時間的變化。了解幾個世紀以來商品邊界如何變化，呈現出截然不同的特徵——以繁榮和蕭條為標誌的轉變、包括阻力在內的固有生態和社會限制，並因它們產生的矛盾而改變——讓我們更能理解資本主義的一些基本動力及其與新空間、新鄉村和新自然形式的連結和包容。而且，至關重要的是，審視商品前沿可以清楚地表明，如果不同樣思考農村和城市、農業和工業，就不可能完全理解資本主義。 |
|
Commodity frontiers are core constituents
of the modern world. Understanding how and why they have expanded, moved and
adapted over time is thus a key step in a better understanding and analysis
of the global history of capitalism. But it includes great challenges: how to
account for the enormous variety and specificity of actors and places
involved in this history, the dizzying number of changes that have taken
place as well as their almost unfathomable scale, without losing sight of the
broad movements of global capitalism and its systemic transformations? It is
to this fundamental social sciences challenge that global history can
contribute crucial insights. |
商品前沿是現代世界的核心組成部分。因此，了解它們如何以及為何隨著時間的推移而擴展、移動和適應，是更好地理解和分析資本主義全球歷史的關鍵一步。但它也面臨著巨大的挑戰：如何解釋這段歷史中所涉及的參與者和地點的巨大多樣性和特殊性、已經發生的令人眼花繚亂的變化及其幾乎深不可測的規模，同時又不忽視全球廣泛的運動資本主義及其係統性變革？全球歷史可以為這項基本的社會科學挑戰貢獻重要的見解。 |
|
Capitalism and commodity frontiers |
資本主義和商品前沿 |
|
Considering the spectacular rise in the
growing of agricultural commodities and the mining of minerals in the past
centuries, and the stunning and ongoing social and environmental effects of
their production and circulation, it is not surprising that many scholars
from a variety of disciplines have tried to grasp the underlying mechanisms
of commodity frontier expansion. |
考慮到過去幾個世紀農產品種植和礦產開採的驚人增長，以及其生產和流通所產生的令人震驚且持續的社會和環境影響，許多來自不同學科的學者試圖研究這一問題也就不足為奇了。把握商品前緣擴張的根本機制。 |
|
Economists have contributed much to our
understanding of these issues, especially their discussion of whether and to
what extent capitalism can resolve the social and ecological crises it has
created. We learn from Edward Barbier’s monumental Scarcity and
Frontiers that over the past centuries, some commodity frontiers
sustained successful resource-based development, while many more collapsed
under social and ecological pressures. Footnote4 We
also discover that capitalist production has created and extracted a wealth
of new agricultural commodities and minerals across the world, while
polluting bodies of water, land and people, depleting and salinizing soils
and degrading the very conditions of its own reproduction. Many economists
conceptualize these processes by emphasizing that capitalism tends to
externalize social and ecological costs, and that the best way to correct
such imbalance is to internalize them. In both economic research and
policy-making, internalizing externalities has become a widely accepted
approach to furthering global sustainability. Neoclassical economists are
especially optimistic about such ecological accounting. Paul Collier, one of
this field’s most prominent voices, promotes an analytical tool he calls
‘right prices’ and highlights the role of ‘inclusive and transparent
institutions’ in defining and regulating such prices.Footnote 5 |
經濟學家為我們理解這些問題做出了巨大貢獻，特別是他們對資本主義是否以及在多大程度上能夠解決其所造成的社會和生態危機的討論。我們從愛德華·巴比爾（Edward Barbier）的巨著《稀缺與前沿》中了解到，在過去的幾個世紀裡，一些商品前沿持續了成功的資源型開發，而更多的前沿則在社會和生態壓力下崩潰了。 註腳4 我們還發現，資本主義生產在世界各地創造和提取了大量新的農業商品和礦物，同時污染了水體、土地和人類，使土壤枯竭和鹽鹼化，並降低了自身繁殖的條件。許多經濟學家透過強調資本主義傾向於將社會和生態成本外部化來概念化這些過程，而糾正這種不平衡的最佳方法是將其內部化。在經濟研究和政策制定中，外部性內部化已成為促進全球永續發展的廣泛接受的方法。新古典經濟學家對這種生態核算尤其樂觀。保羅·科利爾（Paul Collier）是該領域最著名的聲音之一，他推廣了一種他稱之為“正確價格”的分析工具，並強調了“包容性和透明的機構”在定義和監管此類價格方面的作用。註腳 5 |
|
Ecological economists, on the other hand,
have looked at the same set of facts and come to very different
understandings. Economist Joan Martinez-Alier, along with human ecologists
working on distributional conflicts such as Alf Hornborg, for example, are
sceptical that capitalist externalities can be priced into submission. They
offer alternative conceptions of how to define capitalism’s ecological
problems, seeing them as the political results of uneven distribution.Footnote 6 They
deploy concepts such as social metabolism and unequal
ecological exchange to analyse how the flows of energy and materials
between places and peoples generate and maintain inequalities. These scholars
contend that the capitalist system, rather than being able to self-correct by
pricing externalities, is based on crushing forms of ecological debt created
by rich nations underwriting their growth with the resources of poor nations.
For these scholars, past centuries have been marked by industrializing
societies – almost always colonial powers – compensating for their ecological
deficits by imperialist exploitation. Footnote7 By
opening new frontiers of commodity cultivation, production, extraction and
waste disposal, these countries have exported problems of pollution, soil
degradation, poor labour conditions and social upheaval to poorer countries.
Geographer David Harvey – one of the most prominent voices in this debate –
refers to this process as capital’s ‘spatial fix’ – the extraction of resources by
dispossession and labour from local communities, resulting in highly uneven
development.Footnote 8 |
另一方面，生態經濟學家在研究同一組事實時卻得出了截然不同的理解。例如，經濟學家瓊·馬丁內斯-阿利爾(Joan Martinez-Alier)以及研究分配衝突的人類生態學家，例如阿爾夫·霍恩伯格(Alf Hornborg) ， 懷疑資本主義的外部性是否可以透過定價來屈服。他們提供瞭如何定義資本主義生態問題的替代概念，將其視為分配不均的政治結果。註腳 6 他們運用社會新陳代謝和不平等的生態交換等概念來分析地方和人民之間的能量和物質流動如何產生和維持不平等。這些學者認為，資本主義體係不是能夠透過定價外部性來自我糾正，而是建立在富國用窮國的資源來支撐其成長所產生的壓垮性生態債務的基礎上。對這些學者來說，過去幾個世紀的特徵是工業化社會 — — 幾乎總是殖民國家 — — 透過帝國主義剝削來彌補其生態赤字。 註腳7 透過開闢商品種植、生產、開採和廢棄物處理的新領域，這些國家將污染、土壤退化、惡劣的勞動條件和社會動盪等議題輸出給較貧窮的國家。地理學家大衛哈維（David Harvey）——這場辯論中最突出的聲音之一——將這一過程稱為資本的「空間修補」——透過剝奪和勞動力從當地社區獲取資源，導致發展高度不平衡。註腳 8 |
|
Development studies scholars provide yet
another set of approaches to understanding commodity frontiers by asking why
many resource-rich countries tend to be characterized by low levels of
economic growth, massive economic inequality and high rates of poverty.
Neoclassical economic explanations for this ‘paradox of plenty’ or ‘resource
curse’ tend to centre on issues of incorrect pricing, misallocation of
development revenues and inadequate institutional quality and oversight.Footnote 9 Critical
economists and political ecologists, especially in Latin America, argue, in
contrast, that this outcome is not a paradox, but rather the direct result of
outside actors and institutions extracting minerals, raw materials and forest
and agricultural resources and exporting them along with the water, energy,
labour and knowledge that they embody. To conceptualize that impact of
commodity frontier expansion, these thinkers use notions of extractivism, neo-extractivism
and post-extractivism.Footnote 10 Other
scholars, including Mattias Borg Rasmussen, Christian Lund and Nancy Peluso,
use the concept of territorialization to
explain how patterns of resource exploration, extraction and commodification
have dissolved existing social orders and reordered spaces. The reshaping of
social and economic orders around new resource frontiers profoundly reworks
patterns of authority and institutional architectures such as property
systems, political jurisdictions, rights and social contracts.Footnote 11 |
發展研究學者透過詢問為什麼許多資源豐富的國家往往具有經濟成長水平低、經濟不平等嚴重和貧困率高的特點，提供了另一套理解商品前沿的方法。新古典經濟學對這種「充足悖論」或「資源詛咒」的解釋往往集中在錯誤定價、開發收入分配不當以及制度品質和監督不足等問題上。註腳 9 相較之下，批判經濟學家和政治生態學家，尤其是拉丁美洲的批判經濟學家和政治生態學家，認為這一結果並不是悖論，而是外部行為者和機構開採礦物、原材料、森林和農業資源並將其與產品一起出口的直接結果。它們所體現的水、能源、勞動力和知識。為了概念化商品邊界擴張的影響，這些思想家使用了榨取主義、新榨取主義和後榨取主義的概念。註腳 10 其他學者，包括馬蒂亞斯·博格·拉斯穆森（ Mattias Borg Rasmussen）、克里斯蒂安·隆德（Christian Lund）和南希·佩盧索（Nancy Peluso ），使用領土化的概念來解釋資源勘探、開採和商品化的模式如何瓦解現有的社會秩序並重新排序空間。圍繞新資源前沿的社會和經濟秩序的重塑深刻地改變了權力模式和制度架構，例如財產制度、政治管轄權、權利和社會契約。註腳 11 |
|
Insights from these debates are germane
for studying the social and environmental foundations and the effects of
capitalism’s commodity frontiers in the global countryside. But even as
various disciplines converge around studying the social and environmental
foundations and effects of capitalism’s commodity frontiers, their concepts
remain siloed in discrete literatures. What is more, many (though not all of
them) tend to focus on contemporary problems, their analysis limited by a
failure to fully consider the many centuries of commodity frontier expansion. |
這些辯論的見解對於研究全球農村資本主義商品前沿的社會和環境基礎以及影響密切相關。但即使各種學科都集中在研究資本主義商品前沿的社會和環境基礎以及影響上，它們的概念仍然孤立在離散的文獻中。更重要的是，許多人（儘管不是全部）傾向於關注當代問題，他們的分析因未能充分考慮多個世紀以來商品前沿的擴張而受到限制。 |
|
The importance of history |
歷史的重要性 |
|
Historical concepts are crucial, however,
in situating present issues in longer trajectories to highlight the patterns
that will ultimately help us find new analytical tools to grapple with our
present. Of course, there is a long tradition of looking at capitalism
historically, and indeed a distinguished group of social scientists – from
Werner Sombart and Fernand Braudel to Immanuel Wallerstein and Alain Bihr –
has argued that global capitalism emerged on the eve of the Columbian voyages
across the Atlantic, that capitalism, in fact, was born global.Footnote 12 For
this group of scholars and others in that tradition, commodity frontier
expansion was a key marker of capitalism from its very beginning. |
然而，歷史概念至關重要，它可以將當前問題置於更長的軌跡中，以突出最終幫助我們找到新的分析工具來應對當前問題的模式。當然，從歷史角度看待資本主義有著悠久的傳統，事實上，一群傑出的社會科學家——從沃納·桑巴特和費爾南·布羅代爾到伊曼紐爾·沃勒斯坦和阿蘭·比爾——都認為全球資本主義出現在哥倫布橫渡大西洋的前夕。大西洋月刊認為，資本主義其實是全球性誕生的。註腳 12 對於這群學者和其他具有這項傳統的人來說，商品邊界擴張從一開始就是資本主義的關鍵標誌。 |
|
No one has done more to understand
capitalism as a system encompassing distant places and people than Terence
Hopkins and Immanuel Wallerstein, the developers of the concept of the
commodity chain. Footnote13 Their
aim was to show the emergence of a worldwide division of labour about 600
years ago, a system that typically connected rural commodity-producing
regions in the periphery with processing industries and consumers, typically
in cities located in what they called the ‘core.’ These production processes,
they argued, were ‘cross-cutting political jurisdictions,’ expanding over
time, and subject to structural transformations.Footnote 14 Because the
commodity chain concept sees commodities as ‘containers of hidden social
relations’, it concentrates on people working on commodity frontiers, the
places where they work, the conditions they work under and the social
relations governing their work and production.Footnote 15 |
沒有人比商品鏈概念的提出者特倫斯·霍普金斯和伊曼紐爾·沃勒斯坦更能理解資本主義是一個涵蓋遙遠地方和人民的體系。 註13 他們的目的是展示大約 600 年前世界範圍內勞動力分工的出現，該體系通常將外圍的農村商品生產地區與加工工業和消費者（通常位於他們所謂的「核心」的城市）連接起來。他們認為，這些生產過程是“跨領域的政治管轄範圍”，隨著時間的推移而擴展，並受到結構轉型的影響。註腳 14 由於商品鏈概念將商品視為“隱藏的社會關係的容器”，因此它關注的是在商品前沿工作的人們、他們工作的地點、他們的工作條件以及支配他們的工作和生產的社會關係。註腳 15 |
|
Feminist scholars working in this
tradition, importantly, have expanded the scope of the commodity chain to
include the unwaged household work that produces labourers and the ‘free
gifts of nature’ that contribute to the making of commodities and commodity
frontiers.Footnote 16 They
have endeavoured, as Wilma Dunaway put it, to make visible those ‘transfers
of value that are embodied in commodities but do not show up in prices’.Footnote 17 |
重要的是，從事這一傳統的女性主義學者擴大了商品鏈的範圍，包括產生勞動力的無酬家務勞動以及有助於製造商品和商品邊界的「自然的免費禮物」。註腳 16 正如威爾瑪·杜納韋（Wilma
Dunaway）所說，他們努力讓那些「體現在商品中但沒有體現在價格中的價值轉移」變得可見。註腳 17
號 |
|
In recent years, global historians have
picked up on some of these ideas. Studies on the history of particular
commodities, for example, have persuasively illustrated the deep links
between agriculture and industry, the countryside and the city and the
household and production. These studies have revealed how the global emerged
from local configurations and have shown the essential role played by the
politics, ideas and collective actions of non-elite actors such as rural
cultivators, especially in the Global South, in shaping commodity frontiers,
and thus the political economy of global capitalism.Footnote 18 Similarly,
many scholars have been sensitive to the ecological dimension of economic and
technological divergence between ‘core’ and ‘periphery’. Environmental
historian and historical geographer Jason W. Moore, for example, has argued
that since for most of human history technological advances were slow and
piecemeal, the global economy derived much of its growth from an unstinting
expansion of vast frontiers of labour, food, energy and raw materials. Footnote19 Sidney
Mintz made the point abundantly clear in his Sweetness and Power,
observing how slave labour produced cheap sugar for the emerging British
industrial proletariat. Slave-based sugar and cotton supplied calories and
clothing that industrialising Britain could never have procured from its own
soil. In the words of historian Kenneth Pomeranz, these processes provided
Britain with ecological relief. Footnote20 |
近年來，全球歷史學家已經認識到其中的一些想法。例如，對特定商品歷史的研究令人信服地說明了農業與工業、農村與城市、家庭與生產之間的深刻聯繫。這些研究揭示了全球如何從地方結構中崛起，並展示了農村耕種者等非精英行為者（尤其是南半球國家）的政治、思想和集體行動在塑造商品邊界方面所發揮的重要作用，從而塑造了商品邊界。全球資本主義的政治經濟。註腳 18 同樣，許多學者對「核心」與「邊緣」之間經濟和技術差異的生態維度非常敏感。例如，環境歷史學家和歷史地理學家傑森·W·摩爾（Jason W. Moore）認為，由於人類歷史的大部分時間裡，技術進步都是緩慢而零碎的，全球經濟的增長大部分來自於勞動力、食品、能源領域的無止盡擴張。和原料。 註19 明茨（ Sidney Mintz）在他的《甜蜜與力量》（Sweeness and Power）一書中非常清楚地闡述了這一點，觀察奴隸勞動如何為新興的英國工業無產階級生產廉價的糖。奴隸制的糖和棉花提供了熱和衣服，而工業化的英國永遠無法從自己的土地上獲得這些。用歷史學家肯尼斯·彭慕蘭的話來說，這些過程為英國帶來了生態緩解。 註腳20 |
|
It is at this point that Jason W. Moore’s
argument that global capitalism is organized through frontiers becomes
especially relevant. For him, these frontiers have expanded from one place to
the next, transforming socioecological relations as they go, producing more
and more goods and services that circulate through an expanding series of
exchanges. Valued by a growing number of scholars from different disciplines
as a problem-oriented transdisciplinary approach to historical processes,
Moore’s commodity frontier concept invites a radical rethinking of the
commodity chain approach from which it emerged. Commodity chain analysis starts from what its
advocates have called ‘the core’ and works downstream towards peripheral
locations of subaltern production, crop cultivation, mineral extraction and
so on. The commodity frontier approach, in contrast, begins with the
countryside – a significant departure. It moves analytically from chains of
(labour) relations to frontiers of spatial expansion that include not only labour,
but the incorporation and extraction of non-human nature. |
正是在這一點上，賈森·W·摩爾關於全球資本主義是透過邊界組織起來的論點變得尤為重要。對他來說，這些邊界已經從一個地方擴展到另一個地方，改變社會生態關係，生產越來越多的商品和服務，並透過一系列不斷擴大的交換進行流通。摩爾的商品前沿概念被越來越多的不同學科的學者視為一種以問題為導向的跨學科研究歷史過程的方法，它引發了人們對其產生的商品鏈方法的徹底重新思考。商品鏈分析從其倡導者所說的「核心」開始，向下游延伸至底層生產、農作物種植、礦物開採等外圍地點。相較之下，商品前沿方法則從農村開始──這是一個重大背離。它從分析（勞動）關係鏈轉向空間擴張的前沿，其中不僅包括勞動，還包括非人性的納入和提取。 |
|
Yet capitalism never changed solely by
expanding in space and scale. It also experienced fundamental shifts in
character, including in the dominant patterns of commodity frontier
expansion. Analysing and understanding how these patterns varied across time and
place, how and why such variations were institutionalized and how and why key
dynamics changed requires a reflection on the periodization of capitalism. An
influential approach here is that of Harriet Friedmann and Philip McMichael’s
work on successive food regimes. Concerned with ‘the role of
agriculture in the development of the capitalist world economy, and in the
trajectory of the state system’, their food regime concept has been debated,
critiqued and carried further in the past 30 years.Footnote 21 Recently,
Friedmann has amended a rather rigid structural conceptualization of food
regimes by bringing agency and social movements more centrally into the
frame. For her, a regime is constituted by a ‘relatively stable set of
relationships’ with ‘unstable periods in between shaped by political contests
over a new way forward’.Footnote 22 Meanwhile,
McMichael specified that the food regime is foremost an analytical device and
historical method to pose specific questions about the structuring processes
of the global political economy, and/or global food relations, at any particular
moment.Footnote 23 Food
regimes as a concept have thus developed into a device for periodization and
a proposal for a comparative historical method that links broad
political-economic change to local agency and contestation. |
然而，資本主義從來沒有僅僅透過空間和規模的擴張而改變。它也經歷了性質上的根本性轉變，包括商品邊界擴張的主導模式。分析和理解這些模式如何隨著時間和地點的不同而變化，這些變化如何以及為何制度化，以及關鍵動力如何以及為何發生變化，需要反思資本主義的分期。哈里特·弗里德曼（ Harriet Friedmann ）和菲利普·麥克邁克爾（Philip McMichael）關於連續食物體制的研究工作是一個有影響力的方法。出於對「農業在資本主義世界經濟發展和國家體系發展軌跡中的作用」的關注，他們的糧食體制概念在過去30年裡一直被爭論、批判和進一步推進。註腳 21 最近，弗里德曼透過將能動性和社會運動更集中地納入框架中，修正了食物體制相當僵化的結構概念。對她來說，政權是由「相對穩定的一系列關係」和「其間因新的前進道路的政治競爭而形成的不穩定時期」所構成的。註腳 22 同時，麥克邁克爾指出，糧食體制首先是一種分析工具和歷史方法，可以在任何特定時刻提出有關全球政治經濟和/或全球糧食關係的結構過程的具體問題。註腳 23 因此，糧食體制作為一個概念已經發展成為一種分期手段和一種比較歷史方法的提議，該方法將廣泛的政治經濟變化與地方機構和爭論聯繫起來。 |
|
Commodity regimes |
商品體制 |
|
All the approaches outlined above
illuminate important aspects of the expansion of commodity frontiers during
the past six centuries. Yet, each is limited in its own way. Much of the
writing on the history of capitalism produced during the past 150 years
privileges a perspective from the city, from industry and from labour outside
the household; not surprisingly, considering that most of these authors were
men who resided in cities located in industrializing countries. Yet, the vast
majority of humanity has lived and worked, until very recently, in rural and
domestic places, and it was in these places that many of the revolutions of
capitalism have taken place. And while commodity histories and commodity
chain analysis have persuasively shown the deep links between agriculture and
industry and the countryside and the city, their focus on single commodities
has limited their ability to capture the expansion of commodity frontiers
across several centuries and around the world as a whole. Global historians
have captured some of these general processes, but their all-too-frequent
privileging of top-down perspectives and elite actors has led them to ignore
how the global, including global commodity frontiers, has emerged from local
configurations of social space and social power. Scholars who focus squarely
on commodity frontiers have often concentrated on single factors to
illuminate their dynamics, insisting, for example, on master explanations
like the ‘spatial fix’ (Harvey and Moore) or the ‘technical fix’
(neoclassical economists) and failing to historicize particular responses to
particular moments of commodity frontier expansion. Footnote24 Last
but not least, many discussions of contemporary commodity frontier dynamics
(i.e. land grabbing, flex crops, extractivism) fall into the trap of
emphasizing the newness of developments that go back many centuries and can
only be understood via a historical perspective. |
上述所有方法都闡明了過去六個世紀中商品邊界擴張的重要面向。然而，每種方法都有其自身的限制。過去 150 年來，有關資本主義歷史的大部分著作都從城市、工業和家庭以外的勞動力的角度出發。考慮到這些作者大多數是居住在工業化國家城市的男性，這並不奇怪。然而，直到最近，絕大多數人都在農村和國內生活和工作，而許多資本主義革命正是在這些地方發生的。儘管商品歷史和商品鏈分析令人信服地展示了農業和工業、農村和城市之間的深層聯繫，但它們對單一商品的關注限制了它們捕捉商品邊界跨越幾個世紀和世界範圍的擴張的能力。所有的。全球歷史學家已經捕捉到了其中一些一般過程，但他們過於頻繁地賦予自上而下的觀點和精英參與者的特權，導致他們忽視了全球（包括全球商品前沿）是如何從社會空間和社會權力的局部配置中出現的。直接關注商品前沿的學者往往集中於單一因素來闡明其動態，例如堅持「空間修復」（哈維和摩爾）或「技術修復」（新古典經濟學家）等主要解釋，但未能將商品邊界擴張特定時刻的特定反應歷史化。 註腳24 最後但並非最不重要的一點是，許多關於當代商品前沿動態（即土地掠奪、靈活作物、採掘主義）的討論陷入了強調多個世紀以來發展的新穎性的陷阱，並且只能通過歷史的角度來理解。 |
|
What we need, instead, is to analyse
commodity frontiers through a historical approach that (1) keeps multiple
frontiers in the view over a very long time period, (2) focuses on a variety
of actors, including capitalists, rural cultivators (peasants and slaves, men
and women, indigenous people and state bureaucrats), (3) takes both a global
and a local view to scrutinize frictions, contestations and counter movements
from the household to the international arena and (4) asks how commodity
frontiers have transformed in fundamental ways over the past 600 years,
producing new kinds of dynamics, encountering particular resistances and
constructing new fixes. |
相反，我們需要的是透過歷史方法來分析商品邊界，（1）在很長一段時間內保持多個邊界的視野，（2）關注各種參與者，包括資本家、農村耕種者（農民和農民） 。奴隸、男人和女人、土著人民和國家官僚），(3) 以全球和地方視角審視從家庭到國際舞台的摩擦、爭論和反動，(4) 詢問商品邊界在過去600 年來的基本方式，產生了新的動力，遇到了特定的阻力並建立了新的解決方案。 |
|
The concept of commodity regimes allows
us to identify moments in the history of commodity frontiers in which
particular sets of labour relations and property rights, patterns of land
ownership, forms of the insertion of capital, state policies and technologies
come to define a given historical period. It is a meta-historical device that
allows us to capture the ways in which different societal domains on
commodity frontiers (ecological, technological, social and political) are
organized and relate to one another; it allows us to periodize and subdivide
as needed, while still understanding the unity of the diverse. |
商品體制的概念使我們能夠識別商品前沿歷史上的時刻，在這些時刻，特定的勞動關係和財產權、土地所有權模式、資本插入形式、國家政策和技術來定義特定的歷史時期。它是一種後設歷史手段，使我們能夠捕捉商品前沿的不同社會領域（生態、技術、社會和政治）的組織方式和相互聯繫的方式；它使我們能夠根據需要進行分期和細分，同時仍然理解多樣性的統一性。 |
|
Over time, we see that commodity
frontiers exhibited regular, albeit shifting, combinations of labour systems,
property regimes, technologies and state interventions. Any systematic
analysis of the long history of these frontiers needs to begin by
acknowledging this diversity. But we also need to acknowledge certain
patterns. Properly analysed, these patterns help us understand the changing
character of commodity frontiers as a constituent in the historical
development of capitalism. |
勞動力體制、財產制度、技術和國家干預的定期（儘管不斷變化）組合。對這些前沿的悠久歷史的任何系統分析都需要從承認這種多樣性開始。但我們也需要承認某些模式。經過適當的分析，這些模式有助於我們理解作為資本主義歷史發展組成部分的商品前沿的變化特徵。 |
|
We can distinguish, roughly speaking,
four distinct commodity regimes during the past centuries of capitalism’s
history, with the transitions from one to the next propelled by key
transformations such as the abolition of slavery, the Industrial Revolution,
the emergence of powerful state bureaucracies both in the industrializing
countries of the North Atlantic and the colonial peripheries, and over the
course of the twentieth century, the massive concentration of corporate
enterprises. |
粗略地說，我們可以在過去幾個世紀的資本主義歷史中區分出四種不同的商品體制，從一種商品體制到下一種商品體制的轉變是由諸如奴隸制的廢除、工業革命、強大的國家官僚機構的出現等關鍵變革所推動的。北大西洋和殖民地外圍的工業化國家，以及整個二十世紀企業企業的大規模集中。 |
|
The first such regime, which lasted from
the 1450s through the 1850s, can be termed an early capitalist
commodity regime. It was characterized by direct and violent
dispossession of people from land and nature and by unfree labour systems
that included chattel slavery, peonage and indentured contract labour. Footnote25 Its
forceful expansion was sanctioned by states, but its principal expansionary
driver was merchant capital. The sugar commodity frontier is exemplary for
this particular regime. Sugar production principally expanded because ever
more land was violently taken out from underneath its native inhabitants,
ever more workers were enslaved, and ever more capital moved from Europe into
distant locations. Merchant capitalists and planters exerted a decisive
influence on this commodity frontier, often ruling faraway places and
organizing the day-to-day domination of labour. By the end of this period,
maroonage and rebellion emerged as central social contestations, while
technological advances propelled new and deeper forms of exploitation of both
labour and nature. |
第一個這樣的政權從 1450 年代持續到 1850 年代，可以稱為早期資本主義商品政權。其特徵是直接暴力剝奪人民的土地和自然，以及不自由的勞動制度，包括動產奴隸制、勞役和契約勞工。 註25 它的強力擴張得到了國家的批准，但其主要擴張動力是商業資本。食糖商品邊界是這特定制度的典範。食糖生產的擴張主要是因為越來越多的土地被從當地居民手中暴力奪走，越來越多的工人被奴役，越來越多的資本從歐洲流向遙遠的地方。商業資本家和種植園主對這一商品前沿發揮決定性的影響，他們常常統治遙遠的地方並組織對勞動力的日常統治。到這段時期結束時，放逐和叛亂成為主要的社會爭論，而技術進步推動了對勞動力和自然的新的、更深層的剝削形式。 |
|
The second regime, from the 1850s to the
1970s, can be described as an industrial commodity regime. It was
characterized by the massively expanding use of fossil energy, soaring
industrial and state demand for commodities and the rise of multinational
capital, global bulk commodity markets and new transport and communication
technologies. These factors reinforced infrastructural capabilities ranging
from the telegraph to railroads, shaping the conditions under which commodity
frontiers expanded, including the contractual mobilization of land and
labour. |
第二個政權，從1850年代到1970年代，可以被描述為工業商品政權。其特點是大規模擴大化石能源的使用、工業和國家對大宗商品的需求飆升、跨國資本、全球大宗商品市場以及新的運輸和通訊技術的崛起。這些因素增強了從電報到鐵路的基礎設施能力，塑造了商品邊界擴大的條件，包括土地和勞動力的契約動員。 |
|
While the forms this transformation took
were complex and varied across time and space, four central features can be
distinguished: the conversion of a system of customary land rights into
legally defined titles to land ownership; the transformation of the concept
of property from ambiguously defined areas to concretely defined, possibly
enclosed, physical spaces; the rationalization of the use of such demarcated
landed property as a form of capital and the increased privatization of the
earth’s surface through dispossession and displacement of peasants and
indigenous populations. Sharecropping, tenant farming, indentured servitude
and wage labour increasingly replaced non-economic labour coercion such as
enslavement. Massive colonial projects fuelled the commodification of land,
while land grabs abolished communal peasants’ rights and developmental
projects or state-sponsored collectivization schemes led to further
expropriation and displacement. Agricultural science, in turn, brought
productivity leaps, eventually leading to the Green Revolution of the 1960s.
Like the previous commodity regime, the industrial commodity regime was
always contested, with labour activism and anti-colonial movements joining
older forms of resistance. |
雖然這種轉變所採取的形式複雜且隨時間和空間的不同而變化，但可以區分四個核心特徵：將習慣土地權制度轉變為法律定義的土地所有權；財產概念從模糊定義的區域轉變為具體定義的、可能封閉的物理空間；將這種劃定的土地財產作為一種資本形式的使用合理化，並透過剝奪和流離失所農民和原住民來加強地球表面的私有化。佃農、佃農、契約奴役和僱傭勞動越來越多地取代了奴役等非經濟勞動力強制。大規模的殖民計畫推動了土地的商品化，而土地掠奪則廢除了集體農民的權利，而發展計畫或國家資助的集體化計畫導致了進一步的徵用和流離失所。反過來，農業科學帶來了生產力的飛躍，最終導致了 20 世紀 60 年代的綠色革命。與以前的商品政權一樣，工業商品政權總是受到爭議，勞工激進主義和反殖民運動與舊形式的抵抗結合在一起。 |
|
The industrial commodity regime had
enormous staying power and was propelled to new heights by the rapid economic
expansion in the three decades after the Second World War. However, by the
1970s, it started to unravel and be replaced by a new corporate
commodity regime. Slow economic growth hit numerous commodity-producing
countries particularly hard, reducing their governments’ abilities to
mitigate market volatility and forcing them to accept structural adjustment
programmes. This reinforced the changing role of the state vis-à-vis
transnational corporations and financial institutions, as well as new global
political divisions amongst and between North and South, simultaneously
reproducing and remapping imperial, colonial and Cold War political
geographies. The concentration of power in the hands of a few producers took
a quantum leap as commodity trade and financial institutions became tightly
connected from the 1980s on. Capitalist agriculture created new commodified
inputs (seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, etc.) and legal protections for
corporate ownership, resulting in further power concentrations at commodity
frontiers. A massive contraction of land rights accelerated the growth of a
rural proletariat on a world scale, and resistance movements acquired a
transnational character.Footnote 26 |
工業商品體系具有巨大的持久力，並在第二次世界大戰後三十年的快速經濟擴張中被推向了新的高度。然而，到了 20 世紀 70 年代，它開始瓦解並被新的公司商品體制所取代。經濟成長緩慢對許多大宗商品生產國的打擊尤其嚴重，削弱了這些國家政府緩解市場波動的能力，並迫使它們接受結構調整計畫。這強化了國家相對於跨國公司和金融機構不斷變化的角色，以及南北之間新的全球政治分歧，同時再現和重新映射了帝國、殖民和冷戰的政治地理。自 1980 年代起，隨著大宗商品貿易和金融機構的緊密聯繫，權力集中到少數生產者手中發生了質的飛躍。資本主義農業創造了新的商品化投入（種子、化肥、農藥等）以及對企業所有權的法律保護，導致權力進一步集中在商品領域。土地權利的大規模收縮加速了農村無產階級在世界各地的發展，抵抗運動具有了跨國性。註腳 26 |
|
Cracks in the corporate commodity regime
became visible with the Great Recession and the world food crisis in 2008,
spurring a fourth – still tentative – contemporary commodity regime.
In this emerging regime, key elements of the previous regimes are
reintegrated and intensified. For instance, firms already entrenched at the
top of commodity markets and financial actors looking for new investment
opportunities have come to own or finance increasing amounts of land around
the world, largely through dispossession, often with the assistance of state
power, best expressed in the newly fashionable public-private partnerships
(PPPs). Green capitalism, built on the co-optation of
sustainability discourse, continues to create new products and frontiers for
accumulation, amongst them organic foods, biofuels and the optimistically
named clean coal.Footnote 27 Rising
authoritarianism around the world is pressuring people and environments on
commodity frontiers in South America, the USA, South East Asia and elsewhere.
At the same time, new dynamics are coming into view in this post-2008 era
that Klaus Schwab, Executive Chair of the World Economic Forum, has called
the ‘fourth industrial revolution’.Footnote 28 Companies
(often with state assistance) are expanding into radically new production and
information technologies, including new automated (robot) labour in
manufacturing, households and agriculture. Relatedly, new digital
infrastructures that extract data and mediate between different groups have
become increasingly important for commodity frontiers. Examples of what Nick
Srnicek calls platform capitalism include agricultural
implements manufacturer John Deere’s data collection systems that record
farmers’ activities and commodify the data and mobile phone-based money
transfer and (micro)financing services such as Vodafone’s M-Pesa that operate
in East Africa and elsewhere, and China’s new ‘Study the Great Nation’ social
platform that collects user data for surveillance and advertising.Footnote 29 As
this regime is still unfolding, questions about which processes and relations
will be most important, which will spur or encounter the most resistance, and
what forms that resistance will take remain. |
隨著 2008 年經濟大衰退和世界糧食危機，企業商品體制的裂痕變得顯而易見，催生了第四種（仍處於試探性）當代商品體制。在這個新興政權中，先前政權的關鍵要素得到了重新整合和強化。例如，已經在大宗商品市場佔據主導地位的公司和尋求新投資機會的金融參與者已經開始在世界各地擁有或資助越來越多的土地，主要是透過剝奪，通常是在國家權力的幫助下，這最好體現在新流行的公私合作夥伴關係（PPP）。建立在永續發展論述基礎上的綠色資本主義不斷創造新產品和累積前沿，其中包括有機食品、生物燃料和樂觀地命名的清潔煤炭。註腳 27 世界各地不斷抬頭的威權主義正在給南美洲、美國、東南亞和其他地區商品前沿的人民和環境帶來壓力。同時，世界經濟論壇執行主席克勞斯·施瓦布（Klaus Schwab）稱之為「第四次工業革命」的2008年後時代正在出現新的動態。註腳 28 公司（通常在國家援助下）正在擴展到全新的生產和資訊技術，包括製造業、家庭和農業領域的新型自動化（機器人）勞動力。與此相關的是，提取數據並在不同群體之間進行調解的新數位基礎設施對於大宗商品領域變得越來越重要。 Nick Srnicek所說的平台資本主義的例子包括農具製造商約翰迪爾的數據收集系統，該系統記錄農民的活動並將數據商品化，以及基於行動電話的匯款和（小）融資服務，例如在東非營運的沃達豐的 M- Pesa以及其他地方，以及中國新的「學習大國」社交平台，該平台收集用戶資料用於監視和廣告。註腳 29 由於這項政權仍在不斷發展，關於哪些進程和關係最為重要、哪些進程和關係將激發或遇到最大的阻力以及阻力將採取什麼形式等問題仍然存在。 |
|
These four regimes have engendered widely
divergent forms of expansion and exploitation, showing capitalism to be
highly adaptive and flexible. And like capitalism more broadly, each regime
contains profound tensions, generating fierce contestation. Approaching the
history of capitalism through commodity regimes speaks against a teleological
or linear interpretation of the relationship between capitalism and the
countryside, as Figure 1 clearly
shows, and aids us in uncovering capitalism’s shifting historical and spatial
logic. Figure 1 is
our effort to describe in a tentative way and at the most general level how
we propose to investigate frontier expansion as a series of cumulative frictions and fixes. |
這四種政權產生了截然不同的擴張和剝削形式，顯示資本主義具有高度適應性和靈活性。就像更廣泛的資本主義一樣，每個政權都存在著深刻的緊張局勢，引發激烈的爭論。透過商品體制來研究資本主義的歷史，反對對資本主義與農村之間關係的目的論或線性解釋，如圖1所示，並有助於我們揭示資本主義不斷變化的歷史和空間邏輯。圖1是我們嘗試性地在最一般的層面上描述我們建議如何將前沿擴張作為一系列累積的摩擦和修補進行研究的努力。 |
|
|
|
|
Figure 1. Commodity regimes,
frictions and fixes. |
圖1。 商品體制、摩擦和修復。 |
|
Commodity regimes and their frictions |
商品體制及其摩擦 |
|
The expansion of commodity frontiers was
not a smooth unfolding of one universal logic or of unstinting human
progress, but a series of regimes that transformed themselves in quite
fundamental ways at certain moments. These transformations occurred because
each regime ran into frictions that eventually made the further expansion of
commodity frontiers impossible without fundamental changes. Preliminary
investigations suggest that these regimes succeed each other at an
accelerating pace, going from 400 years for the first regime to 30 years for
the third. Market convergence and the increased momentum of technological
change as well as growing resistance might account for fundamental frictions
occurring more frequently. But these are assumptions that we want to test. In
doing so, our point of departure is that commodity regimes encounter frictions
along three central axes: (1) ecological frictions, (2) competition for land
and labour (3) and social resistance, including counternarratives that
contest the existing commodity regime. |
商品邊界的擴張並不是一種普遍邏輯的順利展開，也不是人類無限進步的順利展開，而是一系列在某些時刻以相當根本的方式進行自我轉變的政權。這些轉變的發生是因為每個政權都遇到了摩擦，最終導致商品邊界的進一步擴張不可能在不發生根本性變化的情況下實現。初步調查顯示，這些政權的更替速度不斷加快，從第一個政權的400年到第三個政權的30年。市場趨同、技術變革動能增強以及阻力的增加可能是根本性摩擦更頻繁發生的原因。但這些都是我們想要測試的假設。在這個過程中，我們的出發點是商品體制在三個中心軸上遇到摩擦：（1）生態摩擦，（2）土地和勞動力競爭（3）以及社會阻力，包括與現有商品體制相抗衡的反敘事。 |
|
To begin with, ecological frictions have
imposed an important set of limitations on commodity frontier expansion. In
the early phases of capitalism, ecological frictions such as declining soil
fertility forced the production of agricultural commodities or minerals to
move into new areas. Later, crippling diseases that swept through populations
of uniformly bred crops and livestock instigated the quest for
disease-resistant plant varieties, broad-spectrum pesticides and fungicides,
more powerful vaccines and tightly controlled production systems with
labour-disciplining biosecurity measures. Ecological damage caused by
commodity agriculture or extraction rendered many frontiers unproductive or
uninhabitable, often causing the end of the production of this particular
commodity at this location. Deserted mining regions around the globe, the
problem of severe water shortages and salinization surrounding the irrigated
cotton fields in Central Asia, the wheat frontier in the USA and its
degeneration into the infamous Dust Bowl in the 1930s are all examples of
collapsed commodity frontier zones caused by ecological frictions. |
首先，生態摩擦對商品邊界的擴張施加了一系列重要的限制。在資本主義的早期階段，土壤肥力下降等生態摩擦迫使農產品或礦物的生產轉移到新的地區。後來，席捲統一培育的農作物和牲畜種群的嚴重疾病促使人們尋求抗病植物品種、廣譜殺蟲劑和殺菌劑、更強大的疫苗以及嚴格控制的生產系統和嚴格控制勞動的生物安全措施。商品農業或採掘造成的生態破壞使許多邊境地區生產力低下或無法居住，往往導致該地區特定商品的生產終止。全球廢棄的礦區、中亞灌溉棉田周圍的嚴重缺水和鹽鹼化問題、美國的小麥邊境及其在 20 世紀 30 年代退化為臭名昭著的沙塵暴，都是商品邊境地區崩潰造成的例子。透過生態摩擦。 |
|
Likewise, frictions arising from
competition for land and labour have destabilized many commodity frontier
zones. Rebellions of enslaved and servile women and men were a permanent
feature of the frontier zones during the early capitalist commodity regime.
Slavery became increasingly untenable due to resistance by enslaved people
such as the revolution in Saint-Domingue in 1791 and the large-scale uprising
in Jamaica in 1832, as well as the emergence of an abolitionist movement.
Labour shortages were a perennial problem for commodity frontiers; in fact,
during the many centuries in which mechanization proceeded slowly, labour
supplies were the main limiting factor for commodity production. Once slavery
was abolished and tropical commodity agriculture left its plantation
enclaves, it increasingly inserted itself into existing rural societies,
where it had to compete for land and labour. Thus the expansion of global
capitalism increasingly encroached upon existing land rights, often using
large-scale destruction of communal land ownership and outright dispossession
and displacement of peasants and indigenous populations. This massive
accumulation through dispossession has been a source of permanent, often
violent, conflict. |
勞動力競爭引起的摩擦也破壞了許多商品邊境地區的穩定性。在早期資本主義商品政權期間，被奴役和奴役的婦女和男子的叛亂是邊境地區的一個永久特徵。由於1791年聖多明哥革命和1832年牙買加大規模起義以及廢奴運動的出現，奴隸制越來越難以為繼。勞動力短缺是大宗商品領域長期存在的問題。事實上，在機械化進展緩慢的許多世紀裡，勞動供給是商品生產的主要限制因素。一旦奴隸制被廢除，熱帶商品農業離開其種植園飛地，它就越來越多地融入現有的農村社會，在那裡它必須爭奪土地和勞動力。因此，全球資本主義的擴張日益侵犯現有的土地權利，通常大規模破壞公共土地所有權，徹底剝奪農民和原住民並使其流離失所。這種透過剝奪而進行的大規模累積已成為永久性衝突（往往是暴力衝突）的根源。 |
|
Across the four regimes, commodity regime
expansion produced other social frictions as well. As merchants, chartered
companies, colonial officials, mining capitalists and frontier planters,
amongst others, expanded into new territories and new productive activities,
appropriated new land, extracted new materials and incorporated new labour,
their ongoing attempts to externalize the social and environmental costs of
production and reproduction were met with resistance. Coupled with ecological
limits, such resistances can prefigure and compel regime change, pushing
capital to seek new frontiers. During the early capitalist regime, for
instance, revolt and desertion (maroonage) were responses to enslavement and
servitude and helped propel the shift to sharecropping and wage labour.
During the industrial regime, strikes, working-class political mobilizations
and unionization, together with anti-colonial movements, joined rebellion and
escape as forms of insurgency. Later, as corporate-headed transnational commodity
chains integrated global production in the corporate regime, resistance has
also become transnational. Workers struggled against capital’s ‘race to the
bottom’, indigenous communities against the polluting and degrading
activities of transnational corporations that often operate with near
impunity, peasants against the incursions of transnational capital into
agrarian spaces. In some cases, resistance also provided counternarratives
and counterproposals for different ways of organizing political, economic,
social and ecological life – in recent years, for example, by seeking
collaborative, locally embedded, equitable or non-growth-based forms of
production. Because counter movements suggest some of the key themes around
which people are exploited or oppressed, studying resistance within regimes
is a crucial part of defining and analysing the regimes themselves – and
helping to explain how over time they changed fundamentally. |
在這四個政權中，商品政權的擴張也產生了其他社會摩擦。隨著商人、特許公司、殖民官員、礦業資本家和邊境種植園主等向新領土和新生產活動擴張、佔用新土地、開採新材料並吸收新勞動力，他們不斷試圖將社會和環境成本外部化。生產和繁殖都遇到了阻力。再加上生態限制，這種阻力可能預示並迫使政權更迭，推動資本尋求新的領域。例如，在早期資本主義政權期間，反抗和逃脫（流亡）是對奴役和奴役的反應，並有助於推動向佃農和僱傭勞動的轉變。在工業政權時期，罷工、工人階級政治動員和工會化，以及反殖民運動，都與叛亂和逃亡一起成為叛亂的形式。後來，隨著以企業為主導的跨國商品鏈將全球生產納入企業制度，抵抗也變得跨國化。工人們反抗資本的“逐底競爭”，土著社區反抗跨國公司的污染和有辱人格的活動，而這些活動往往幾乎不受懲罰，農民反抗跨國資本侵入農業空間。在某些情況下，抵制也為組織政治、經濟、社會和生態生活的不同方式提供了反敘事和反建議——例如，近年來，透過尋求協作、嵌入當地、公平或非成長型的生產形式。由於反運動暗示了人們被剝削或壓迫的一些關鍵主題，因此研究政權內部的抵抗是定義和分析政權本身的關鍵部分 — — 並有助於解釋隨著時間的推移它們如何發生根本性的變化。 |
|
Commodity regimes and their fixes |
商品體制及其修復 |
|
Frictions and resistances were part of
each commodity regime over the centuries, usually culminating in systemic
crises. In response, new commodity regimes emerged, characterized by
particular fixes or combinations of fixes. Each ensemble was particular to
particular moments in the history of global capitalism. The fixes, as
described in Figure 1,
were (A) the spatial fix, (B) the technological fix, (C) the state-led fix
and (D) the corporate fix. Although each new fix was hailed as the master key
to resolving the then-current limits to commodity frontier expansion, they
were usually not entirely new. Moreover, older fixes did not disappear.
Spatial fixes, for example, remain powerful today, usually at the expense of
tropical rain forests, grasslands, indigenous communities and biodiversity. |
幾個世紀以來，摩擦和阻力是每種商品體制的一部分，通常最終導致系統性危機。作為回應，新的商品體制出現了，其特徵是特定的修復或修復的組合。每個組合都針對全球資本主義歷史上的特定時刻。如圖1所示，修復措施包括 (A) 空間修補、(B) 技術修補、(C) 國家主導修補和 (D) 企業修補。儘管每個新的解決方案都被譽為解決當時商品邊界擴張限制的萬能鑰匙，但它們通常並不是全新的。此外，舊的修復並沒有消失。例如，空間修復在今天仍然很有效，但通常是以犧牲熱帶雨林、草原、原住民社區和生物多樣性為代價的。 |
|
Nonetheless, the spatial fix was most
pronounced during the early capitalist commodity frontier regime, when the
state was distant and quite weak and most increases in output came from
additional inputs of land and labour. Until the late eighteenth century, the
consequences of soil exhaustion caused by sugar, tobacco or coffee
plantations, for example, were almost always overcome either by using
additional labour to perform manuring or by adding more land for crop
rotation. Labour shortages were addressed by immigration of either free or
enslaved workers, as happened in most of the plantations of the New World.
From the late eighteenth and particularly the early nineteenth century
onward, a new set of fixes emerged to join the continuing spatial expansion.
In the early stages of capitalism, technology had only a limited impact on
productivity. The Industrial Revolution changed this, as it resulted in
massive mechanization of both agriculture and mining and immense improvements
in transportation, although these innovations entered the commodity frontiers
unevenly and increased rural inequalities through class differentiation and
lay the ground for future ecological distribution conflicts. |
儘管如此，空間固定在早期資本主義商品邊境政權期間最為明顯，當時國家距離遙遠且相當弱，產出的大部分增長來自土地和勞動力的額外投入。例如，直到十八世紀末，糖、菸草或咖啡種植園造成的土壤耗竭的後果幾乎總是可以透過使用額外的勞動力施肥或增加更多的土地進行輪作來克服。勞動力短缺問題是透過自由工人或奴隸工人的移民來解決的，就像新大陸大多數種植園所發生的那樣。從十八世紀末，特別是十九世紀初開始，出現了一系列新的解決方案來加入持續的空間擴張。在資本主義的早期階段，科技對生產力的影響非常有限。工業革命改變了這一點，因為它帶來了農業和採礦業的大規模機械化以及交通運輸的巨大改善，儘管這些創新不均勻地進入商品前沿，並通過階級分化加劇了農村不平等，並為未來的生態分配衝突奠定了基礎。 |
|
Increasingly, the state came to play a
more prominent role in commodity frontier expansion. Where the expansion of
commodity frontiers had previously been driven by a particularly violent type
of capitalism exerted by merchant capital and sanctioned by the state, in the
nineteenth and twentieth centuries states attained the infrastructural
capability needed to shape the conditions under which frontiers operated.
Infrastructure construction, financial legislation, sponsored migration of
contract labour and legislation and implementation of new property rights
regimes all featured as prominent new forms of state interventions. While
technology-enabled global commodity production to soar after the systemic
crisis that attended the abolition of the slave trade and slavery itself,
these technological innovations would not have materialized without the new
role played by the state. |
國家在大宗商品邊境擴張中扮演越來越重要的角色。商品邊境的擴張以前是由商業資本施加並受到國家認可的特別暴力的資本主義所驅動的，而在十九世紀和二十世紀，國家獲得了塑造邊境運作條件所需的基礎設施能力。基礎設施建設、金融立法、贊助合約工移民和立法以及新產權制度的實施都是國家幹預的突出新形式。儘管在廢除奴隸貿易和奴隸製本身的系統性危機之後，技術驅動的全球商品生產激增，但如果沒有國家扮演的新角色，這些技術創新就不會實現。 |
|
Science, moreover, produced leaps in
agricultural productivity, including the Green Revolution at the end of the
industrial commodity regime. Differential access to technology and the ways
that capitalist agriculture created new commodified inputs (seeds,
fertilizers, pesticides, etc.) engendered new dependencies for farmers, Footnote30 thus
leading to further concentrations of power at the commodity frontier. The
current stage of biotechnology enables the integration of the food and energy
sectors and a profound appropriation of life through seed patents and
intellectual property protections, leading to further large-scale
dispossessions. In fact, over time, the state-led fix has paved the way for a
transnational corporate enterprise to become the dominant force on commodity
frontiers, which continues – not without contestation – in the contemporary
regime. |
此外，科學也帶來了農業生產力的飛躍，包括工業商品體制結束時的綠色革命。獲得技術的差異以及資本主義農業創造新的商品化投入（種子、化肥、農藥等）的方式給農民帶來了新的依賴， 註腳30 從而導致權力進一步集中在商品領域。當前階段的生物技術使食品和能源領域得以融合，並透過種子專利和智慧財產權保護對生命進行了深刻的佔有，從而導致進一步的大規模剝奪。事實上，隨著時間的推移，國家主導的解決方案為跨國公司企業成為商品前沿的主導力量鋪平了道路，這種情況在當代政權中繼續存在——並非沒有爭議。 |
|
Capitalism has been driving the creation
of increasingly integrated and complex commodity chains, massively changing
the relationship between commodity frontiers and processing industries.
Significant convergence of commodity prices appeared by the late eighteenth
century; information systems connected the global countryside with industrial
centres by the mid-nineteenth century; the concentration of power in the hands
of a few end producers intensified during the twentieth century, especially
in the 1980s when commodity trade and financial institutions became tightly
connected. Currently, a narrow range of mostly transnational corporations
controls much of the expansion of commodity frontiers through direct
ownership of land and means of production and contracting, subcontracting,
digital data collection and general control of commodity circulation.Footnote 31 Much
of the economic risks and the environmental and social costs of corporate-led
production are dumped on marginalized people and places, while new calls for
sustainability are co-opted into opportunities to deepen Green Capitalism in
the new commodity regime. |
資本主義一直在推動日益一體化和複雜的商品鏈的創建，極大地改變了商品前沿和加工業之間的關係。十八世紀末，商品價格出現顯著趨同；到十九世紀中葉，資訊系統將全球農村與工業中心連結起來；在1920世紀期間，權力進一步集中在少數最終生產者手中，特別是在商品貿易和金融機構緊密聯繫的20世紀80年代。目前，少數跨國公司透過直接擁有土地和生產資料以及承包、分包、數位資料收集和對商品流通的全面控制，控制了商品邊界的大部分擴張。註腳 31 企業主導的生產的大部分經濟風險以及環境和社會成本都轉嫁給了邊緣化人群和地區，而對永續發展的新呼聲則被轉化為在新商品體制中深化綠色資本主義的機會。 |
|
The framework of commodity regimes takes
commodity frontiers as an analytical point of departure, sensitizing us to
geopolitical shifts, the role of the state, technology, ecology, and last but
not least, local agency. This is to say that capitalism develops not only
through incorporation and commodification, but also through what resists it.
Non-human nature is not flat, constant or given: soils give out, water
becomes scarce or toxic, wells run dry, ‘weeds’ and microorganisms develop
resistance to agrochemicals and antibiotics. At the same time, social
movements and civil society initiatives compel capital to adjust to the
demands of organized groups of people, sometimes creating new avenues and
segmented markets for capital such as fair trade and organic labelling in
food, and sometimes creating a barrier for capital to overcome, such as wage
labour. |
商品體制的架構以商品前沿為分析出發點，使我們對地緣政治的變化、國家的角色、技術、生態以及最後但並非最不重要的地方機構更加敏感。這就是說，資本主義的發展不僅透過合併和商品化，而且還透過抵抗它的東西。非人類自然不是平坦的、恆定的或既定的：土壤腐爛，水變得稀缺或有毒，水井乾涸，「雜草」和微生物對農業化學品和抗生素產生抗藥性。同時，社會運動和民間社會倡議迫使資本適應有組織的人群的需求，有時為資本創造新的途徑和細分市場，例如公平貿易和食品有機標籤，有時為資本創造障礙克服諸如工資勞動等。 |
|
A research strategy |
研究策略 |
|
It is challenging to translate the
framework of commodity regimes into a workable research strategy; this
challenge, of course, also pertains to global history’s project of making
wide-ranging comparisons across large time spans and geographic regions.Footnote 32 A
commodity frontiers research project directly engages with ongoing debates
about the ambitions, promises and limits of global and world history. It
requires building collaborative and discipline-crossing research networks. It
offers methods and sources for a history that aims to surpass or delegitimize
the old Eurocentric stories of the rise of a unified world.Footnote 33 |
將商品體制架構轉化為可行的研究策略具有挑戰性；當然，這項挑戰也與全球歷史計畫有關，即在大的時間跨度和地理區域之間進行廣泛的比較。註腳 32 商品前沿研究計畫直接參與有關全球和世界歷史的雄心、承諾和限制的持續辯論。它需要建立協作和跨學科的研究網絡。它為歷史提供了方法和來源，旨在超越或取消有關統一世界崛起的古老歐洲中心故事的合法性。註腳 33 |
|
We aim for an inductive approach that
studies localized experiences and global systemic movements and past
experiences and contemporary problems within a single analytical framework.
This requires that we overcome the fragmented and individualized character of
archival research and fieldwork, which, because they are so labour intensive,
usually produce geographically and temporally limited work. The immense
library of existing case studies does not add up to a systematized body of
knowledge. Another challenge – one that again pertains to global history more
broadly – is to move beyond privileging the national level as a unit of
analysis. Many historical indicators of development – per capita income,
demography, migration, balance of trade, etc. – are only available at the
national level, but commodity frontier zones are usually subnational units,
and sometimes cross national borders.Footnote 34 National
data collections remain indispensable, but data collection at the subnational
and transregional level is equally important. |
我們的目標是採用歸納法，在單一分析框架內研究局部經驗和全球系統性運動以及過去的經驗和當代問題。這要求我們克服檔案研究和田野工作的分散性和個性化特徵，因為它們是勞動密集的，通常產生地理和時間上有限的工作。現有案例研究的巨大圖書館並不能構成一個系統化的知識體系。另一個挑戰 — — 再次與更廣泛的全球歷史相關 — — 是超越將國家層級作為分析單位的特權。許多歷史發展指標——人均收入、人口、移民、貿易平衡等——只能在國家層級取得，但商品邊境地區通常是次國家單位，有時甚至跨越國界。註腳 34 國家資料收集仍然不可或缺，但國家以下和跨區域層級的資料收集同樣重要。 |
|
While still difficult, an inductive and
multi-scalar approach is increasingly feasible thanks to innovative
technologies of data gathering, analysis and visualization. Digital
humanities techniques let us look at a myriad of sources to illuminate the
workings of commodity frontiers at the local level and may release us from
over-relying on data aggregated at the national level. Publications on
particular commodity frontier zones that span decades and perspectives are
already available in digital format, and we can draw on their research
findings. Moreover, since frontier zones are marked by the commodification of
land and labour, they have been relatively well documented by colonial
administrations, revenue records and so on. In recent years archives have
been digitizing their holdings of documents, historical artefacts and
newspapers. Archaeologists working on the Baltics, Southern Spain and the
Eastern Mediterranean, for example, have employed excavations,
paleoenvironmental sources and laser techniques that would help us
reconstruct even the oldest commodity frontiers.Footnote 35 |
儘管仍然很困難，但由於資料收集、分析和視覺化的創新技術，歸納和多標量方法變得越來越可行。數位人文技術讓我們能夠看到無數的來源，以闡明地方一級商品前沿的運作情況，並可能使我們擺脫對國家一級匯總數據的過度依賴。關於特定商品前沿區域跨越數十年和觀點的出版物已經以數位格式提供，我們可以藉鏡他們的研究成果。此外，由於邊境地區的特徵是土地和勞動力的商品化，殖民當局、稅收記錄等都對它們進行了相對詳細的記錄。近年來，檔案館一直在將其持有的文件、歷史文物和報紙數位化。例如，在波羅的海、西班牙南部和東地中海工作的考古學家利用挖掘、古環境資源和雷射技術來幫助我們重建最古老的商品邊界。註腳 35 |
|
If these sources can be digitally connected
and automated data-mining processes applied to them, it becomes feasible to
extract a wide range of data from very disparate sources in different
languages. What is more, semantic technology can help us create structured
data sets from immense collections of fuzzy data. Analysis of these sources
within a global comparative context, enhanced by visual representations such
as maps and graphs, can provide clues for new hypotheses to be tested against
the assembled corpus of data or even Linked Open Data. These technologies
facilitate the integration of geographic knowledge from diverse data sources,
and they have been developing rapidly, offering the promise that they will
soon become more customer-friendly.Footnote 36 |
如果這些來源可以數位化連接，並對其應用自動化資料探勘流程，那麼從不同語言的截然不同的來源中提取廣泛的資料就變得可行。更重要的是，語意技術可以幫助我們從大量的模糊資料中創建結構化資料集。在全球比較背景下對這些來源進行分析，並透過地圖和圖表等視覺表示進行增強，可以為新假設提供線索，以便根據組裝的資料集甚至連結的開放資料進行測試。這些技術促進了來自不同資料來源的地理知識的整合，並且它們一直在快速發展，預計很快就會變得對客戶更加友好。註腳 36 |
|
To deliver on the promises of a commodity
frontiers centred analysis of global capitalism we need to draw on approaches
and disciplines that often stay aloof from one another.Footnote 37 Combining
data gathering and analysis techniques with fieldwork will bridge the divide
between disciplines that study the past and those that study the present.
Global historians need to draw on the methods of ecological economists and
other social scientists – on the Environmental Justice Atlas
https://ejatlas.org/, for example – to map today’s ecological inequalities.
Combining archival research, fieldwork and digital techniques and deploying
an inductive methodology at different spatial and time scales will enable us
to understand the shifts of key commodity frontiers and the emergence of
particular commodity regimes, and thus to redraw our understanding of global
capitalism. |
兌現商品前沿的承諾 為了對全球資本主義進行集中分析，我們需要借鏡往往彼此疏離的方法和學科。註腳 37 將資料收集和分析技術與實地考察相結合將彌合研究過去的學科和研究現在的學科之間的鴻溝。全球歷史學家需要藉鏡生態經濟學家和其他社會科學家的方法——例如《環境正義地圖集》https://ejatlas.org/——來描繪當今的生態不平等。結合檔案研究、田野調查和數位技術，並在不同的空間和時間尺度上運用歸納方法，將使我們能夠理解關鍵商品前沿的變化和特定商品體制的出現，從而重新繪製我們對全球資本主義的理解。 |
|
*** |
*** |
|
Studying the global history of commodity
frontiers is crucial to coming to terms with important aspects of world
history over the past six centuries. But this project is just as important
when it comes to understanding our contemporary dilemmas. Two recent reports
commissioned by the European Union recommend that the EU considers its giant
global ecological footprint.Footnote 38 These
reports – along with international reporting more generally – suggest that we
have arrived at a new state of unsustainability. But as alarming as this is,
when we look at commodity frontiers over the very long term, we immediately
see that our contemporary dilemmas are not new. The consumption of massive
amounts of extra-European resources is an old story that goes back at least
600 years and has played a major role in Europe’s economic ascendancy. There
is a similar, though shorter story for the USA and other emerging powers that
arrange their economies through a mix of domestic production and global trade
in commodities that usually originate in the countryside. |
研究商品前沿的全球歷史對於了解過去六個世紀世界歷史的重要方面至關重要。但這個計畫對於理解我們當代的困境同樣重要。歐盟最近委託編寫的兩份報告建議歐盟考慮其巨大的全球生態足跡。註腳 38 這些報告——以及更廣泛的國際報告——表明我們已經進入了一種新的不可持續狀態。但儘管這令人擔憂，但當我們從長遠來看商品前沿時，我們立即發現我們當代的困境並不新鮮。消耗大量歐洲以外的資源是一個古老的故事，至少可以追溯到 600 年前，並且在歐洲的經濟崛起中發揮了重要作用。美國和其他新興大國也有類似的故事，儘管故事較短，它們透過國內生產和通常源自農村的大宗商品的全球貿易相結合來安排其經濟。 |
|
To disentangle the complexities that may
derail today’s attempts to frame a global agenda of sustainable growth, we
have to understand in new historical depth the dynamics of appropriation of
nature, enclosures of land, regimes of labour control and transfers of
capital and knowledge and the concomitant elimination of ecological and
social knowledge. At the same time, global history can deliver on some of its
fundamental promises by looking systematically at global change over very
long time periods while remaining attentive to history told from the
bottom-up. A new global social history will allow us to analyse consecutive
commodity regimes and understand the ways they have created unequal power
relations and massive inequities that shape the present. Studying commodity
frontiers can help us identify historical capitalism as a process rooted in a
profound restructuring of rural societies and their relation to nature and
lets us connect processes of extraction and exchange with degradation,
adaptation and resistance in rural peripheries. When we look at the history
of the sixteenth-century sugar frontier or the mid-twentieth-century soy
frontier as moments in the unfolding of various commodity regimes over the
past six centuries, we gain not just novel perspectives on the history of
capitalism, but also on our contemporary dilemmas. Global historians can make
a unique contribution to this conversation. |
為了理清可能使當今制定全球永續成長議程的努力脫軌的複雜性，我們必須以新的歷史深度來理解佔用自然、圈地、勞動力控制制度以及資本和知識轉移的動態以及隨之而來的問題。消除生態和社會知識。同時，全球歷史可以透過系統地審視很長一段時間內的全球變化，同時保持對自下而上講述的歷史的關注，從而兌現其一些基本承諾。新的全球社會歷史將使我們能夠分析連續的商品體制，並了解它們是如何創造不平等的權力關係和塑造當前的巨大不平等的。研究商品前沿可以幫助我們將歷史資本主義識別為植根於農村社會及其與自然關係的深刻重組的過程，並讓我們將提取和交換過程與農村外圍地區的退化、適應和抵抗聯繫起來。當我們將十六世紀糖業前沿或二十世紀中葉大豆前沿的歷史視為過去六個世紀各種商品體制發展的時刻時，我們不僅獲得了關於資本主義歷史的新穎視角，而且還獲得了關於資本主義歷史的新視角。也關於我們當代的困境。全球歷史學家可以為這場對話做出獨特的貢獻。 |
|
Sven Beckert is Laird Bell Professor of
History at Harvard University, where he teaches the history of the USA and
co-directs the Weatherhead Imitative on Global History. Beckert has been a
fellow of the Guggenheim Foundation, the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation
and the American Council of Learned Societies, amongst others. His latest
book, Empire of Cotton: A Global History, won the Bancroft Award,
the Alfred D. Chandler Jr. Award, the Taft Award, the Cundill Prize for
Academic Excellence and was a finalist for the Pulitzer. The New York
Times listed it as one of the ten best books published in the USA in
2015. Currently, Beckert is at work on Capitalism: A Global History,
to be published by Penguin Press. |
貝克特(Sven Beckert ) 是哈佛大學萊爾德貝爾 (Laird Bell) 歷史學教授，教授美國歷史，並共同指導韋瑟黑德全球歷史研究計畫。貝克特曾是古根漢基金會、亞歷山大馮洪堡基金會和美國學術協會理事會等機構的會員。他的最新著作《棉花帝國：全球歷史》榮獲班克羅夫特獎、小阿爾弗雷德·D·錢德勒獎、塔夫脫獎、康迪爾學術卓越獎，並入圍普立茲獎決賽。 《紐約時報》將其列為2015年美國出版的十本最佳書籍之一。目前，貝克特正在撰寫《資本主義：全球史》
，該書將由企鵝出版社出版。 |
|
Ulbe Bosma is Senior Researcher at the
International Institute of Social History and Professor of International
Comparative History at the VU University in Amsterdam. His main fields of
interest are plantation societies, commodity production and colonial
migrations. Among his recent publications are The Sugar Plantation in
India and Indonesia, Industrial Production 1770–2010 (Cambridge
University Press, 2013) and The Making of a Periphery. How Island
Southeast Asia Became a Mass Exporter of Labor (Columbia University
Press, 2019). He is currently working on a global history of sugar. |
烏爾伯 博斯馬是國際社會歷史研究所的高級研究員和阿姆斯特丹自由大學國際比較史教授。他的主要興趣領域是種植園社會、商品生產和殖民移民。他最近的著作包括《印度和印尼的糖業種植園》
、
《工業生產 1770-2010》 （劍橋大學出版社，2013 年）和《外圍的製造》。東南亞島嶼如何成為勞動力大規模出口國（哥倫比亞大學出版社，2019 年）。他目前正在研究全球糖史。 |
|
Mindi Schneider is Assistant Professor in
the Sociology of Development and Change at Wageningen University, the
Netherlands. She is a development sociologist with specialization in agrarian
political ecology, the political economy of development, and commodity
studies. She has published extensively on the capitalist transformation of
food and farming in China, including analyses of the metabolic rift,
state-agribusiness power, the material-cultural politics of dispossession,
rural-urban relations and contestations, and rural activism. She is senior
editor of the open access journal, Commodity Frontiers. |
Mindi Schneider) 是荷蘭瓦赫寧根大學發展與變革社會學助理教授。她是一位發展社會學家，專長於農業政治生態學、發展政治經濟學和商品研究。她發表了大量關於中國糧食和農業的資本主義轉型的文章，包括對代謝裂痕、國家農業企業權力、剝奪的物質文化政治、城鄉關係和爭論以及農村行動主義的分析。她是開放取用期刊《Commodity Frontiers》的高級編輯。 |
|
Eric Vanhaute is Professor in Economic
and Social History and World History at Ghent University, Belgium. He has
published extensively about agrarian and rural history, the history of labor
markets and social inequality, and world history. His latest book is Peasants
in World History (Routledge, 2021).Together with Claudia Bernardi he
is working on a book project Global History of the Living Planet. A
Human Narrative. |
Eric Vanhaute)是比利時根特大學經濟社會史與世界史教授。他發表了大量有關農業和農村歷史、勞動市場和社會不平等歷史以及世界歷史的著作。他的最新著作是《世界歷史中的農民》
（勞特利奇，2021 年）。他正在與克勞迪婭·貝爾納迪(Claudia Bernardi ) 一起開展圖書項目《生命星球的全球歷史》(Global History of the Living Planet)。人類敘事。 |
|
|
|
|
Footnotes |
註腳 |
|
† |
† |
|
The authors would like to thank Pepijn
Brandon, Philip McMichael and Marcel van der Linden for their valuable
comments. |
作者要感謝Pepijn Brandon、Philip McMichael 和 Marcel van der
Linden 的寶貴意見。 |
|
|
|
|
References |
參考 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
1 |
|
Richard Ligon, A True and Exact
History of the Island of Barbados (London: Peter Parker, 1673), 96. |
利根(Richard Ligon) ， 《巴貝多島真實而準確的歷史》
（倫敦：彼得·帕克，1673 年），96。 |
|
|
|
|
2 |
2 |
|
Ligon, A True and Exact History,
109. |
利根，真實而準確的歷史，109。 |
|
|
|
|
3 |
3 |
|
See United States Department of
Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service, Circular Series, June 2020, World
Agricultural Production. |
請參閱美國農業部，對外農業服務局，通告系列，2020 年 6 月，世界農業生產。 |
|
|
|
|
4 |
4 |
|
See United States Department of
Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service, Circular Series, June 2020, World
Agricultural Production. |
請參閱美國農業部，對外農業服務局，通告系列，2020 年 6 月，世界農業生產。 |
|
|
|
|
5 |
5 |
|
See Paul Collier, The Plundered
Planet. Why We Must – and How We Can – Manage Nature for Global Prosperity (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2010). |
參見保羅‧科利爾， 《被掠奪的星球》。為什麼我們必須──以及我們如何能──管理自然以促進全球繁榮（牛津：牛津大學出版社，2010）。 |
|
|
|
|
6 |
6 |
|
Alf Hornborg, “Zero-Sum World. Challenges
in Conceptualizing Environmental Load Displacement and Ecologically Unequal
Change in the World-System,” International Journal of Comparative
Sociology 50, no. 3–4 (2009): 237–62. |
阿爾夫‧霍恩伯格，《零和世界》。世界體系中環境負荷位移和生態不平等變化概念化的挑戰，」國際比較社會學雜誌50，第 1 期。 3-4（2009）：237-62。 |
|
|
|
|
7 |
7 |
|
See Alf Hornborg, “Introduction:
Environmental History as Political Ecology,” in Rethinking
Environmental History. World-System History and Global Environmental Change,
ed. Alf Hornborg, J.R. McNeill, Joan Martinez-Alier (Lanham: Altamira Press,
2007), 1–26. |
參見阿爾夫·霍恩伯格（ Alf Hornborg）的“引言：作為政治生態學的環境史”， 《重新思考環境史》。世界體系歷史和全球環境變化，編輯。阿爾夫·霍恩伯格、JR 麥克尼爾、瓊·馬丁內斯-阿利爾（Lanham：阿爾塔米拉出版社，2007 年），1-26。 |
|
|
|
|
8 |
8 |
|
David Harvey, The Limits to
Capital (Oxford: Blackwell, 1982); David Harvey, “The Geopolitics of
Capitalism,” in Social Relations and Spatial Structure, ed. Derek
Gregory, John Urry (Basingstoke, Hampshire: Macmillan, 1994), 128–63; David
Harvey, Spaces of Capital: Towards a Critical Geography (Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press, 2001); Stephen H. Bunker, “Natural Values and the
Physical Inevitability of Uneven Development Under Capitalism,” in Rethinking
Environmental History. World-System History and Global Environmental Change,
ed. Alf Hornborg, J.R. McNeill, Joan Martinez-Alier (Lanham: Altamira Press,
2007), 239–258; Alf Hornborg, “Zero-Sum World”. |
大衛哈維（David Harvey）， 《資本的限制》
（牛津：布萊克威爾，1982 年）；大衛哈維，《資本主義的地緣政治》，《社會關係與空間結構》
，編者。德里克·格雷戈里、約翰·厄裡（漢普郡貝辛斯托克：麥克米倫，1994 年），128–63；大衛哈維，
《資本空間：邁向批判的地理》
（愛丁堡：愛丁堡大學出版社，2001 年）；邦克（Stephen H.
Bunker），“資本主義下不平衡發展的自然價值和物理必然性”，《重新思考環境史》。世界體系歷史和全球環境變化，編輯。阿爾夫·霍恩伯格、JR·麥克尼爾、瓊·馬丁內斯-阿利爾（Lanham：阿爾塔米拉出版社，2007 年），239–258；阿爾夫‧霍恩伯格，《零和世界》。 |
|
|
|
|
9 |
9 |
|
On the “resource curse” see amongst
others F. van der Ploeg and S. Poelhekke, “Natural Resources: Curse or
Blessing?,” Journal of Economic Literature 49, no. 2 (2011):
366–420; R.M. Auty, Resource Abundance and Economic Development (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2001). |
Ploeg和 S.
Poelhekke等，“自然資源：詛咒還是祝福？ ” ，經濟文獻雜誌49，第 1 期。 2（2011）：366-420； RM Auty ，資源豐富與經濟發展（牛津：牛津大學出版社，2001 年）。 |
|
|
|
|
10 |
10 |
|
On extractivism see Eduardo Gudynas,
“Transitions to Post-Extractivism: Directions, Options, Areas of Action,”
in Beyond Development, ed. Miriam Lang and Dunia Mokrani
(Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2013), 165–88. On neo-extractivism, see
Hans-Jürgen Burchandt and Kristina Dietz, “(Neo-) Extractivism – A New
Challenge for Development Theory from Latin America,” Third World
Quarterly 35, no. 3 (2014): 468–86. Extractivism has been extended
beyond mineral extraction to include agriculture and forestry. On
post-extractivism and counternarratives, see J. Martinez-Alier, et al.,
“Between Activism and Science: Grassroots Concepts for Sustainability Coined
by Environmental Justice Organizations,” Journal of Political Ecology 21
(2014): 19–60. |
關於榨取主義，請參閱 Eduardo
Gudynas的《向後榨取主義的轉變：方向、選擇、行動領域》，《超越發展》
，編輯。米里亞姆·朗和杜尼婭 Mokrani （阿姆斯特丹：跨國研究所，2013 年），165–88。關於新榨取主義，請參閱 Hans-Jürgen Burchandt和 Kristina Dietz，“（新）榨取主義– 來自拉丁美洲的發展理論的新挑戰”，《第三世界季刊》第
35 期，第 1 期。 3（2014）：468-86。採掘主義已經從礦物開採擴展到農業和林業。關於後榨取主義和反敘事，請參閱 J. Martinez- Alier等人，“行動主義與科學之間：環境正義組織創造的可持續發展的草根概念”，《政治生態學雜誌》 21 (2014)： 19-60。 |
|
|
|
|
11 |
11 |
|
Mattias Borg Rasmussen and Christian
Lund, “Reconfiguring Frontier Spaces: The Territorialization of Resource
Control,” World Development 101 (2018): 388–99; Nancy Lee
Peluso and Christian Lund, “New Frontiers of Land Control:
Introduction,” Journal of Peasant Studies 38, no. 4 (2011):
667–81. |
Mattias Borg Rasmussen 和 Christian Lund，“重新配置前沿空間：資源控制的地域化”，《世界發展》 101（2018）：388-99； Nancy Lee Peluso和 Christian Lund，“土地控制的新前沿：簡介”，《農民研究雜誌》 38，第 1 期。 4（2011）：667-81。 |
|
|
|
|
12 |
12 |
|
Alain
Bihr, Le premier âge du capitalisme (1415–1763): Vol.
1. (L’expansion européenne Lausanne: Page deux, 2006). There are also those who disagree, seeing capitalism’s history
instead as either much longer (for example, Larry Neal and Jeffrey
Williamson, The Cambridge History of Capitalism. 2 vols
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014), or as emerging in a very
particular locale in Europe and becoming global only in the nineteeth
century, most prominently Robert Brenner. |
阿蘭‧比爾（Alain Bihr）， 《資本主義時代》（1415-1763）：卷。 1. (L'expansion européenne Lausanne:
Page deux, 2006)。也有一些人持不同意見，他們認為資本主義的歷史要么更長（例如，Larry Neal 和 Jeffrey
Williamson， 《劍橋資本主義史》 。第 2卷（劍橋：劍橋大學出版社，2014 年），要么是在一個非常特殊的時期出現的。歐洲的一個地方，直到十九世紀才變得全球化，其中最著名的是羅伯特·布倫納（Robert Brenner）。 |
|
|
|
|
13 |
13 |
|
Terence Hopkins and Immanuel Wallerstein,
“Commodity Chains in the World Economy Prior to 1800,” Review 10,
no. 1 (1986): 157–70. See also Gary Gereffi and Miguel Korzeniewicz,
eds. Commodity Chains and Global Capitalism (ABC-Clio,
1994); William G. Clarence-Smith and Steven Topik, eds. The Global
Coffee Economy in Africa, Asia and Latin America: 1500–1989 (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2003); Jennifer Bair, “Editors Introduction: The
Political Economy of Commodity Chains,” Journal of World-Systems
Research 20, no. 1 (2014): 1–10 and see further this special issue. |
Terence Hopkins 和 Immanuel Wallerstein，“1800 年之前世界經濟中的商品鏈”，評論10，第 1 期。 1（1986）：157-70。另請參閱 Gary Gereffi和 Miguel
Korzeniewicz編輯。商品鍊與全球資本主義（ABC-Clio，1994）；威廉·G·克拉倫斯·史密斯和史蒂文·托皮克編輯。非洲、亞洲和拉丁美洲的全球咖啡經濟：1500-1989 （劍橋：劍橋大學出版社，2003 年）； Jennifer Bair，“編輯簡介：商品鏈的政治經濟學”，《世界系統研究雜誌》 20，第 1 期。 1 (2014): 1–10 並進一步查看本期特刊。 |
|
|
|
|
14 |
14 |
|
Hopkins and Wallerstein, “Commodity
Chains,” 158. |
霍普金斯和沃勒斯坦，“商品鏈”，158。 |
|
|
|
|
15 |
15 |
|
Jane Collins, “A Feminist Approach to
Overcoming the Closed Boxes of the Commodity Chain,” in Gendered
Commodity Chains: Seeing Women’s Work and Households in Global Production,
ed. Wilma A. Dunaway (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2014), 27; Jane
Collins, Threads: Gender, Labor, and Power in the Global Apparel
Industry (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003). |
Jane Collins，“克服商品鏈封閉盒子的女性主義方法”，載於性別商品鏈：在全球生產中審視婦女的工作和家庭，編輯。 Wilma A. Dunaway（史丹佛：史丹佛大學出版社，2014 年），27； Jane Collins，主題：全球服裝產業中的性別、勞動力和權力（芝加哥：芝加哥大學出版社，2003 年）。 |
|
|
|
|
16 |
16 |
|
Nancy Fraser, “Behind Marx’s Hidden
Abode,” New Left Review 86 (March/April 2014). |
南希·弗雷澤，“馬克思隱秘居所的背後”， 《新左派評論》
86（2014 年 3 月/4 月）。 |
|
|
|
|
17 |
17 號 |
|
Wilma A. Dunaway, “Women’s Labor and
Nature: The 21st Century World-System from a Radical
Ecofeminist Perspective,” in Emerging Issues in the 21 st Century
World-System, ed. Wilma Dunaway (Praeger Press, 2003), 189. Joan Smith
and Immanuel Wallerstein eds. Creating and Transforming Households.
The Constraints of the World-Economy (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1992). |
Wilma A. Dunaway，“女性的勞動與自然：從激進的生態女權主義角度看 21世紀的世界體系”，《 21 世紀的新問題》 英石 世紀世界體系，編輯。 Wilma
Dunaway（ Praeger Press，2003），189。Joan Smith 和 Immanuel
Wallerstein 編輯。創建和改造家庭。 世界經濟的約束（劍橋：劍橋大學出版社，1992）。 |
|
|
|
|
18 |
18 |
|
Sven Beckert, Empire of Cotton: A
Global History (New York: Alfred A. Kopf, 2014); Ulbe Bosma, The
Making of a Periphery: How Island Southeast Asia Became a Mass Exporter of
Labor (New York: Columbia University Press, 2019). |
Sven Beckert ， 《棉花帝國：全球歷史》
（紐約：Alfred A. Kopf，2014 年）；烏爾伯 Bosma ， 《外圍的形成：東南亞島嶼如何成為大規模勞動力輸出國》
（紐約：哥倫比亞大學出版社，2019 年）。 |
|
|
|
|
19 |
19 |
|
Jason W. Moore, Capitalism in the
Web of Life: Ecology and the Accumulation of Capital (London: Verso,
2015); Alf Hornborg, J.R. McNeill, and Joan Martinez-Alier, Rethinking
Environmental History. World-System History and Global Environmental Change (Lanham:
Altamira Press, 2007). |
Jason W. Moore，《生命網絡中的資本主義：生態與資本累積》
（倫敦：Verso，2015 年）； Alf Hornborg 、JR McNeill 與 Joan Martinez- Alier ， 《重新思考環境史》。世界體系歷史與全球環境變遷（Lanham：阿爾塔米拉出版社，2007 年）。 |
|
|
|
|
20 |
20 |
|
Sidney W. Mintz, Sweetness and
Power: The Place of Sugar in Modern History (New York: Viking,
1985); Kenneth Pomeranz, The Great Divergence. China, Europe and the
Making of the Modern World Economy (Princeton and Oxford: Princeton
University Press, 2000), 274–8. |
Sidney W. Mintz ， 《甜味與力量：糖在現代歷史中的地位》
（紐約：Viking，1985）；肯尼斯‧彭慕蘭， 《大分流》。中國、歐洲和現代世界經濟的形成（普林斯頓和牛津：普林斯頓大學出版社，2000 年），274-8。 |
|
|
|
|
21 |
21 |
|
Philip McMichael, “Global Development and
the Corporate Food Regime,” in New Directions in the Sociology of
Global Development, ed. Frederick H. Buttel, and Philip D. McMichael
(Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2005), 272; Harriet Friedmann and
Philip McMichael, “Agriculture and the State System: The Rise and Fall of
National Agricultures, 1870 to the Present,” Sociologia Ruralis,
29, no. 2 (1989): 93–117; Philip McMichael, “Commentary: Food regime for
thought,” Journal of Peasant Studies, 43, no. 3 (2016): 648–70. |
菲利普·麥克邁克爾，“全球發展和企業食品體制”，《全球發展社會學新方向》
，編輯。 Frederick H. Buttel和 Philip D.
McMichael（Bingley：Emerald Group Publishing Limited，2005 年），272； Harriet Friedmann和 Philip McMichael，“農業與國家體系：國家農業的興衰，1870 年至今”，社會學
鄉村，29，沒有。 2（1989）：93-117；菲利普·麥克邁克爾，“評論：思想的食物體制”，《農民研究雜誌》 ，43，第 1 期。 3（2016）：648-70。 |
|
|
|
|
22 |
22 |
|
Harriet Friedmann, “From Colonialism to
Green Capitalism: Social Movements and the Emergence of Food Regimes,”
in New Directions in the Sociology of Global Development, ed.
Frederick H. Buttel and Philip D. McMichael (Bingley: Emerald Group
Publishing Limited, 2005), 227–64, and here 228. |
Harriet Friedmann ，“從殖民主義到綠色資本主義：社會運動和糧食體制的出現”，《全球發展社會學新方向》 ，編輯。 Frederick H. Buttel和 Philip D.
McMichael（Bingley：Emerald Group Publishing Limited，2005 年），227-64，此處為 228。 |
|
|
|
|
23 |
23 |
|
Philip McMichael, “A Food Regime
Genealogy,” Journal of Peasant Studies 36, no. 1 (2009):
148. |
菲利普·麥克邁克爾，“食物體制譜系”， 《農民研究雜誌》
36，第 1 期。 1（2009）：148。 |
|
|
|
|
24 |
24 |
|
The idea that there are additional fixes
besides the well-known spatial fix has been expressed by Beverly Silver in
her book Forces of Labor: Worker’s Movements and Globalization Since
1870. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 76. She mentions
among others the technological/organizational fix. See also Giovanni Arrighi,
“Spatial and Other “Fixes” of Historical Capitalism,” [https://irows.ucr.edu/conferences/globgis/papers/Arrighi.htm],
2003 and Marcel van der Linden, Workers of the World: Essays Toward a
Global Labor History (Leiden: Brill, 2008). |
《勞動力的力量：自 1870 年以來的工人運動和全球化》一書中表達了除了眾所周知的空間修復之外還有其他修復的想法。
（劍橋：劍橋大學出版社，2003 年），76。她提到了技術/組織修復等問題。另請參見
Giovanni Arrighi ，“歷史資本主義的空間和其他“修復””，[ https://irows.ucr.edu/conferences/globgis/papers/Arrighi.htm
]，2003 年和 Marcel van der Linden， 《世界工人》 ：全球勞工史論文（萊頓：布里爾，2008 年）。 |
|
|
|
|
25 |
25 |
|
An extensive investigation of these
changing labour relations is conducted by the Global Collaboratory on
the History of Labour Relations, based at the International Institute of
Social History in Amsterdam: https://collab.iisg.nl/web/labourrelations.
See also Karin Hofmeester and Marcel Van der Linden eds. Handbook
Global History of Work (Berlin, etc.: De Gruyter, 2018). |
阿姆斯特丹國際社會歷史研究所的全球勞動關係歷史合作實驗室對這些不斷變化的勞動關係進行了廣泛的調查：https: //collab.iisg.nl/web/labourrelations
。另請參見 Karin
Hofmeester和 Marcel Van der
Linden 編輯。全球工作史手冊（柏林等：De Gruyter ，2018）。 |
|
|
|
|
26 |
26 |
|
See Joe Bandy and Jackie Smith,
eds. Coalitions Across Borders: Transnational Protest and the
Neoliberal Order (Lanham Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2005);
Saturnino M. Borras Jr., Marc Edelman, and Cristóbal Kay, Transnational
Agrarian Movements Confronting Globalization (New York:
Wiley-Blackwell, 2008). |
參見喬·班迪和傑基·史密斯編輯。跨國界聯盟：跨國抗議與新自由主義秩序（Lanham Md.：Rowman &
Littlefield，2005）； Saturnino M. Borras Jr.、Marc Edelman 和Cristóbal Kay， 《面對全球化的跨國農業運動》 （紐約：Wiley-Blackwell，2008 年）。 |
|
|
|
|
27 |
27 |
|
See Scott Prudham, “Pimping Climate
Change: Richard Branson, Global Warming, and the Performance of Green Capitalism,” Environment
and Planning A 41 (2009): 1594–613; Victor Wallis “Beyond ‘Green
Capitalism’,” Monthly Review 61, no. 9 (2010): 32–48;
Friedmann, “From Colonialism to Green Capitalism”. |
參見 Scott Prudham ，“拉皮條氣候變遷：理查德·布蘭森、全球變暖和綠色資本主義的表現”， Environment
and Planning A 41 (2009): 1594–613；維克多·沃利斯“超越‘綠色資本主義’”，月度評論61，第 1 期。 9（2010）：32-48；佛里曼，《從殖民主義到綠色資本主義》。 |
|
|
|
|
28 |
28 |
|
https://www.weforum.org/about/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-by-klaus-schwab. |
https://www.weforum.org/about/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-by-klaus-schwab
。 |
|
|
|
|
29 |
29 |
|
Nick Srnicek, Platform Capitalism (Cambridge,
UK; Malden, MA: Policy, 2016). |
Nick Srnicek ， 《平台資本主義》
（英國劍橋；麻薩諸塞州馬爾登：政策，2016 年）。 |
|
|
|
|
30 |
30 |
|
See David Goodman, Bernardo Sorj, and
John Wilkinson, From Farming to Biotechnology: A Theory of
Agro-Industrial Development (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987). The
authors describe this process as appropriationism, whereby
‘elements once integral to the agricultural production process are extracted
and transformed into industrial activities and then reincorporated into
agriculture as inputs’ (p. 2). Through state policies and agribusiness-led
markets, farmers adopt these technologies, entering into production
treadmills that create dependencies, competitive imperatives in
price-governed markets, and systemic ecological degradation. See also Philip
Howard, “Visualizing Consolidation in the Global Seed Industry:
1996–2008,” Sustainability 1, no. 4 (2009): 1266–87. |
參見 David Goodman、Bernardo Sorj和 John Wilkinson，《從農業到生物技術：農業工業發展理論》
（牛津：Basil Blackwell，1987 年）。作者將此過程描述為撥款主義，即「農業生產過程中曾經不可或缺的要素被提取並轉化為工業活動，然後作為投入重新納入農業」（第 2 頁）。透過國家政策和農業企業主導的市場，農民採用這些技術，進入生產跑步機，從而產生依賴性、價格管制市場的競爭要求以及系統性生態退化。另請參閱 Philip Howard，“全球種子產業的可視化整合：1996-2008 年”，永續發展1，第 1 期。 4（2009）：1266-87。 |
|
|
|
|
31 |
31 |
|
See McMichael, “A Food Regime Genealogy”;
Jennifer Clapp and Doris Fuchs, eds. Corporate Power in Global
Agrifood Governance (Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press, 2009). |
參見麥克邁克爾，“食物體制譜系”；珍妮佛克拉普和多麗絲福克斯，編輯。全球農產品治理中的企業力量（麻薩諸塞州劍橋：麻省理工學院出版社，2009 年）。 |
|
|
|
|
32 |
32 |
|
We refer to some useful reflections:
Philip McMichael, “Incorporating Comparison within a World-Historical
Perspective: An Alternative Comparative Method,” American
Sociological Review, 55, no. 3 (1990): 385–97; Gareth Austin, “Reciprocal
Comparison and African History: Tackling Conceptual Eurocentrism in the Study
of Africa’s Economic Past,” African Studies Review 50, no. 3
(2007): 1–28; P. Parthasarathi, “Comparison in Global History,” in Writing
the History of the Global. Challenges for the 21st Century, ed. M. Berg
(Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2013), 69–82. |
我們參考了一些有用的反思：Philip
McMichael，“將比較納入世界歷史視角：另一種比較方法”，《美國社會學評論》 ，55，第 1 期。 3（1990）：385-97；加雷斯·奧斯汀（Gareth Austin），“相互比較和非洲歷史：非洲經濟歷史研究中解決概念性歐洲中心主義”，《非洲研究評論》 50，第 1 期。 3（2007）：1-28； P. Parthasarathi ，“全球歷史的比較”，《書寫全球歷史》。 21 世紀的挑戰，編輯。 M.
Berg（牛津，牛津大學出版社，2013），69-82。 |
|
|
|
|
33 |
33 |
|
Richard Drayton and David Motadel,
“Discussion: The futures of global history,” Journal of Global
History, 13, no. 1 (2018): 1–21; Eric Vanhaute, “Who Is Afraid of Global
History? Ambitions, Pitfalls and Limits of Learning Global History,” Osterreichische
Zeitschrift Fur Geschichtswissenschaften 20, no. 2 (2009): 22–39;
Patrick O’Brien, “Historiographical Traditions and Modern Imperatives for the
Restoration of Global History,” Journal of Global History, 1, no.
1 (2006): 3–39, 38; Dominic Sachsenmaier, “World History as Ecumenical
History,” Journal of World History, 18, no. 4 (2007): 465–89;
Barbara Weinstein, “History Without a Cause? Grand Narratives, World History,
and The Postcolonial Dilemma,” International Review of Social History,
50, no. 1 (2005): 71–93, 80; Kenneth Pomeranz, “Writing About Divergences in
Global History. Some Implications for Scale, Methods, Aims, and Categories,”
Writing the History of the Global. Challenges for the 21st Century, ed. M.
Berg (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2013), 117–28. |
理查德·德雷頓 (Richard Drayton) 和大衛·莫塔德爾 (David Motadel) ，“討論：全球歷史的未來”，《全球歷史雜誌》 ，13，第 1 期。 1（2018）：1-21；艾瑞克範豪特（ Eric
Vanhaute） ，「誰害怕全球歷史？學習全球歷史的野心、陷阱和局限性，」 Osterreichische Zeitschrift Fur Geschichtswissenschaften 20，編號。 2（2009）：22-39；帕特里克·奧布萊恩，“恢復全球歷史的史學傳統和現代勢在必行”，《全球歷史雜誌》 ，1，第 1 期。 1 (2006): 3–39, 38;多米尼克·薩克森邁爾（Dominic Sachsenmaier） ，“作為普世歷史的世界歷史”，《世界歷史雜誌》 ，18，第 1 期。 4（2007）：465-89；芭芭拉溫斯坦，《無因的歷史？宏大敘事、世界歷史和後殖民困境，」《國際社會史評論》
，50，第 1 期。 1 (2005): 71–93, 80;肯尼思·彭慕蘭 (Kenneth Pomeranz) ，“撰寫全球歷史中的分歧。對規模、方法、目標和類別的一些影響”，《書寫全球歷史》。 21 世紀的挑戰，編輯。 M. Berg）（牛津：牛津大學出版社 2013 年），117-28。 |
|
|
|
|
34 |
34 |
|
See, for example, the Maddison Conference
Board: https://www.conference-board.org/data/economydatabase/index.cfm?id=27722 and https://www.clio-infra.eu/. |
例如，請參閱麥迪遜會議委員會：
https: //www.conference-board.org/data/economydatabase/index.cfm?
id=27722和https://www.clio-infra.eu/ 。 |
|
|
|
|
35 |
35 |
|
Aleksander Pluskowski, Adrian J. Boas,
and Christopher Gerrard, “The Ecology of Crusading: Investigating the
Environmental Impact of Holy War and Colonisation at the Frontiers of
medieval Europe,” Medieval Archaeology 55 (2011): 192–225.
See also the Medin project (Mediterranean Insularities: Space, Landscape and
Agriculture in Early Modern Cyprus and Crete. https://medins.ims.forth.gr/, |
亞歷山大 Pluskowski 、Adrian J. Boas 和 Christopher
Gerrard，“十字軍東徵的生態：調查中世紀歐洲邊境聖戰和殖民化的環境影響”，中世紀考古學55 (2011)：192-225。另請參閱Medin計畫（地中海島嶼：早期現代塞浦路斯和克里特島的空間、景觀和農業。https: //medins.ims.forth.gr/， |
|
|
|
|
36 |
36 |
|
See, for example, the work by Reinaldo
Funes of Cuba’s Fundación Nuñez Jimenez who has been leading the way in developing
a historical GIS for Cuba, focused on mapping changing land use and
ownership, the spread of the commodity-plantation economy and its
environmental impact. http://www.fanj.org. |
例如，請參閱古巴基金會Reinaldo
Funes的工作 Nuñez Jimenez 一直在為古巴開發歷史地理資訊系統方面發揮領導作用，專注於繪製不斷變化的土地利用和所有權、商品種植園經濟的傳播及其對環境的影響。
http://www.fanj.org 。 |
|
|
|
|
37 |
37 |
|
For an extensive discussion of
transdisciplinarity, see Eve Darian-Smith and Philip McCarty, “Beyond Interdisciplinarity.
Developing a Global Transdisciplinary Framework,” Transcience 2
(2016): 1–26, and Id., The Global Turn. Theories, Research Designs,
and Methods for Global Studies (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 2017). |
跨學科性的廣泛討論，請參閱 Eve
Darian-Smith 和 Philip McCarty，“超越跨學科性” 。制定全球跨學科框架”， Transcience 2 (2016)：1-26，以及同上，
《全球轉向》。全球研究的理論、研究設計與方法（柏克萊：加州大學出版社，2017 年）。 |
|
|
|
|
38 |
38 |
|
Feasibility study on options to step
up EU action against deforestation (January
2018); Study on the environmental impact of palm oil consumption and
on existing sustainability standards (February 2018). |
關於加強歐盟打擊森林砍伐行動的可行性研究（2018 年 1 月）；關於棕櫚油消費對環境影響和現有永續發展標準的研究（2018 年 2 月）。 |
|
|
|
沒有留言:
發佈留言