{"title":"以社区为中心的环境论述:重新定义澳大利亚墨累达令盆地的水资源管理","authors":"Amanda Shankland","doi":"10.1007/s10806-024-09926-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Australian government's response to the Millennium Drought (1997–2010) has been met with praise and contestation. While proponents saw the response as timely and crucial, critics claimed it was characterized by government overreach and mismanagement. Five months of field research in farm communities in the Murray Darling Basin (MDB) identified two dominant discourses: administrative rationalism and a local community-based discourse I have termed community-centrism. Administrative rationalism reflects the value of scientific inquiry in service to the state and is the dominant research-based problem-solving model used by water and natural resource agencies (Dryzek in The politics of the earth: environmental discourses, Oxford University Press, 2013; Colloff and Pittock in Aust J Water Resour, 23(2):88–98, 2019). Community-centrism was identified through discussions with farmers and represents a bottom-up approach to environmental planning and management that seeks to incorporate local knowledge, planning, and direct participation. This investigation reveals how discourses define problems and policy choices. While market-based government interventions were likely necessary to address the crisis in the MDB, community-centred responses could have enhanced the government’s capacity to respond to problems. This paper argues that the long-term sustainability of water management in the Basin will require a reorientation on the part of farmers, academics, and governments to develop a community-centred approach to water policies impacting agriculture.</p>","PeriodicalId":501152,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Community-Centred Environmental Discourse: Redefining Water Management in the Murray Darling Basin, Australia\",\"authors\":\"Amanda Shankland\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10806-024-09926-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The Australian government's response to the Millennium Drought (1997–2010) has been met with praise and contestation. While proponents saw the response as timely and crucial, critics claimed it was characterized by government overreach and mismanagement. Five months of field research in farm communities in the Murray Darling Basin (MDB) identified two dominant discourses: administrative rationalism and a local community-based discourse I have termed community-centrism. Administrative rationalism reflects the value of scientific inquiry in service to the state and is the dominant research-based problem-solving model used by water and natural resource agencies (Dryzek in The politics of the earth: environmental discourses, Oxford University Press, 2013; Colloff and Pittock in Aust J Water Resour, 23(2):88–98, 2019). Community-centrism was identified through discussions with farmers and represents a bottom-up approach to environmental planning and management that seeks to incorporate local knowledge, planning, and direct participation. This investigation reveals how discourses define problems and policy choices. While market-based government interventions were likely necessary to address the crisis in the MDB, community-centred responses could have enhanced the government’s capacity to respond to problems. This paper argues that the long-term sustainability of water management in the Basin will require a reorientation on the part of farmers, academics, and governments to develop a community-centred approach to water policies impacting agriculture.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-024-09926-0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-024-09926-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
澳大利亚政府应对千年旱灾(1997-2010 年)的措施受到了赞扬和质疑。支持者认为应对措施及时而关键,而批评者则认为其特点是政府越权和管理不善。我在墨累达令盆地(MDB)的农场社区进行了五个月的实地研究,发现了两种主流话语:一种是行政理性主义,另一种是以当地社区为基础的话语,我称之为社区中心主义。行政理性主义反映了为国家服务的科学探索的价值,是水和自然资源机构使用的基于研究的主流问题解决模式(Dryzek,载于《地球政治:环境话语》,牛津大学出版社,2013 年;Colloff 和 Pittock,载于《Aust J Water Resour》,23(2):88-98, 2019 年)。社区中心主义是通过与农民的讨论确定的,代表了一种自下而上的环境规划和管理方法,旨在纳入当地知识、规划和直接参与。这项调查揭示了话语如何定义问题和政策选择。虽然以市场为基础的政府干预可能是解决多米尼加共和国危机所必需的,但以社区为中心的应对措施本可以增强政府应对问题的能力。本文认为,盆地水资源管理的长期可持续性需要农民、学者和政府重新定位,制定以社区为中心的影响农业的水资源政策。
Community-Centred Environmental Discourse: Redefining Water Management in the Murray Darling Basin, Australia
The Australian government's response to the Millennium Drought (1997–2010) has been met with praise and contestation. While proponents saw the response as timely and crucial, critics claimed it was characterized by government overreach and mismanagement. Five months of field research in farm communities in the Murray Darling Basin (MDB) identified two dominant discourses: administrative rationalism and a local community-based discourse I have termed community-centrism. Administrative rationalism reflects the value of scientific inquiry in service to the state and is the dominant research-based problem-solving model used by water and natural resource agencies (Dryzek in The politics of the earth: environmental discourses, Oxford University Press, 2013; Colloff and Pittock in Aust J Water Resour, 23(2):88–98, 2019). Community-centrism was identified through discussions with farmers and represents a bottom-up approach to environmental planning and management that seeks to incorporate local knowledge, planning, and direct participation. This investigation reveals how discourses define problems and policy choices. While market-based government interventions were likely necessary to address the crisis in the MDB, community-centred responses could have enhanced the government’s capacity to respond to problems. This paper argues that the long-term sustainability of water management in the Basin will require a reorientation on the part of farmers, academics, and governments to develop a community-centred approach to water policies impacting agriculture.