2019 Fiscal Year Final Research Report
Processes of Capitalization/financialization of Nature: From Cases in Southeast Asia
| Project/Area Number |
15H05125
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Section | 海外学術 |
|---|
| Research Field |
Environmental policy and social systems
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Okayama University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
|
|---|
| Co-Investigator(Kenkyū-buntansha) |
内藤 大輔 京都大学, 農学研究科, 特定准教授 (30616016)
百村 帝彦 九州大学, 熱帯農学研究センター, 准教授 (80360783)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2015-04-01 – 2019-03-31
|
| Keywords | 地域研究 / 環境政策 / 国際開発 / 東南アジア / 自然資本 / 商品化 / 制度 / 住民 |
|---|
| Outline of Final Research Achievements |
In recent years, there have been discussions about the approach to procure funds by the use of financial instruments to mitigate environmental problems. Common examples in developing countries include the use of carbon credits (e.g., REDD+) and systems to pay for environmental services (e.g., PES). Taking examples from Southeast Asia, this research examined processes that lead to the formulation of these funding mechanisms, and regarded them as new developments that mainstream the commodification of nature (capitalization/financialization of nature). At the same time, this research also examined its socioeconomic impacts and the changes in governance of society and the environment.
As a result, we could conceptualize a three-stage process to capitalize the nature. We also found that the stakeholders who have technical knowledge, and are distant from the target area, became more influential in the process, which sometime caused various social confusions in implementation.
|
| Free Research Field |
東南アジア地域研究、環境と開発
|
| Academic Significance and Societal Importance of the Research Achievements |
これまでのPES、REDD+等に関する研究では、主に環境経済・政策の視点に基づき当該制度の直接的影響に絞って分析されることが多かった。その結果、自然にも社会にもネガティブな影響は生まれていないという報告もある。しかし、これらの制度を現地がたどった歴史的な視点、すなわち近代以降展開された「自然の擬制商品化」の新局面として位置づける視点から掘り下げる研究は少なかった。本研究ではこのような視点にたつことで、当該制度を歴史的文脈や他制度・社会とのリンクのなかで捉えており、研究成果も国家や国際社会が環境対策を通じて人への支配を強めているという、上述の研究とは異なる立場からの批判になっている。
|
