Wildlife Conservation in China: Preserving the Habitat of China's Wild West
Wildlife Conservation in China: Preserving the Habitat of China's Wild West
复制标题
DOI：
10.1086/tcj.61.20648064
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Evelyn Chia
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Evelyn Chia
中国野生动物保护：保护中国西部野生动物的栖息地，理查德B。哈里斯阿尔蒙克：M。E.夏普，2008年。24 + 341页。74.95美元（精装）。这本书是基于一位西方野生生物学家在中国西部长达20年的田野调查。标题不言自明，讨论的问题从生物和地理主题到野生动物保护的政治经济问题。前言和第一章认为，中国野生动物管理的问题在于不能为野生动物本身而重视野生动物，而不是栖息地的破坏。不重视野生动物可能导致无法管理消费和生产/收获与保护野生动物资源之间的关系。在第二章中，哈里斯考察了中国西部的干旱、偏远和人口稀少等地理因素。他考察了种族和文化，然后跳到中国西部是否越来越干燥的问题上。他接着用了一个关于草原土地所有权制度的章节，并强调了中国人对“科学”解决方案的偏好，比如牧场私有化。第三章提出了中国人对野生动物的看法是功利主义的观点：中国人只重视对人类有用的野生动物，而不是为了野生动物本身而重视野生动物。当最终采取保护行动时，它们的措辞否认自然利益与文明人类的要求之间存在任何冲突。他认为，这种“儒家的乐观主义”与保护的目标背道而驰。第四章表明，中国对野生动物资源的需求主要是通过圈养繁殖来满足的，并询问这种繁殖是否对野生动物种群有任何明显的负面影响。结论是，无论哪种方式都没有足够的数据。第五章是本书中论证最充分、连贯性最强的部分，着眼于野生动物保护背后的法律的制度，特别是1988年的《野生动物保护法》。哈里斯在这里强调了中国立法中的一种倾向，即发布过于严厉和简单化的法律，这些法律太难执行。他引用何润东、阿尔福德和沈媛媛的话指出，由于法律如此严格，它只表达了一种理想，而不是反映执法的现实。第六章还探讨了保护野生动物栖息地的一种制度安排：自然保护区。与1998年的《野生动物保护法》一样，自然保护区的理想与现实之间的差距显而易见。他再一次看到中国政府倾向于简单化的解决方案，例如将自然保护区的指定等同于保护（第119页），这是适得其反的。他正确地指出，快速的立法修正和仅仅指定保护区对真实的保护毫无帮助。…
Wildlife Conservation in China: Preserving the Habitat of China's Wild West, by Richard B. Harris. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe, 2008. xxiv + 341 pp. US$74.95 (hardcover). The book is based on 4 years of fieldwork in western China by a western wildlife biologist over a period of 20 years. The title is self-explanatory, and the matters discussed range from biological and geographical topics to politico-economic issues of wildlife conservation. The Preface and Chapter 1 argue that Chinese wildlife management suffers from an inability to value wildlife for its own sake, more than from habitat destruction. The failure to value wildlife presumably leads to the failure to manage the relationship between consumption and production/harvest and protection of wildlife resources. In Chapter 2, Harris examines geographical factors such as aridity, remoteness and the sparseness of human population of China's west. He examines ethnicity and culture, then jumps to the question of whether western China is getting drier. He follows with a section on the land tenure system of grasslands, and highlights the Chinese penchant for "scientific" fixes such as the privatization of pastoral lands. Chapter 3 presents the argument that Chinese views on wildlife are utilitarian: the Chinese value wildlife only to the extent that it is of use to humankind, rather than valuing wildlife for its own sake. When conservation initiatives are finally taken, they are couched in terms that deny any conflict between the interests of nature and the requirements of civilized humanity. Such "Confucian optimism", he argues, is paradoxically counterproductive to the aims of conservation. Chapter 4 shows that most demands for wildlife resources in China are fulfilled by captive breeding, and asks whether such breeding has any discernible negative effects on wildlife populations. The conclusion is that there is insufficient data either way. Chapter 5 is the best argued and most coherent section of the book, and looks at the legal institutions behind the protection of wildlife, in particular the 1988 Wildlife Protection Law. Here Harris highlights a tendency in Chinese legislation to issue draconian and overly-simplistic laws which are too difficult to implement. Quoting Peter Ho, William Alford and Shen Yuanyuan, he states that, because the law is so strict, it only expresses an ideal, rather than reflecting the realities of enforcement. Chapter 6 also looks at one institutional arrangement for the protection of wildlife habitat: nature reserves. As with the 1998 Wildlife Protection Law, the gap between the stated ideal of nature reserves and their reality is evident. Once again, he sees the Chinese government's penchant for simplistic solutions, such as equating the designation of nature reserves with conservation (p. 119), as counterproductive. He argues, correctly, that quick legislative fixes and the bare designation of reserves do nothing for real conservation. …