Integrated Rural Policy in Context: A Case Study on the Meaning of ‘Integration’ and the Politics of ‘Sectoring’
Integrated Rural Policy in Context: A Case Study on the Meaning of ‘Integration’ and the Politics of ‘Sectoring’
复制标题
整合农村政策的背景：“整合”含义和“部门化”政治的案例研究
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Wiskerke
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
P.H.M. Derkzen;B. Bock;J. Wiskerke
农村发展伙伴关系往往被视为促进“一体化”的有力途径。本文探讨了这一要求的现实，首先通过分析什么是“一体化”的意思，然后提出了一个案例研究的荷兰农村合作伙伴关系，显示如何“一体化”被稀释的“政治部门”。在本案例研究中，“一体化”是指协调自然环境的部门政策，并意味着将相互竞争的土地使用要求一体化。不同政策部门的代表力求通过一些战略来维护和推进其部门目标，包括将冲突扩大到其他领域和通过私下解决来遏制冲突。这些利益的相互作用产生了一个矛盾的结果。现有的部门政策得以维持，并通过在空间上分离最冲突的土地用途，即集约化畜牧业耕作和保护自然，实现了“一体化”。荷兰农业部认为这种伙伴关系是“综合农村政策”的一个很好的例子，但这一例子表明，综合现有的自然环境部门政策与实现更广泛的社会经济目标关系不大。
Partnerships for rural development are often presented as powerful ways of promoting ‘integration’. This paper examines the reality of this claim, first by analysing what ‘integration’ means and then presenting a case study of a Dutch rural partnership that shows how ‘integration’ was diluted by the ‘politics of sectoring’. In this case study, ‘integration’ was taken to mean harmonizing sectoral policies for the physical environment and to imply the integration of competing land-use claims. Representatives of different policy sectors sought to safeguard and advance their sectoral objectives through a number of strategies, including expanding conflicts to other playing fields and containing conflicts through private settlement. The interplay of these interests created a paradoxical outcome. The existing sectoral policies were maintained and ‘integration’ was achieved through the spatial separation of the most conflicting land uses, those of intensive husbandry farming and protecting nature. The Dutch Ministry of Agriculture sees such partnerships as a good example of ‘integrated rural policy’ but the example shows that the integration of existing sectoral policies for the physical environment has little to do with the achievement of wider socio-economic objectives.