1、<p><b>　　中文3301字</b></p><p>　　本科畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)（論文）</p><p>　　外 文 翻 譯</p><p><b>　　原文：</b></p><p>　　Agricultural Modernization or an Organic Treadmil

2、l</p><p>　　The Development of Organic Farming: Applying Ecological Modernization Theory</p><p>　　According to one of its founding theorists, Arthur Mol, four central elements define ecological

3、 modernization theory. The first concerns technology. From this perspective, science and technology are‘ central institutions for ecological reform’(Mol 1997, 140). Unlike earlier environmental thinking, which

4、 perceived technological development as a source of ecological problems, ecological modernization theorists argue that, in the contemporary era, technology is being used to he</p><p>　　ideas and buil

5、d public support for environmental practices while working with state</p><p>　　and private actors to develop environmentally sound policies. These are the four central features of ecological modernization th

6、eory. Ecological modernization theorists have applied this perspective to interpret developments such as the reduction in packaging waste (Lauber and Ingram 2000), improved industrial energy efficiency (Enevoldsen 2000),

7、 and the reduction of toxic waste within the chemical industry(Mol 1995; 1997). </p><p>　　The institutionalization of organic agriculture provides another opportunity to assess how well ecological modernizat

8、ion theory applies to the social processes associated with this development. The growth in organic farming beginning in the 1970s emerged out of a confluence of social developments, some of which began decades earlier (G

9、uthman 2004a; Treadwell et al. 2003). J. I. Rodale is credited with advancing organic farming in the United States beginning in the 1940s through his magazine Orga</p><p>　　An Organic Treadmill</p>&l

10、t;p>　　In many ways, the development of organic food production and the institution alization of these practices by the federal government reflect the central argument put forth by ecological modernization theorists. S

11、ocial movement organizations representing farmers, consumers, and environmentalists, market forces,‘ enlightened' business owners, and the state acted together to create a policy designed to advance a more environmen

12、tally sound method of farming. In contrast, treadmill theorists see a sys</p><p>　　In examining these central actors, capital is viewed as fully committed to economic expansion due to the competitive pressur

13、e inherent in market economies. Owners must continuously reinvest in order to remain profitable in a competitive environment. This typically means expanding production or developing less costly means of producing goods a

14、nd services. Although cost reductions can, at times, also involve environmental efficiencies, historically this process has involved the introduction of l a</p><p>　　Agricultural Modernization or an Organic

15、Treadmill</p><p>　　In looking at the development of organic agriculture in the United States, there is</p><p>　　significant evidence to support both ecological modernization and treadmill theory

16、</p><p>　　interpretations. In this sense, when considering the organic case, it is not possible</p><p>　　to declare a definitive ‘winner.’ But examining the social processes associated with spec

17、ific economic developments provides us with more material with which to consider our environmental future from each theoretical perspective. Do the development and spread of organic agriculture represent a trend toward a

18、n ecologically sustainable food production system? While the ultimate benefits of organic agriculture cannot be determined based on this analysis, even if those benefits were significant, a c</p><p>　　Thus,

19、the environmental promise of organic production may not prove to be as great as implied by ecological modernization theory. In addition, critics are likely correct in that the benefits of organic production will be far f

20、ewer than expected, given treadmill processes that tend to erase environmental gains</p><p>　　over time.</p><p>　　But one might still argue that organic production represents a lasting improveme

21、nt over conventional agriculture. The analysis need not focus on the issue of whether organics are all they are alleged to be or whether organic production will eventually fully displace conventional agriculture, but rat

22、her, is it better than the alternative, even if limited to a relatively small segment of the overall food market? Granted, treadmill processes favoring greater reliance on energy and (organic)chemical</p><p>

23、;　　But the nature of the food industry also raises questions about the applicability of the treadmill approach. A central claim of treadmill theory is that overall production increases over time. Thus, occasional savings

24、 in one sector of production or consumption do not represent true environmental improvement, because those savings simply get displaced elsewhere. For example, consumers who save money by purchasing more energy-efficient

25、 hybrid vehicles will use those fuel cost savings to purchase s</p><p>　　even though it is limited to a single, rather unique, industry.</p><p>　　In addition, ecological modernization theorists

26、might argue that given the growing ecological sensibility among consumers and producers, further innovations are likely to take the form of still more ecologically sound food production. In deed, there is evidence of thi

27、s in the form of an array of upstart farmers’ movements that seek to go ‘‘beyond organic’’ (LaTrobe and Acott 2000; Minick 2004). The creation of national organic standards can be cynically viewed as a maneuver that co-o

28、pted a grass</p><p>　　Conclusion</p><p>　　Both the treadmill of production and ecological modernization theories offer insightful perspectives on the social processes associated with environment

29、al developments. When looking at the spread of organic production practices and their institutionalization in the form of state-sanctioned standards, there is a great deal of empirical evidence that can be marshaled to s

30、upport either perspective. Social movements, consumers, entrepreneurs, and the state have acted in concert to develop agricultur</p><p>　　While this analysis does not enable us to draw definitive conclusions

31、 regarding the long term environmental prognoses offered by ecological modernization and treadmill theorists, the organic case provides a valuable opportunity to consider the implications, not only for the agriculture in

32、dustry but for society as a whole. Although it is difficult to see how the growth in organic production and the creation</p><p>　　of standards alone help to verify some of the more ambitious claims of ecolog

33、ical modernization theory regarding a wholesale shift to ecological sustainability, the nature of the food industry makes it one in which a claim regarding permanent ecological gains are defensible. If in fact demand for

34、 food is truly finite, real ongoing environmentally beneficial improvements in production practices can be realized.</p><p>　　But in the broader debate, treadmill theory claims about the failures of ecologic

35、al</p><p>　　modernization on a macro level have yet to be adequately refuted. The overall logic of</p><p>　　capitalism still favors continuous economic expansion. Although the case can be made&l

36、t;/p><p>　　that there are real limits within the food industry given the nature of the demand for</p><p>　　food, this is not the case for most other commodities. In these other cases the drive for&

37、lt;/p><p>　　profit will continuously favor reinvestment and expanded production. In some cases,</p><p>　　these may be more environmentally sound than previous forms of production, but unless real l

38、imits to consumer demand and the quest for profit can be found, any environmental improvements are likely to be overtaken by future increases in withdrawals of limited natural resources and the addition of still more pol

39、lutants to the ecosystem. On the macro level the only way that environmental improvements can be seen as real progress toward full ecological sustainability is if such improvements are fou</p><p>　　Source:

40、New Paltz,2006’’Theoretical Interpretations of the Growth in Organic Agriculture’’ Harvard agriculment review. August.pp.128-131</p><p><b>　　譯文：</b></p><p>　　農(nóng)業(yè)現(xiàn)代化或單一有機(jī)農(nóng)業(yè)的應(yīng)用</p>

41、;<p>　　農(nóng)業(yè)的發(fā)展：應(yīng)用生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化理論</p><p>　　根據(jù)創(chuàng)始理論家亞瑟摩爾的生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化的四個(gè)核心要素理論，第一，首要關(guān)注的就是技術(shù). 從這個(gè)角度看，科學(xué)技術(shù)是生態(tài)改革的重要組成結(jié)構(gòu)（摩爾，1997.140）. 早先的環(huán)保意識(shí)認(rèn)為生態(tài)問(wèn)題的根源是科技的發(fā)展，生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化理論家認(rèn)為，在當(dāng)今時(shí)代，技術(shù)是用來(lái)幫助我們實(shí)現(xiàn)生態(tài)持續(xù)發(fā)展的。第二,生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化理論家認(rèn)為市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)體是能和環(huán)境完全兼容并支持

42、環(huán)保生產(chǎn)的經(jīng)濟(jì)。他們強(qiáng)調(diào)提高生態(tài)經(jīng)濟(jì)和市場(chǎng)動(dòng)態(tài)改革及將創(chuàng)新者，企業(yè)家和其他經(jīng)濟(jì)主體作為社會(huì)生態(tài)重組載體的重要性, (p141)。此類(lèi)措施可以通過(guò)環(huán)保的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和認(rèn)證方案的建立，對(duì)相關(guān)消費(fèi)者環(huán)保意識(shí)的呼吁，其自身的利基市場(chǎng)的形成來(lái)滿(mǎn)足其市場(chǎng)需求。第三，生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化理論在環(huán)?，F(xiàn)狀中的作用. 即使是它是一種完全不同于傳統(tǒng)的“控制和指導(dǎo)”方法，也不是對(duì)集中官僚主義強(qiáng)加硬性規(guī)定. 現(xiàn)代生態(tài)引導(dǎo)個(gè)人對(duì)環(huán)境無(wú)害行為.這允許個(gè)人在參與特定改革的靈活性和

43、針對(duì)性。最后，生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化理論為環(huán)保運(yùn)動(dòng)組織確立了一個(gè)新角色.根據(jù)摩爾所說(shuō)，環(huán)保運(yùn)動(dòng)的位置正慢慢從一于社會(huì)發(fā)展外的評(píng)論員變成一個(gè)以生態(tài)改革發(fā)展為目的的獨(dú)立的關(guān)鍵參與者。（摩爾1997年，142）今天的運(yùn)動(dòng)有助于在國(guó)家和個(gè)人的合</p><p>　　農(nóng)業(yè)的制度化提供了另一個(gè)契機(jī)，通過(guò)這個(gè)制度化的發(fā)展將生態(tài)學(xué)現(xiàn)代化理論很好地適用于社會(huì)過(guò)程。有機(jī)耕種的增長(zhǎng)了在20世紀(jì)70年代涌現(xiàn)出社會(huì)發(fā)展的合流，其中一些還要更早十幾年出

44、現(xiàn)（Guthman 2004a; Treadwell et al. 2003）。J. I. Rodale在20世紀(jì)40年代的美國(guó)通過(guò)他的雜志《有機(jī)園藝》讓人們相信超前的有機(jī)種植。然而就是這20世紀(jì)60年代的結(jié)合環(huán)保和健康的回歸土地運(yùn)動(dòng)奠定了20世紀(jì)70年代有機(jī)農(nóng)業(yè)的擴(kuò)張的基礎(chǔ)。從那以后，有機(jī)生產(chǎn)方式進(jìn)入了大部分的農(nóng)業(yè)產(chǎn)業(yè)，通過(guò)國(guó)家支持的形式，導(dǎo)致了產(chǎn)業(yè)區(qū)域的迅速增長(zhǎng)(Dimitri and Greene 2002)。</p>

45、<p><b>　　單一農(nóng)業(yè)</b></p><p>　　在許多方面，有機(jī)食品生產(chǎn)的發(fā)展和政府出臺(tái)的有機(jī)農(nóng)業(yè)制度化措施反應(yīng)了生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化理論家提出的核心論點(diǎn)。社會(huì)運(yùn)動(dòng)組織表明了農(nóng)民，消費(fèi)者，環(huán)保主義者，市場(chǎng)力量，'開(kāi)明'的經(jīng)營(yíng)業(yè)主，和政府團(tuán)結(jié)協(xié)作共同創(chuàng)造一個(gè)旨在推進(jìn)環(huán)保農(nóng)作的政策。與此相反，跑步機(jī)理論家看到了一個(gè)由資本，勞動(dòng)，政府和那些對(duì)擴(kuò)大生產(chǎn)有興趣卻很少考慮生

46、態(tài)影響的人共同組成的驅(qū)動(dòng)系統(tǒng)（Schnaiberg1980; Schnaiberg和古爾德1994年）。從這個(gè)角度看，有機(jī)農(nóng)業(yè)，至多，是一個(gè)由單一力量主宰，以增大利益和擴(kuò)大生產(chǎn)為目的真正的社會(huì)變革運(yùn)動(dòng)。</p><p>　　這檢測(cè)這些核心要素的過(guò)程中，由于市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)中固有競(jìng)爭(zhēng)壓力，資金被視為完全致力于經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的因素。業(yè)主為保持在競(jìng)爭(zhēng)環(huán)境中獲利必須不斷進(jìn)行再投資。這通常意味著擴(kuò)大生產(chǎn)或開(kāi)發(fā)生產(chǎn)低成本的商品和服務(wù). 雖

47、然成本降低，有時(shí)也包括環(huán)境效益，但是歷史上這一過(guò)程所涉及的勞動(dòng)力的減少 ，也意味著引進(jìn)更多的有毒化學(xué)品和對(duì)提高能源技術(shù)的依賴(lài)。因此，整體生產(chǎn)速度的提高導(dǎo)致了越來(lái)越多的資源提取和有害產(chǎn)品的產(chǎn)生。</p><p>　　農(nóng)業(yè)現(xiàn)代化還是單一有機(jī)農(nóng)業(yè)</p><p>　　放眼看美國(guó)農(nóng)業(yè)的發(fā)展，可以同時(shí)支持農(nóng)業(yè)現(xiàn)代化和單一有機(jī)農(nóng)業(yè)的理論闡釋. 在這個(gè)意義上說(shuō)，有機(jī)農(nóng)業(yè)中，很難確定一個(gè)明確的贏家. 但是

48、，研究和相關(guān)的社會(huì)進(jìn)程有關(guān)的經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展時(shí)，它提供了更多從每個(gè)理論的角度來(lái)考慮我們的未來(lái)環(huán)境的材料。是否做有機(jī)農(nóng)業(yè)的發(fā)展和傳播代表了一種可持續(xù)的糧食生態(tài)生產(chǎn)系統(tǒng)的發(fā)展趨勢(shì)？雖然有機(jī)農(nóng)業(yè)的這些利益顯著，但它的最終利益無(wú)法在此基礎(chǔ)上分析.單一生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化核心理論的批判仍可以用在這里：將有限的積極發(fā)展作為可持續(xù)發(fā)展道路的開(kāi)始時(shí)錯(cuò)誤的.盡管取得了重大增長(zhǎng)，有機(jī)食品仍然是一個(gè)利基市場(chǎng)，具有成本競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力的產(chǎn)業(yè)，將可能依然存在，例如（Guthman 2004

49、a;里昂1999年邁克爾遜2001b）。因此，有機(jī)生產(chǎn)做出的環(huán)境承諾可能被證實(shí)和生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化理論完全一樣。此外，評(píng)論家們可能是正確的，因?yàn)橛袡C(jī)生產(chǎn)的好處將遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)少于預(yù)期，由于其單一的過(guò)程，隨著時(shí)間的推移，往往會(huì)擦除環(huán)境利益.</p><p>　　但仍可能有人認(rèn)為，有機(jī)生產(chǎn)代表了一種相對(duì)傳統(tǒng)農(nóng)業(yè)而言持續(xù)的改善。研究分析的焦點(diǎn)不是有機(jī)物是否都是如他們所聲稱(chēng)的那樣，也不是是機(jī)產(chǎn)品是否最終將完全取代傳統(tǒng)農(nóng)業(yè)的問(wèn)題，而是在整體

50、食品市場(chǎng)中相對(duì)有限的選擇性. 當(dāng)然，單一進(jìn)程更加有利于增加對(duì)能源和集約型（有機(jī)）化學(xué)產(chǎn)品的依賴(lài)，也可能未來(lái)的有機(jī)產(chǎn)業(yè)比現(xiàn)在很多傳統(tǒng)農(nóng)業(yè)更有害于環(huán)境。即使有機(jī)生產(chǎn)的一些優(yōu)勢(shì)會(huì)隨著時(shí)間的推移逐漸丟失，但是它仍可以證明比傳統(tǒng)農(nóng)業(yè)強(qiáng)。這表明了一些生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化大膽理論的失敗，但它也表明環(huán)境保護(hù)能夠取得真正的進(jìn)展，至少，該地區(qū)生態(tài)破壞的速度可以放慢。</p><p>　　但食品業(yè)也提出了關(guān)于單一操作的應(yīng)用性問(wèn)題。跑步機(jī)理論的一

51、個(gè)核心主張是整體產(chǎn)量隨著時(shí)間的推移而增加。因此，生產(chǎn)部門(mén)一個(gè)偶然的儲(chǔ)蓄或消費(fèi)并不代表真正的環(huán)境改善，因?yàn)槟切┑膬?chǔ)蓄只是轉(zhuǎn)移到了其他地方。例如，消費(fèi)者用節(jié)省的錢(qián)購(gòu)買(mǎi)節(jié)能的混合動(dòng)力汽車(chē)，然后用這些燃料成本節(jié)省下來(lái)的錢(qián)購(gòu)買(mǎi)別的東西，從而引導(dǎo)一些其他形式的產(chǎn)品，這樣的節(jié)能可以改善環(huán)境. 然而，雖然一個(gè)人的能力消耗消費(fèi)品的能力幾乎是無(wú)限的，但是食品行業(yè)的獨(dú)特之處就是可以考慮到其有限的需求。雖然高要求處理和遠(yuǎn)距離的異國(guó)食品運(yùn)輸當(dāng)然是可能的，但是也給

52、了食品的易腐性質(zhì)和生物的限制性。對(duì)糧食的需求，不像其他商品，最終可能是有限的。如果這樣，改善糧食生產(chǎn)對(duì)環(huán)境的影響可能被證明是不遵守與在其他商品生產(chǎn)所取得的環(huán)境利益同樣的限制的實(shí)際收益。事實(shí)上</p><p>　　至少，在一些傳統(tǒng)食品產(chǎn)業(yè)的整體部分已被對(duì)環(huán)境更無(wú)害的生產(chǎn)工藝所取代，可以說(shuō)是代表了環(huán)境永久的改善，即使它并不表明一個(gè)走向全面可持續(xù)發(fā)展環(huán)境的總趨勢(shì)。但與單一農(nóng)業(yè)的是不一樣的，即使單一農(nóng)業(yè)僅限于一個(gè)單一頗為

53、獨(dú)特的產(chǎn)業(yè)。</p><p>　　此外，生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化理論家會(huì)認(rèn)為，鑒于消費(fèi)者與生產(chǎn)者之間越來(lái)越強(qiáng)的生態(tài)敏感性，更合理的食品生產(chǎn)生態(tài)形式有可能采取進(jìn)一步創(chuàng)新。的確，有這方面，具有先進(jìn)意識(shí)的農(nóng)民尋求超越有機(jī)''的形式（拉特羅布和阿康特2000;米尼克2004）。國(guó)家有機(jī)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的制定，可以看作是一種尋求真正的可持續(xù)發(fā)展草根運(yùn)動(dòng)，并能開(kāi)啟了另一個(gè)全面改善環(huán)境的重振運(yùn)動(dòng).（米科爾森2001a）。一些運(yùn)動(dòng)積極分子

54、正試圖設(shè)計(jì)新的生產(chǎn)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，使人們幾乎不可能進(jìn)行大規(guī)模生產(chǎn)，從而有利于當(dāng)?shù)厣鷳B(tài)可持續(xù)的小規(guī)模生產(chǎn)。生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化理論可以說(shuō)，是這一進(jìn)程的一部分。有機(jī)對(duì)真正的生態(tài)可持續(xù)生產(chǎn)可能只是一個(gè)中途站。當(dāng)然，有機(jī)運(yùn)動(dòng)可能最終超過(guò)任何創(chuàng)新而追求其利潤(rùn)。</p><p><b>　　總結(jié)</b></p><p>　　單一生產(chǎn)理論和生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化理論都為環(huán)境改善發(fā)展提供了精辟的觀點(diǎn)。在有機(jī)生產(chǎn)實(shí)踐

55、和尋找國(guó)家認(rèn)可的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的形式制度發(fā)展過(guò)程中，有大量的經(jīng)驗(yàn)證據(jù)可以支持其任何觀點(diǎn)。社會(huì)運(yùn)動(dòng)，消費(fèi)者，企業(yè)家和政府的協(xié)同行動(dòng)比常規(guī)做法更有利于環(huán)境改善，如生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化理論家預(yù)測(cè)農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)。但也有證據(jù)表明，在國(guó)家與資本結(jié)合的情況下，在在追求擴(kuò)大利潤(rùn)和生產(chǎn)的過(guò)程中，有機(jī)農(nóng)業(yè)破壞了一些對(duì)環(huán)境的原有的承諾。</p><p>　　雖然這種分析并不使我們明確得出由生態(tài)理論和農(nóng)業(yè)現(xiàn)代化理論家提出的關(guān)于長(zhǎng)期生態(tài)環(huán)境的結(jié)論，但是不僅為農(nóng)業(yè)產(chǎn)

56、業(yè)化，也為整個(gè)社會(huì)提供了一個(gè)寶貴的機(jī)會(huì)來(lái)實(shí)行有機(jī)案例。這是很難看到有機(jī)生產(chǎn)如何增長(zhǎng)和驗(yàn)證創(chuàng)造的.單獨(dú)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)有助于驗(yàn)證的生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化理論的結(jié)果。如果事實(shí)確實(shí)對(duì)糧食的需求是有限的，真正有利于環(huán)境的不斷改善，在生產(chǎn)實(shí)踐便可實(shí)現(xiàn)。</p><p>　　但在更廣義的辯論上，單一農(nóng)業(yè)理論對(duì)在宏觀層面的生態(tài)現(xiàn)代化的失敗的主張是沒(méi)有被充分的反駁?？偟恼f(shuō)，資本主義仍然主張經(jīng)濟(jì)持續(xù)擴(kuò)張。雖然此案可有鑒于食品工業(yè)內(nèi)部需求和局限性，這不是大

57、多數(shù)其他商品的情況。在這種情況下，利潤(rùn)將會(huì)繼續(xù)驅(qū)動(dòng)炳支持投資和生產(chǎn)的擴(kuò)大化。在某些情況下，這些生產(chǎn)可能比以往的生產(chǎn)更環(huán)保，但是，只有只有實(shí)際限制消費(fèi)者的需求和對(duì)利潤(rùn)的追求的情況下?？梢园l(fā)現(xiàn)，如果增加對(duì)未來(lái)有限資源的提取，對(duì)生態(tài)系統(tǒng)增加更多的污染物，任何環(huán)境都有不可能改善。我們可以在農(nóng)業(yè)的生產(chǎn)中尋求創(chuàng)新的辦法，從而超越有機(jī)。但是要實(shí)現(xiàn)一個(gè)行業(yè)的可持續(xù)發(fā)展仍有許多不足。此外，在目前的社會(huì)和經(jīng)濟(jì)背景下，由于生態(tài)收益的迅速的破壞，我們正朝著生態(tài)