中国邻避冲突结果的影响因素研究——基于40个案例的模糊集定性比较分析
|
摘要
本文旨在对中国邻避冲突结果的影响因素进行分析,从抗争者视角出发,结合社会运动理论框架提炼条件变量,通过模糊集定性比较分析法(fsQCA)对40个邻避冲突案例进行分析,以探求影响抗争者偏好结果的必要条件及组合情况。研究发现,新媒体联动是使邻避冲突结果导向抗争者偏好的必要条件,框架使用具有一定的解释力,但不是必要条件,可视为充分条件。在条件组合的10条解释路径中,发现两条典型路径,以及媒体互激、城市业主偏好策略、意见领袖作用有限论三条结论。研究结果显示,与以往研究认为"闹解"成为抗争主流策略以及意见领袖发挥重要作用的结论不同的是,模糊集定性比较分析发现城市业主这一群体更倾向于选择非暴力的行动策略,并且意见领袖作用有限。最后重新审视邻避冲突结果,进一步得到政府邻避冲突治理的启示。
The objective of this paper is to conduct system analysis for 40 NIMBY conflicts cases,and to explore the necessary conditions and combinations that affect the outcomes of the combatants' preferences. This study adopts Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis(fsQCA)methodology,and the explanatory variables are extracted from the combination of social movement theory. The study has found out that prerequisites that NIMBY conflicts leading to protesters' preferences is new media integration;Framework using can be seen as sufficient condition due to its explanatory power in a certain sense. Among the 10 interpretation paths of the conditional combination,two typical paths and three conclusions,which are media interaction,preferred strategies of urban property owners,and limited role of opinion leaders,are found. However,there are three limitations in the study:First,case sources are mostly secondary sources;Second,the conclusions drawn by fsQCA are not a complete causal interpretation,and the dynamic complete causal interpretation between variables needs to be focused case by case;Third,the method has limited ability to exclude conditional variables with inadequate interpretation. After reviewing the three types of results,the research found that the third type of results after communication and compromise should be the result of the government's realistic governance pursuit of NIMBY conflict,and the research conclusion of this paper still has reference value. Meanwhile,the research found that being contrary to previous studies,it is different from the opinion—— "making trouble" is the mainstream strategy and opinion leaders played an important role,fsQCA leads to the conclusion that urban property owners preferred to choose non-violent action strategies,and the role of opinion leaders is limited.
The objective of this paper is to conduct system analysis for 40 NIMBY conflicts cases,and to explore the necessary conditions and combinations that affect the outcomes of the combatants' preferences. This study adopts Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis(fsQCA)methodology,and the explanatory variables are extracted from the combination of social movement theory. The study has found out that prerequisites that NIMBY conflicts leading to protesters' preferences is new media integration;Framework using can be seen as sufficient condition due to its explanatory power in a certain sense. Among the 10 interpretation paths of the conditional combination,two typical paths and three conclusions,which are media interaction,preferred strategies of urban property owners,and limited role of opinion leaders,are found. However,there are three limitations in the study:First,case sources are mostly secondary sources;Second,the conclusions drawn by fsQCA are not a complete causal interpretation,and the dynamic complete causal interpretation between variables needs to be focused case by case;Third,the method has limited ability to exclude conditional variables with inadequate interpretation. After reviewing the three types of results,the research found that the third type of results after communication and compromise should be the result of the government's realistic governance pursuit of NIMBY conflict,and the research conclusion of this paper still has reference value. Meanwhile,the research found that being contrary to previous studies,it is different from the opinion—— "making trouble" is the mainstream strategy and opinion leaders played an important role,fsQCA leads to the conclusion that urban property owners preferred to choose non-violent action strategies,and the role of opinion leaders is limited.
引文
[1]王奎明,钟杨.“中国式”邻避运动核心议题探析---基于民意视角[J].上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2014,22(1):23-33.
[2]侯光辉,陈通,王颖,等.公众参与悖论与空间权博弈--重视邻避冲突背后的权利逻辑[J].吉首大学学报(社会科学版),2017,38(1):117-123.
[3]王佃利,邢玉立.空间正义与邻避冲突的化解--基于空间生产理论的视角[J].理论探讨,2016(5):138-143.
[4]何艳玲,陈晓运.从“不怕”到“我怕”:“一般人群”在邻避冲突中如何形成抗争动机[J].学术研究,2012(5):55-63.
[5]BULLARD R D.Unequal Protection:Environmental Justice and Communities of Color[M].San Francisco:Sierra Club Books,1994:5-6.
[6]MCGURTY M.From NIMBY to Civil Rights:The Origins of the Environmental Justice Movement[J].Enviromental History,1997(3):301-323.
[7]王刚,毕欢欢.“政治机会结构”视域下环境邻避运动的发生逻辑及其治理---基于双案例的对比分析[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2017,17(2):97-106.
[8]GARY M,WINTERFELDT V D.Not In My Backyard:Influence of Motivational Concerns on Judgments about a Risky Technology[J].Journal of Applied Psychology,1984(3):408-415.
[9]KASPERSON R E.Six Proposition on Public Participation and Their Relevance for Risk Communication[J].Risk Analysis,1986(3):275-281.
[10]WRIGHT S A.Citizens'Information Levels and Ggrassroots Opposition to New Hazardous Waster Sites:Are NIMBYists Informed?[J].Waste Management,1993(3):253-259.
[11]张乐,童星.“邻避冲突”中的议程设置---基于R市的实证研究[J].行政论坛,2015,22(1):7-13.
[12]王佃利,王玉龙,于棋.从“邻避管控”到“邻避治理”:中国邻避问题治理路径转型[J].中国行政管理,2017(5):119-125.
[13]DAVIS C.Public Involvement in Hazardous Waste Siting Decisions[J].Polity,1986(2):296-304.
[14]李良荣.透视人类社会第四次传播革命[J].新闻记者,2012(11):3-6.
[15]汤志伟,凡志强,韩啸.媒介化抗争视阈下中国邻避运动的定性比较分析[J].广东行政学院学报,2016,28(6):48-57.
[16]曾繁旭.传统媒体作为调停者:框架整合与政策回应[J].新闻与传播研究,2013,20(1):37-50.
[17]王军洋.超越“公民”抗议:从企业竞争的角度理解邻避事件[J].中国行政管理,2017(12):84-90.
[18]高新宇,秦华.“中国式”邻避运动结果的影响因素研究---对22个邻避案例的多值集定性比较分析[J].河海大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2017,19(4):65-73.
[19]赵鼎新.社会与政治运动理论:框架与反思[J].学海,2006(2):20-25.
[20]唐世平.超越定性与定量之争[J].公共行政评论,2015,8(4):45-62.
[21]MCADAM M D,BOUDET H S."Site Fights":Explaining Opposition to Pipeline Projects in the Developing World[J].Sociological Forum,2010,25(3):401-427.
[22]HALEBSKY S.Explaining the Outcome of Antisuperstore Movements:A Comparatives Analysis of Six Communities[J].Mobilization:A International Journal,2006,11(4):443-460.
[23]马奔,李继鹏.我国邻避效应的解读:基于定性比较分析法的研究[J].上海行政学院学报,2015(9):41-51.
[24]MILLER W.The Comparative Method:Moving beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies[J].Journal of Public Policy,1987(4):454-456.
[25]毛湛文.定性比较分析(QCA)与新闻传播学研究[J].国际新闻界,2016,38(4):6-25.
[26]李蔚,何海兵.定性比较分析方法的研究逻辑及其应用[J].上海行政学院学报,2015,16(5):92-100.
[27]陶鹏,童星.邻避型群体性事件及其治理[J].南京社会科学,2010(8):63-68.
[28]陈晓运.争取科技公民权:为什么邻避从抗争转向社会运动---以中国城市反焚事件(2009-2013年)为例[J].甘肃行政学院学报,2017(6):77-92.
[29]王佃利,等.邻避困境:城市治理的挑战与转型[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2017:223.
[30]TARROW S.Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements:States and Opportunities:The Political Structuring of Social Movements[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1996:41-61.
[31]高芳芳.环境传播:媒介、公众与社会[M].杭州:浙江大学出版社,2016:119.
[32]黄荣贵,郑雯,桂勇.多渠道强干预、框架与抗争结果--对40个拆迁抗争案例的模糊集定性比较分析[J].社会学研究,2015,30(5):90-114.
[33]MCADAM D.Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency 1930-1970[M].Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1999:37.
[34]ARNSTEIN S R.A Ladder of Citizen Participation[J].Journal of the American Planning Association,1969,35(4):216-224.
[35]冯仕政.西方社会运动研究:现状与范式[J].国外社会科学,2003(5):66-70.
[36]SPECTOR,MALCOLM I,KITUSE.Constructing Social Problems[M].Menlo Park,CA:Cummings,1977:23.
[37][比]伯努瓦·里豪克斯,[美]查尔斯·C·拉金.QCA设计原理与应用[M].杜运周,等译.北京:机械工业出版社,2017:25.
[38]曾繁旭.媒体作为调停人公民行动与公共协商[M].上海:上海三联书店,2015:12.
[39]陈宝胜.从“政府强制”走向“多元协作”:邻比冲突治理的模式转换与路径创新[J].公共管理与政策评论,2015,4(4):26-39.
[40]唐庆鹏.邻避冲突治理:价值契合与路径优化---基于社会主义协商民主视阈[J].学习与实践,2017(1):37-44.
[41]唐睿,唐世平.历史遗产与原苏东国家的民主转型---基于26个国家的模糊集与多值QCA的双重检测[J].世界经济与政治,2013(2):39-57.
(1)2014年,美国社会学协会将研究方法终身成就奖(又称拉扎斯菲尔德奖)颁给了QCA创始人查尔斯·拉金,以褒奖他在定性比较分析方法的创立中做出的卓越贡献,这一奖项使QCA在社会科学研究中再次获得关注。
(1)真值表是使用于逻辑中(特别是在连结逻辑代数、布尔代数和命题逻辑上)的一类数学用表,用来计算逻辑表示式在每种论证(即每种逻辑变量取值的组合)上的值,表征逻辑事件输入和输出之间全部可能状态。
(1)根据定性比较法的惯例,中等样本(10~40个案例)条件变量的数量一般为4~7个。
(2)选择三家作为联动的边界值的依据参见文献[32]。
(1)将18家央媒按照影响力和行政级别划分为两个等级,《人民日报》、新华社、中央电视台、《新华每日电讯》作为影响力大的第一等级,其余则为影响力较大的第二等级。此划分依据参见文献[32]。
(2)在模糊集定性比较法的赋值方案中,研究者可将变量得分进行以下赋值:1,0.8,0.6,0.4,0。其中,0表示条件未发生,1表示条件发生,其他值则表示介于两种状态之间。
(1)鉴于篇幅所限,有关真值表及相关计算数据、流程可与作者联系索取。
[2]侯光辉,陈通,王颖,等.公众参与悖论与空间权博弈--重视邻避冲突背后的权利逻辑[J].吉首大学学报(社会科学版),2017,38(1):117-123.
[3]王佃利,邢玉立.空间正义与邻避冲突的化解--基于空间生产理论的视角[J].理论探讨,2016(5):138-143.
[4]何艳玲,陈晓运.从“不怕”到“我怕”:“一般人群”在邻避冲突中如何形成抗争动机[J].学术研究,2012(5):55-63.
[5]BULLARD R D.Unequal Protection:Environmental Justice and Communities of Color[M].San Francisco:Sierra Club Books,1994:5-6.
[6]MCGURTY M.From NIMBY to Civil Rights:The Origins of the Environmental Justice Movement[J].Enviromental History,1997(3):301-323.
[7]王刚,毕欢欢.“政治机会结构”视域下环境邻避运动的发生逻辑及其治理---基于双案例的对比分析[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2017,17(2):97-106.
[8]GARY M,WINTERFELDT V D.Not In My Backyard:Influence of Motivational Concerns on Judgments about a Risky Technology[J].Journal of Applied Psychology,1984(3):408-415.
[9]KASPERSON R E.Six Proposition on Public Participation and Their Relevance for Risk Communication[J].Risk Analysis,1986(3):275-281.
[10]WRIGHT S A.Citizens'Information Levels and Ggrassroots Opposition to New Hazardous Waster Sites:Are NIMBYists Informed?[J].Waste Management,1993(3):253-259.
[11]张乐,童星.“邻避冲突”中的议程设置---基于R市的实证研究[J].行政论坛,2015,22(1):7-13.
[12]王佃利,王玉龙,于棋.从“邻避管控”到“邻避治理”:中国邻避问题治理路径转型[J].中国行政管理,2017(5):119-125.
[13]DAVIS C.Public Involvement in Hazardous Waste Siting Decisions[J].Polity,1986(2):296-304.
[14]李良荣.透视人类社会第四次传播革命[J].新闻记者,2012(11):3-6.
[15]汤志伟,凡志强,韩啸.媒介化抗争视阈下中国邻避运动的定性比较分析[J].广东行政学院学报,2016,28(6):48-57.
[16]曾繁旭.传统媒体作为调停者:框架整合与政策回应[J].新闻与传播研究,2013,20(1):37-50.
[17]王军洋.超越“公民”抗议:从企业竞争的角度理解邻避事件[J].中国行政管理,2017(12):84-90.
[18]高新宇,秦华.“中国式”邻避运动结果的影响因素研究---对22个邻避案例的多值集定性比较分析[J].河海大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2017,19(4):65-73.
[19]赵鼎新.社会与政治运动理论:框架与反思[J].学海,2006(2):20-25.
[20]唐世平.超越定性与定量之争[J].公共行政评论,2015,8(4):45-62.
[21]MCADAM M D,BOUDET H S."Site Fights":Explaining Opposition to Pipeline Projects in the Developing World[J].Sociological Forum,2010,25(3):401-427.
[22]HALEBSKY S.Explaining the Outcome of Antisuperstore Movements:A Comparatives Analysis of Six Communities[J].Mobilization:A International Journal,2006,11(4):443-460.
[23]马奔,李继鹏.我国邻避效应的解读:基于定性比较分析法的研究[J].上海行政学院学报,2015(9):41-51.
[24]MILLER W.The Comparative Method:Moving beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies[J].Journal of Public Policy,1987(4):454-456.
[25]毛湛文.定性比较分析(QCA)与新闻传播学研究[J].国际新闻界,2016,38(4):6-25.
[26]李蔚,何海兵.定性比较分析方法的研究逻辑及其应用[J].上海行政学院学报,2015,16(5):92-100.
[27]陶鹏,童星.邻避型群体性事件及其治理[J].南京社会科学,2010(8):63-68.
[28]陈晓运.争取科技公民权:为什么邻避从抗争转向社会运动---以中国城市反焚事件(2009-2013年)为例[J].甘肃行政学院学报,2017(6):77-92.
[29]王佃利,等.邻避困境:城市治理的挑战与转型[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2017:223.
[30]TARROW S.Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements:States and Opportunities:The Political Structuring of Social Movements[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1996:41-61.
[31]高芳芳.环境传播:媒介、公众与社会[M].杭州:浙江大学出版社,2016:119.
[32]黄荣贵,郑雯,桂勇.多渠道强干预、框架与抗争结果--对40个拆迁抗争案例的模糊集定性比较分析[J].社会学研究,2015,30(5):90-114.
[33]MCADAM D.Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency 1930-1970[M].Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1999:37.
[34]ARNSTEIN S R.A Ladder of Citizen Participation[J].Journal of the American Planning Association,1969,35(4):216-224.
[35]冯仕政.西方社会运动研究:现状与范式[J].国外社会科学,2003(5):66-70.
[36]SPECTOR,MALCOLM I,KITUSE.Constructing Social Problems[M].Menlo Park,CA:Cummings,1977:23.
[37][比]伯努瓦·里豪克斯,[美]查尔斯·C·拉金.QCA设计原理与应用[M].杜运周,等译.北京:机械工业出版社,2017:25.
[38]曾繁旭.媒体作为调停人公民行动与公共协商[M].上海:上海三联书店,2015:12.
[39]陈宝胜.从“政府强制”走向“多元协作”:邻比冲突治理的模式转换与路径创新[J].公共管理与政策评论,2015,4(4):26-39.
[40]唐庆鹏.邻避冲突治理:价值契合与路径优化---基于社会主义协商民主视阈[J].学习与实践,2017(1):37-44.
[41]唐睿,唐世平.历史遗产与原苏东国家的民主转型---基于26个国家的模糊集与多值QCA的双重检测[J].世界经济与政治,2013(2):39-57.
(1)2014年,美国社会学协会将研究方法终身成就奖(又称拉扎斯菲尔德奖)颁给了QCA创始人查尔斯·拉金,以褒奖他在定性比较分析方法的创立中做出的卓越贡献,这一奖项使QCA在社会科学研究中再次获得关注。
(1)真值表是使用于逻辑中(特别是在连结逻辑代数、布尔代数和命题逻辑上)的一类数学用表,用来计算逻辑表示式在每种论证(即每种逻辑变量取值的组合)上的值,表征逻辑事件输入和输出之间全部可能状态。
(1)根据定性比较法的惯例,中等样本(10~40个案例)条件变量的数量一般为4~7个。
(2)选择三家作为联动的边界值的依据参见文献[32]。
(1)将18家央媒按照影响力和行政级别划分为两个等级,《人民日报》、新华社、中央电视台、《新华每日电讯》作为影响力大的第一等级,其余则为影响力较大的第二等级。此划分依据参见文献[32]。
(2)在模糊集定性比较法的赋值方案中,研究者可将变量得分进行以下赋值:1,0.8,0.6,0.4,0。其中,0表示条件未发生,1表示条件发生,其他值则表示介于两种状态之间。
(1)鉴于篇幅所限,有关真值表及相关计算数据、流程可与作者联系索取。