政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/100208
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113318/144297 (79%)
Visitors : 50998859      Online Users : 854
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/100208


    Title: 公平卻不見得正義：美國環境公平政策的分析
    Other Titles: Equal but Unjust: An Analysis of the US Environmental Equity Policy
    Authors: 黃之棟
    Huang, Morgan Chih-Tung
    Keywords: 環境正義;環境種族主義;環境公平;以言行事;實作
    Environmental Justice;Environmental Equity;Environmental Racism;Practice
    Date: 2013-10
    Issue Date: 2016-08-16 13:54:10 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 在環境正義的領域裡，用語的問題一直是爭論的焦點。而環境公平（Environmental Equity）一詞，大概又是當中最難以區辨、也最常引發爭議的一個。為了釐清爭議，本文試圖採取社會理論的視角，通過美國環保署著名的《環境公平：為所有社區降低風險》報告，來疏理環境公平一詞背後所背負的歷史性與階段性意義。質言之，本文仔細耙梳了環境公平裡的「不義性」，並說明為什麼美國環保署一開始接受了環境公平這個概念，並認為只有這個詞最適合用來引導他們的政策，但最後卻又決定放棄該詞。此外，本文還將利用「以言行事」（doing things with words）的理論，來對環境公平報告書進行多重操演性 (performativity）的分析，並透過對「實作」（practice）的強調來探索新法論上新的可能。
    In the language of environmental justice (EJ), environmental racism, equity and justice are often considered interchangeable. Using detailed historical exposition in tandem with the analysis of performativity, this article seeks to demonstrate that these terms in fact exist in particular reference frames and therefore should not be considered conflated. Special attention is paid to US EPA’s 1992 Environmental Equity Report. It is argued that, after the publication of the 1992 report EJ is widely considered a “scientific” issue. This scientific understanding is however by no means value-free, as this report implicitly inclined to support a particular value judgement, which moulds, and sometimes even distorts, our understanding of EJ. This article suggests that although understanding EJ through a scientific lens is tempting, a just society cannot be achieved merely through scientific research. Therefore, EJ research should move towards a deeper understanding on performativity questions.
    Relation: 社會科學論叢, 7(2), 93-125
    Journal of Social Sciences
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[Journal of Social Sciences] Journal Articles

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    7(2)-93-125.pdf1290KbAdobe PDF2747View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback