The Problematic Nature of Nature: The Post-constructivist Challenge to Environmental History

This article discusses the program of environmental history within the larger discipline of history and contrasts it with more recent contributions from post‐constructivist science. It explores the ways in which post‐constructivism has the potential to productively address many of the shortcomings of environmental history's theories and models that environmental historians themselves have begun to view with a critical eye. The post‐constructivist authors discussed in this article, Donna Haraway and Bruno Latour, both represent challenges to the ways in which nature and the natural sciences tend to be conceptualized as non‐problematized entities within environmental history. They also challenge the ways in which dichotomies of nature and culture tend to be reproduced within the program of environmental history. It is argued that these post‐constructivist contributions represent a radical and arguably more truly historical way of introducing non‐human actors into the historical narrative, and thus represent a potential reinvigoration of environmental history that would embrace a more radical historicity, greater diversity, and openness to difference.     

Observations on the Nature and Culture of Environmental History

This article aims to consider the robust field of environmental history as a whole, as it stands and as it has developed over the past twenty‐five years around the world. It necessarily adopts a selective approach but still offers more breadth than depth. It treats the links between environmental history and other fields within history, and with other related disciplines such as geography. It considers the precursors of environmental history, its emergence since the 1970s, its condition in several settings and historiographies. Finally it touches on environmental history's relationship to social theory and to the natural sciences as they have evolved in recent decades. It concludes that while there remains plenty of interesting work yet to do, environmental history has successfully established itself as a legitimate field within the historical profession, and has a bright future, if perhaps for discouraging reasons.     

近十年来美国环境史研究的动向——以《环境史》期刊为中心的探讨

本文以2000～2010年《环境史》(Environmental History)所刊论文和书评为基础,通过分析、归纳、总结,对近十年来美国环境史研究的特点和动向进行考察,可以看出,在过去的十年里,美国环境史研究在研究主题、研究方法上都有了长足的发展,不但继续拓宽自然保护和资源保护传统研究领域的研究范围,而且还对过去的研究主题进行重新思考.与此同时,不断地涌现着新的环境史研究热点,如海洋环境史、环境正义、少数族群等.此外,综合环境史的研究也逐渐引起环境史研究者的关注.     

环境史及其对自然的重新书写

长期以来,由于根深蒂固的静止世界观及地理环境决定论的消极影响,再加上人类对自然的生态价值缺乏认识,自然长期被历史学家所忽视。自19世纪后半期,一些美国学者尝试将自然纳入历史的写作范畴。经过长时间摸索,这一努力日臻成熟,集中表现在20世纪六七十年代出现的环境史。环境史扩大了历史研究的范畴,提供了观察历史的新思路和新视角,它还可以对一些重大历史事件和理论问题重新做出解释。     

史学与政治——美国“共识”史学初探

史学与政治的关系历来备受关注。但人们往往从史学应不应该为政治服务的角度出发看待它们之间的关系,未免有些简单化。事实上,史学与政治的关系涉及了史学理论的诸多问题。本文围绕“共识”史学探讨史学与政治之间的关系,实际上是探讨史学理论中有关主观性的问题。笔者认为,历史学家的研究活动预设了政治前提,其研究的对象也是在政治环境中产生的。因此,史学与政治之间有一种天然的联系。对此,我们应该有一种自觉的认识,才会有利于我们的历史研究。     

评日本政治“存异”和文化“求同”的殖民统治方针

迄今为止,国内外史学界对日本在台湾、朝鲜、“满洲国”进行殖民统治的研究,已取得丰硕成果。但不能不指出的是,对日本殖民统治方针形成和演变的研究,仍存在不足。这种不足至少表现在两个方面：一、日本殖民统治方针的形成和演变,均是以如何对殖民地进行政治和化统治为重心的,