A Study of Ecological Imperialism from the Perspective of World-Systems Theory

I. Introduction

一、引言

With the escalation of the global ecological crisis, competition among Western developed countries for resources has intensified, and social-ecological injustices visible everywhere are growing more severe. Environmental crises are often intertwined with issues such as land grabbing, livelihood deprivation, and violent violations of the rights of indigenous peoples, small farmers, and the urban poor. Behind this deprivation, there is often an alliance of corrupt officials, domestic elites, international financial institutions, and transnational corporations, whose wealth and political power are directly linked to environmental degradation. However, the core crux of the social-ecological crisis lies in the fact that it cannot be attributed in isolation to a specific practice, a specific economic policy, or the actions of a specific country, nor can it be reduced to the absence of ecological measures in a particular industry such as mining or industrial agriculture.

随着全球生态危机的升级，西方发达国家对资源的争夺日益激烈，随处可见的社会生态不公正现象愈演愈烈。环境危机通常与侵占土地、剥夺生计，以及暴力侵害原住民、小农户和城市贫民权利等问题交织在一起。在剥夺现象的背后，往往存在着由腐败官员、国内精英、国际金融机构和跨国公司勾结而成的联盟，其财富和政治权力与环境恶化直接相关。然而，社会生态危机的核心症结在于，它们既不能孤立地被归咎于一种特定的做法、一项特定的经济政策或一个特定国家的行动，也不能被归结为采矿业或工业式农业等某一特定行业生态举措的缺位。

Orthodox development theory can neither explain the worsening state of the global ecological crisis nor the social-ecological relations that induce global environmental injustice. For decades, ecological modernization theorists and other technological optimists have argued that economic and technological progress stimulated by the market contributes to resource efficiency and environmental protection, and decouples GDP growth from resource dependence. On this basis, “green growth” and the “Sustainable Development Goals,” unanimously adopted by all UN member states in 2015, have been promoted as core policy frameworks.

正统的发展理论既不能解释全球生态危机持续恶化的状况，也无法解释诱发全球环境不公正的社会生态关系。几十年来，生态现代化理论家和其他技术乐观主义者一直认为，经由市场刺激而取得的经济和技术进步有助于资源高效利用和环境保护，并使GDP增长摆脱对资源的依赖。基于此，“绿色增长”以及2015年联合国所有成员国一致通过的“可持续发展目标”被作为核心政策体系而加以推广。

For the Global South, economic growth achieved through the division of labor and free trade can provide governments with tax revenue, help improve the quality of life in poor countries, and consolidate environmental achievements. However, these views are fundamentally problematic. Climate, biodiversity, and other crises are intensifying rather than abating. This is not surprising, because global economic growth has not “decoupled” from resource use or environmental impact in any sustained or significant way. More importantly, the economic development and consumption levels of the Global North have been, and continue to be, largely based on the ecological exploitation of the Global South through the mechanisms of global economic integration—this is precisely what this article attempts to demonstrate.

对于全球南方而言，通过分工和自由贸易实现的经济增长可以为政府提供税收，有助于改善贫困国家的生活质量并巩固环保成果。然而，这些观点从根本上而言是有问题的。气候、生物多样性和其他危机正在加剧而非减缓。这并不奇怪，因为全球经济增长并未以任何持续或显著的方式与资源利用或环境影响“脱钩”。更重要的是，全球北方的经济发展和消费水平在很大程度上已经并将继续建立在全球经济一体化机制对全球南方的生态利用基础之上，这也是本文试图论证的内容。

In the book *Ecological Imperialism, Development and the Capitalist World-System: Cases from Africa and Asia*, the author of this article points out that the ecological crisis of the 21st century is ultimately intertwined with the development of industrial capitalism and its global expansion. This book explores the complex relationship between the global ecological crisis and ecological imperialism from three key perspectives: world-systems theory, neoliberal globalization, and neoliberal development policies. This article elucidates some important viewpoints from that book, which are built on the foundation of world-systems theory and expand the understanding of imperialism on both a historical basis and an ecological level. This theoretical contribution can provide crucial political, economic, and historical context for understanding how the appropriation and exploitation of the global ecological commons under neoliberalism has become an arena for global capital competition.

本文作者在《生态帝国主义、发展和资本主义世界体系：来自非洲和亚洲的案例》一书中指出，21世纪的生态危机最终与工业资本主义的发展及其全球扩张交织在一起。此书从世界体系理论、新自由主义全球化和新自由主义发展政策等三个关键视角探讨了全球生态危机与生态帝国主义之间的复杂关系。本文阐明了该书中的一些重要观点，这些观点建立在世界体系理论的基础上，并在历史基础和生态层面扩展了对帝国主义的理解。这一理论贡献可以提供至关重要的政治、经济和历史背景，让我们了解在新自由主义背景下对全球生态公域的侵占和利用如何沦为全球资本角逐的领域。

Furthermore, the study of ecological imperialism based on world-systems theory provides a background for critically explaining the integration of the Global South into neoliberal globalization. Over the past four to five decades, neoliberal globalization has been advanced step by step through established development programs, often with disastrous ecological consequences. With the collapse of traditional colonialism, the development model shifted, with market- and private-property-based relations of production replacing traditional development models, while placing greater emphasis on export-oriented growth. Development programs advocating industrialization, urbanization, and agricultural modernization have led to resource overexploitation and environmental degradation.

此外，基于世界体系理论的生态帝国主义研究为批判性地解释全球南方融入新自由主义全球化提供了背景。在过去的四五十年中，新自由主义全球化通过既定的发展计划逐步推进，而这往往带来了灾难性的生态影响。随着传统殖民主义的瓦解，发展模式随即发生转变，以市场和私有财产为基础的生产关系取代传统的发展模式，同时更加侧重出口导向型增长。主张工业化、城市化和农业现代化的发展计划导致了资源的过度开发和环境的退化。

For the poor and marginalized groups in the Global South, this development trend is a manifestation of contemporary ecological imperialism, as local indigenous groups lose their land and livelihoods due to environmental degradation. Laissez-faire globalization and neoliberal development policies, with international trade, international investment, and international finance as their three pillars, have created a global economy dominated by large transnational corporations and transnational financial companies. Within the capitalist world-system, the resources of the Global South flow into the Global North in the form of consumer goods through the process of “ecologically unequal exchange,” while profits are devoured by transnational corporations and their shareholders.

对全球南方的贫困群体和边缘化群体而言，这种发展态势是当代生态帝国主义的表现形式之一，当地的土著群体由于环境退化而失去了土地与生计。自由放任的全球化和以国际贸易、国际投资、国际金融为三大支柱的新自由主义发展政策创造了一种由大型跨国公司和跨国金融公司主导的全球经济。在资本主义世界体系中，全球南方的资源在“生态不平等交换”的过程中以消费品的形式流入全球北方，而利润则被跨国公司及其股东蚕食。

II. Ecological Interpretations of World-Systems and Dependency Theory

二、世界体系与依附理论的生态学解释

In the 1960s, world-systems and dependency theory emerged as a radical critique of orthodox development theory, especially modernization theory. Modernization theory held that interaction with Western capitalist countries was a source of economic growth and development for poor countries. However, from Samir Amin and Arghiri Emmanuel to Walter Rodney, these theorists reached a basic consensus that capitalism must be viewed as a hierarchical world-system. In the capitalist world-system, the core regions (or metropoles) dominate the subordinate or dependent peripheral regions. The development of the core regions is based on the underdevelopment of the peripheral regions. Scholars such as Raul Prebisch sought to reveal structural inequalities in the world economy, such as the deteriorating terms of trade for primary commodity producers. Building on this, Immanuel Wallerstein argued that the capitalist world-system comprises core, semi-peripheral, and peripheral parts.

1960年代，世界体系与依附理论以对正统发展理论、特别是现代化理论的激进批判面目出现。现代化理论认为，与西方资本主义国家的交往是贫穷国家经济增长和发展的来源。然而，从萨米尔·阿明（Samir Amin）、阿吉里·伊曼纽尔（Arghiri Emmanuel）到沃尔特·罗德尼（Walter Rodney），这些理论家之间达成了如下基本共识，即必须将资本主义视为等级森严的世界体系。在资本主义世界体系中，中心地区（或大都市）支配着处于从属或依赖地位的边缘地区。中心地区的发展是以边缘地区的不发达为基础的。劳尔·普雷维什（Raul Prebisch）等学者则试图揭示世界经济中的结构性不平等，如初级产品生产国的贸易条件恶化。在此基础上，伊曼纽尔·沃勒斯坦（Immanuel Wallerstein）认为资本主义世界体系包含中心、半边缘和边缘三个部分。

Currently, scholars studying world-systems and dependency theory attempt to extend these arguments and use world-systems and dependency theory to analyze contemporary social-ecological issues. “Ecologically unequal exchange” is a concept that has received much attention over the past decade and is one of the core features of ecological imperialism. Although the concept of ecologically unequal exchange is evolving and interpreted differently, scholars engaged in related research have made significant progress in the interdisciplinary field of world-systems and dependency theory and ecology, conducting a large amount of empirical research. The concept of ecologically unequal exchange critically draws on Emmanuel’s concept of unequal exchange. Emmanuel argued that wage gaps between different countries produce “trade imperialism” in the sense of unequal exchange of labor time. Alf Hornborg, a scholar researching the theory of ecologically unequal exchange, argues that the industrial metabolism of core economies requires appropriating hinterland resources from peripheral regions and reducing their ecological carrying capacity. Therefore, the theory of ecologically unequal exchange posits an asymmetric transfer of resources between core and peripheral economies through trade, which appears fair from a monetary perspective but is not from an ecological one.

目前，研究世界体系与依附理论的学者试图通过扩展上述论点并利用世界体系与依附理论来分析当代社会生态问题。“生态不平等交换”是过去10年来备受关注的概念，也是生态帝国主义的核心特征之一。虽然生态不平等交换概念在不断演变且解读不一，但从事相关研究的学者已在世界体系与依附理论与生态学的交叉研究领域取得了重要进展，并开展了大量实证研究。生态不平等交换概念批判性地借鉴了伊曼纽尔提出的不平等交换概念。伊曼纽尔认为，不同国家之间的工资差距在劳动时间不平等交换的意义上产生了“贸易帝国主义”。从事生态不平等交换理论研究的学者阿尔夫·霍恩堡（Alf Hornborg）认为，中心地区经济体的产业新陈代谢需要侵占边缘地区的腹地资源并削减其生态承载力。因此，生态不平等交换理论假定中心经济体与边缘经济体之间通过贸易进行了非对称性的资源转移，这种转移从货币角度看似乎是公平的，但从生态角度看则不然。

Stephen Bunker was one of the first theorists to systematically link the concept of underdevelopment with ecology. He argued that market transactions between peripheral and core economies lead to the systematic deterioration of the ecological conditions of peripheral economies, while core economies benefit. During the neoliberal development period, especially over the past decade, as social-ecological data has become more comprehensive and refined, scholars working on the theory of ecologically unequal exchange have conducted extensive empirical research. They have strongly questioned the basic premises of ecological modernization theory, arguing that developed countries mitigate their own environmental degradation by transferring the consequences of environmental degradation to other countries. At the same time, they have analyzed other key issues in world-systems and dependency theory—such as the impact of foreign investment, the impact of deteriorating terms of trade for primary producers, and the impact of foreign debt—from an environmental perspective. However, all forms of ecologically unequal exchange occur within the broader political-economic context of ecological imperialism.

斯蒂芬·邦克（Stephen Bunker）是最早将欠发达概念与生态学系统地联系起来的理论家之一。他认为，边缘经济体与中心经济体之间的市场交易导致边缘经济体的生态状况陷入系统性恶化，而中心经济体则从中受益。在新自由主义发展期间，特别是在过去10年间，随着社会生态数据愈发全面和完善，从事生态不平等交换理论研究的学者进行了大量实证研究。他们对生态现代化理论的基本前提提出了强烈质疑，认为发达国家通过将环境恶化的结果转移到其他国家从而减缓了本国的环境恶化程度；同时，对世界体系与依附理论中的其他关键问题，如外国投资的影响、初级产品生产者贸易条件恶化的影响以及外债的影响，他们也从环境问题的角度进行了分析。然而，所有的生态不平等交换形式都发生在生态帝国主义这一更为广泛的政治经济背景下。

III. Five Essential Characteristics of Ecological Imperialism

三、生态帝国主义的五个本质特征

According to the simplest definition, imperialism refers to a system in which a dominant great power controls the trade, investment, labor, and natural resources of other countries or regions. Both classical and modern theories of imperialism have consistently recognized the important role of natural resources in global capital accumulation. Alfred Crosby discussed imperialism from an ecological perspective, but scholars engaged in world-systems theory place greater emphasis on a political-economic perspective. From this theoretical viewpoint, ecological imperialism possesses five essential characteristics.

按照最简单的定义，帝国主义是指一个占主导地位的大国控制其他国家或地区的贸易、投资、劳动力和自然资源的体系。无论是古典的还是近代的帝国主义理论，都一直承认自然资源在全球资本积累中有着重要作用。阿尔弗雷德·克罗斯比（Alfred Crosby）基于生态学视角对帝国主义进行了讨论，但从事世界体系理论研究的学者则更侧重政治经济学视角。从这一理论观点来看，生态帝国主义具有五个必不可少的特征。

The first characteristic of ecological imperialism is its rootedness in the inexorable drive of capital accumulation and capitalist relations of production. Expansionism is an internal reason for the normal operation of capitalism, enabling it to seek new markets, resources, and investment channels for over-accumulated capital. At the same time, expansionism is also its response to its own internal contradictions and crises. As many scholars have pointed out, this innate expansionism of capitalism is highly destructive to a planet with limited resources and a fragile ecology. From the origins of colonialism to the era of neocolonialism, and then to today's neoliberal globalization, this dynamic has underpinned the historical development of capitalism.

生态帝国主义的第一个特征是其植根于资本积累和资本主义生产关系的不竭驱动。扩张性是资本主义得以正常运行的内在原因，其能够为过度积累的资本寻找新的市场、资源和投资渠道。同时，扩张性也是其对自身内部矛盾和危机的反应。正如许多学者指出的，资本主义这种与生俱来的扩张性，对于资源有限与生态脆弱的地球而言具有高度破坏性。从殖民主义的起源到新殖民主义时代，再到如今的新自由主义全球化，这一动力支撑着资本主义的历史发展。

The second characteristic of ecological imperialism is the inequality of power (economic, political, military, and ideological) among states within the hierarchical international division of labor of the capitalist world-system. Because capitalism must continuously obtain cheap resources, it must create political-economic conditions similar to those that guarantee the exploitation of labor to ensure the smooth extraction of resources. Since the 1980s, the political-economic landscape has largely continued the trend of neoliberal globalization and the concomitant intensification of the global commodification of the ecological environment.

生态帝国主义的第二个特征是在资本主义世界体系的等级制国际分工中，国家之间（经济、政治、军事和意识形态）权力的不平等。由于资本主义必须源源不断地获取廉价资源，因此必须创造一种类似于保障劳动力剥削的政治经济条件来保障资源的顺利攫取。自1980年代以来，政治经济格局大致延续着新自由主义全球化以及随之不断强化的全球生态环境商品化的趋势。

The third characteristic of ecological imperialism is that it imposes negative socio-ecological impacts, ecological debt, or ecologically unequal exchange on peripheral countries, and these harms cannot be genuinely compensated at the monetary level. Ecological debt is a multidimensional concept; in research on environmental injustice, it is intertwined with many other issues, its scope encompassing everything from the blatant plunder and exploitation of the labor and natural resources of the Global South by the Global North under colonial rule to various forms of underpayment in the contemporary global economy. As noted above, ecologically unequal exchange is one of the core characteristics of ecological imperialism.

生态帝国主义的第三个特征是其给周边国家带来了负面的社会生态影响、生态债务或生态不平等交换，而这些侵害无法从货币层面获得真正补偿。生态债务是一个多维度的概念，在有关环境非正义的研究中，它与其他诸多问题交织在一起，其范围囊括了从殖民主义统治下的全球北方对全球南方劳动力和自然资源的公然掠夺与剥削，到当今全球经济中各种形式的欠付。如上所述，生态不平等交换是生态帝国主义的核心特征之一。

The fourth characteristic of ecological imperialism is that the form it takes is a backlash against social protest movements. Ecological imperialism requires the establishment of a favorable political-economic environment within "subjugated" countries. However, this practice is periodically met with resistance. The price of natural resources in peripheral countries depends not only on market supply and demand and ground rent but also on class struggle, anti-imperialist struggles, and environmental struggles. By tracing the history of anti-imperialist movements and economic nationalist positions in the Global South, this article argues that the neoliberal economic policies we see today concerning trade, foreign investment, and international finance are, in essence, a backlash against the aforementioned protest movements.

生态帝国主义的第四个特征是其所采取的形式是对社会抗议运动的回击。生态帝国主义需要在“臣服的”国家内部建立有利的政治经济环境。然而，这种做法不时遭到抵制。边缘国家的自然资源价格不仅取决于市场供求和地租，还取决于阶级斗争、反帝国主义和环境斗争。通过追溯全球南方反帝国主义运动和经济民族主义立场的历史，本文认为，我们今天看到的关于贸易、外国投资和国际金融的新自由主义经济政策在本质上是对上述抗议运动的回击。

The fifth characteristic of ecological imperialism is the continuous accumulation of capital in imperialist countries, which is precisely the result of the combined effect of all the factors mentioned above. For imperialist countries, ecological imperialism ensures their profiting from environmentally destructive activities and their preemptive extraction of the planet's resources. The ecological wealth of the earth flows from the regions targeted by ecological imperialism to the imperialist countries.

生态帝国主义的第五个特征是帝国主义国家资本的持续积累，而这正是上述所有因素共同作用的结果。对于帝国主义国家来说，生态帝国主义确保了它们从环境破坏活动中牟利以及对地球资源的抢先掠取。地球的生态财富从生态帝国主义瞄准的地区流向帝国主义国家。

Ultimately, when we discuss ecological imperialism, we are concerned with the ecological dimension of imperialism and the global expansionist tendency of capitalism. This expansionism requires a comprehensive global adjustment of the socio-ecological relations between humanity and nature. From traditional colonialism to the development of neoliberalism and neoliberal globalization, this expansionism has forced the Global South to adjust its economic, political, and social systems to accommodate the needs of capital accumulation in the Global North.

归根结底，当我们讨论生态帝国主义时，关注的是帝国主义的生态方面和资本主义的全球扩张倾向。这种扩张主义需要在全球范围内全面调整人类与自然之间的社会生态关系。从传统殖民主义到新自由主义的发展以及新自由主义全球化，这种扩张主义迫使全球南方调整其经济、政治和社会制度，以便适应全球北方资本积累的需要。

IV. Dynamic Changes of Ecological Imperialism in the Capitalist World-System

四、生态帝国主义在资本主义世界体系中的动态变化

Ecological imperialism arises from a global economy that operates as an integrated system, which has always been a hierarchical system of international division of labor. Colonialism gave birth to an integrated capitalist world-system, becoming the "background" of today's globalization. The world is divided into a wealthy Global North and a poor Global South, as well as core industrialized economies and peripheral economies dependent on natural resource extraction and export. World-systems theory views the global economy as a hierarchical system of interconnected economies. In this system, different geographical regions assume different economic tasks, and certain countries hold overall hegemony through the international division of labor. Theorists of world-systems and dependency theory, such as Johan Galtung and Immanuel [Wallerstein], have long recognized the importance of the capitalist world-system for imperialism.

生态帝国主义产生于作为综合系统运行的全球经济之中，而后者一直是等级森严的国际分工体系。殖民主义催生了一体化的资本主义世界体系，成为当今全球化的“底色”。世界被划分为富裕的全球北方和贫穷的全球南方，以及中心工业化经济体和依赖自然资源开采与出口的边缘经济体。世界体系理论将全球经济视为一个由相互联系的经济体组成的等级体系。在这个系统中，不同的地理区域承担不同的经济任务，而某些国家通过国际劳动分工把持着总体霸权。从事世界体系与依附理论研究的理论家，如约翰·加尔通（Johan Galtung）和伊曼纽尔，早已认识到资本主义世界体系对于帝国主义的重要性。

In the world-system, which includes core, semi-peripheral, and peripheral regions, the first fundamental relationship on which ecological imperialism depends is the severe inequality caused by the continuous exploitation of the periphery by the core. It originates from colonialism, when peripheral economies in Africa, Latin America, and parts of Asia were restructured as exporters of natural resources to meet the industrial needs of European colonizers. Leaders of many post-colonial countries have called this division of labor, which persists after colonies gain independence, "neocolonialism," to indicate that peripheral countries remain economically, politically, and technologically dependent on their former colonial metropoles.

在包括中心地区、半边缘地区和边缘地区的世界体系中，生态帝国主义所依赖的第一个基本关系是中心地区对边缘地区的持续剥削所造成的严重不平等。它源于殖民主义，当时非洲、拉丁美洲和亚洲部分地区的边缘经济体被重组为自然资源出口国,用来满足欧洲殖民者的工业需求。许多后殖民主义国家的领导人将这种在殖民地获得独立后仍存在的劳动分工关系称为“新殖民主义”，以表示边缘国家在经济、政治和技术上仍依赖其前殖民主义宗主国。

Although the global economy is increasingly complex, due to developed countries outsourcing manufacturing to certain developing countries, many economic tasks still geographically follow the logic of the core-periphery distribution. Core countries are characterized by highly developed productive forces, including capital-intensive production and high technology; peripheral countries are characterized by low levels of productive forces, including cheap labor and labor-intensive production. Geographically, the core consists of developed industrial countries such as Europe, North America, and Japan; the periphery consists of most of sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and certain Asian countries.

虽然全球经济日益复杂，但由于发达国家将制造业外包给某些发展中国家，许多经济任务在地理上仍遵循中心地区和边缘地区的分布逻辑。中心地区国家的特点是生产力高度发达，包括资本密集型生产和高新科技；处于边缘地区国家的特点是生产力水平低下，包括廉价劳动力和劳动密集型生产。从地理上看，中心地区由发达的工业国家组成，如欧洲、北美和日本；边缘地区由撒哈拉以南非洲的大部分地区、拉丁美洲和亚洲某些国家组成。

There are two main ways in which ecological imperialism penetrates peripheral countries. One is that, within the international division of labor of the world-system, the economies of peripheral countries are based on natural resource exports, bringing about ecologically unequal exchange and ecological debt. This unequal status creates a dependency structure that makes peripheral countries more vulnerable to various socio-ecological crises. For example, the deterioration of the terms of trade for primary products forces peripheral countries to increase their level of natural resource exports, which exacerbates deforestation and mineral exports. Some studies link the deterioration of terms of trade to ecologically unequal exchange and environmental degradation in Latin America. In addition to the factor of falling primary product prices, the impact of foreign debt has also been incorporated into research. Scholars such as John M. Shandra, through a cross-national study of 62 poor countries from 1990 to 2005, found that foreign debt and structural adjustment exacerbated deforestation. Both factors appear to drive peripheral countries to increase export earnings in order to pay interest and principal.

生态帝国主义入侵边缘地区国家的方式主要有两种。一种是在世界体系的国际分工中，边缘地区国家的经济以自然资源出口为基础，带来了生态不平等交换和生态债务。这种不平等的地位产生了一种依赖性结构，使边缘地区国家更容易遭受各种社会生态危机的影响。例如，初级产品贸易条件的恶化迫使边缘地区国家提高自然资源出口水平，而这加剧了森林砍伐和矿业出口。一些研究将贸易条件恶化与拉丁美洲的生态不平等交换及环境恶化联系起来。除了初级产品价格下降的因素外，外债影响也被纳入研究范围。约翰·尚德拉（John M. Shandra）等学者通过研究1990—2005年62个贫穷国家的跨国模型发现，外债和结构调整加剧了森林砍伐。这两个因素似乎都在推动边缘地区国家增加出口收入，以便支付利息和本金。

Another pattern is found in certain regions, particularly sub-Saharan Africa, where international trade is primarily controlled by multinational corporations. Host countries have very low tax rates, especially in the mining and agricultural sectors. Consequently, resources and profits flow overseas. For example, among the top 25 mining companies listed on the African Mining Association website, 16 are from Canada, Australia, and Europe. This trend has been termed by some as "regional sub-imperialism." African governments hold only a small equity stake in foreign investments, typically between 5% and 20%. A 2016 report by the organization War on Want revealed that 101 companies listed on the London Stock Exchange control African resources worth $1.05 trillion, involving just five commodities—oil, gold, diamonds, coal, and platinum. These 101 companies have mining operations in 37 African countries, with 59 incorporated in the United Kingdom. Due to tax rates far below international standards, even during the commodity boom of the early 21st century, African governments derived minimal revenue from mineral exports.

另一种是在一些区域特别是撒哈拉以南非洲，国际贸易主要由跨国公司控制。东道国的税率很低，特别是在采矿业和农业部门。因此，资源和利润都流向了海外。例如，在非洲矿业协会网站上列出的排名前25位的矿业公司中，有16家来自加拿大、澳大利亚和欧洲。这种趋势被一些人称为“区域次帝国主义”。非洲各国政府只持有外国投资的一小部分股权，通常为5%—20%。2016年“向匮乏宣战”（War on Want）机构发布的报告显示，在伦敦证券交易所上市的101家公司控制着价值1.05万亿美元的非洲资源，而这仅仅涉及5种大宗商品——石油、黄金、钻石、煤炭和铂金。这101家公司在37个非洲国家均有矿产业务，其中59家在英国注册成立。由于税率远低于国际标准，即使在21世纪初大宗商品交易的高峰期，非洲政府从矿产出口中获得的收益也微乎其微。

Scholars have long argued that these underdeveloped economies suffer from uneven development. Within these economies, there typically exists a comprador elite aligned with foreign investors and linked to resource extraction. One report indicates that between 1970 and 2018, 30 African countries lost approximately $2 trillion due to capital flight, with net trade misinvoicing accounting for $588 billion.

长期以来，学者们一直认为这些欠发达经济体受到发展不平衡的困扰。在这些经济体内部，通常存在着与外国投资者利益一致且与资源开采相关的买办精英。一份报告指出，1970—2018年，有30个非洲国家由于资本外逃而损失了约2万亿美元，其中进出口净虚开发票占5880亿美元。

However, the capitalist world-system has undergone significant changes in recent decades. One of the most important shifts over the past half-century is the global intensification of capitalist relations of production. This process has been driven by multinational corporations, which began outsourcing manufacturing around the 1960s, objectively promoting economic growth and industrialization in emerging semi-peripheral economies. In the pursuit of cheap labor, neoliberal globalization has transnationalized various links in the chains of production and value creation, leading some scholars to argue that this trend has resulted in a new international division of labor.

然而，资本主义世界体系近几十年来发生了重要变化。过去半个世纪最重要的变化之一是全球范围内资本主义生产关系的强化。这一进程由跨国公司推动，它们大约在1960年代开始将制造业外包，客观上推动了新兴半边缘经济体的经济增长和工业化。在对廉价劳动力的追求中，新自由主义全球化使生产和价值创造链条中的各个环节实现了跨国化，于是有学者认为这一趋势导致了新的国际分工。

Compared to previous eras of imperialism, the world-system is now connected by billions of commodity chains, triggering corresponding environmental consequences on a global scale. The international division of labor has undergone significant changes: on one hand, many previously non-industrial economies now possess substantial manufacturing sectors; on the other hand, manufacturing employment as a share of total employment in high-income countries has declined, while service-sector employment has risen.

与以往的帝国主义时代相比，世界体系如今被数十亿条商品链连接起来并在全球范围内引发了相应的环境后果。国际分工发生了显著变化：一方面，之前的许多非工业经济体如今拥有了大量的制造业部门；另一方面，制造业就业占高收入国家总就业的比例有所下降，而服务业就业占高收入国家总就业的比例不断上升。

The rise of industrialized semi-peripheral countries has had a major impact on the operation of ecological imperialism, ecologically unequal exchange, and the distribution of ecological debt within the world-system. The rise of "South-South cooperation" has prompted divergent interpretations. Some scholars praise the economic development of the Global South and its potential to break free from the dominance of the Global North; conversely, others argue that the success of the Global South will ultimately be incorporated into the existing paradigm of global capitalist development. Nevertheless, despite changes in the world-system, these are insufficient to prove the existence of imperialism and ecologically unequal exchange on the part of industrialized semi-peripheral countries. In many cases, semi-peripheral economies act as suppliers and subcontractors for Global North corporations, and a significant portion of their exports are ultimately consumed in the Global North.

工业化半边缘国家的崛起，对生态帝国主义的运作、生态不平等交换和生态债务在世界体系中的分布产生了重大影响。“南南合作”的兴起引发了不同的解读，一些学者称赞全球南方经济的发展及其摆脱全球北方统治的潜力；与之相反，另一些学者则认为全球南方的成功将最终被纳入现有的全球资本主义发展范式之中。然而，尽管世界体系发生了变化，也不足以证明工业化的半边缘国家存在帝国主义和生态不平等交换。在许多情况下，半边缘经济体充当着全球北方公司的供应商和分包商，它们的许多出口产品最终仍在全球北方消费。

V. How Ecological Imperialism Takes Shape in the World-System

五、世界体系中的生态帝国主义如何形成

From the perspective of world-systems theory, neoliberal international trade, foreign investment, international finance, and the development policies that underpin them constitute the latest phase of ecological imperialism in the 21st century. Based on what this article identifies as major changes in the core-periphery relationship and the specific socio-ecological impacts of capital accumulation in peripheral and core regions, three stages in the evolution of ecological imperialism within the contemporary capitalist world-system can be identified.

从世界体系理论来看，新自由主义国际贸易、国外投资、国际金融以及支撑它们的发展政策，构成了21世纪生态帝国主义的最新阶段。根据本文所认为的中心与边缘关系的重大变化以及边缘和中心地区资本积累的具体社会生态影响，可以确定当代资本主义世界体系中生态帝国主义演变的三个阶段。

(1) Colonialism: 1492 to the 1960s

（一）殖民主义：1492年至1960年代

The historical roots of the ecological imperialism and global ecological crisis facing humanity in the 21st century lie in European colonialism. European colonialism began with Columbus's exploration of the Americas in 1492 and persisted in various forms until the decolonization movements of the late 20th century. Colonialism was a practice that severely damaged the ecological environment. As parts of Asia, Africa, and the Americas fell under the control of European capitalist states, colonialism impoverished these colonized regions while also destroying their ecosystems. To meet colonial demands, European colonizers, in the process of plundering colonized areas, not only extracted their resources but also fundamentally restructured society, the economy, and the relationship between indigenous peoples and nature. It can be said that its effects remain deeply entrenched to this day. Under Spanish and Portuguese colonial rule, resources such as gold and silver in the Americas were plundered, causing a severe demographic crisis, with between 45 million and 90 million indigenous people dying from overwork, disease, or conflict with the colonizers.

21世纪人类所面临的生态帝国主义和全球生态危机，其历史根源在于欧洲殖民主义。欧洲殖民主义始于1492年哥伦布对美洲的探索，并以不同的形式持续到20世纪末的非殖民化运动。殖民主义是一种严重破坏生态环境的实践。随着亚洲、非洲和美洲的部分地区落入欧洲资本主义国家的控制，殖民主义在使殖民地区贫困落后的同时，也破坏了这些地区的生态。为了满足殖民需求，欧洲殖民者在掠夺殖民地区的过程中，不仅攫取其资源，更对整个社会、经济、原住民与自然的关系进行了重新调整。可以说，其影响直到今天仍根深蒂固。在西班牙和葡萄牙的殖民统治下，美洲的黄金和白银等资源被掠夺，造成了严重的人口危机，多达4500万至9000万的土著居民死于过劳、疾病或与殖民者的冲突。

With the development of colonialism and the introduction of capitalist relations of production, the economic systems of the colonies were also restructured. Before colonialism, most indigenous peoples were self-sufficient, relying on local ecosystems. However, with economic restructuring, pre-colonial food systems were replaced by monocultures dedicated to export, which were needed for the European Industrial Revolution. The monoculture of crops triggered a series of environmental problems, including overexploitation of land in peripheral areas, soil depletion, and ultimately a sharp decline in yields. Through colonial expansion, the initial impetus for capitalist industrialization was formed. Driven by the logic of profit maximization, nature was decomposed into specific components and exploited as "natural capital" in the production process. The colonizers also introduced the logic of primitive accumulation, namely the enclosure, privatization, and exploitation of ecological commons.

随着殖民主义的发展和资本主义生产关系的引入，殖民地的经济体系也随之发生重构。在殖民主义实行之前，大多数土著居民依靠当地的生态系统便可以自给自足。然而，随着经济体系的重构，前殖民主义时期的粮食体系被欧洲工业革命所需的且专门用于出口的单一作物所取代。种植作物的单一化引发了一系列的环境问题，包括边缘地区土地的过度开发、土壤耗竭，最终导致产量锐减。通过殖民主义扩张，资本主义工业化的初始动力得以形成。在利润最大化逻辑的驱使下，自然被分解为各个具体组成部分并在生产过程中作为“自然资本”而遭到剥削。殖民者还引入了原始积累的逻辑，即对生态公域进行圈占、私有化和剥削。

Colonialism also laid the foundation for the initial capital accumulation of the Global North. The profits of colonialism not only triggered a massive flow of resources but also led to the transfer of capital from the colonies to the metropolises of the colonizing powers. Importantly, colonialism provided external markets for the export of the colonizers' products, which, while constituting another key driving force for capitalist expansion, also destroyed the local industries of the colonies.

殖民主义也为全球北方最初的资本积累奠定了基础。殖民主义的利润不仅引发了资源的大量流动，而且导致资本从殖民地大量流向宗主国的大都市。重要的是，殖民主义为殖民者的产品出口提供了外部市场，这虽然构成了资本主义另一个关键性的扩张动力，但也破坏了殖民地的本土工业。

(2) Economic Nationalism and Resource Sovereignty: 1940s to the Late 1970s

（二）经济民族主义与资源主权：1940年代至1970年代末

The 1970s marked the peak of economic nationalism in the Third World. Post-colonial states attempted to impose stricter controls on multinational corporations operating within their borders, demanded improved terms of trade for primary commodities, formed primary commodity cartels like OPEC, and sought reparations for colonialism through platforms such as the United Nations' "New International Economic Order." During this period, the neocolonial world order in which post-colonial states found themselves faced numerous challenges. The writings of post-colonial African leaders, social activists, and intellectuals reflected the dynamics and dangers of neocolonialism: the vulnerable state of dependence on primary commodities and the continued control of key sectors of African economies by multinational corporations. Crucially, although many of these attempts did not explicitly use environmental terminology, they challenged ecological imperialism, because much of the Third World's resistance to neocolonialism had the fundamental goal of reclaiming resource sovereignty.

1970年代是第三世界经济民族主义的顶峰时期，后殖民国家试图对在其境内经营的跨国公司进行更严格的管制，要求提高初级产品的贸易条件，组建像欧佩克这样的初级产品卡特尔组织，并且通过联合国“国际经济新秩序”等平台获得殖民主义的赔偿。这一时期，后殖民国家所处的新殖民主义世界秩序受到了诸多挑战。后殖民时代的非洲领导人、社会活动家和知识分子的著作反映了新殖民主义的动态和危险，即依赖初级产品的脆弱状态和跨国公司对非洲关键经济部门的持续控制。至关重要的是，其中的诸多尝试虽未明确使用环境术语进行表达，但却对生态帝国主义形成了挑战，因为第三世界对新殖民主义的大部分抵抗以夺回资源主权为根本目标。

However, major events in the First and Third Worlds soon led to the collapse of economic nationalism. Most importantly, the West’s categorical rejection of the Third World’s demands to adjust the international economic order heralded the arrival of a new, aggressive phase of what Amin called “anti-Third Worldism.” First, these demands ran counter to the tenets of neoliberalism and neoconservatism, and threatened the international economic system based on the “free market.” Neoliberalism, following the path of the free market, replaced economic nationalism. As the debt crisis worsened, many developing countries, unable to secure further private loans, turned to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank for credit. These economic organizations imposed a series of conditions on borrowing countries, including domestic austerity policies and deep-seated economic policy adjustments known as structural adjustment. In developing countries, these neoliberal policies manifested as a large-scale backlash against economic nationalism.

然而，第一世界和第三世界发生的重大事件很快导致了经济民族主义的崩溃。尤为重要的是，西方对第三世界调整国际经济秩序的要求更是断然拒绝，这预示着阿明所言的咄咄逼人的“反第三世界主义”新阶段的到来。首先，这些要求与新自由主义和新保守主义的主张大相径庭，并且威胁到以“自由市场”为基础的国际经济体系。遵循自由市场路线的“新自由主义”取代了经济民族主义。随着债务危机日益严重，许多发展中国家无法进一步获得私人贷款，转而向国际货币基金组织和世界银行寻求信贷。这些经济组织对贷款接受国施加了一系列条件，包括国内紧缩政策，以及被称为结构性调整的深层次经济政策调整。在发展中国家，这些新自由主义政策表现为对经济民族主义的大规模抵制。

(III) Debt, the Collapse of Economic Nationalism, and the Neoliberal Turn: From the Early 1980s to the Present

（三）债务、经济民族主义的崩溃与新自由主义的转向：1980年代初至今

Due to the Third World debt crisis and the ensuing structural adjustment policies, economic nationalism in most Third World countries exited the historical stage in the 1980s. Third World countries underwent a series of radical structural adjustments, restructuring the economies of the Global South according to the principles of free-market capitalism, comparative advantage, and enhanced external integration. This shift was embodied in the economic policies of the “Washington Consensus,” which encouraged market-led, export-oriented economies and advocated privatization, trade liberalization, minimal state regulation, and limited state budget deficits, resting on three main pillars.

由于第三世界的债务危机和随之而来的结构调整政策，第三世界大部分国家的经济民族主义于1980年代退出历史舞台。第三世界国家经历了一系列激进的结构调整，按照自由资本主义、比较优势和强化对外一体化原则重新调整了全球南方经济。这一变化体现在“华盛顿共识”的一系列经济政策中，它鼓励市场主导的外向型出口经济，主张私有化、贸易自由化、国家监管最小化和有限国家预算赤字等，主要包含如下三个支柱。

The First Pillar: International Trade. The changes described above led to severe socio-ecological consequences, which became characteristic of ecological imperialism in its neoliberal phase. The formation of the first pillar is closely tied to policies of international trade development. From the perspective of Western-dominated institutions such as the IMF, the WTO, and the World Bank, trade liberalization, specialization, and export-oriented development meant that peripheral countries in Latin America and Africa had to specialize in exporting natural resources. For Africa, these policies largely replicated the neocolonial international division of labor, accelerating the disarticulation of its internal socio-economic development and deepening its ecological unequal exchange with the rest of the world. Research by Thomas O. Wiedman shows that developed countries, through international trade, can shift their environmental burdens onto developing countries, thereby maintaining a predatory pattern of consumption. At the same time, the unequal consumption of global resources by developed countries, facilitated by trade mechanisms, is also evident in greenhouse gas emissions, land use, and water use. Similarly, the consumption of specific commodities by developed countries threatens species.

第一个支柱：国际贸易。上述变化导致了严重的社会生态后果，这成为生态帝国主义在新自由主义阶段的特征。第一个支柱的形成与国际贸易发展政策息息相关。在国际货币基金组织、世界贸易组织和世界银行等西方主导的机构看来，贸易自由化、专业化分工以及出口导向型发展意味着拉丁美洲和非洲的边缘地区国家必须专门从事自然资源的出口。对于非洲而言，这些政策很大程度上重复了新殖民主义的国际分工，加速了其内部社会经济发展的脱节，加深了其与世界其他地区的生态不平等交换。托马斯·威德曼（Thomas O. Wiedman）的研究表明，发达国家通过国际贸易能够将其环境负担转嫁给发展中国家，从而维持涸泽而渔式的消费。同时，发达国家借助贸易机制对全球资源的不平等消费也体现在温室气体排放、土地利用和水资源使用等方面。同样，发达国家对特定商品的消费也对物种造成了威胁。

The Second Pillar: Preferential Policies for Foreign Investors. It can be said that transnational corporations and their supply chains are the organizational structure on which any form of imperialism depends. Therefore, in the neoliberal phase, the second pillar of ecological imperialism is formed through development policies that strongly support the rights of foreign investors. The IMF, the World Bank, and the OECD have argued in recent decades that foreign direct investment is key to increasing foreign exchange earnings and avoiding debt accumulation in low-income countries. Consequently, neoliberal structural adjustment programs pushed developing countries to open up through privatization and various incentives, including prohibitions on nationalization, reduced taxes for foreign investors, and the removal of barriers to profit repatriation, thereby creating favorable conditions for transnational corporations.

第二个支柱：国外投资者优惠政策。可以说，跨国公司及其供应链是任何形式的帝国主义赖以生存的组织结构。因此，在新自由主义阶段，生态帝国主义的第二个支柱是通过大力支持外国投资者权利的发展政策来形成的。国际货币基金组织、世界银行和经合组织近几十年来一直认为，国外直接投资是增加低收入国家外汇和避免债务累积的关键。因此，新自由主义结构调整计划通过私有化和各种激励措施推动发展中国家对外开放，这些激励措施包括禁止国有化、降低外国投资者税收、消除利润回流障碍等，这同时为跨国公司创造了有利条件。

Furthermore, trade treaties include substantive protections for investors in the form of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms. ISDS is an arbitration procedure that can assess whether changes in government policy have harmed investors. If harm is found, the procedure compels the local government to compensate the investor for the corresponding economic losses. It can be said that ISDS has become another constraining mechanism of ecological imperialism. Companies in the natural resource sector (headquartered mainly in the Global North) are most likely to initiate ISDS proceedings (primarily against governments in the Global South). Finally, alongside protecting investors in multilateral and bilateral trade treaties, the IMF and the World Bank have also promulgated a series of reform measures applicable to areas such as mining and land.

此外，贸易条约还包括以“投资者—国家争端解决机制”（ISDS）的形式对投资者提供的实质性保护。ISDS是一种仲裁程序，它能够评估政府政策的变化是否损害了投资者。如果产生了损害，该程序就会强制当地政府向投资者赔偿相应的经济损失。可以说，ISDS已经成为生态帝国主义的另一种约束机制。自然资源行业的公司（总部主要位于全球北方）最有可能启动ISDS程序（主要针对全球南方国家的政府）。最后，在多边和双边贸易条约中保护投资者的同时，国际货币基金组织和世界银行还颁布了适用于矿业和土地等领域的一系列改革措施。

The laws and regulations redefined to attract foreign investors regarding large-scale land investments are fundamental to understanding the series of socio-ecological problems emerging in the Global South. Many large-sample empirical studies link foreign investment and its supply chains to environmental degradation, ranging from deforestation associated with industrial agriculture to pollution and waste linked to the outsourcing of manufacturing.

为吸引外国投资者而重新制定的有关大规模土地投资的法律法规，是理解全球南方出现一系列社会生态问题的基础。许多大样本的实证研究将外国投资及其供应链与环境退化联系起来，从与工业化农业相关的森林砍伐，到与制造业外包相关的污染和浪费，不一而足。

The Third Pillar: International Financial Liberalization. International financial liberalization constitutes the third pillar connecting neoliberal globalization, global development, and ecological imperialism. In recent decades, financial market liberalization and the rapid growth of global financial capital have been characterized by the rise of a financial hegemonic class and the over-accumulation of capital in the financial sector. While trade and investment policies created the necessary conditions for the enclosure, privatization, and continuous accumulation of capital by foreign entities, liberalization freed financial capital from state constraints. Importantly, global capital can easily access resources in peripheral regions, as these resources have been opened to foreign investors after decades of structural adjustment.

第三个支柱：国际金融自由化。国际金融自由化构成了连接新自由主义全球化、全球发展和生态帝国主义的第三个支柱。最近几十年中，金融市场自由化和全球金融资本迅速发展，其特点是金融霸权阶层的崛起和金融部门资本的过度积累。贸易和投资政策为国外资本的圈地、私有化和持续积累创造了必要条件，而自由化则使金融资本摆脱了国家的约束。重要的是，全球资本能轻易获取边缘地区的资源，因为这些资源在经过数十年的结构性调整后已经向国外投资者开放。

The first key point linking international financial capital, ecological imperialism, and the capitalist world-system is that financial capital pursues the highest rates of return, with little regard for socio-ecological impacts. Therefore, financial capital is both the lifeblood of the global economy and a primary driver of the global ecological crisis. For example, recent research shows that despite the temperature control targets set by the *Paris Climate Agreement*, financial capital continues to fund two of the most dangerous activities threatening the global environment, which lead to biodiversity loss and climate change.

将国际金融资本、生态帝国主义和资本主义世界体系联系起来的第一个要点在于：金融资本追求最高的回报率，却很少考虑社会生态影响。因此，金融资本既是全球经济的资金命脉，也是全球生态危机的始作俑者。例如，最近的研究表明，尽管《巴黎气候协定》设定了控温目标，但金融资本仍在继续资助威胁全球环境的两大最危险活动，它们导致了生物多样性丧失和气候变化。

The second key point linking international financial capital, ecological imperialism, and the capitalist world-system is that international finance itself reflects the hierarchical structure of the capitalist world-system, being concentrated mainly in the core countries of the Global North. North American managers control 58.1% of assets, European fund managers manage 31.8% of assets, Japanese fund managers manage 4.8% of assets, while the rest of the world controls only 5.2% of assets. The world’s 50 largest banks are mostly located in Europe, the United States, and Japan.

将国际金融资本、生态帝国主义和资本主义世界体系联系在一起的第二个要点是：国际金融本身反映了资本主义世界体系的等级制度，其主要集中在全球北方的中心国家。北美的管理者控制着58.1%的资产，欧洲的基金经理管理着31.8%的资产，日本的基金经理管理着4.8%的资产，而世界其他地区仅控制着5.2%的资产。世界上最大的50家银行大部分位于欧洲、美国和日本。

The profits from investments in the resource sector, flowing into the global financial sector in the form of interest and dividends, represent, at least in part, the ecological surplus derived from the enclosure and exploitation of ecological commons in the Global South. For example, the Vanguard Group, an American investment management company, is the sponsor of the world’s largest mutual fund. From 2013 to 2021, Vanguard invested approximately $1.894 billion in the palm oil, rubber, timber, beef, pulp and paper, and soybean sectors in Southeast Asia, Brazil, Central Africa, and West Africa—all industries closely linked to deforestation and habitat destruction. The Vanguard case clearly shows that the surplus from the capitalization of nature in peripheral and semi-peripheral regions is transferred to the core, or more specifically, to the elites of the Global North. For instance, the wealthiest 10% of people in the United States own over 90% of stocks and mutual funds.

资源部门的投资利润以利息和红利的形式流入全球金融部门，至少在一定程度上代表了对全球南方生态公地的圈占和开发所带来的生态盈余。例如，美国投资管理公司先锋领航集团是世界上最大公募基金的赞助者。2013—2021年，先锋领航集团在东南亚、巴西、中非和西非的棕榈油、橡胶、木材、牛肉、纸浆和纸张以及大豆领域投资了约18.94亿美元，所有的这些产业都与森林砍伐和生物栖息地破坏活动密切相关。先锋领航集团的案例清楚地表明，边缘和半边缘地区自然界被资本化后的盈余转移到了中心地区，或者更具体地说，是流向了全球北方的精英阶层。比如，美国10%最富有的人群拥有90%以上的股票和公募基金。

In sum, neoliberal development policies, on the one hand, restructured the economies of developing countries to ensure that the debts of First World banks and other financial institutions could be repaid; on the other hand, under the influence of economic nationalism, postcolonial states regarded sovereignty over natural resources and the power to regulate transnational corporations as key to economic independence and the end of neocolonialism. In the process of neoliberal reform, the ecological resources of the Third World and their profits were once again exploited for capital accumulation. Against the dual backdrop of economic and political crises, the movement of economic nationalism arising from the contradictions of the expansion of the capitalist world system was replaced by the neoliberal counterrevolutionary movement, namely, the stage of ecological imperialism.

总之，新自由主义发展政策一方面重组了发展中国家的经济，以确保第一世界的银行和其他金融机构的债务能够得到偿还；另一方面则是在经济民族主义的影响下，后殖民国家将自然资源的主权和监管跨国公司的权力视为经济独立和终结新殖民主义的关键。在新自由主义改革过程中，第三世界的生态资源及其利润再次被资本积累所利用。在经济和政治危机的双重背景下，源于资本主义世界体系扩张矛盾的经济民族主义运动被新自由主义反革命运动即生态帝国主义阶段所取代。

VI. Conclusion

六、结论

As the global ecological crisis intensifies in the 21st century, it is increasingly recognized that the consumption patterns of the global North bear much of the blame. However, what is less understood is the political and economic system that allows this unsustainable consumption to persist while concentrating the bulk of capital in the global North. The study of ecological imperialism based on world-systems theory helps to examine these issues. Ecological imperialism demands a large-scale readjustment of the socio-ecological relationship between humans and nature, and control over the political, economic, and institutional structures of the global South. Building on world-systems theory, this article explains how ecological imperialism operates within the hierarchy of the capitalist world system. The perspective of world-systems theory illuminates the vulnerabilities and dependencies of the global economic structure that continue to plague peripheral regions, bringing disastrous socio-ecological impacts, including plunder, foreign debt, domination by transnational corporations, and deteriorating terms of trade. Finally, a world-systems perspective grounded in historical facts views today’s neoliberal globalization and the development policies that underpin it as the latest form of ecological imperialism.

随着21世纪全球生态危机的加剧，人们越来越认识到，全球北方的消费模式在很大程度上难辞其咎。然而，人们不太了解的是，究竟是何种政治和经济体制使这种不可持续的消费得以存续，同时使大部分资本积聚于全球北方。基于世界体系理论的生态帝国主义研究有助于观察这些问题。生态帝国主义要求大规模地重新调整人类与自然之间的社会生态关系，并掌控全球南方的政治、经济和制度结构。在世界体系理论的基础上，本文解释了生态帝国主义如何在资本主义世界体系的等级制度中运作。世界体系理论的观点阐明了全球经济结构的脆弱性和依赖性，这些脆弱性和依赖性依旧困扰着边缘地区，并带来了灾难性的社会生态影响，这些影响包括掠夺、外债、跨国公司统治和贸易条件恶化。最后，以历史事实为基础的世界体系视角将如今的新自由主义全球化以及支撑它的发展政策视为生态帝国主义的最新形式。

(Author: Mariko L. Frame, Department of Economics, Merrimack College, USA; Translators: Tian Fangchen, Liu Mingming, School of Marxism, Nankai University)

（作者：马里科·弗雷姆（Mariko L. Frame），美国梅里马克学院经济学系；译者：田方晨、刘明明，南开大学马克思主义学院）

Online Editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心