Between ‘state’ and ‘society’: Commune authorities and the environment in Vietnam's craft villages

Abstract

Maintaining a liveable environment in Vietnam's polluted craft villages is a daily challenge for state authorities and residents. Neighbouring urban populations demand that the state effectively curtails and manages pollution, while local residents prioritise their livelihoods and routinely flout regulations. The commune official, tasked with the seemingly impossible task of environmental regulation, occupies a fraught position, torn between the imperatives and constraints of craft producers and state regulatory demands. This study of water pollution in northern Vietnam's craft villages finds that commune officials' conflicted role in environmental governance is a central factor in the failure of the current environmental governance regime, and reflects the internally conflicted nature of the Vietnamese state.

The Influence of Farmers’ Clan Networks on Their Participation in Living Environment Improvement during the Time of Transition in Traditional Rural China

“…Many scholars have conducted substantial research on the factors that influence farmers' participation in rural living environment improvement, mainly focusing on the following three aspects: first, as for the factors of government, some scholars have pointed out that insufficient government financial support [6], the promotion of urbanization and community harmony [7], community officials' conflicted roles [3], new social networks of trust at the local level [8], the inadequate institutional mechanism of rural environmental governance [9,10] and innovation and technology adoption effects of past environmental policies [11] are factors that affect farmers' participation in living environment improvement. Second, for the factors of the village, some scholars consider the improvement measures at a village level and community participation [12], the distance between villages and county towns [13,14], village scale and residential density as factors influencing farm households' participation in living environmental improvement.…”

“…In this paper, the clan organizations of farmers were divided into three categories: "1. no family network or organization; 2. a clan network linked by surnames but no formal organization and 3. a clan organization centered on genealogy/shrine", and these three types of organizations were assigned the values of "1, 2, 3" in order. The strength of the village clan network was obtained by summing up the average farm clan assignment; then, the developed degree of the village clan network could be obtained by Equation (3). Table 6 presents the estimation results using the IV-Probit model, with regressions 9 and 10 being the dependent variables of whether or not to participate in solid waste disposal and whether or not to use flush toilets, respectively.…”

“…In recent years, the problems in the rural living environment of China have caused seriously negative impacts on the life of farmers, and even directly affected the health level of rural residents [1][2][3]. Therefore, making up for the shortcomings in rural environmental governance has become a crucial challenge in China's rural social governance [4].…”

Recovering Tradition in Globalising Rural China: Handicraft Birdcages in Da’ou village

“…The discontinuities that consequently can be found in rural craft traditions in the global north contrast with stronger continuities in the global south, including the persistence of ‘craft villages’ where the economy is dominated by specialist craft production (Gough and Rigg ; Mahanty and Dang ; Hieu and Rasovka ). As in the global north, rural craft making in the global south has come under pressure from modernisation and globalisation, notably the industrialisation of production to increase supply to domestic and export markets, and the spread of ‘modern’ western consumer culture (Karolia and Sardiwal ).…”

“…The recent proliferation of artisan craft workshops and businesses has emphasised their more artistic outputs as part of rural culture economies, sometimes tapping into embedded local traditions of specialist craft making, but in many cases involving the hybridisation of products, styles and techniques and the production of generic 'rustic' artefacts (Kneafsey et al 2001;Mayes 2010;Fox Miller 2017;Mitchell and Shannon 2018). Elsewhere, in Africa, Asia, Latin America and parts of Eastern Europe, artisan craft production has persisted as a mainstream part of rural economies, including in specialist 'craft villages', only more recently encountering pressures to restructure, modernise and engage new markets (Rogerson 1986;Eyferth 2003Eyferth , 2009Kimura 2011;Gough and Rigg 2012;Mahanty and Dang 2015;Chu 2016;Pudianti et al 2016). As in Europe, such dynamics may form part of neo-endogenous rural development strategies based on the commodification of local cultural resources as 'authentic' ethnic artefacts for export to niche markets (Aguayo 2008;Forstner 2013) or to attract tourism (Hieu and Rasovska 2017), but they can also involve processes of industrialisation and deterritorialisation as production is reoriented towards mass manufacture of low-cost commodities for export (Kimura 2011;Gough and Rigg 2012;Chu 2016).…”