株式会社極東書店トップ ＞ 商品一覧 ＞ Song of the Forest : Russian Forestry and Stalinist Environmentalism, 1905 - 1953.
商品詳細
Song of the Forest : Russian Forestry and Stalinist Environmentalism, 1905 - 1953. ロシアの林業とスターリン主義の環境保護主義 1905～53年
・ISBN 978-0-8229-6165-9 paper US$ 55.00
￥12,886.- (税込) ※（※）価格はご注文時の参考価格となります。
納品価格につきましては書籍の入荷時点で確定となります。
版元の原価改定、外国為替の変動等により異なる場合がございますので、予めご了承下さい。
お気に入り
★★★
| 著者・編者 | Brain, Stephen, |
|---|---|
| シリーズ | Pitt Series in Russian and East European Studies |
| 出版社 | (U. Pittsburgh Pr., US) |
| 出版年月 | 2011 |
| ページ数 | 310 pp. |
| 言語 | ENG |
| ニュース番号 | ＜588-2065 588-2830＞ |
解説
The Soviets are often viewed as insatiable industrialists who saw nature as a force to be tamed and exploited. Song of the Forest counters this assumption, uncovering significant evidence of Soviet conservation efforts in forestry, particularly under Josef Stalin. In his compelling study, Stephen Brain profiles the leading Soviet-era conservationists, agencies, and administrators, and their efforts to formulate forest policy despite powerful ideological differences.
By the time of the revolution of 1905, modern Russian forestry science had developed an influential romantic strand, especially prevalent in the work of Georgii Morozov, whose theory of \u201cstand types\u201d asked forest managers to consider native species and local conditions when devising plans for regenerating forests. After their rise to power, the Bolsheviks turned their backs on this tradition and adopted German methods, then considered the most advanced in the world, for clear-cutting and replanting of marketable tree types in \u201cartificial forests.\u201d Later, when StalinAEs Five Year Plan required vast amounts of timber for industrialization, forest radicals proposed \u201cflying management,\u201d an exaggerated version of German forestry where large tracts of virgin forest would be clear-cut. Opponents who still upheld MorozovAEs vision favored a conservative regenerating approach, and ultimately triumphed by establishing the worldAEs largest forest preserve.
Another radical turn came with the Great Stalin Plan for the Transformation of Nature, implemented in 1948. Narrow \u201cbelts\u201d of new forest planted on the vast Russian steppe would block drying winds, provide cool temperatures, trap moisture, and increase crop production. Unfortunately, planters were ordered to follow the misguided methods of the notorious Trofim Lysenko, and the resulting yields were abysmal. But despite Lysenko, agency infighting, and an indifferent peasant workforce, StalinAEs forestry bureaus eventually succeeded in winning many environmental concessions from industrial interests. In addition, the visionary teachings of Morozov found new life, ensuring that the forestAEs song did not fall upon deaf ears.
By the time of the revolution of 1905, modern Russian forestry science had developed an influential romantic strand, especially prevalent in the work of Georgii Morozov, whose theory of \u201cstand types\u201d asked forest managers to consider native species and local conditions when devising plans for regenerating forests. After their rise to power, the Bolsheviks turned their backs on this tradition and adopted German methods, then considered the most advanced in the world, for clear-cutting and replanting of marketable tree types in \u201cartificial forests.\u201d Later, when StalinAEs Five Year Plan required vast amounts of timber for industrialization, forest radicals proposed \u201cflying management,\u201d an exaggerated version of German forestry where large tracts of virgin forest would be clear-cut. Opponents who still upheld MorozovAEs vision favored a conservative regenerating approach, and ultimately triumphed by establishing the worldAEs largest forest preserve.
Another radical turn came with the Great Stalin Plan for the Transformation of Nature, implemented in 1948. Narrow \u201cbelts\u201d of new forest planted on the vast Russian steppe would block drying winds, provide cool temperatures, trap moisture, and increase crop production. Unfortunately, planters were ordered to follow the misguided methods of the notorious Trofim Lysenko, and the resulting yields were abysmal. But despite Lysenko, agency infighting, and an indifferent peasant workforce, StalinAEs forestry bureaus eventually succeeded in winning many environmental concessions from industrial interests. In addition, the visionary teachings of Morozov found new life, ensuring that the forestAEs song did not fall upon deaf ears.