新流动范式下非流动性的研究进展与展望北大核心CSCDCSSCI

新冠疫情下的中断与非流动性改变新流动性范式的叙事逻辑,作为现代社会基本原则的流动性受到挑战与质疑,而正确认识非流动性事关新流动范式的未来转向与变革。为此,本研究对新流动范式下的非流动性研究进行综述,思考流动性与非流动性的辩证关系,为新流动范式的转型提供新的路径。本研究发现,新流动范式下非流动性的研究领域具有四个重要转向:从批判解构到辩证关系的认识;从本体不可能到有可能的思考;从宏观视野到微观解释的叙述;从方法二元到方法平衡的转变。同时,非流动性研究中存在四大重要议题:地方性非流动人口;支撑性的停泊空间;非表征的静默身体;跨时空的节点主体。最后,本研究为非流动性的未来研究提出相关展望:关注非流动性的人口异质性;关注多样化的非流动性空间;认识后人类技术与非流动性身体;探讨可持续发展的流动性。

Immobility under the new flow paradigm:Research progress and future prospect

The interruption and immobility under the Covid-19 are changing the narrative logic of the new mobility paradigm. Mobility as a basic principle of modern society has been challenged and questioned, and a correct understanding of immobility is related to the future shift and change of the new mobility paradigm. To this end, this study summarizes the static research under the new mobility paradigm, considers the dialectical relationship between liquidity and static, and provides a new path for the transformation of the new mobility paradigm. We found that the study of immobility under the new mobility paradigm has four important turns. Firstly, there has been a shift from criticism of immobility to the understanding of the relationship of immobility. Geographers formed the thought of dialectical relationship (e.g., infrastructure and power geometries) between mobility and immobility based on criticizing the theory of sedentarism metaphysics. Secondly, previous research has opened space for an ontology and epistemology of immobility in and of itself. Traditional mobility research has viewed immobility as passive, othered, and utilized objects, while recent research has endowed immobility with activity, selfness, and subjectivity. Thirdly, much research has clearly shifted in favor of the microscopic interpretation (e.g., daily life) not just macroscopic view (e.g., locals and cosmopolitans). Fourthly, methodology has transformed from the duality of methods to the balance of methods. At the same time, there are four important issues in the study of immobility: (1) the antecedences of immobile regular population including factors that retain, repel, and adjust internal constraints; (2) the significant impact of anchoring space on mobility, such as supporting role; (3) the embodied experiences of non-representational silent body, such as the practices and emotions; (4) the node subject across time and space which has proved the immobile mobility. Overall, the research of immobility under the new flow paradigm has become a topic full of postmodernism and posthumanism color. Finally, we propose relevant prospects for the future research of immobility: to focus on the population heterogeneity of immobility, to pay attention to diversified immobility spaces, to understand post-human technology and immobility bodies, and to explore the mobility of sustainable development. This research has crucial value and significance for the new flow paradigm to enter a new historical development stage.