【摘要】 美国学者施坚雅研究近代中国农村社会经济时，构建了“核心—边缘”模型，认为核心区有较多的水利等基础投资、更高水平的商品化以及在盛世时民众有较多向上流动的机会。格尔茨根据印度尼西亚农家经济提出的“内卷化”理论，被黄宗智运用到中国研究。由于中国广大农村情况千差万别，这两个模型均存在程度不同的“水土不服”。武凯芝提出长江三角洲北部地区农家经济的“半殖民地化”的系统论点，认为张謇等地方精英在追求实业救国、抵制帝国主义侵略时，最终沦为帝国主义的帮凶，加剧了对农民的剥削，阻碍了农村的发展。其核心论点不自觉地沿袭了20世纪初俄国民粹派的旧调。更多还原

【Abstract】 George William Skinner developed the “core-periphery model ”based on his study of modern Chinese rural society and economy. According to this model,China’ s core regions, compared with peripheral areas, had greater infrastructural investment—especially in water conservancy—a higher degree of commercialization,and more opportunities for upward social mobility. Separately,Philip C. C. Huang introduced Clifford Geertz’s “involution”theory,originally formulated in the context of the Indonesian peasant economy, into studies of rural China. In practice,however,both models show limited explanatory power when applied to China,due to the significant regional diversity within its rural economy. Kathy Le Mons Walker examined the peasant economy of the northern Yangtze Delta through a“semicolonialization”framework. She argues that modernizing Chinese elites such as Zhang Jian, despite their intent to achieve national salvation through industrial development and to resist imperialist aggression,ultimately became complicit in imperialist structures. In Walker’s view,this dual role intensified the exploitation of peasants and hindered rural development. Yet her central argument unconsciously aligns with the theoretical currents of early twentieth-century Russian populism.更多还原