党的十八届五中全会提出“筑牢生态安全屏障，坚持保护优先、自然恢复为主，实施山水林田湖生态保护修复工程，开展大规模国土绿化行动”。黄河流域的生态保护修复工程在坚持系统治理和全要素治理的背景下，统筹森林、草原、湿地、荒漠生态保护修复，实现治沙、治水、治山全要素协调和管理。本文在田野调查的基础上，以内蒙古自治区 W 山造林工程为个案，围绕 “在国家工程的语境下，人们如何制造森林？”这一主题，对该生态工程的生态治理的具体过程和运作逻辑进行了系统地研究，在此基础上探索工程的现代性问题，回应了人类学在现代社会研究中人与自然关系的理论争议问题。

全文分为五个部分：第一部分论述笔者研究的缘起与兴趣并厘清研究基本概念、所使用的理论框架与方法及全文架构，并对田野点概况进行了介绍、对相关学术史进行了回顾。在第二部分中分析了造林活动如何围绕工程语境下的五项生产要素而展开育苗、存储、运输、栽种、维护的具体生产活动。树苗的禀赋与人们的劳动投入共同决定了树苗能否“活好”以及“好看”。随后，考察了工程中的前期调研、规划与后期的验收，以及其中的文书工作。第三部分考察了人与非人之间的亲昵关系，包括通过劳动将树苗视为孩子的类亲属关系以及在工程中影响着工程实践的鬼神系统，并讨论了随着工程结束这一关系的脱嵌。第四部分介绍了工程中的其他治理主体的参与，包括大型国企、科层制政府以及牧民。第五部分探讨了工程的现代性问题。

研究发现，对于大规模的环境修复工程，人们对于环境的改造远远超过了“前现代”时期。造林工程在实践中受到地方气候条件的制约，并形成环境、工程团队、当地牧民、政府部门以及树苗之间的交互影响，不断塑造着造林的行动模式。工程本身在不断制造着自身的工程性与现代性，即在正式层面使自然与社会、现代工程与非现代工程之间的边界不断清晰，而这一自然与社会的二元对立性却在非正式层面的造林实践中得到了弥合和混融。正如布鲁诺·拉图尔所言，现代性建立在自然与社会的分裂与纯化之上，这在本研究中体现为两个方面：在正式层面，工程制度性地制造着社会与自然的分裂，如将树苗视为均质材料、造林如建楼房的生产方式，体现着其工程性和现代性；在非正式层面，人类与非人类在造林实践中不断卷入关系网络，如树苗的生命属性的与人作为照料者的社会属性的凸显，以及两者通过劳动构筑的跨物种关系。当合同期满，照管树苗的第一责任人——工程团队与树的亲昵关系也随即终止，他们制度性地从这一关系中脱嵌出来。最后在讨论部分提出工程的治理效果如何可持续的问题，未来可能出现高成本维护、国家生态目标与地方治理的多目标之间可能出现张力、自然的复杂性和不可预测性等问题，这些因素将持续形塑着造林工程的文化形貌，值得持续研究和关注。

The 18th CPC Central Committee's Fifth Plenary Session proposed to "build a solid ecological security barrier, adhere to priority protection and natural restoration as the main approach, implement the ecological protection and restoration project of mountains, rivers, forests, farmland, lakes, and carry out large-scale land greening actions." In the context of insisting on systematic governance and all-element governance, the ecological protection and restoration projects in the Yellow River Basin coordinate the protection and restoration of forest, grassland, wetland, and desert ecology, realizing the coordination and management of sand control, water control, and mountain control. Based on field investigations, this paper takes the W Mountain afforestation project in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region as a case study, aiming to explore the theme of "how people manufacture forests in the context of national projects?" It systematically studies the specific process and operation logic of the ecological governance of the project, and explores the modernity issues of the project, responding to the theoretical disputes on the relationship between human and nature in anthropological research on modern society.

The paper is divided into five parts. The first part discusses the origin and interest of the author's research, clarifies the basic concepts, theoretical frameworks, and methods used, and introduces the field sites and reviews the relevant academic history. The second part analyzes how afforestation activities unfold the specific production activities of seedling cultivation, storage, transportation, planting, and maintenance around the five factors of production in the project context. The endowment of seedlings and the labor input of people together determine whether the seedlings can "survive well" and "look good." It then examines the pre-research, planning, and post-acceptance work in the project. The third part examines the intimate relationship between humans and non-humans, including the quasi-kinship relationship of viewing seedlings as children through labor, and the spirit system that influences project practices, as well as the disembedding of these relationships as the project ends. The fourth part introduces the participation of other governance subjects in the project, including large state-owned enterprises, bureaucratic governments, and herdsmen. The fifth part discusses the modernity issues of the project.

The research finds that for large-scale environmental restoration projects, human transformation of the environment far exceeds the "pre-modern" period. The afforestation project is constrained by local climatic conditions in practice and forms an interactive influence among the environment, project team, local herdsmen, government departments, and seedlings, constantly shaping the mode of afforestation. The project itself is constantly manufacturing its own engineeringness and modernity, that is, formally making the boundary between nature and society, modern engineering and non-modern engineering increasingly clear, while the dichotomy between nature and society is blended and merged in the informal afforestation practices. As Bruno Latour said, modernity is established on the separation and purification of nature and society, which is reflected in two aspects in this study: formally, the project institutionally manufactures the separation of society and nature, such as viewing seedlings as homogeneous materials and the production mode of afforestation like building houses, reflecting its engineeringness and modernity; informally, humans and non-humans are constantly entangled in the network of relationships in afforestation practices, such as the highlighting of the life attributes of seedlings and the social attributes of humans as caregivers, and the cross-species relationships built through labor. When the contract period expires, the first responsible person for caring for the seedlings - the project team - also institutionally disembeds from this relationship.Finally, the discussion part raises the question of how the governance effects of the project can be sustained, and potential problems such as high maintenance costs, tensions between national ecological goals and local governance, the complexity and unpredictability of nature, which will continue to shape the cultural features of the afforestation project and are worth continuous research and attention.