The Crisis of China’s Environmental Pollution: What Does It Take to Clean Up the PRC?
A Discussion with Students at Leiden University and Rotterdam’s School of Management
China’s impressive economic growth has come at a high cost: according to estimates by the World Bank and China’s Environmental Protection Administration (World Bank 2007), the environmental fallout from China’s growth miracle may cost the economy as much as 5.8 percent of GDP per year. China’s environmental pollution has been making headlines for some time now: the PRC is home to some of the most badly polluted cities in the world; about half of the country’s sweet water reserves are toxic from contaminants, and the air quality in many areas is threatening the health of China’s citizens. In some areas, the situation is so dire that laundry hung out in the open will reportedly turn black before it dries. China’s capital city Beijing is regularly smothered in smog – in early 2013, the air pollution there reached levels 30 times higher than what the World Health Organization considers to be safe.
These developments have led to a marked shift in public awareness. Only ten years ago, surveys still suggested that Chinese university students significantly favoured economic development and social stability over environmental protection (Wong 2003). Today, the dangerous levels of pollution are a constant matter of concern, with citizens monitoring air pollution levels in real time on their smartphones before leaving the house. The deteriorating environmental situation in China has become a serious political challenge to a government that has linked its legitimacy to its ability to provide welfare for its population. Chinese citizens are increasingly posting sardonic comments about China’s environmental record online, for instance offering awards to officials who are willing to take a swim in poisoned lakes, or suggesting that Shanghai’s Huangpu River could be turned into a tasty broth by tossing in ginger and garlic – in addition to the thousands of dead pigs that were discovered floating there in 2012. Often such humorous comments make way for outright dissent, with more and more urban citizens taking to the streets over environmental issues.
These developments have placed environmental pollution at the top of the government’s reform agenda, with President Xi Jinping pledging in May 2013 that his administration would assure sustainable development through “the strictest system and most tightknit law enforcement”. But can China’s environment still be cleaned up, or are the official promises simply too little, too late? What does it take to curb industrial pollution in a country that is still developing? Will affluent Chinese urbanites be willing to forgo the chance at a new car or turn down their air-conditioning units while their neighbours are propagating conspicuous consumption? Join us this week to discuss these questions and to share your views on China’s environmental situation.
References
Wong, Koon-Kway (2003): “The Environmental Awareness of University Students in Beijing, China”, Journal of Contemporary China 12(36), 519–536.
World Bank (2007): Cost of Pollution in China – Economic Estimates of Physical Damages. Beijing: The World Bank and The State Environmental Protection Agency.
Share This Post, Choose Your Platform!
About the Author: Florian Schneider
20 Comments
Comments are closed.
Although the environmental problems for China are significant and urgent, I would like to argue that China currently has two fundamental assets which are essential in solving the environmental problems. On the one hand, leadership understands the environmental challenges and sustainability is high on the Chinese agenda. On the other hand, economic growth of the past years has freed up a lot of resources which can be used to solve these problems. Thereby I believe that if there is going to be a country that can solve the challenging global environmental problems, it is China.
Interesting point of view Olaf. I agree that the availability of resources and strong government influence can facilitate sustainable development. However I believe that achieving sustainable development in China is going to be difficult to say the least. The shear size and speed of China’s development combined with lacking natural resources are driving the country away from sustainability. Whilst sustainability is high on the Chinese agenda, maintaining the current growth outweighs it. I do believe structural changes have to and can be made. Otherwise the increasing demand for energy, water and arable land will impact the environment on a scale not seen before.
China needs to provide incentives to all types of enterprises aiming at sustainable growth. Additionally it needs to focus on green technology development. All in all, it needs to make sustainable development, economically viable. Due to the remaining influence on markets of the government and the availability of capital, China could make this change far better and faster than other countries. However an economic downturn could deteriorate these efforts as Chinese government would probably refocus purely on maximising growth.
Thanks for both your comments, Olaf and Jort. Since Jort mentioned potential government influence on industries, I wanted to share with you how the Beijing government is using its leverage to influence consumers as they buy cars. Here is a very recent update on how the municipality is reforming its license plate lottery system: http://bit.ly/1b3fM36
I agree with Olaf’s point that China surely has the capability to solve its current environmental problems. However, I still believe that economic growth indeed will still remain the main focus of the Chinese agenda for the coming years. The published reforms on environmental issues of the Third Plenum in November are only expressed in general terms. For example, the CCP calls for reform [of] ecological and environmental protection and management systems, yet do not specify what it should include. Moreover, no exact time frames are mentioned to execute these reforms. To me, the Party does not show enough commitment to the environmental problems. Combined with the lack of incentives towards consumers to be “more green”, I forecast few improvement on the environmental issues for the next years. I think the international community should put more pressure on China and stress the need for sustainable growth, also because China is one of the world’s biggest polluter. Furthermore, China itself needs to develop more supporting technology that could accelerate the effectiveness of the environmental reforms.
I believe that China will be able to solve its environmental issues, however, it will be a long and difficult way. The government and most people from the middle-high income classes are aware of the current environmental issues and will try to burden the environment as little as possible in their behavior. But on the other hand, although some of the low incomes and the poorer people are aware of the environmental issues, survival is more important for them. They will not think about the environment before the quality of their lives becomes better. So to solve the environmental problems in China, China have to first improve the lives of the poorer people.
The fact that Chinese Leadership now recognizes the problem does not mean that they will be able to solve the severe problem of environmental pollution in China. China has for 30 years focused exclusively on GDP growth in a gradual, pragmatic manner. Hwoever, they lost sight of the environmental costs and whenever there was a trade-off between economic growth and environmental inrerests. the latter lost. The CCP may now begin with fixing the problem, but this will come at extremely high costs. The matter at stake here is : Are they willing to forsake economic growth in favour of a environmental focused policy measures ?
As someone who has lived in Beijing during the period of the most alarming smog levels, I agree that it is extremely important for China to clean up its environmentally damaged land, water and air from decades of purely economic growth led development.
I do not think that this shift towards sustainable development will necessarily come at a cost for the country’s growth rate. The current slow down in growth rate also relates to the fact that simply adding labour and capital is not working anymore. The previously discussed upgrading of technology and production methods to increase productivity will help to reduce waste and thus increase efficiency. With increasing energy prices, the current levels of waste or unused heat are not economically viable for China. The incentives for reducing pollution are thus not only related to cleaning up what has been damaged, but to a large extent also to use the existing resources more wisely and by doing so sustain strong economic growth.
I strongly believe, that China will be able to successfully combat its environmental problems in the long run. Last years pollution in Beijing has surely led the government to rethink its policies, since the officials and their families themselves suddenly were able to experience what it means to live within a cloud of poisonous smog.
I don’t believe very much in the typical “top down” approach where a number of policy makers think of new legislation that is going to solve the problem.
Instead I think that like most things in economics, the proper business environment should be established for the private sector to be incentivized to nurture and improve the natural environment. This is more of a “bottom-up” approach where actual environmental improvements are results of entrepreneurship, profit-seeking and market mechanics.
While it is difficult to create such a business environment, the PRC can start by doing research in what exactly is the most harmful to the environment. For example, a study [1] indicates that red meats are 150% more greenhouse gas intensive than chicken or fish. This should be reflected in tax rates: when meat tax rates are higher than the tax rates of chicken or fish, the demand and therefore supply of the latter will increase whereas the herding of cows will decrease. In this case the proper environment was established for consumers to do “business” with retail markets: they are now more inclined to purchase food that is less harmful to the environment.
Sources
[1]: Weber, C. L., & Matthews, H. S. (2008). Food-miles and the relative climate impacts of food choices in the United States. Environ Sci Technol, 42(10), 3508-3513.
Many of the above comments discuss China’s commitment to environmental reforms, and the question of whether making it a political priority will be enough to bring about the massive changes in China’s economic model (probably at the expense of growth figures) that would probably be necessary to turn the tide. This is an important question, and rather than tackling it here, I’d like to add to the discussion by pointing to
– the ideological sophistication of the environmental debate: since Hu Jintao first used the term ‘ecological civilization’ (shengtai wenming) in 2007, much has been written on what this next phase in China’s development (that should replace ‘traditional industrial civilization’) should look like. See for example this English translation of a January 2013 article in Qiushi, a CCP journal http://climateandcapitalism.com/2013/03/31/chinese-leader-calls-for-ecological-civilization/ Nothing too concrete, but pretty cool to see how environmental policy is given a place in Chinese ‘socialist theory’
– the rays of light. Whether it is nation-wide NDRC emission-trading pilot programs or SOEs who are now denied tax rebates unless they work on their pollution record (this information comes from Ma Jun, a n activist who runs a website on which people can see how polluting factories in their surroundings are: http://www.ipe.org.cn/en/), lots _is_ changing. As the pollution has caused and is still causing many deaths, all of this already is too little and too late, but that does not diminish the significance of these developments. Hmm, does anyone know of a website tracking what (national) environmental laws/regulations/pilots etc are being adopted?
Advocates of the Ecological Modernisation Theory argue that economic growth and environmental awareness and betterness can and do intertwine; for instance high-tech innovations can result in water saving technologies, and decrease and avoid further exhaustion of natural resources, pollution and contamination. Moreover, it is often believed that environmental awareness increases with economic growth and development.
In an opinion piece on Al Jazeera online, January 2012, Arthur Mol, professor Environmental Policy at Wageningen University and reknown scholar on the Ecological Modernisation Theory, stated ‘The Chinese middle class will become the environmental vanguard, because it is backed by the state.’
(http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/01/201217122143498595.html)
Yet, I’m not that positive about the growth of environmental awareness in China, not on the short run at least. Despite some positive signs, also indicated by some of you above, there are particularly at the local level severe counteracting forces (despite local protests too).
Moreover, I question whether eventually implemented mechanims are later not merely ‘locking the stable door after the steed is stolen’ (de put dempen als het kalf verdronken is)..
@ Tabitha; is http://www.lawinfochina.com/ of help to check adoption of laws? It contains information on recently adopted laws, in several sectors of the economy and society.
Very true about the local counteracting forces (not in local officials’ interest to strictly implement environmental regulations), but last week I watched a documentary about a ‘cancer village’ in Yunnan that got me thinking about this. In this particular village, 75% of the deaths were caused by lung cancer, probably due to pollution from the coal mines surrounding it. I was struck by the strong environmental awareness of the villagers. They have compelling first-hand experiences (dying family members) that point to the urgency of reforms, and made sophisticated statements about the need to build a low-carbon society. It is just that most of them don’t have any power…
And thanks very much for the link :)
I have no doubt that the Chinese government has the means to overcome environmental and pollution problems, as you all mentioned above. But, I strongly believe that these problems cannot only be managed by the government implementing new regulations or other means to overcome the problem. I think the citizens are used to live in such an environment where recycling, for instance, is not part from their daily lives. If we look at other countries in Europe, such as Germany, almost every household has a recycling culture and thinks of the environment and the negative implications that might arise if they do not take care of it.
In contrast, developing countries such as China, and I can also say Peru, do not have these habits. Thus, even though the central government intervenes, and takes action into this issue, they also need to educate the people, for example kids in school so that later generations think “green”.
I also agree that the Chinese government can address the problem of environmental pollution. China has mainly relied on coal for energy in the past, which is very environmentally damaging. Currently China is transitioning into using more ‘green’ technology, which shows that the country is on the right track. In addition, China is a growing market for products that reduce emissions or purify polluted air/water. International companies such as Philips are developing products to boost the air quality. Therefore I believe that there is a lot of opportunity for the Chinese government to collaborate with (foreign) firms to find innovative solutions for economic growth and sustainable development in China.
I agree with Johannes (and others) that this problem is a high priority issue and should be solved. In addition, as Hannie mentioned earlier, I think that China is still very much involved with the economic growth of the country. But the recognition of the problem by the Chinese government is in my opinion a step in the right direction and an important prerequisite to start solving the problem. The Chinese government has come up with a five-year plan to tackle, for instance, the air pollution on a national scale by imposing stringent standards on the air quality in different parts of the country (Reuters, 2013). One problem could be that the new standards are not complied, because the local authorities will go check the companies.
As Olaf and others already mentioned, I think that China can definitely solve the problem of environmental pollution. But I also agree with Maria that only the implementation of new rules is not sufficient to address the problem. The Chinese people should be very aware of the risks and each individual needs to help to resolve the environmental pollution problem. The Chinese people are not used to take care of their environment, and it is easier to learn something new than to unlearn an old habit. Therefore, I think it is a very good idea to teach the Chinese children how to cope better with the environment and to learn to think green at primary schools.
Reuters. (2013) China to invest $277 billion to curb air pollution: state media, 2 December 2013.
Most participants of this discussion believe that curbing industrial pollution will be at the expense of economic growth. However, I disagree with this view; I would argue that cleaning up the PRC could yield significant economic growth and employment opportunities in the long run. The use of green technologies and practices can establish new growth markets. According to a report from the Green Jobs Initiative (a partnership organization with the UN) the transition to a greener economy could generate 15-60 million additional jobs globally over the next two decades and lift tens of millions of workers out of poverty (ILO, 2012). Nevertheless, such a strategy is unlikely to be favored by the Chinese central government considering its trend of the past decade of constantly aiming for short term growth. It is fairly difficult to sell to the public to achieve significant growth in the course of 20 years instead of 5 years. Another important point is that Western countries have not really improved their practices either, particularly the United States. Therefore, I would like to claim that the issue of pollution is not only limited to China, it is rather a global issue. It is imperative to find a way to get the interests of different parties aligned in order to truly tackle this issue.
References:
ILO (2013, May 31). Transition to green economy could yield up to 60 million jobs. Retrieved December 12, 2013, from http://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/newsroom/news/WCMS_181795/lang–en/index.htm
I would like to add that the responsibility lies not only with the government, but also the chinese people have to be thaught how to live more responsible. Recycling, as mentioned by maria jose is for example not implemented in Chinese soceity. I think small things like this will make a huge difference for this large population. I also like the idea of Tom of taxing certain products that are more harmfull to the environment. Thereby learning Chinese citizens to handle things more responsible. I think these sort of lifestyles should be advertised in order to make people more aware that they kan make a difference to what happenes outside, instead of merely blaming firms.
Individual behavior is definitely a very important aspect. However, although most Chinese households don’t recycle much at home, instead leaving the sorting to scavengers and other professionals, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.. Not sure about the figures, but a fascinating account of recycling in China can be found in Adam Minter’s Junkyard Planet. This online excerpt is a really good read: http://www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/11/how-china-profits-from-our-junk/281044/
I think Annemieke brings up an interesting point. Of course a big part of the solution lies with the government who has to apply stricter laws and enforcement of the laws. But the citizens also need to become aware of what their contribution to a healthier, cleaner environment could be. I think that currently the environmental awareness in China is slowly growing as I read about schools who are paying attention to the problems and to the solutions to the problems. But this is only a small start. Maybe the government should also play a role here and provide information to the citizens about what they can do, like the ‘postbus 51’ commercials we have on Dutch television.
Since a few years I work for a company in the Chinese countryside near Kunming. Based on my experiences here I don’t expect China to make a serious effort in dealing with this ecological nightmare.
Some examples: money is what makes many people in China tick. People in the streets of Kunming see ferrari’s, porsches and hummers. Who owns these cars? in general the same people who own coalmines and factories that run on coals. These people are the standard that everyone looks up to. This situation also seems to be in harmony with what Roger Scruton writes on the Chinese situation in his 2012 book “Green Philosophy”. Scruton’s basic message (as I recall it) about the Chinese situation is quite pessimistic. He argues that there is not much real political will to change the situation because there is so much more money to be made. And even if there is a real will at the highest level, it is extremely difficult to get that to seep through all the way to the roots because the corruption (especially in the form of guanxi) on which the country is built will undermine it at all levels.
Another example from what I see here is that most of the people do not see waste. they throw it everywhere, especially in waterways which sometimes even clog up. Last week’s thanksgiving I happened to discuss this situation with some Chinese and Japanese people. The Chinese had one argument saying that you have to throw waste on the street… Why? otherwise the street cleaner looses her job…
If this is the attitude, I have not many hopes for a quick change of mind in Chinese society.
it would appear to me that capitalist countries have managed to export the message of capitalism quite successfully. But in view of scandals concerning animal wellbeing – google ‘chinese angora rabbits’ if you dare for the most recent addition – I would say that the message of ethics and responsible behaviour belonging with good stewardship in case of economic development has not arrived in equal strength. Perhaps because the voice of ethics has been a faint murmur in our own society, until recently. Astrid Maria, master student humaniora university of utrecht