The Environment with Chinese Characteristics: Implications for Policy, Governance, and Political Change

Abstract

Multiple strains of China’s major philosophical /
religious / cosmological ideologies variously emphasize harmony,
respect, non-action, non-interference, or careful stewardship of
human relationships to the natural world. Yet throughout most
of its history, China’s land and resources have more often than
not been subject to highly anthropogenic processes that are
materially transformative: natural features have been rigorously
controlled or shaped to suit human purposes. These material
developments contrast sharply with a wide range of more gentle
attitudes toward nature expressed in Taoist, Buddhist, and
Confucian ideologies. This paper examines such contradictions,
starting with early periods of Chinese political history, through to
Mao’s “attack on nature†during The Great Leap Forward, but
it concentrates on specifically Chinese characteristics regarding
current environmental tensions, problems, policies, and
imperatives it its current era of rapid development and economic
growth. The primary questions asked are: Is there any
relationship between current environmental problems and ways
of thinking about or acting on them that facilitate the possibility
of political change? Do newly emerging forms of environmental
consciousness now replace other forms of political consciousness
in China, such as class, given a new climate of prosperity and the
rise of both capitalist enterprise and middle-class concerns about
consumption and quality of life? Is environmental consciousness
enough to tip the balance toward real political/social change?
This paper makes the case that environmental management
always reflects political structures and that the terms of
engagements between social institutions and the natural world
have always been significant. Whereas China has had a history
of centralized authoritarianism, political isolation, and attempts
to keep foreign influences at a distance, such stances are no
longer viable given the global nature of environmental
responsibility and concern. Current environmental political
thought that recognizes that proper “governance†of
environmental issues can not be left to governments alone. Also
required are a wide range of localized, public / private, or
government / community / individual partnerships. China seems
to have recognized and affirmed such link-ups in the domain of
economic development. Now the task seems to be to apply such
partnerships toward the goal of environmental sustainability. In
a political culture in which NGOs still need official recognition in
the form of sponsorship by a government agency China still has a
long way to go in realizing this widely recognized mode of
environmental management success in which power is not just
governmental but also popular. Given the scale of China’s global
environmental impact, these are crucial questions for our time
and they significantly affect China’s position within the world
community.