Time to take a green leap forward

• Source: Global Times
• [22:45 July 15 2010]
• Comments

Laurence Tubiana

Editor's Note:

Environmental governance might be a new term in China, but it has been on Beijing's agenda for years. Every year, foreign experts are invited to share their opinions on balancing economic growth and environmental protection. Laurence Tubiana (Tubiana), director of the France-based Institute of Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI), has been a member of the China Council for International Cooperation on Environment and Development for four years. Global Times (GT) reporter Wu Mian talked to Tubiana on the obstacles and challenges that China faces in trying to go green.

GT: You've been a consultant to the Chinese government on environmental protection for over four years now. Have you noticed any changes?

Tubiana: When I first started consulting on environmental governance to the Chinese government, I understand things are very different here from where I come from.

In China, to lift people out of poverty, to keep the economy developing and to maintain equity in wealth distribution all require urgent attention.

But when I taught a course in environmental governance in Peking University this year, I noticed some of the officials are convinced that the environment should be the first priority and they are anxious to do something to protect it. They also have a broader range of knowledge in this field, which allow them to have a better understanding of the balance between development and environment.

The idea that the international conventions on environmental issues were biased against China used to be popular, but now more and more people have taken up a more realistic perspective and decided to protect the environment for their own sake.

GT: China's past development model is said to have traded environment and natural resources for economic success. Do you think we've reached a point where this needs to be changed?

Tubiana: I think it is high time for China to start the transition. The development cost is already high for China and the value of trading scarce resources, landscape or biodiversity for GDP growth will be less and less.

Some of them can be reestablished to a certain level, like air quality, but natural resources such as minerals and biodiversity, once you over-exploit them, can never recover. This is not only a problem for China; in fact, the whole world is facing this problem too.

China is trying to boost a more service-based and valued-added economy. Yet if we fail to find a new development pattern that is not based on production and consumption, the environmental damage will only transfer from one country to another, whereas on the worldwide level, the environment situation will not achieve any progress. This is where China and the other major powers should step up and take the lead.

GT: The current development model seems to be the rich countries outsourcing heavy industries and manufacturing to the less developed countries and shifting the environmental cost. How do you see it?

Tubiana: It is more of a transition from one development model to another rather than just shipping the problem from one country to another. The transition needs to be made everywhere. I must say we are still pretty far away from that goal, but there have been achievements in the process.

For example, there has been a lot of progress in renewable energy. Wind and solar energy don't really put much pressure on the environment, while other alternative energy such as nuclear and hydropower can also be green with proper controls.

Besides that, mobility is also another way where we can cut energy consumption. The media should encourage people to take public transportation instead of going for private cars. I understand it must be hard for people to give that up in a society where cars and houses represent social status and wealth, but this is where the media should guide the public. In Paris, the trendy thing to do is not to drive but to cycle.

As for heavy industries, I think this is the toughest part for innovation. Basically it is hard to make manufacture clean. But if we limit pollution to such industries, we can still make a lot of progress and the general amount of pollution will still drop significantly.

So my suggestion for China is to switch from a material-consumption economy to a service-consumption one. Other than that, we should further research the above-mentioned aspects and try to make new progress.

GT: Yet the dilemma China now faces is encouraging domestic consumption on the one hand while trying to save the environment, which is usually the trade-off for economic growth. How do you think China should choose at this crossroads?

Tubiana: I think the current leadership in China has a clear stance on the environmental issue. Even though there are still some people who think economic growth should be prioritized, the general attitude toward environmental protection and the consequences of ignoring it is getting serious. So China should further working on persuading everyone to work toward the same goal.

What China should do now is to find good development opportunities. To raise domestic consumption has a great effect on lifting people out of poverty, yet making consumption green requires a lot of new actions.

The current policies that China has been taking are generally well designed, but due conflicts in objectives make it hard for these plans to be implemented. This calls for the central government's action in monitoring and auditing. If the policies are carried out seriously, they will bring huge changes in China.

GT: All the promotion about saving the natural resources seem to be contradict popular consumerist values. How can we persuade the public to go back to frugality in such a materialistic world?

Tubiana: This is again a global problem. On the one hand, strong economy urges companies continue trying to sell more products. On the other hand, the media and social norm don't promote the value of other alternatives. Under such situation, it must be really hard for the general public to maintain a neutral attitude to material goods, especially when the standard of success is to own two cars per household. But this can be changed.

When you look at Paris, you will find most of the people there live an affluent life, but the trendy form of transportation is by bike. Having a car in Paris doesn't show any superiority, and then people are less inclined to buy one if it is not necessary.

Behaviors can change, with the help of mainstream opinion and media guidance.

Take obesity in the US. People nowadays eat too much fat and sugar. In this case, media guidance is very important.

Government should also pressure to private sectors and guide the public to understand that quality matters much more than just quantity. At one stage, when the public understands the way things being done is too costly for their health or future, they will voluntarily change.