China's Not Alone in Environmental Crisis
Leaders from around the world gathered these past two weeks at the Bali climate change talks to chart our collective future. Looking out my window in Beijing through the dense haze that envelops this powerful city with world-record levels of smog, dust, and deadly pollution, it is easy to understand why many there perceived China as the Godzilla of global warming. As a country choking on its own "success," now producing over 20 percent of global greenhouse gases, China makes for easy scapegoating. However, targeting China does little to address the fundamental causes of climate change, mitigate its consequences, or provide lasting solutions.
The West has worked long and hard to transform China into what it is today: an industrial platform for the world where some of the most noxious, occupationally hazardous production processes are concentrated. Western governments and corporations have not only benefited, but have helped lead China down this road of energy-intensive, environmentally destructive development with resulting rapid increases in greenhouse gas emissions.In addition, Western consumers have directly profited from the inexpensive products that pour from China's factories. Fundamental to the rise of China's emissions is the rapacious growth of consumption, and the championing of it - especially in the West. The carbon dioxide embedded in China's exports to the United States in 2004 alone is estimated at 1.8 billion tons, equivalent to 30 percent of the US total.
The World Bank, Japan, and Western donor countries have provided more than $200 billion in loans to China since the early 1980s - the largest global flow of development aid during this period - to create the infrastructure that has enabled China to become the world's factory. Multinational companies received contracts to help build China's infrastructure - the power plants, electrical grids, railways for coal transport, natural gas pipelines, highways, ports, and airports. Combined with its large, mobile, low-cost workforce of rural peasants, China became highly attractive to globalizing companies.
Simultaneously, Western leaders have promoted neoliberal economic policies increasing capital mobility. For 25 years, corporations moved factories to China, often partnering with local companies and subcontractors to take advantage of lax environmental and occupational conditions and achieve higher profits. In moving manufacturing jobs to China, footloose corporations have de-industrialized other parts of the world.
China's global integration was further enabled by Beijing's own devotion to rapid growth at any cost, averaging more than 10 percent per year for over two decades. Paradoxically, the resulting environmental destruction threatens that very growth, with hundreds of protests around the country every day reflecting the big divide between those who reap the profits and those who suffer the consequences of China's far-flung production networks. While the greatest benefits fill corporate coffers in China and abroad, the real costs are imposed upon local environments and Chinese workers' bodies.
The long-term destructive environmental consequences of China's development path are well known to the country's leadership and citizens. Official statistics point to pollution as the primary cause of death. And global warming's catastrophic consequences for China provide strong incentives for action. The rapidly shrinking Himalayan water tower foretells a dire future for billions in China, India, and Southeast Asia as Asia's rivers dry up. This helps explain China's increasing engagement with the international community at the Bali talks.
But China's global integration means its footprint of environmental destruction does not stop at its borders. The world's companies pull global resources through China from far-flung corners of the planet - timber from Siberia, Mozambique, and Burma; petrochemicals and minerals from Sudan, Indonesia, and Bolivia. The impacts on global warming through deforestation, as just one example, are magnified far beyond China itself.
The West must acknowledge its own role in shaping and benefiting from China's global integration and rapid increase in consumption of resources. Instead of being diverted by the relatively easy and therefore attractive answer of blaming China or any single country for rising greenhouse emissions, we must focus on the real root of the problem: a highly unequal and unsustainable international system of production, distribution, and consumption that insulates winners from losers, and delivers the greatest share of the benefits to a lucky few while jeopardizing the future for everyone else.
Joshua Muldavin is a professor of geography at Sarah Lawrence College.
© Copyright 2007 Globe Newspaper Company
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
13 Comments so far
Show Allhuman said:
"I guess CAPITALISM is the KEY ROOT of all evil."
Maybe it's not capitalism or communism for that matter, but too many people and too much wealth/power in too few.
Capitalism is a failed system. Waiting for "The West" (ie corporations and their political stooges) to acknowledge its role and change is beyond pointless. We need to create new institutions that actually work for all people. Otherwise, we are just polishing the brass on the Titanic.
I guess CAPITALISM is the KEY ROOT of all evil.
Reminds me of another recent story of how UK scampi producers ship the raw material to Asia for processing and then back, and they claim it is more environmentally friendly than producing the final product in the UK using processing machines.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7150834.stm
This would not be the case if the product was processed in the same way in the UK, but no one wants to do that as a job, as it is tedious and badly paid.
Maybe scampi should be left in the sea in that case?
The ultimate blame for this lies with us here in the 'western world'. We were greedy for cheap products, and were willing to sacrifice whatever we needed to to get them, including quality, safety, our own economy, our working class, and our planet.
Greaseman...there are 1.3 or more BILLION Chinese. So...what? Screw the other billion? The ones painting lead on the toys, and working in inhuman conditions? The farmers whose water is being diverted to the cities and whose land is drying up and blowing here...carrying toxins with it?
Neoclassical economics has not created wealth. It is a Reverse Robinhood scheme, taking what little wealth the many have and diverting it to the few.
What is poverty? When your air and water are polluted are you rich?
China and other developing countries will never adopt meaningful global warming mitigation measures until the USA sets the example by actively promoting, rather than obstructing, real mitigation measures.
This means we must take back our country from an administration that is causing incalculatible damage to our planet, by that responding only to the energy cartel & special interests and maiipulating science.
In the last 25 years, several HUNDRED MILLION Chinese have left poverty behind. Screw them, huh?
From the brilliant little animated cartoon on the web called "Story of Stuff", a linear system (extraction-->production-->distribution-->discard) dependent on a finite planet is guaranteed by the laws of logic to ultimately fail.
The fruits of communism and capitalism--pollution, overpopulation, resource depletion and species extinctions. We need the Greens now more than ever.
Great article. Globalization has made every country responsible, not only China. In the recent toy recall by Mattel, for example, that corporation has admitted that its design was responsible for many of the dangerous defects found in the toys. But of course the American mass media has largely ignored this news, as they focused on China bashing.
There have been several reports about toxic subsances in children toys produced in China. The latest one involved a substance which, when accidentally eaten, metabolized into a date rape drug. That much about Chinese products. But what the companies who sell these products fail to say is that they have fought legislation which would have protected the consumer. In Europe there was between 2003 and 2006 a 4 year battle to pass a fundamental chemicals legislation called REACH. The entire industry either fought it or stayed outside, there was not one retailer who strongly sided with the environmentalists (those who took a more environmental position were nearly all Swedish and a couple of UK companies like Marks & Spencer). To my big surprise, the chemical industry, with the active or silent backing of importers and retailers, fought all attempts to introduce sufficiently strong legislation on toxic chemicals in imported articles. Leading this fight was the US chemical industry. So all the companies, who are now blaming the Chinese, have for decades actively prevented testing, control etc. and if somebody is to blame it is those European and US companies who sell for instance children toys without bothering about the toxic chemicals and their effects.