Home » Opinion » Chinese Views
China's Green Leap Forward is the future
By Zhu Dajian |
December 28, 2009, Monday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
EVEN had there not been a climate change summit in Copenhagen, China would still set itself on a path of low-carbon development if its growth model is to remain competitive.
As one of the countries most affected by climate change, it has become imperative for China to act now to avert a climate catastrophe at a relatively low cost.
Theoretically, it would cost a country only US$10 for every ton of carbon emissions reduced now. If countries involved do not act now, the cost may well soar to more than US$200 at the lowest by 2050.
According to the book "The Economics of Climate Change" by British scholar Nicholas Stern, unless we invest 1 percent of global GDP per annum in cutting carbon emissions, up to 20 percent of global GDP will be lost to the effects of climate change by 2050. This is why we call developing a low-carbon economy a "no-regrets" strategy.
China's commitments to addressing climate change have been an act of volition. That means no binding caps should be imposed on it whereas developed economies are under obligations to set their emission quotas. There are substantial grounds for this "common-responsibility-but-different-burden" approach.
In line with the "different-burden" guideline, the onus of making deeper cuts lies squarely on those "haves," who emit far more carbon dioxide than those "have-nots" that scrape by on a pittance every day.
Based on this assumption, it's clear why China, still a developing country with hundreds of millions of poor people, flatly rejected any proposal of radical and mandatory cuts at Copenhagen.
Some media stories have mistakenly equated a low-carbon life with one of self-imposed destitution. Though thrift is indeed a desirable end in itself, there is certainly much more to an environmentally sustainable life than an ostentatious show of eating one fewer beefsteak a day.
The carbon emissions per capita in China now stand at 4.3 tons - slightly higher than the world average of 4.28 tons but way lower than the US' 20 tons, the EU's 10-odd tons and Japan's 9.9 tons.
It's true that China has overtaken the US as the largest greenhouse gas emitter in 2007. However, a recent study by Carnegie Mellon University found one third of China's carbon emissions between 2002 and 2005 were made for the benefit of developed countries in the form of exports.
China does have to contribute its share in limiting future emissions, to be sure, but this has to come as a spontaneous choice, not as a result of external pressure or scrutiny.
As the strain of environmental degradation keeps mounting, its impact on China's future growth can be acutely felt.
To cope with this challenge, China's growth model has to undergo a seismic shift.
On economic front, sprawling Chinese cities would do well to exempt certain areas from urban planning, namely, abundant tracts of forest, arable land and wetlands in addition to natural, uninhabited space.
Exempt from land expropriations that often come with urbanization, these areas can absorb greenhouse gases and offset environmental damages caused by the construction sector.
In the rush to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy - sometimes done in a wrongheaded manner - cities should be mindful of the basic fact that coal is still a major source of energy in China. Instead of abandoning it altogether at this point, a realistic solution lies in exploring new ways to make coal burning more efficient and less polluting.
Central to the "Green Leap Forward" is the promotion of a genuine low-carbon life. Nevertheless, its applicability depends on where people find themselves on a carbon hierarchy.
For the sake of academic convenience, I coin the term "middle carbon stratum" - people whose per capita CO2 emissions range between 4.28 tons and 10 tons.
For their part, rich folks with the largest carbon footprint are responsible for the deepest cuts while the growing "middle carbon stratum" can enjoy newfound wealth if their emissions remain on a modest level. People at the bottom should be spared any talk of emission reductions that will only add to their miseries.
A more profound change will take place when we finally jettison the possession-oriented mindset.
Individual ownership of gas guzzlers, bigger houses and high-tech apparatus is long held to be an ultimate symbol of modern life. If the sharing of public transit, like metro, bus and cab, gradually becomes the order of the day and in the meantime private cars' use wanes, this trend will likely herald an authentic green tidal wave.
After all, collective use of something doesn't necessarily diminish its efficacy. The two goals of lifting Chinese living standards and cutting carbon emissions can and should progress in tandem, just as one can boost his or her green credentials without bearing economic hardship.
(The author is professor of the School of Economics & Management, head of the Department of Public Management, and director of the Institute of Governance for Sustainable Development at Tongji University in Shanghai. The article is adapted from his speech at a forum in Shanghai organized by Wen Hui Daily on December 20. He can be reached at dajianzhu@263.net)
As one of the countries most affected by climate change, it has become imperative for China to act now to avert a climate catastrophe at a relatively low cost.
Theoretically, it would cost a country only US$10 for every ton of carbon emissions reduced now. If countries involved do not act now, the cost may well soar to more than US$200 at the lowest by 2050.
According to the book "The Economics of Climate Change" by British scholar Nicholas Stern, unless we invest 1 percent of global GDP per annum in cutting carbon emissions, up to 20 percent of global GDP will be lost to the effects of climate change by 2050. This is why we call developing a low-carbon economy a "no-regrets" strategy.
China's commitments to addressing climate change have been an act of volition. That means no binding caps should be imposed on it whereas developed economies are under obligations to set their emission quotas. There are substantial grounds for this "common-responsibility-but-different-burden" approach.
In line with the "different-burden" guideline, the onus of making deeper cuts lies squarely on those "haves," who emit far more carbon dioxide than those "have-nots" that scrape by on a pittance every day.
Based on this assumption, it's clear why China, still a developing country with hundreds of millions of poor people, flatly rejected any proposal of radical and mandatory cuts at Copenhagen.
Some media stories have mistakenly equated a low-carbon life with one of self-imposed destitution. Though thrift is indeed a desirable end in itself, there is certainly much more to an environmentally sustainable life than an ostentatious show of eating one fewer beefsteak a day.
The carbon emissions per capita in China now stand at 4.3 tons - slightly higher than the world average of 4.28 tons but way lower than the US' 20 tons, the EU's 10-odd tons and Japan's 9.9 tons.
It's true that China has overtaken the US as the largest greenhouse gas emitter in 2007. However, a recent study by Carnegie Mellon University found one third of China's carbon emissions between 2002 and 2005 were made for the benefit of developed countries in the form of exports.
China does have to contribute its share in limiting future emissions, to be sure, but this has to come as a spontaneous choice, not as a result of external pressure or scrutiny.
As the strain of environmental degradation keeps mounting, its impact on China's future growth can be acutely felt.
To cope with this challenge, China's growth model has to undergo a seismic shift.
On economic front, sprawling Chinese cities would do well to exempt certain areas from urban planning, namely, abundant tracts of forest, arable land and wetlands in addition to natural, uninhabited space.
Exempt from land expropriations that often come with urbanization, these areas can absorb greenhouse gases and offset environmental damages caused by the construction sector.
In the rush to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy - sometimes done in a wrongheaded manner - cities should be mindful of the basic fact that coal is still a major source of energy in China. Instead of abandoning it altogether at this point, a realistic solution lies in exploring new ways to make coal burning more efficient and less polluting.
Central to the "Green Leap Forward" is the promotion of a genuine low-carbon life. Nevertheless, its applicability depends on where people find themselves on a carbon hierarchy.
For the sake of academic convenience, I coin the term "middle carbon stratum" - people whose per capita CO2 emissions range between 4.28 tons and 10 tons.
For their part, rich folks with the largest carbon footprint are responsible for the deepest cuts while the growing "middle carbon stratum" can enjoy newfound wealth if their emissions remain on a modest level. People at the bottom should be spared any talk of emission reductions that will only add to their miseries.
A more profound change will take place when we finally jettison the possession-oriented mindset.
Individual ownership of gas guzzlers, bigger houses and high-tech apparatus is long held to be an ultimate symbol of modern life. If the sharing of public transit, like metro, bus and cab, gradually becomes the order of the day and in the meantime private cars' use wanes, this trend will likely herald an authentic green tidal wave.
After all, collective use of something doesn't necessarily diminish its efficacy. The two goals of lifting Chinese living standards and cutting carbon emissions can and should progress in tandem, just as one can boost his or her green credentials without bearing economic hardship.
(The author is professor of the School of Economics & Management, head of the Department of Public Management, and director of the Institute of Governance for Sustainable Development at Tongji University in Shanghai. The article is adapted from his speech at a forum in Shanghai organized by Wen Hui Daily on December 20. He can be reached at dajianzhu@263.net)
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
