Photo courtesy of Alex Pasternack.

Our man Mark Hiew and friends John Romankiewicz (of China’s Green Beat) and Alex Pasternack (of Treehugger) called awareness to climate change on 350.org’s International Day of Climate Action on October 24 by rapping at the Roots & Shoots China Summit and Climate Action Carnival in Beijing.

From Treehugger:

…dropping green knowledge was legendary Beijing green rapper Sustainable John, of China’s Green Beat (see an old video here), accompanied by beatbox extraordinaire Huan Bao Panda (huan bao means environmental protection) and yours truly, MC ?uestration. A sampling: “we don’t carbon / we need a car ban! / if we want to go far/ man, we need a good plan.” Yep, we brought the house down, if not CO2 levels.

Hollllaaaa!

(If you’re interested, check out another post I wrote recently for TheCityFix.com about how hip-hop has changed the face of environmental advocacy: “Sustainable Cities and Hip Hop: Creating a New Urban Beat.“)

Lu Guang (??) from won the $30,000 W. Eugene Smith Grant in Humanistic Photography for his documentary project “Pollution in China.” Image via ChinaHush.com.

Previously, I’ve blogged about environmental justice as a framework of looking at environmental protection and why we should act. In the past few years, a new form of environmental ethics has been gaining momentum - environmental virtue ethics (EVE). Aristotle saw moral virtue as a reflection of a certain state of character, rather than our passions or our faculties and it is this kind of virtue - a consistent, repeated, dedicated character to environmental protection that is considered a environmental virtue ethic.

Ronald Sandler and Peter S. Wenz say that acting virtuously for the environment would mean manifesting a combination of both human-centered values and non-human centered values. An environmental virtue would allow both human life and nature to flourish, whereas acting non-virtuously would be harmful to both. For example, they argue that uncontrolled consumerism is harmful to both humans and the environment; any short-term gain is outweighed by long-term harms. To put this into visual perspective, Lu Guang’s documentary “Pollution in China” does a heart-wrenching job.

While sometimes it seems difficult to constantly act environmentally-friendly in today’s society, it is not impossible to be an environmentally virtuous person and I think China, while still economically developing in ways that are harming the environment, is also in many ways setting examples for how one would act virtuously to function in synergy with the environment, rather than merely utilizing it for personal gain.

One good example is that China’s entrepreneurs are shaping up. In this article from The Nature Conservancy, Charles Bedford talks about SEE (Society-Entrepreneurs-Ecology), an organization of wealthy entrepreneurs who want to help the environment.

From Bedford’s post:

SEE, quite simply, is a club of like-minded entrepreneurs with a commitment to support the government’s environmental agenda by funding local NGOs that also embrace that agenda and that are committed to principles of “cooperation” and “win-win” solutions. They have raised and spent millions of dollars. They have grant cycles and annually give out over 70 prestigious (and monetary) awards for good works in the field that meet their criteria. SEE acts like a cross between a foundation and a country club — members pony up a certain amount every year and participate in the grant-making and awards decisions in what can only be described as a very garrulous democracy.

In other words, these entrepreneurs have found a way to be consistently dedicated to environmental protection. Also, the reasoning behind the creation of SEE is something people who are more “pro-economy” do not understand (everyone might seem green these days, but this is not completely always the case): Pollution will only harm the environment and the economy. This also reiterates the reasoning behind environmental virtue ethics.

Another way in which China could be an example to other countries is rooted in the habits of its citizens. The 2009  Greendex survey showed that China ranked third in terms of environmentally friendly consumer behavior. Chinese citizens drink boiled tap water instead of bottled water, use bikes for transportation more often than cars (China scoring highest overall in the transportation category), and practice energy-saving activities when it comes to housing.

Of course, China is still very much a coal-guzzling economy. Due to the massive amounts of coal found within China’s borders, this might not change anytime soon. Also, as China still has a ways to go before being fully “developed,” consumption is likely to increase.

In no way am I saying that China is perfect when it comes to being environmentally friendly, but in order to establish what an environmental virtue would be, it is useful to examine those activities that might lead to virtuous states of character. Aspects of China’s economic growth show that capitalism and environmental protection are not mutually exclusive and can even be mutually beneficial – electric bikes and scooters, solar power, reducing the use of plastic bags. I have noticed a recent wave of praise from the Western media for China’s environmental policies (i.e. Thomas Friedman’s The New Sputnik, or this GOOD magazine article about Chinese solar.) These are productive not because they are pats on the back for China, but as a model of environmentally virtuous acts for other countries to take note of. Criticism should motivate China, but praise should motivate other countries.

Baihua Lake, China. Image via the International Wushu Federation.

I’ve recently found two stories about environmental NGOs in China directly taking a stance against the government to improve environmental policy.

The first is a landmark case in which a court accepted a lawsuit brought on by a charitable organization, The All-China Environment Federation. They are suing the government for allowing the construction of a ice cream workshop in Baihua Lake, a beautiful scenic area. This article is reported in both English and Chinese. Also, the China Environmental Law Blog has a good article on it.

The second concerns The Green Volunteer League asking the Ministry to reconsider its recent punishment of two hydropower projects in the Jinshajiang River in southwest China. The NGO is requesting that the Ministry also halt the construction of two hydroelectric power plants in addition to stopping construction of the dams (China Daily).

Both of these stories have undetermined endings, but I’m hoping they’ll end in favor of the environment. I also hope that I will see more and more stories about NGOs standing up for environmental protection.

International Youth Summit on

Energy and Climate Change

July 18, 2009 - July 19, 2009

Beijing, China

Hosts:
Tsinghua University Student Green Association
Peking University CDM Club
China Youth Climate Action Network

To learn more, visit the official Web site:

http://www.iysecc.org/en/index.html

Executive Summary

The International Youth Summit on Energy and Climate Change (IYSECC) will bring together 300 Chinese and international students from over 35 universities around the world. It is the first international youth conference in the field of energy and climate change to be held in China. As part of the Energy Crossroads “Our-Opportunity” 2009 global summit series, it is the first international youth conference to be organized in the field of energy and climate change in China. The forum will be held on July 18-19, 2009 at Tsinghua University in Beijing, China.

IYSECC has received formal support from the Chinese Development and Reform Commission. Our advisory board members include:

• Su Wei, Director of Department of Climate Change, NDRC
• Jiang Jiasi, Chairperson of Peking University Environment Fund
• He Jiankun, Director of School of Public Policy & Management, Tsinghua University

Our confirmed speakers include:

• Jiang Kejun, Director, Energy System Research Office, Energy Research Institute, NDRC
• Qin Dahe, Former Director, the China Meteorological Administration
• Liu Xiaowei, Deputy Director of External Affairs, Shell

In addition, representatives from the Climate Group, WWF, Vestas and McKinsey will also share their thoughts at the Summit.
Our media partner include:

1. CCTV Energy Channel
2. China5E.com
3. China Environment News

As the co-host, Energy Channel of CCTV.com will provide our sponsor media support during the whole process, including:

1. Report of enterprises during the conference. The interview will be broadcasted on CCTV.com and available for one
2. year.
3. Conference live on CCTV.com
4. Report of the conference broadcasted in CCTV channels.
5. On-line promotion. Sponsors will be able to choose put advertisements on the website of Energy Channel of
6. CCTV.com.
7. Special interview of enterprises in CCTV’s studio: the interview can be broadcasted on CCTV.com or CCTV channels.

IYSECC is an ideal opportunity to further your commitment to social responsibility and build up the brand image among the best and brightest youth in the field of energy and climate change!

We invite you to participate in the conference as a keynote speaker, sponsor, panelist, workshop facilitator, to receive branding and advertising opportunities throughout the Summit. Please see the following page for sponsorship opportunities. IYSECC looks forward to working with you to bring together youth from China and around the world to take action on climate change and energy.

Photo by art_es_anna.

The Modern Predicament

The amount of material needed to sustain the modern world is somewhat ridiculous– and what better way to understand how much substance we buy is there than looking at the trash we produce? For example, in 2005, the United States produced 246 million tons of trash.

This is an extremely large amount of trash to visualize and sociologists tell us that the human mind cannot meaningfully grasp numbers higher than a few thousand. A better way to put it into perspective: A blue whale, the largest animal in the world, weighs about 160 tons. Therefore, 246 million tons of trash is equal to 1.64 million blue whales of trash. Just the heart of a blue whale is the size of a car.

Chris Jordan is an artist that is focused on displaying the extent of American consumerism. I think that through his work, we can develop a more concrete image of the incredible amount of things we use. His Web site can be found here. He says:

The pervasiveness of our consumerism holds a seductive kind of mob mentality. Collectively we are committing a vast and unsustainable act of taking, but we each are anonymous and no one is in charge or accountable for the consequences. I fear that in this process we are doing irreparable harm to our planet and to our individual spirits.

Trash encompasses unwanted food, cans, computers, boxes, etc. The implications of throwing out trash might bring a sense of guilt sometimes because you’re not recycling. But here’s a thought: Trash kills. Not quickly and violently, but slowly, dismissively, and subtly.

For around $1.50 USD, about 60,000 local workers including children risk their lives and limbs to scramble for anything out of your old computer. In Guiyu, Guangdong, picking through electronic waste has replaced rice production. The city is an electronic slaughterhouse. For example, some workers go to the local river where they make small fires to heat an extremely toxic mixture called Aqua Regia (Latin for “king’s water”), which is composed of 75% hydrochloric acid and 25% nitric acid. This process is extremely harmful to both humans and the environment. The residents of Guiyu cannot drink local water, and many villagers have become sick and weak. China takes in about 72% of the world’s electronic waste, which is about 35 million tons. Most of this waste is toxic and dangerous and long-term effects are still unclear.

A New Framework for Trash Disposal: Environmental Justice

The U.S. goes through at least 426,000 cell phones everyday (Chris Jordan art) in addition to countless other electronic supplies. How can we re-conceptualize this amount of stuff in a way that is more human, more ethical, and more pragmatic? Let’s look at the philosophy of John Rawls. He says, “In justice as fairness, men agree to share one another’s fate.” Rawls emphasizes that legitimacy is more of a technicality than a moral standard, and that justice is the maximal moral standard. Although it is “legal” for companies to throw electronic waste in Guiyu because the locals get paid for compensation, this is not necessarily just.

The environmental justice movement emerged in the early 1980s as a concept in the United States. Dr. Robert Ballard, a prominent environmental justice advocate says:

The environmental justice movement has basically redefined what environmentalism is all about. It basically says that the environment is everything: where we live, work, play, go to school, as well as the physical and natural world. And so we can’t separate the physical environment from the cultural environment. We have to talk about making sure that justice is integrated throughout all of the stuff that we do.

Before the rise of environmental justice, the trend of the environmental movement has been neglectful of difference and pluralism, especially in the United States. As Wolff notes, “the genius of American politics is its ability to treat matters of principle as though they were conflicts of interest.” (quoted from here). Scholsberg writes:

In addition to the lack of both diversity and attention to environmental inequalities, the form that mainstream environmental organizing has taken has angered grassroots activists attentive to resource and environmental justice issues. Specifically, critiques have addressed the centralization and hierarchical structure, the lack of democratic and community participation, and the general evolution of the major groups into professionalized interest groups practically indistinguishable from their adversaries.  (Read as a Google Book)

Environmental justice shifts the focus from the environment as a commodity to be preserved to a more holistic understanding of the environment as an interactive forum that is part of experience, whether it be for humans, animals or plants.

New legal precedents should be set in the realm of trash disposal to be environmentally just, so cities in the deathly condition of Guiyu do not exist.  As Keith Lewis, of the Serpent River First Nation in Ontario and an object of the history of nuclear waste in the United States says, “There is nothing moral about tempting a starving man with money.”

More sites on Guiyu:
Guiyu, Largest E-waste Site on Earth (Video) – China-pix
China’s electronic waste village – Photo Essays – Time
Guiyu: A Grim Recycling Landscape – Recycling Today
Where computers go to die – and kill – Salon

More on environmental justice:
Environmental Justice and the New Pluralism (Google Book) – David Scholsberg
Environmantal Justice (Google Book)– Peter S. Wenz
Environmental Justice: An Interview with Robert Ballard – Earth First! Journal

I met with the president of the Professional Association for China’s Environment (PACE) a few weeks ago and he got the term “eco-civilization” stuck in my head. Ever since, I’ve been sticking “eco-” in front of anything that’s environmentally friendly. Upon a quick Google search though, I found that “eco-documentaries” is actually a term in wide use.

Anyways, I’m friends with a few people that are putting on the New Beijing International Movie Week. There are two eco-documentaries showing on March 7th at The Boat (address here). One is a full-length movie and one is a short (they have descriptions online in English and Chinese). The Facebook invite is here. The New Beijing International Movie Week also has a lot of other really interesting movies being shown, so I would highly recommend joining the Facebook group to stay updated on their events.

Feature length:

“Tales of a Yellow Bike,” directed by Canadian filmmaker Tina Hahn, tells the story of bike share programs in Europe, North America, Columbia and China. The film was inspired by the now defunct Toronto BikeShare program, a community-based bicycle-lending program in downtown Toronto that provided its members with access to bright yellow bikes from various “hubs” around the city from 2001 to 2006. The non-profit program ended because of a lack of funding, prompting Hahn to make an around-the-world journey to six cities, including Beijing, in search of bikesharing  best practices.

Read a review of the film in Beijing Today. Here’s an excerpt:

“Of the five countries we’ve been to, China has the largest number of bicycles with 470 million. Bikes used to be the only mode of transportation in the country,” Hahn said.

The director was impressed by some of the locals she met during filming. “We interviewed Wang Yong, manager of the Beikelantu Bicycle Rental company in Beijing. Wang tried to promote bicycle rental 15 years ago but failed. This year, he tried the same business again and succeeded,” she said. “It is exciting to see his blue bikes moving along Beijing’s streets.”

Short:

“One Cup of Coffee” follows Rohan Marley, son of Bob Marley, and his family on their quest to “continue the legacy of their famous father by setting new standards in ethical coffee farming.” Their company, Marley Coffee, sells products that are certified organic and sustainably grown.

From the NBIMW website:

They combine the ideas of organic farming, fair-wage farming, and sustainable farming under one umbrella - ‘Ital,’ which is the Rastafari word meaning pure, vital, and natural. In this way, they are beginning to bring new hope to rural Jamaica and to farmers all over the world.

View the trailer of the film here.

Here in my time zone, we have just a few more hours left of Blog Action Day 2008, where bloggers all over the world commit to covering one specific topic. This year, that topic is POVERTY.

I wanted to examine the cross-section between poverty and environmentalism. And I won’t just focus on China because I believe this issue is widespread and relevant to many countries.

SUSTAINABLE LUXURY

The first thing that comes to mind is the idea of “eco-luxury,” which has been defined as “the ‘production process’ of economic activities that simultaneously promote a sustainable economy and high quality standards,” according to one lodging website. This can involve trends in tourism, production and fashion, for example in China, an eco-friendly boutique hotel in Shanghai, a responsible manufacturer of bamboo kitchen products, and organic baby clothes. (For a bigger list of worldwide examples, check out this online contribution from environmental consultant Michael Jessen.)

WorldChanging.com writes about “The Sustainable Luxury Myth,” responding to the argument that pricey eco-friendly products and experiences are out of reach for most people, and therefore, cause for concern (from a social equality standpoint.) But, Josh Dorfman writes, “Equating sustainability with luxury is like equating technology with luxury.” What he means is that we’re only in the early stages of sustainable design and consumerism, just like there was once an early stage of computer manufacturing, and once the trend becomes more mainstream, so-called “luxury” goods will be more accessible, and therefore, affordable. He writes:

Two years from now there will be no more talk of aspirational/out-of-reach sustainable luxury. Sustainable design-entrepreneurs are on the cusp of the next phase of economic growth where scale is achieved and prices begin to fall. As this transpires and more consumers articulate their demand through their purchases, multinational corporations, fueled by the profit motive, will respond to market signals and employ their vast economies of scale to drive prices for sustainably designed products even lower. Millions of consumers will be the beneficiaries as will be the planet. Sustainability might still take the form of luxury goods but it will also be found in more affordable products.

So, in this case, poor people will simply have access to environmentally friendly options. In other words, they will still be relatively poor, but at least they’ll be eco-friendly.

But what about if we think about the reverse process? How does environmentalism (and its byproducts, whether it be products or services or activism) actually reach out to poor people, and lift them out of poverty? When does environmentalism become the actual catalyst for change?

GREEN COLLAR JOBS

The best example of this is the growth of “green-collar jobs.” Van Jones, social entrepreneur and author of “The Green Collar Economy,” believes that a green economy, based on industries like renewable energy, sustainable agriculture and green building, can achieve the following:

• Rebuild a Strong Middle Class
• Provide Pathways Out of Poverty
• Strengthen Urban and Rural Communities
• Protect Our Health and the Health of the Planet

Jones fulfills this mission through the advocacy efforts of his nonprofit, called Green For All, which recently  “worked with national partners to produce “Green Jobs Now” – the first-ever ‘national day of action’ calling for green-collar jobs in the United States. More than 600 communities in all 50 states participated, with more than 50,000 signing a petition that called for federal government action to spur green jobs.”

Protecting and responsibly managing ecosystems can also help fight poverty.

PROTECTING ECOSYSTEMS

The Marketing & Strategy Innovation Blog has this nice write-up in reference to a World Resources Institute report, “The Wealth of the Poor: Managing Ecosystems to Fight Poverty,” which views the physical environment as a valuable asset to the poor. “WRI deftly connects the dots,” the blog says, “showing how natural resources — soils, forests, water, fisheries — managed at the local level are frequently the most effective means for the rural poor people to create wealth for themselves.”

Nearly half of the world’s six-billion people live on less than $2 per day, and three-quarters of them live in rural areas that depend overwhelmingly on natural resources for their income. When these ecosystems become degraded, as many have over the past 50 years, they are unable to provide the fuel for economic development that can boost the rural poor beyond subsistence and into the mainstream of national economies.

But then again, poverty and environmentalism can also contradict each other.

PARADOX?

Take this example: “Would you rather help the poor or combat global warming?” asks Tim Haab of Environmental Economics.

In short, a group of environmental organizations and cities (Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, Boulder, Colorado and Arcata, California) want to sue U.S. development agencies (Overseas Private Investment Corp. and the Export-Import Bank of the United States) that fund power plant construction projects in developing countries.  The premise, such projects produce greenhouse gas emissions which cause global warming which harms the U.S. So, such projects should fall under the National Environmental Policy Act.  It requires economic assessments of government projects with environmental impacts.

So let me get this straight…U.S. environmental organizations want to improve the environment by stopping development projects in the poorest countries.

These examples all show the close links between the environment (and its degradation) and poverty. The point to remember is to always be concerned with the local situation. Where there are eco-friendly goods to be sold, make them affordable. Where there are green jobs to be created, make sure low-income people have access to them, through training, education and employment outreach. And where there are communities that depend on nature for their economic and social well-being, be sure to protect their most prized possessions–the land, sea and air. Finally, if and when it comes down to a choice between helping the poor and combating global warming, make sure that one doesn’t come at the expense of the other. There shouldn’t be a choice between either/or.

(Image via TaylorFrancis.org)

The American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai welcomes Taylor Francis, the youngest presenter trained by Al Gore for The Climate Project, a grassroots nonprofit organization dedicated to spreading awareness about the climate crisis.

Francis, who has been featured in the New York Times and TIME magazine, will be discussing climate change and global warming at an upcoming AmCham event as a guest of China’s newly created Ministry of Environmental Protection.

Environmental Committee
Date:     Tuesday, June 10, 2008 17:00 to 19:00
Venue:     The Regent Shanghai 1116 Yan An West Road (near cnr Fan Yu Road)
?????????? ????1116? (????)
Cost:     Members (RMB): 150.00
Non Members (RMB): 250.00

All students will be admitted free of charge.

(Image via BBC News)

• “China quake toll ‘to top 50,000′“
  BBC News
  May 15, 2008

More than 50,000 people may have died in the earthquake that devastated parts of China on Monday, state media say.

The warning came after the government confirmed the death toll had risen to 19,500, as rescue efforts continue to search for thousands still trapped.

About 10 million people across Sichuan province have been directly affected by the 7.9 quake, the media said.

 confirmed the death toll had risen to 19,500, as rescue efforts continue to search for thousands still trapped.

About 10 million people across Sichuan province have been directly affected by the 7.9 quake, the media said.

=====

I received an email from the Chinese Internet Research listserv, too. Rebecca MacKinnon, co-founder of GlobalVoicesOnline.org and blogger at RConversation.com, encourages everyone to make donations for earthquake relief.

As the Chinese people deal with the trauma of the worst earthquake
since Tangshan, it is time for our community - many if not most of
whom have built livelihoods based on our China experience and
knowledge - to help out.

Please make a public pledge of your support for the Chinese people by
going to this link on Pledgebank:
http://www.pledgebank.com/chinaquake

After making your pledge, please go right away to one of the websites
linked on the site (or to some other charity of your choice) and make
a donation. If you would like to suggest other websites where people
can donate online to the Chinese quake victims, please click on the
“comments” section and post the web link and/or any other information
you’d like others to know concerning donations.

Feel free to forward this email to anybody you want.

Thanks.
Rebecca

Rebecca MacKinnon
Assistant Professor, Journalism & Media Studies Ctr.
University of Hong Kong (http://jmsc.hku.hk)
E-mail: rmack@hku.hk | Tel: +852-2219-4005
Blog: RConversation.com
Co-founder: GlobalVoicesOnline.org
“The world is talking. Are you listening?”

=====

Also, the American Chamber in Shanghai posted some more information on how to make donations. Click here.

=====

See my previous post here about more disaster relief organizations that need your help.

(Image via  Small Worlds Magazine)

We are all bombarded with information about our “footprint” and how big and bad it is. But what exactly are we supposed to be doing with this information in China, a country where “green” can be few and far between?

Two groups, Shanghai Roots & Shoots and SCMC, a Coca-Cola vendor, are working together to reduce Shanghai’s carbon footprint by planting the right kind of trees in the right kind of places. “Tree planting” is based on the idea that trees can reduce the threat of global warming because they basically suck up carbon and other greenhouse gases (GHG) in the air. While no one is pretending that you can plant trees and negate your impact on the earth, it is an example of what China can do to acknowledge its environmental impact and make a quantitative change. Shanghai Roots & Shoots raises money and awareness for the tree planting program and then purchases trees from a nursery in Inner Mongolia. The organization plants pine and poplar trees, which scientists and biologists have certified as appropriate for the area.

The trees benefit the earth in the following ways:

• rehabilitate the eco-system in the area
• stop desertification
• help alleviate local poverty

The Shanghai Roots & Shoots tree planting program is responsible for guaranteeing that local farmers are supplied with seedlings and that they are then responsible for re-planting the trees they cut down, after 20 years, in order to guarantee there is a new tree in its place for up to a 50 year period.

In April, SCMC sponsored two trips involving a total of 28 Shanghaiers, who planted more than 2,000 poplar trees in the Kulunqi desert. As one SCMC rep said, “Coca-Cola Bottlers Manufacturing Co Ltd is…addressing environmental concerns on multiple fronts - holding back desertification, carbon offsetting, sustainable local economic rejuvenation that compliments the environmental objectives and finally environmental education.” In one corner of China at least, tree planting is firmly on the CSR menu.

For more information about the Roots & Shoots program, please visit www.jgi-shanghai.org.