荒诞者共和

Funding Sources and Actors

Public funding for NGOs is still quite limited and fundraising activities are highly regulated, thus NGOs mainly depend on two sources: lifetime savings of some dedicated activists and founders, plus funds from foreign foundations, grant-making NGOs, and donors abroad. Some funding sources, especially those from the US, are keen to push their ideology and practices that may or may not be suitable for local conditions. For example, Nature Conservancy has generated a lot of controversy, as it is buying up large areas and pushing people off the land.

China's environmental activists are often well educated and from a middle-class background. Many leading activists, especially those based in Beijing, have spent time in US universities or US-based NGOs. Naturally, many of them have brought back ideas, languages, and methodology from the west—sometimes this is beneficial, sometimes it is not. For example, just like many western environmentalists, some leading Chinese environmentalists often adhere to the line of thought that ecological disaster will follow "If every Chinese drove a car" or "If every Chinese consumed as much meat as American." While they might be right on target on the resource issue, the ethnocentric framing of the problem is not very helpful to gain an audience in China. For China's rising consuming class, the knee-jerk response can well be: you got rich this way, now you don't want me to get rich. For many working people who can never dream of possessing a car or US lifestyle, the message is simply irrelevant.

The uncontrolled explosion of private automobiles is indeed a huge problem in China, especially for the poor. Public buses getting slower and slower because of the traffic jams; more and more roads are closed to bicycles to make more room for cars; highways and urban sprawl are swallowing huge amount of land, creating many landless peasants. If China's environmentalists were more connected to the common people instead of their western teachers, they would have found their own message instead of the copycat message. The question is not about "what if every Chinese drives a car"; instead, it is about equality and justice—if only 50% of Chinese drove a car, will the remaining 50% have place to walk and bike, or have enough land to grow food? This problem goes beyond the issue of language and framing. So far many Chinese environmentalists are busy learning technical fixes or even the "not in my backyard" approach from the west, while ideas of environmental justice and deep ecology, etc. do not receive enough attention.

So far, NGOs that are based in Beijing enjoy most of the media attention and receive most of the funding. But green organizations are spreading rapidly in the provinces as well. Indigenous conservation movement are growing in many minority areas, including Tibet Plateau, Inner Mongolia, and Yunnan province. Many smaller, locally based NGOs have been founded to address local concerns. For example, "Huai River Guards" is dealing with the horrific water pollution in the Huai River basin; many Yunnan NGOs are engaged in the debate on dams. Compared to NGOs in Beijing, local NGOs often have a more grassroots support. This is even reflected in their rhetoric. For example, the recent protests against dams have mobilized environmentalists all across China, yet their messages differs. NGOs in Beijing talk predominantly about protecting biodiversity, while local NGOs talk extensively about social justice, displaced peoples, and traditional livelihood. Hopefully, the provincial NGOs will play a more important role in shaping the environmental movement in China, preventing it from becoming an elitist movement of city people demanding a clean environment for themselves while ignoring the needs of the poor.

College students are increasingly involved in the environmental movement as well. Tang Xiyang, an environmental pioneer, set up the first "green camp" for university students in 1996. Since then, it has rapidly spread to many college campuses. Many larger universities have more than one environmental club. On Earth Day of 2004, over 100,000 students participated in green activities.

The Dam Debate

Currently, the hottest issue in China's environmental movement is probably the debate about large dams. China already has around 22,000 large dams (defined as being at least 15 meters high), or 46 percent of the global total. Yet the fierce demand for hydraulic electricity has initiated another building spree. Some projects have ignited heated public debates.

In 2003, the government halted the construction of Yangliuhu Dam. Environmental groups and local people had protested that it would endanger Dujiangyan, an ancient irrigation system that has continuously benefited the region for more than 2200 years. The termination of the project was considered the first major victory of China's environmental movement.

But also in 2003, the government announced plans to build 13 dams on the Nu (or Salween) River. Among China's major rivers, Nu River is one of only two that have not been dammed (The other undisturbed river is the Yaluzangbu in Tibet). Many environmental groups have spoken against these dams, even though their protest is not without risk. In 2004 and 2005, several environmental groups were shut down temporarily or received harsh warnings from the government, because they collected signatures against the project or brought villagers slated for relocation to visit those displaced by existing dams. While such strategies have been effective for the NGO purpose, they have raised red flags with the Chinese government. Apparently, mass organizing and mobilization is one sensitive area where the government has little tolerance.

It is also noteworthy that deregulation and privatization of the utility industry is at the root of the problem—privatization has speeded up the rush for more dams at all cost. The phenomenon is generally referred to as "enclosure of waters" in Chinese. It is in sharp contrast to the case of the Three Gorges dam: though the dam itself is generally considered a lost cause, at least it has taken the proponents of the project 30 years to get it passed by the People's Congress, and hydraulic experts had extensive debates about the project. Now it has become virtually impossible to find any opponent voices within this profession. Privatization has further externalized the cost, and essentially all insiders have been corrupted by the huge profit. One environment economist once commented on the issue, "Today the professionals have a monopoly power over knowledge and information, and they are using it for their private gain."

In response, the public is demanding more transparency. On August 26, 2005, 61 organizations and 99 individuals issued an open letter , arguing that the environmental impact assessment concerning the Nu River project must be made available for public scrutiny, in accordance with Chinese law. "We should no longer tolerate the low-cost or even free exploitation of public resources and the earning of huge profits at the expense of our environment," the letter demanded, "Dam-builders should not externalize the huge costs of dam construction on affected people, the public, the nation's finances, and future generations." NGO Interaction with the Government

Many green NGOs have worked very closely with China's State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA). They have joined forces in calling for a green Olympics, campaign for energy efficiency, and many other projects. SEPA and NGOs have often formed alliance against local polluters, or even local governments that neglect environmental regulations. Even on dam construction, which is a most sensitive issue, SEPA and NGOs are arguing on the same side—they both demand careful evaluation and proper environmental impact assessment from builders before the project can go forward.

Future Challenges

The achievements by Chinese environmental NGOs in the last ten years are impressive. Public understanding and support has growing considerably, and NGOs have formed strategic alliance with the government (especially SEPA). Still, many challenges remain as the movement continues to evolve.

First, Chinese environmentalists need to gain independence from their western teachers, both financially and intellectually. The heavy dependence on international funding makes them quite vulnerable to political attacks. Some environmentalists have been accused being foreign agents who are trying to stop China's development, especially when they are engaged in public debate. While such accusations bear little or no truth at all, many environmentalists are often at a loss to defend themselves. The directives from such a narrow funding source may also limit their ability to explore different ideas and strategies. Instead of only learning from their western counterparts, Chinese environmentalists need to have more exchange and communications with environmentalists from other developing countries, which face similar ecological challenges.

In general, many NGOs, especially those based in Beijing, need to reach out of the comfort zone of their middle-class enclave. So far, the limited perspective leads to many problems. During a NGO conference, one environmental activist once commented on the protection of a minority area, "My ultimate hope is that the local environment and culture can be protected as well as that of the Native Indian reserves."—if Chinese NGO activists take Native Indian reserves as a success model, it is quite worrisome where the movement is going. Dr. Eva Stefeld, a German expert in charge of an environmental education center in Beijing, once gave an example of narrow focuses by many green enthusiasts: they had a full house of audiences during a presentation on snow leopard; yet when some expert talked about water privatization in Shanghai and other Chinese cities, only four people came. Environmental pollution and degradation are most serious in the countryside, yet most NGOs are predominantly focused on urban issues. From their real-life experience, some provincial NGOs have a better understanding of the problems on the ground, but many of them have yet to learn how to articulate their views. These NGOs should receive more media attention and funding support, which are now going mostly to urban NGOs (especially those based in Beijing).

Other movements, like the new rural reconstruction movement covered in the next section, are addressing environmental concerns as well. But so far there is little communication and collaboration between the environmental movement and rural reconstruction movement. By coordinating their efforts, these movements could be more effective to change China for the better.