James Oswald

(The University of Adelaide， Australia)

The rapid change and development that has occurred in China in the last four decades has lifted millions from the grip of poverty but simultaneously had a devastating impact on the local environment. It also puts further stress on the global environment already under severe pressure from the development and lifestyles of people in developed nations. In order to demonstrate the importance that the Chinese government attaches to ameliorating environmental degradation it incorporated the goal of “constructing an ecological civilisation” into its official lexicon; this happened during Hu Jintao’s presidency in 2007 at the 17th plenum of the People’s Congress. This “ecological civilisation” aims to obviate the old unsustainable model of economic growth at all costs, instead striving for a development based on ideals of frugality in the use of energy and resources and environmental protection. In this paper I discuss the origins and meaning of “ecological civilisation,” tracing its evolution before and after its adoption by the Chinese government and its significance in the face of the global environmental crisis. The adoption of this concept into official discourse denotes that the Chinese government recognise that environmental health is necessary in securing the wellbeing of the Chinese people. However, as the centrality of values to the notion of ecological civilisation is not well stated, it risks becoming meaningless. The looming environmental crisis is at its heart a social problem, whilst technological solutions are necessary they are not sufficient, and we must urgently address the issue of values, to create ecologically civilised people who will work together to create an ecological civilisation.

Ⅰ.The Rise of ‘Ecological Civilisation’ and the Problem of Values

When considering the case of China and the environmental problems that have become so visible in the past decades, it might seem that there is a lack of environmental consciousness. However, an analysis of the language in the five-yearly work reports from the National People’s Congress (NPC) reveals that environmental consciousness in China has historically kept pace with that of the rest of the world. Further, the Chinese government has been an active participant in environmental fora since the 1970s, beginning with the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm in 1972. This rise in environmental consciousness, reflected in official governmental discourse, culminated in the announcement by Hu Jintao in 2007 that China was aiming to become an ‘ecological civilisation.’ Traditionally, environmental thinking and ideas have flowed from east to west, but the notion of ‘ecological civilisation’ marks a change in that trend as an idea which has emerged from China that is starting to gain global influence.

The first use of ‘environmental’ language in an NPC report is the term ‘ecological balance’ (生態(tài)平衡), which first appeared in 1982.〔1〕The idea of ecological balance is drawn from the “Gaia Hypothesis” which comes from Western academia and is attributed to Lovelock and Margulis.〔2〕The incorporation of the term into this NPC report is indicative of the flow of Western environmental thinking into the official Chinese discourse, demonstrating the flow of ideas from west to east. Further evidence of this process is found in the NPC work report of 1997, where the term “sustainable development” (可持續(xù)發(fā)展) first appears-this term has its roots in the Bruntland Report, also known as Our Common Future, which was published in 1987. By the year 2007, the notion of “ecological civilisation” first appeared in official Chinese discourse, promising a uniquely Chinese approach that had the potential to help guide humanity out of the current environmental disaster were are facing at present. Interestingly, although this idea has its origins in China, and generally conforms with the government’s previous ‘civilising discourses,’〔3〕the first usages of the term were inspired by an article that originated outside of China.

The first time the term ‘ecological civilisation’ in the Chinese language was in an article published in the Guangming daily in 1985, titled “The way to foster ecological civilisation in individuals under the conditions of advanced socialism.”〔4〕In this article it describes ecological civilisation as a system that synthesises social science with ecological studies, however, it is a brief overview of an article that originated by a Russian author of the former Soviet Union. This initial article, that actually uses the term ‘экологической культуры’ which translates into English as ‘ecological culture,’ stresses the negative effects of development on the environment, and emphasises the need of an understanding of ecology throughout society. It defines ecological culture as the interaction between society and nature, which takes in to consideration the modern understanding of ecology and the ecological demands of society.〔5〕Since its translation as 生態(tài)文明 or ‘ecological civilisation’ from this original article about ecological culture, the idea was adopted by academic LIU Zongchao, and has since been fleshed out into a body of work-what he calls the Su Jia (甦家) school of ecological civilisation- dedicated to remediating the environmental destruction that human development has had on the world. Since that time, other important contributions have been made on the topic, such as by JIA Weilie (also of the Su Jia school), and the work of the ‘Cla Jia’ scholars at Claremont Theological College in California, who have developed a framework called ‘Organic Marxism’ whose chief aim is to facilitate the transition to an ‘ecological civilisation’.

Whilst much of the literature on ecological civilisation promotes technological change-indeed technological change is an integral part-it is my view that its most crucial notion is that of the need for the wide-scale adoption of ecological values. This component is featured in the original Soviet-era Russian language article of 1984 which places a firm emphasis on the idea of values through fostering ecological culture. Thus in this regard the ‘civilisation’ of ‘ecological civilisation’ is best understood as a process of becoming civilised, that promotes the universal adoption of ecological values so that people can change their attitudes to the environment. It is only in moving away from the notion of man against nature-人定勝天-towards the notion of people being a part of nature-天人合一-that we can move away from our destructive tendencies and truly become ecologically civilised. The crucial factor that needs to change if we are to have any hope of success is that of values, of our attitudes towards the environment. This need is recognised by the Chinese government as evidenced by a policy document released in 2015 by the CCP Central Committee and the State Council titled “An Overall Plan for Ecological System Reform,”〔6〕which, alongside many technical measures, importantly addresses the problem of values. This is found in section 10 of the document, where in clause 55 it stipulates the need to foster ecological culture and to improve ecological awareness, alluding to the need for the promotion of ecological values amongst society.

It is important that we realise that the environmental problem is, at its core, a social problem. Whilst technological change is necessary, it is not sufficient, and must be coupled with the wide-scale adoption of an environmental ethic that would see us understand that our happiness and wellbeing is inextricably linked to the health of the planet, its diverse ecosystems and its myriad inhabitants. Until recently, the governments of the world have generally limited their response to environmental issues to technological changes, largely ignoring or ignorant of the fact that the environmental problem is a moral issue. It is encouraging to see that China is making positive moves in this regard, however, as the environmental problem is an international issue it does require international cooperation to be successful. The understanding that the environmental problem is a social problem has been long recognised by academics, however, until recently this revelation has not had much influence. Is there hope that the rebranding of this idea as ‘ecological civilisation’ may lead to positive change?

Ⅱ.How do we Become Ecologically Civilised

So with this understanding that, at its core, the notion of ecological civilisation is about values, how do we go about changing our relationship with the environment, understanding that we are part of the environment, so that we can live our lives in ways that nurture and foster the health of the environment and ecosystems? The idea of ‘ecological civilisation’ is novel in that it has its origins outside of the West, although there have been similar ideas in the past. As early as 1962, Bookchin wrote that:

Environmentally, we are a beleaguered species-not by natural forces that inflict material scarcity and toil as unavoidable features of the human condition, but by social forces that create irrational relations and requirements as utterly needless features of our lifeways.〔7〕

This passage alone shows that, over 50 years ago, the link between environmental degradation and society was firmly established in the Anglophone literature. Later, in 1971, Barry Commoner outlined his four laws of ecology, that: everything is connected to everything else; everything must go somewhere; nature knows best; and there is no such thing as a free lunch.〔8〕In 1981, Garrett Hardin published an article called ‘An Ecolate View of the Human Predicament,’ where he wrote that, on top of literacy and numeracy, human beings must learn “ecolacy,” a way of understanding nature by asking the question “and then what?”〔9〕- that the key to solving the environmental problem is an understanding of the interconnectedness of everything, and that every action has consequences. In 1989, Milbrath wrote of the need to create a new society that repudiates values that lead to environmental degradation in his work Envisioning a Sustainable Society.〔10〕

More recently, in 1997 when LIU Zongchao published his first book on ‘ecological civilisation,’〔11〕he also emphasised the needs for ecological values - 生態(tài)文明價值觀.〔12〕This has been a continuing theme in his work, and he still publishes prolifically to this day, along with others based at the ‘Beijing Academy of Eco-Civilisation’ in Beijing.〔13〕And just this year, Clayton and Heinzekehr produced their work Organic Marxism, which aims at creating an ‘ecological civilisation’ through a reimagining of Marxism based on four basic precepts: a rejection of historic determinism; a rejection of meliorism and utopian ideas; expanding the scope of analyses of production and capital to include the roles of ideas, beliefs, art and literature, philosophy and religion in addressing social inequity; and moving away from anthropomorphism, by including all living things and natural resources as relevant to the class struggle.〔14〕This list is hardly exhaustive, however, it is intended to demonstrate the point that the key concepts on which an ‘ecological civilisation’ can be built have been long established, and largely unheeded.

One of the benefits of the expression ‘ecological civilisation’ is that it can take on a double meaning. The first is that of a post-industrial stage of society, of an ecological civilisation that does not prioritise development over environmental integrity. The other denotes a process, of becoming ecologically civilised. In this, it meshes well with China’s existing ‘civilising’ discourse-the previous civilising campaigns of spiritual, material, and political-in that it seeks to mould the population to act in a matter mindful of the environment and the potential negative consequences of their actions. The issue, however, is that these ideas are clearly nothing new-thus, why is it that previous calls by academia have failed to resolve the issue of humanity’s negative impact on the environment? Will ecological civilisation be different? This is an open question, as the idea of an ecological civilisation is nascent, and its impact is yet to be determined as it is unfolding under our very eyes. At the very least, previous notions have arisen in a world where we still had time to be ignorant of the pending environmental catastrophe. Today, with such an enormous human population draining the world of resources, we are at the critical juncture where if we do not change our ways, much suffering and misery lies ahead.

Ⅲ.Ensuring The Success of Ecological Civilisation

There is much promise in the idea of becoming an ‘ecological civilisation’ (建設(shè)生態(tài)文明)-a lofty aspiration founded in the knowledge that we must, as a species, act responsibly towards the planet that provides our sustenance, that we must not only stop biting the hand that feeds us, but repair the generations of damage that we have inflicted. The failure of Western nations, who paved the way towards ‘development,’ in addressing this problem so far, whose solution has so far been to transfer the cost of the damage to the developing world,〔15〕is clear evidence that a new approach is needed. And whilst it may be natural for us to spend time laying the blame, the fact is that the matter is far too urgent to waste time pointing fingers. Further, as this problem is an international problem, its resolution requires international cooperation at all levels.

It is clear that the Chinese government understand that environmental health is crucial to the wellbeing of the people, and this is reflected in moves towards environmental remediation, and its official adoption of the notion of ‘ecological civilisation.’ What is unclear is whether or not the importance of the wide-scale adoption of ecological values is central to the plan for becoming an ‘ecological civilisation.’ Policy documents touch on the subject, but are especially technologically focused. Indeed, ecological values should be used to guide the development and implementation of remediation measures, be they technological, financial or otherwise, and these values need definition. As ‘ecological civilisation’ becomes popularised, it has become a catchcry for anyone involved in environmental remediation, regardless of their motivation. The success of ‘ecological civilisation’ as a concept lies in giving it a solid, official, and state-sponsored definition centred on the notion of ecological values in order to prevent it becoming meaningless.

〔1〕胡耀邦：“全面開創(chuàng)社會主義現(xiàn)代化建設(shè)的新局面”, (1982).

〔2〕James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis, “Atmospheric Homeostasis By and For the Biosphere: The Gaia Hypothesis,”Tellus 26, no. 1-2 (1974).

〔3〕See, for example: Dynon, Nicholas. “‘Four Civilizations’ and the Evolution of Post-Mao Socialist Ideology”, The China Journal, no. 60, (2008), pp.83-109.

〔4〕張擅：“在成熟社會主義條件下培養(yǎng)個人生態(tài)文明的途徑”, 光明日報, (1985).

〔5〕В. С. Липицкий, “ Пути формирования экологической культуры личности в условиях зрелого социализма,” Вестн. Моск. ун-та. Сер. 12, Теория научного коммунизма 2 (1984): p.43.

〔6〕中共中央國務(wù)院：“生態(tài)文明體制改革總體方案”, (2015).

〔7〕Bookchin quoted in Steven Best, “Murray Bookchin’s Theory of Social Ecology: An Appraisal of The Ecology of Freedom,” Organization & Environment 11, no. 3 (1998): p.336.

〔8〕Commoner, Barry. The Closing Circle: Nature, Man and Technology, Knopf: New York, 1971.

〔9〕Hardin, Garrett, ‘An Ecolate View of the Human Predicament,’ Alternatives, Vol 7, No 2, 1981.

〔10〕Milbrath, Lester. Envisioning a Sustainable Society: Learning Our Way Out, State University of New York Press: Albany, 1989.

〔11〕Interestingly, the term (in English) ‘ecological civilisation’ was first published in a book in English by Roy Morrison, in 1995, in his seminal work Ecological Democracy. This work was published in Chinese this year, see: 羅伊·莫里：《森生態(tài)民主》 綠色經(jīng)濟與綠色發(fā)展叢書，中國環(huán)境出版集團有限公司，2016.

〔12〕劉宗超：“生態(tài)文明觀與中國可持續(xù)發(fā)展走向”, p.31.

〔13〕See: http://stwmclub.org/.

〔14〕Clayton and Heinzekehr. Organic Marxism: An Alternative to Capitalism and Ecological Catastrophe, Process Century Press: Claremont, California, (2016), pp.64-7.

〔15〕This idea of cost-transference is attributed to Professor Wen Tiejun, in his acclaimed work 八次危機 (Eight Crises).