Conference in Shanghai, China on May 26-27, 2013
Collaboration Among Government, Market, and Society: Forging Partnerships and
Encouraging Competition
Organizers:
Fudan University School of International Relations and Public Affairs (SIRPA),
Shanghai, University of Maryland School of Public Policy (UMD), Association for
Public Policy Analysis and Management (APPAM)
Target Group: worldwide audience, including academics and professionals from universities,
think tanks, government agencies, nonprofits, and the private sector.
*
Paper ID 4438
Prof. Dr. Berthold Kuhn, Xiamen University, School of Public Policy, P.R. China
*
State-Market-Civil Society Collaboration in Promoting Low Carbon Policies and
Lifestyles in China
Abstract:
This paper argues that climate protection and the promotion of low carbon policies and
lifestyles require collaboration between state, market and civil society. The aggravation of the
pollution problem in many big cities and the growing media attention makes it likely that the
political authorities will formulate more policies, set incentives for the private sector and
become more responsive to initiatives of civil society organizations (CSO). Social media
facilitate awareness raising and monitoring by civil society and citizens. However, there is also
a risk of unrest and conflicts in the context of rising environmental concerns of citizens.
Reflections on an appropriate institutional mix to address climate protection may guide policy
makers to identify further actions including command-and-control, market-based and
awareness raising initiatives.
Key words: climate protection, collaborative governance, cooperation, co-production, civil
society, NGO, low carbon policies, low carbon lifestyles
1
1. Introduction
The issue of combatting pollution and protecting the climate is of high relevance for the political
authorities in the P.R. China at both the national and international level. Climate protection is a
complex and abstract issue but pollution problems are felt by a growing number of people living
in China. Many Chinese cities are exposed to serious environmental risks due to industrial
pollution, vehicle exhaust and lack of recycling of hazardous waste.
Media interest on the subject has increased. Reports on the pollution levels in Beijing made
world headlines in January 2013. The levels of greenhouse gas emissions reached record high
in 2011 measuring 392.2 parts per million (China Meteorological Administration 2012). The
rapid growth of Internet use and social media in China leads to much faster spread of
information and concerns among citizens.
The political leadership in the P.R China has recognized that combatting pollution requires a
degree of mobilization and commitment of political, social and economic forces and institutions.
The Central Government authorities and state agencies cannot achieve it without participation
of social forces and citizens. In China, like in other countries, the climate protection discourse is
still an elite-driven discourse. Sociological analysis may help to understand and, perhaps,
overcome limitations of elite-based approaches as Beck suggests in its theses on green
modernity (2012). The rich and the poor, the centre and the periphery are all concerned by
climate change and the consequences of climate change will further aggravate the rich-poor
divide (Beck 2012). Climate protection, thus, is not only an environmental policy issue but also
a challenge for the preservation of “social harmony”, the omnipresent term in Chinese political
and social discourse in the past decade.
China’s commitment to address environmental problems and climate protection issues is of
major global concern. China is the largest emitter of carbon-dioxide. Its emissions amounted to
more than 28 percent in the year 2011 (Spiegel Online 13.04.2013, CDIC 2013). The prospects
for binding agreements at the international levels are not very promising. Global summits have
not met the expectations. Climate governance at the global level is in a crisis situation.
Brunnengräber (2012: 21) writes on the “failure” (“Scheitern”) of international climate
negotiations. National interests dominate the agenda, the political will for financial transfers is
low and the scope of international agreements is limited (Brunnengräber 2012: 26). Glaeden
predicts that the management of promising expectations on global climate protection summits
by the United Nations may peter out (Bojanowski 2012).
The growing complexity and difficulty of international negotiations has met academic interest
across disciplines. Game theory has been applied to explain the failure of cooperative behavior
of states:
“Game theory suggests current climate negotiations won’t avert catastrophe”
(Rehmeyer 2012).
Experts and media observers voice their frustrations and argue in favor of more
emphasis on climate protection policies and action at local, national and regional level
2
(Bojanowski 2012). Game theorist Barret argues that “a more promising approach is to
negotiate smaller agreements including only some countries or some greenhouse gases,
and to use the threat of trade sanctions to enforce the agreements.” (Rehmeyer 2012).
Schreurs (2010) argues that cities and provinces may play a more important role in future
climate policies and linking their climate action plans to global initiatives.
The Chinese Government is carefully observing citizens’ and experts’ concern on pollution.
Worries have increased about possible trade sanctions linked to the non-participation in
international agreements on climate protection. China has passed a series of regulations,
formulated new policies and targets and designated low carbon pilot provinces and cities. The
private sector and non-governmental organizations are making their contributions in terms of
technology development, green investments, public private partnerships and CSR reporting.
Civil society organizations have built networks and are engaged in campaigns and projects at
various levels. Urban planning takes place with an increased focus on ecological issues. “Think
globally, act locally”; this famous phrase of grassroots activists and town planners is now
resounding among Chinese experts.
What are the potentials and limitations of different types of institutions and their cooperation in
the field of climate protection in China? This paper describes the roles and contribution of the
state, the private sector and civil society organizations and reflects on two questions of
relevance for the further transition path of China’s economic and social development.
First, will climate protection become a new area of growing government-private sector-civil
society cooperation or rather an area of potential conflicts of different stakeholders and
Government-citizen interaction?
Second, will the new policies and green model projects lead to a coherent multi-stakeholder
approach in addressing climate protection or will there be an increasing gap between different
regions and between some green show-case policies and dirty mainstream business as usual?
The prospects for progress and collaboration among different actors may look good at the first
glance. The Central Government pays increased attention to the topic. However, priorities of
regions and stakeholders may greatly vary across the country and the implementation record of
environmental policies has been mixed in the past decades. The magnitude of the problem
seems to require a new level of commitment of multiple stakeholders.
Reflections and analysis are based on literature review and on case studies. Theoretical
considerations refer to E. Ostrom, the pioneer of co-production concepts, and recent papers of
Pestoff, Meijer and Verschure/Brandsen/Pestoff. Reference is also paid to my previous works
on comparative advantages of state, market and civil society actors in development
cooperation (Kuhn 2005/2009).The case studies draw on experiences and results of three
recent initiatives of Xiamen University's new School of Public Policy.
The empirical evidence is gathered from the German-Chinese conference in climate protection
which addressed resource efficiency and waste policies from different disciplinary perspectives
in December 2012, one research project supported by Friedrich Ebert Foundation on climate
change awareness, role of NGOs and citizens participation and one research project on the
3
competence and role of different stakeholders in the field of climate protection in Xiamen
supported by Konrad Adenauer Foundation.
2. Cooperation and Co-production in the Field of Climate Protection
Elinor Ostrom, the pioneer of co-production theories, was an environmental economist. She is
known for her works on common resources and was awarded the Nobel Prize in 2009.
Academic research on co-production and the role of NGOs, however, has so far largely focused
on social sectors. The recently published special section on “Co-production – The State of the
Art” in Voluntas (Vol. 23, Nr. 4, Dec. 2012) covers mainly case studies in social services
(Pestoff 2012, Brandsen/ Heldermann 2012, Vamstad 2012, Meijer 2012).
Which lessons can be learned from theoretical considerations and empirical analysis of
co-production in social sectors? Pestoff (2012: 1107) provides a useful analysis of the
difference between co-governance and co-management. Co-governance takes place at the
decision making and input level while co-production and co-management take place at the
output level which is of relevance to the Chinese context. The Chinese political leadership has
largely recognized that some NGOs provide valuable services in line with Government policy
priorities, especially in the social sectors. The role of NGOs as agenda setters and advocacy
networks at the input level is much less recognized. The focus of Government-NGO interaction
in China has been on the output level for a long time, at least from the perspective of the
Government. The growing concern on environmental issues may enlarge the space for NGOs
in advocacy work and agenda setting.
The Chinese authorities may find it easier to embrace the co-production discourse than the
co-governance discourse. The latter may be seen as a challenge to the leadership role of the
party and the competence of the state administration. Co-production with its focus on the output
level and on citizens’ participation – as reflected in the dominant discourses in the US and
continental Europe (Pestoff 2012: 1107) – comes across as an opportunity for increasing the
effectiveness and efficiency of policy implementation. Thus, it seems more acceptable.
Pestoff (2012: 1112) also dwells on the issue of co-operative gambits: individuals sacrifice their
short-term personal interests for the sake of the long-term individual and group-benefits. With
reference to Ostrom (2000) he stresses that “rational egoist” are not the only players in real
world settings and people seem to be prone to pursue the cooperative gambit if certain
institutions exist (Pestoff 2012: 1112).
Further analysis of case studies in the social sector (Vamstadt 2012) provides evidence for the
lack of capacity by the public and the private for profit sector of childcare to promote greater
citizens participation and client-co-production. They encounter lower ceilings of co-production
levels by citizens than nonprofits. Such analysis support the crowding out argument
These empirical findings underscore E. Ostrom’s (1999/2000) analysis on how external
incentives may crowd out or crowd in behaviors that are based on intrinsic preferences. Civil
society organizations may be viewed as agents who harvest the intrinsic motivation of citizens
to volunteer, to engage and to co-produce public goods. The proposition of specific
4
comparative advantages, disadvantages and trade-offs of civil society organizations (Kuhn
2005/2009) is essential to identify the right institutional arrangements for mobilizing resources.
In China, the crowd in argument may be easier to accept for the political leadership than the
crowd out theory when reasoning about the level, the depth and breadth of government
engagement in social and environmental policies.
Meijer (2012) highlights that social media are a facilitator of co-production because the costs of
connecting to citizens have been reduced drastically and the new technologies create
opportunities to interact 24/7. The media hold the promise of strengthening co-production in an
information age. Meijer’s findings are relevant to the promotion of climate protection and low
carbon lifestyles, too. Climate protection is an abstract and complex issue. However, citizens
are exposed to problems of pollution, quality of food, water and waste issues. Social media may
play a significant role in facilitating quick information sharing on risks, good practices and
lifestyles. Blogs and tweets are also expressions of lifestyles. Many environmental and climate
protection activists are active bloggers. Social media provide opportunities for organizations
and experts to educate their peers and other citizens on policies, incentives and projects. Such
bottom-up approaches based on personal interactions of people build social capital and
contribute to altering perceptions of climate change from a global to a local problem (Adger
2010: 342). Linking individual and global responsibilities, consumption and production are ways
to more sustainable and climate friendly livelihoods
Climate protection through the promotion of low carbon policies and lifestyles requires linkages
between production, the supply side of goods and services, and consumption, the demand side
of goods and services. The recycling and upcycling discourse (Kay 1994 with reference to Pilz,
Pauli 1999) and the sustainable consumption and production discourse (Tukker et al. 2008)
have made valuable contribution to understanding the transformative power of citizens’
consumption priorities on environmental friendly and low carbon lifestyles.
“All economic activity, and hence the related environmental impacts, are driven by
consumption…. Mobility (car and air transport, including for holidays), food (meat and
dairy followed by the other types of food) and energy use in and around the home
(heating, cooling and energy using products) plus house building and demolition, cause,
on most environmental impact categories, together 70 to percent of the life-cycle
environmental impacts in society.” (Tukker et. el. Al. 2008: 1219)
Sustainable consumption and production is the theme of many policy frameworks and
programs stressing the multiple responsibilities of stakeholders in climate protection
engagement. The concept involves business, government, communities and households.
“The major innovation and strength of SCP is to provide a holistic approach that
integrates the whole life cycle of products and services, combines production and
consumption related practices… (United Nations ESCAP, www.greengrowth.org,
n.d.)”.
The United Nations have promulgated the concept and are support by many regional and
transnational organizations and programs, such as the SWITCH Asia program of the European
Union (Tukker et. Al. 2008). SWITCH-Asia is promoting Sustainable Consumption and
5
Production across the Asia region by addressing the policy level and working with producers
and consumers at the ground. Sixty-six projects in 16 Asian countries have been funded by the
end of 2012. An EU co-financed project in China aims to assist Chinese small and medium size
enterprises (SMEs) in their management of eco-efficiency, occupational health and corporate
social responsibility (CSR) measures (www.switch-china-sme.eu)
Nemeskeri/Mont (2008: 3) brought up relevant questions for future research on sustainable
production and consumption:
“Who are the key actors of the production and consumption system? What roles
do they assume? What drives their decisions and behaviors? What kind of
systemic conflicts arise amongst them?”
The playing field of the complex issues of sustainable consumption and production consist of
many institutional and individual actors.
“All institutional actors are also individuals in their different social and economic
roles, expertise and disciplines. Designers and engineers, people hooked on
creative ”games” and technology, mesmerised by the beauty and power they can
generate through technological answers to certain challenges,themselves drive
development to specific paths.” (Nemeskeri/Mont 2008:19)
While acknowledging that actors and individuals possess multiple identities and assume
various roles in society, the state-market-civil society model of distinguishing groups of
stakeholders shall provide the theoretical framework for the following further analysis.
The role of the state and the market are subject to many political, economic and social science
theories. Research efforts have also established ample evidence that it is possible and relevant
to develop theories of typical roles of civil society organizations and their comparative
advantages and dilemmas in partnerships with other organizations (Kuhn 2005/2009).
The role of the Government typically consists of introducing green policies, legislation,
regulations and setting different kinds of incentives for the private sector and civil society
organizations. Incentives may comprise tax policies, subsidies, preferential loans, procurement
rules, awards and project funding. The United Nations Economic and Social Commission for
Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) recommends the introduction of green taxes and budget reforms
(GTBR) as a fiscal policy instrument for improving eco-efficiency, public health and
environmental quality.
Almost all businesses, including small and medium sized industries, have the potential for
contributions to climate protection and promotion of low carbon lifestyle by creating new
products and services and by responding to new demand and consumption patterns. Industrial
and business associations can promote and disseminate best practices in cooperation with
policy makers at national and international level.
Civil society is the space where discourses on new trends, practices and lifestyles are spread
through the work of community based groups, associations and foundations dedicated to
protect the climate. Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) are playing the role of agenda
setters, peddlers of information (Jakimow 2012) and service providers. They enter into many
6
partnerships with government departments and companies to support them in program design
and implementation and in CSR related activities
Citizens contribute resources to climate protection in form of knowledge generation and
application (best practices, how to save energy?), time (extra time needed for garbage
separation and use of low carbon transport means) and money (investments in household
energy saving, purchase of low carbon products, participation in carbon-offset programmes).
The behavior of citizens is influenced by regulations, incentives and voluntary commitment.
Their lifestyle and choices of consumption make a difference at the personal, the community
and the society level. In a society with diversity of income levels, education levels, cultural
backgrounds and motivations it is easy to understand that command-and-control, market based
and awareness based mechanisms need to be combined to appeal to different people and
sections of society. Dissemination of information has become much easier in the age of
information.
3. State-Market-Civil Society Collaboration in China
China has enacted comprehensive environmental laws, formulated ambitious policies, set up
emission trading systems, created and mandated an array of institutions dealing with climate
protection issues and is one of the world’s biggest investors in renewable energies. It also hosts
a number of well recognized NGOs, some of which united in the China Civil Climate Action
Network (CCCAN). The country has an enormous potential for fruitful interaction to benefit
climate protection. It also faces major obstacles given the growth oriented paradigm of
economic policies in the past decades, the dependency on coal for its primary energy supply
and the disparity in income and density of population different regions.
Understanding and conceptualizing state-market-civil society collaboration in China is a
challenging venture. Francis (2001) observed that unorthodox interactions between the state
and the market are ubiquitous in China’s emerging market system. The situation may have
changed in some areas in the context of further transformation to a market economy. However,
the proliferation of ‘hybrid institutional forms’ is still high [Francis 2001: 279].
Striking a balance between the trap of the great divide (E. Ostrom) and overstretching
boundaries of institutions is one of today’s obvious challenges in Chinese economic and social
policies. The role of big state owned enterprises and the many emerging social enterprises
need to be taken into consideration when discussing the framework for collaboration and
co-production in China. However, the dominant political discourse on collaboration and
co-production in China seems one of pragmatism and adaptation to specific circumstances.
The number of policies, organizations, projects and initiatives to deal with climate protection
has risen in China in the past years. Strategies to address climate change mitigation include
command and control mechanism, market-based mechanism, research, educational and
awareness raising projects.
3.1 The Role of the State
In China, the political system may be associated with strong regulatory and governance powers
by the state, but there are great variations across different policy areas and sector.
7
“While China, for example, is able to control most parts of its vast territory, its
government lacks the capacity to enforce its own laws, particularly with regard to
environmental protection (Boerzel/Risse 2010: 119 with reference to Thauer
2009).
While China’s environmental legislation is generally appreciated considering the country’s short
environmental law history, it has also received criticism by legal experts. Beyer (2006) refers to
vague statutory language, overlapping and sometimes contradicting legislation administered by
agencies with varying commitments and experiences with formal legal process, local
protectionism, week courts, and week public participation. Tan Zhu/Kon-Che (2009) identify
plenty of scope to improve and refine the existing framework of Environmental Impact
Assessments (EIA) and recommend to encourage and summon more social organizations and
general public to participate in the management of EIA.
The issue of climate change has received growing attention over the past decades. China
signed the United Nations Framework Conventions on Climate Change in 1992, established a
National Climate Centre (1995), joined the Kyoto Protocol (1998), passed a National
Renewable Energy Law (2006), established a National Leading Group on Climate Change and
approved a National Climate Change Action Plan (2007), upgraded the State Environmental
Protection Agency (SEPA) to the rank of a full Ministry of Environmental Protection in 2008 and
designated low carbon-cities and provinces (2010).
Carbon emission trading systems were started in 2009 and led by the China Beijing
Environmental Exchange, Shanghai Environmental Energy Exchange and Tianjin Climate
Exchange.
China’s new 12th Five-Year Plan (2011–2015) includes new elements for a low-carbon
development pathway. China has made long term pledges to reduce greenhouse gas (GH)
emissions and issued emission reduction targets at both provincial and sector levels. The 12th
Five-Year-Plan aims to reduce the amount of carbon emitted per GDP unit by 17 percent by
2015 compared to 2010 levels.
The State Council published a new edition of a White Paper on China’s energy policy in
October 2012 outlining efforts to move toward clean energy and climate protection. The
Government has also addressed the problem of toxic and hazardous chemicals and will
introduce a management system to control the use of these chemicals by 2015.
The State Council plays the key role in policy formulation which is under the framework of the
national Five Year Plans. The National Development and Reform Commission with branches
at provinces and city level is the core policy coordinating body. The Ministry of Environmental
Protection and the Ministry of Sciences and Technology are the key players at the level of the
Ministries. However, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs still exercises influence at the international
level. It has a Special Representative for Climate Change Negotiations. Influential actors at the
local level are the Environmental Protection Bureaus and various departments in the field of
Economic Development, Construction, Transport, Sanitation, Sciences, Education, Agriculture,
Gardens, Forestry and Maritime Affairs.
8
Conrad describes China’s administrative battles, competing claims and growing mandates in
the arena of climate change policies as “bureaucratic land rush” (Conrad 2010).
“The example of China’s climate change policy vividly illustrates how bureaucratic
actors venture into new territories of bureaucratic turf, trying to build specific
expertise that allows them to take on additional responsibilities and thereby to
broaden their sphere of influence.” (Conrad 2010: 63)
In China, the role of the state is politically powerful in terms of agenda setting and policy
development. The Government uses command-and-control, market-based and other
incentives to address the issue of pollution and climate protection. Market based instruments
include trade-emission schemes, incentives through tax policies, subsidies, and preferential
access to loans and punitive measures.
Hu developed a set of recommendations for the Chinese Government on environmental
policies. What he calls “synoptic policies” is a rationale for introducing new government policies
based on market-based mechanisms (HU Wei 2009: 11)
“First, China’s government should harness the market to work for the environment,
not against it. Market forces have provided the foundation for the economic growth
of the past two decades. Properly harnessed, they can be major allies for a
cleaner future. Synoptic policy-making is different from market decision, but it can
utilize market mechanisms for sustainable development. This will require, for
example, adjusting prices to cover economic costs and incorporating social costs
of pollution through taxing environmental externalities.
Cao (2010) discussed different climate policy options and elaborated on the advantages of
market-based instruments:
“Market based instruments, in general, are more cost effective, more flexible, and
may provide consistent stimulus for firms to invest in low carbon technologies,
and for households to change their lifestyles with less reliance on energy use.”
(Cao 2010: 126)
The subsidies and incentives provided by the Chinese central and local governments are
sometimes criticized as unfair competition by other countries. The solar industry has suffered
from punitive duties and exports dropped 35 percent year-on-year in 2102. SunTech Power
Holdings Co., the first and world largest solar panel manufacturer, has undergone bankruptcy
reorganisation (Li Jiabao/China Daily: 26.03.2013: 13).
Nevertheless, Chinas rapid growth of the renewable energy sector has set an encouraging
example and national and international level (Liguang Liu 2013). Jänicke (2010) included
China’s climate policy, in particular the promotion of wind energy, in his best practice analysis.
China introduced pollution liability insurance in the coal industry and subsequently extended it
to other industries. Special guidelines were issued for the petro-chemical and heavy metal
industries in March 2013. Those enterprises which operations are not covered by the
insurance scheme encounter restrictions and difficulties in the approval of their projects’
environmental impact assessment. Implementation and monitoring of policies, especially in
economically backward provinces, is relatively weak and prone to corruption. The large
9
territory, the economic and cultural diversity of the regions and the decentralized economy
make policy implementation and evaluation difficult. However, Chinese authorities have used
various methods to persuade companies to disclose, including laws, regulations, indexes and
ratings, as well as ‘naming and shaming’ polluters (Loh 2012: 61)
Provinces have made green development commitments following the annual sessions of the
National People’s Congress (NPC) and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative
Conference (CPPCC) including the reduction of cutting carbon emissions, planting more trees
and raising public awareness about environmental protection.
The enormous challenges of climate protection are also supposed to be addressed in the
context of the proposed quality urbanization process and the realization of compact city
models. Pilot provinces and cities are supposed to set examples for processes of
modernization with focus on green technologies and life styles. The concept of environmental
model cities is now firmly established (Schroers 2010: 98). NDRC launched a national
low-carbon province and low carbon city experimental project in 2010 covering the provinces
of Guangdong, Liaoning, Hubei, Shaanxi and Yunnan and the eight cities of Tianjin,
Chongqing, Shenzhen, Xiamen, Hangzhou, Nanchang, Guiyang and Baoding. Activities are
supposed to include the development of a low carbon development plan, low carbon industrial
and transport projects and promotion of low carbon lifestyles.
3.2 The Role of the Private Sector
China is extensively involved in global supply chains and the world’s major manufacturer for
many products. It hosts some of the most polluting enterprises in the world. China ranks first in
chemical industrial output value. The production levels of pesticides, dyestuff, methanol and
chemical fertilizers are all the highest in the world (Wu Wencong/China Daily; Guideline uses
market approach to curb pollution, 22.02.2013: p. 3)
China’s private sector has grown enormously following the reform and open-door policies after
1978. Private companies now account for three fourth of Chinese companies. Investments in
research and development are high and most major multinational companies are represented
in mainland China and Hong Kong. The private sector is under constant pressure to meet the
high expectations and cope with new regulations set by the political leadership in terms of
technological improvement, environmental standards and insurance schemes. It also faces the
challenge to avoid rows over environmental standards and copyright issues at the international
level and to deal with fierce competition of other emerging economies in the region. In sum, the
private sector in China experiences a high paced development. In terms of technology
development and marketing, the Chinese private sector may benefit from research done by
manufacturers in countries that adopted regulations earlier and possess experience with
marketing of low carbon products. Mehdi (2009: 26) has drawn such conclusions with regard
to regulations in the car manufacturing industry.
The political leadership has meanwhile adopted a clear vision of technological upgrade and
greener growth. However, regional visions and policies on development vary greatly.
Economically backward provinces still attract environmentally harmful industries while
prosperous regions and pilot cities showcase low carbon projects, especially in the field of
industrial production, transport and construction.
10
The traditional view of the private sector in China is that environmentalism and economic
development are opposing forces (Ward/People’s Daily Online: 14 .03.2013). Like in other
economies increased regulations and taxes are perceived as a burden by the private sector.
The traditional view has been challenged by project factoring the costs of environmental
degradation into economic growth projections. According to assessments by the World Bank
(2012: An Analytical Framework for inclusive Growth: p. 29), the costs to China’s economy
incurred due to environmental degradation account for about 9 percent of the country’s total
GDP, with a growing tendency. Some experts estimate it to be much higher.
Today there is growing evidence that the views are changing and top level industries are
prepared to address the issues of climate protection, especially consumer-facing companies.
The motivation comes from investors, NGOs and consumers who inquire about environmental
standards and carbon footprints (Loh 2012: 54). China’s first voluntary carbon trade took place
in 2009. Tianping Auto Insurance purchased credits generated by a green commuting
campaign during the Beijing Olympics (Qin Tianbao 2012: 77). Voluntary emission trading has
received approval and support by the Government and leading companies.
Multinational consulting companies have addressed the issue of climate change in
cooperation with business leaders in China and worldwide. The annual Global Chief Executive
(CEO) Survey of PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PwC) finds that among China/HK CEOs 33
percent cite climate change as one of their key global risks, ahead of 27 percent of CEOs in
the global sample. 28 percent factored climate change risks explicitly into strategic planning
against 26 percent of CEO globally. According to the survey four in ten companies plan to
increase their investment in addressing the risks of climate change and protecting biodiversity
over the coming three years. Chinese/HK CEOs are starting to move towards global
leadership in climate change mitigation. (Loh 2012 with reference to PwC’s 2011.
The Sustainability Maturity Curve (SMC) developed by PwC (Loh 2012: 78) illustrates different
phases of development of companies, from compliance, to operational effectiveness, to
leverage and to leadership and from risk management to managing for value to strategic
advantage. The model serves as an analytical framework for consulting services to major
corporations in China. The potential and costs to reduce emissions vary across business
sectors. KPMG developed a chart showing relatively high emission intensity and low cost
reduction costs in in mining, utilities, property and the automotive sector (KPMG China 2011/
KPMG Australia).
Columbia University, Tsinghua University and McKinsey developed an “Urban Sustainability
Index: A New Tool for Measuring China’s Cities” in 2010 which is designed to measure relative
performance of Chinese cities across a set of sustainability categories and indicators
(www.urbanchinainitiative.org).
The role of the private sector in protecting the environment involves many aspects. One key
aspect is technological development, marketing and sales of renewable energy sources and
clean technologies. The policy environment in China provides many stimuli for the private
sector to invest in green technologies. China aims to generate 15 percent of energy supply
from renewable sources by 2020. The source of energy supply is an important factor. While
electric forms of transportation such as electric cars, bikes and railways may make more
11
efficient use of electricity and reduce vehicle emissions, their overall impact on carbon dioxide
depends on how clean the source of electricity is (Loh 2012).
The private sector is involved in up-grading infrastructure, phasing out polluting low technology
plants, retrofitting and weatherizing old buildings. Companies operating in China are expected
to become more and more transparent and accountable. The Ministry of Environment issued
guidelines to Environmental Information Disclosure of listed companies, targeting 16 pollution
sectors (Loh 2012: 64). The number of CSR reports in China has increased over the years and
reached 1000 CSR reports in 2000, an increase by 30 percent compared to 2010. 58 percent
are state owned enterprises. Standards have been developed but the quality of many reports
needs improvement according to expert opinion by Guo Peiyuan of SynTao, a Chinese CSR
consulting firm. Reporting formats in the context of Corporate Social Responsibility include
environmental and social compliance issues and inventories of toxic substance release
(Peiyuan 2005). At the local level, social enterprises may lead community level ventures to
showcase environmental concerns following the slogan Planet before Profit.
The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), a multi-stakeholder initiative, has developed a
framework on environmental, social and governance aspects, the ESG standard. Indicators for
ESG reporting include energy efficiency, carbon emissions, biodiversity targets, water usage,
natural resource use, recycling practices and waste to energy. ESG reporting has spread in
China and the first ESG index was launched in September 2010.
Another reporting system which related directly to climate protection is the Carbon Disclosure
Project (CDP) which requires companies to disclose data and information on greenhouse gas
emissions, water management and climate change strategies.
The climate disclosure standards board acts as a forum or collaboration on how existing
standards and practices can be linked to financial and climate change related reporting and
respond to regulatory developments.
The United Nations Global Compact is another high level initiative which seeks to increase the
commitment of the private sector to address environmental and social issues. The Dow Jones
Sustainability Index based on a best-in-class approach is another stimulus for companies to
engage more in sustainable development. International rankings complement the stimuli for
Chinese companies. Newsweek published a Green Ranking of Chinese companies in 2011.
Certifications and green audits (Loh 2012: 65). Dow Jones launched a new sustainability index
targeting emerging markets in February 2013 (www.greenbiz.com).
There are many initiatives worth noting in China but it would be too early to say that climate
protection has been mainstreamed into strategy development and operational management of
Chinese companies. Low quality reporting, outsourcing of dirty production and even corruption
still seem to be widespread.
3.3 The Role of Civil Society and NGOs
Civil society, the sphere between the state and the market, comprises initiatives and
organizations that engage in activities of mutual or public benefit through delivery of services
or advocacy work (Kuhn 2005, Kuhn 2006, www.civicus.org). The concept of civil society has
gained importance in China over the past decade, in particular in the area of social and
12
environmental work. The term civil society organizations (CSO) with its broader focus on
initiatives and organizations within the realm of civil society is now widely used in European
Union policy dialogue. However, in China the term civil society is still somewhat sensitive
outside the academic sphere. This paper refers to civil society organizations (CSO) in
reference to concepts relating to initiatives from the wider arena of civil society. It uses the term
NGO in describing the role of non-state and not-for-profit organizations, including shehui tuanti
or shetuan (associations), minban fei qiye danwei, also known as min fei (non-profit
enterprises) and jijinhui (foundations). The number of registered NGOs increased in China
over the past decade in a significant way – approximately ten percent per year – amounting to
close to 500 000 registered non-profit organizations (shehui tuanti, jijinhui, minfei).
Civil society in China is still curtailed by an unfavorable political and regulatory environment
(inherited from an authoritarian old-fashioned-style communist regime suspicious of economic
and social initiatives outside the realm of the party and the state). The successful introduction
and scaling up of reform policies from 1978 onwards under the political leadership of Deng
Xiaoping have transformed China into a modern and more open society. However, trust
between political authorities and NGOs is still relatively low and public opinion’s skepticism
seems to have grown after the recent charity scandal involving the Red Cross in 2011. The
scandal has sparked new debates on NGO regulation and certification as means to build trust.
Economic development has brought new opportunities and challenges for which the state
administration seeks support of experts and citizens initiatives. Many NGOs have benefited
from cooperation with Government departments, partnerships with business and international
cooperation in terms of financial support, project cooperation and networking. Reform
measures to ease registration for grassroots NGOs and to step up funding and project
cooperation at the municipal level are under way in some cities, especially in Shenzhen, but are
not yet implemented across the country. Political authorities still shy away from passing more
liberal legislation. Associations, foundations and non-profit enterprises are still governed by
provisional regulations and are relatively closely supervised. Fundraising is more restricted
than in many other countries. The number of registered NGOs is still growing and cumulative
figures of different legal types of organizations have almost reached 500 000 by the end of
2012.
Many environmental NGOs have made their voices heard beyond the neighborhood and
community level. Their expertise is recognized by political authorities at different levels. They
have participated in international conferences and engage in exchange and cooperation with
the state administration at different levels. More Chinese civil society organizations participated
in the Rio+20 conference than on previous world summits.
“In 2012, Chinese civil society went to Rio to show to the world what is happening
in terms of sustainable development initiatives implemented by civil society in
China.” (Schroeder 2012).
Some of Chinese environmental NGOs have included climate protection in their agenda and
set up joint initiatives to address the issue and network at transnational level. The China
Climate Change Action Network (CCCAN) includes some renowned NGOs such as the
13
Chinese Association for NGO Cooperation (CANGO), Friends of Nature, Environmental and
Development Institute, Global Village Beijing, Green Earth Volunteers, Xiamen Green Cross
Association and Chinese Youth Climate Action Network. Chinese NGOs have been involved in
many projects related to awareness raising and education in the field of sustainable
consumption.
NGO networks also seek to influence government policies. The Zero Waste Alliance, a
partnership of NGOs focuses on urban waste issues and is led by Friends of Nature, Beijing.
Through a network of NGOs – the nationwide “Zero Waste Alliance” (ZWA) – aims to promote
zero waste policies for the national circular economy and to promote local actions to avoid and
reduce waste by involving relevant stakeholders, including NGOs, research institutions and
Universities, government departments, as well as citizens. It is just one example of a civil
society initiative aiming at influencing policy making. Civil society organizations have also
voiced their opinion on the Renewable Energy Law. The Chinese Renewable Energy Society
has been actively involved in the research and drafting of the renewable energy laws,
regulations, technical norms and standards.
There are growing signs for successful advocacy work of NGOs in China. NGOs played a role
in successfully lobbying for disclosures of air pollutants by Chinese cities (Loh 2012). NGO
networks
have
also
criticized
Multi-National
Companies
(MNC)
through
a
naming-and-shaming initiative of Chinese NGOs.
“A recent high-profile example of name-and-shame tactics is that of Chinese
NGOs that banded together in April 2012 to accuse 46 Multinational Companies
and Chinese brand owners and retailers of sourcing from suppliers that have
violated Chinese environmental laws by discharging polluted water. The brands
included Adidas, Armani, Calvin Klein, Carrefour, Nike and Zara (Loh 2012: 40).
Furthermore, civil society organizations play a role in influencing technology development and
lifestyles. One of the best known and successful campaigns is GreenFreeze, Greenpeance’s
campaign to transform the refrigeration and cooling industries by eliminating the use of fluorine
gases which were developed a replacements for Chloroflourocarbons but are strong
greenhouse gases. Led by Greenpeace Germany, the organizations has transformed the
refrigeration industry in Europe and Asia. The campaign has become a huge success of
Greenpeace and for the protection of the climate though the small size company in the former
Democratic Republic of Germany which produced the first fluorine free fridges in co-operation
with Greenpeace has not been able to survive in market. The story of success (of the campaign)
and the failure (of the company) illustrates the potentials and limitations of civil society
initiatives in exemplary manner and underscores the theory of typical strengths, weaknesses,
potentials and problems of state, market and civil society organizations (Kuhn 2005/2009).
Many civil society organizations are led by charismatic leaders outside the political and
economic realm of power and money, and carry a good influence on lifestyles. There are many
examples in China. Two of them are Hao Xin, founder and chief executive of Green Zhejiang,
Hangzhou and Ma Tiannan, founder of Green Cross, Xiamen. Both are relatively young and
14
very active social media communicators and have spread their ideas across the boundaries of
their cities and provinces.
Bourdieu (1984) taught us that consumption patterns do not only reflect need and greed but
also affirm social and cultural norms. Barthes (1990) elaborated on the social and cultural
meanings of consumption in the context of the fashion system. Schuetzenmeister (2010: 272)
points out that the mainstream marketing industry in developed countries is already targeting
well-off and middle income consumers with products reflecting a Lifestyle of Health and
Sustainability (LOHAS).
The symbolic power of consumption patterns as concept of social distinction is currently
receiving renewed attention by sociologists. Studies on consumption have long been
influenced by the works of Adorno and Horkheimer (1947/2002) on the cultural industry
(“Dialectic of Enlightment”) who regarded it chiefly as an easy pleasure of popular culture.
Bourdieu’s works on habitus and distinction have laid the ground for a differentiated analysis of
consumption patterns. Ulrich (2013) views consumption as a cultural technique emphasizing
conscious choice of consumers even for products of daily life.
While lifestyles are influenced by multiple factors, including financial means, social status and
education, we shall not assume that higher education or awareness on climate protection
issues correspond with a low carbon lifestyle. Diekmann/Preisendoerfer (1992, 1999) have
conducted several social experiments to show discrepancies between aspirations and reality in
environmental behavior. Findings of a survey by Green Beagle (2012) among households in
China confirm that higher income level correspond with higher carbon footprints.
One of the major discrepancy between environmental and climate protection discourse in
China and richer Western countries is the almost non-existence of the voluntary simplicity
discourse in China. Given the many decades of deprivation and the still predominant economic
catch-up mentality in China and many developing and transition countries, it seems still far
away that movements like the voluntary simplicity movement (Maniates 2002) appeal to the
mainstream Chinese consumer. However, even if it may not reach “the mainstream consumer”,
the diversification of life styles may still have some positive environmental consequences as
observed in the trendy low carbon city of Xiamen where riding the bicycle, consuming healthy
food and keeping the environment clean seems popular.
On the one hand, a growing number of citizens seem to reflect more about their lifestyles. On
the other hand, citizens are also voicing their concerns and engage in protest movement. The
number of environmental protests has significantly grown over the past years. Serious protests
and clashes occurred in Dongyang in 2005. In Xiamen, protests forced the relocation of a
chemical plant in 2007. In Guanxi Zhuang autonomous region, more than 1000 villagers
marched on the streets to protest against pollution caused by an aluminum plant in 2010. The
year 2012 saw protests in Shifang in Sichuan province, Qidong in Jiangsu province and Ningbo
in Zhejiang province. Over 300,000 petitions were received on environmental matters during
the 11th Five Year Plan period prompting 2614 administrative decisions to be re-examined
(Feng Jie/Wang Tao/China Dialogue: 6.12.2012). One of the hottest issues in China is the
existences of so-called “cancer villages”. The term has been readily used by the media and the
15
Ministry of Environment acknowledged the problem (Mosbergen/The Huffington Post
23.02.2013).
It is difficult for Chinese NGOs to strike a balance between supporting environmental concern
of citizens and maintaining good relations and cooperation with the government. Recent NGO
history in China demonstrates the pitfalls of successfully aligning with protest movement.
Yunnan province has once been considered to be among the most progressive provinces in China in
terms of freedom and scope for NGO activity (Kuhn 2006). Many success stories of government-NO
cooperation developed after the 1996 earth quake. However, government-NGO relations have
witnessed a period of growing mistrust after the successful protest movement against the Nu river dam
project.
More recently, waste management issues, in particular incineration plant projects, have become an area
of potential conflicts and sparked protests in several cities, including Beijing and Guangzhou. The
protests, however, have also led to intensified research and dialogue activities on the issue. Recycling
and waste management were the topics of the second Xiamen conference in December 2012 (see 4.1).
The Role of the Media
Chinese media reporting on environmental and climate protection issues has increased as
perceived by experts of different background (Kuhn/Zhang 2012). This corresponds with
growing concerns of citizens (Hong 2012, Kuhn/Zhang 2012). Chinese media seldom criticize
past or present policies of the Government. The media in China, in particular the big traditional
media corporations, have not the same degree of independence as Western media. They
have closer ties with political authorities. The growing media interest on environmental and
climate protection issues, however, reflects the rising concerns of citizens and is taken
seriously by the political leadership. The following excerpt from China Daily illustrates such
increased attention:
“Journalists usually report social changes, but sometimes they signify the
changes themselves. Recently, journalists flocking to a news conference on the
environment outnumbered – for the first time – those at the conference about the
economy on the sidelines of the ongoing annual meetings that bring together
Beijing’s legislators and political advisers. That reflects the growing focus of the
public: Beijingers increasingly care about the environment instead of economic
growth.” (Cao Yin/JinHaixing/China Daily 25.1.2013: 7)
The use of social media is widespread and fast growing due to cheaper costs and high affinity
to new technologies. This facilitates peer-to-peer interaction and dissemination of news and
scandals, including pollution levels.
The website http://aqicn.info/city/ provides frequently updated information on city pollution
levels. Air Quality China and China Air Quality Index are popular smart phone applications.
“Environment becomes a priority. Public focus has shifted in recent years, especially with heavy
smog in the capital (Cao Yin/Jin Haixing/China Daily 25.1.2013: p. 7) reads a headline of China
Daily in January 2013. The Ministry of Environment announced stricter standards to improve air
16
quality in March 2013. About 1500 monitoring sites are supposed to set up n all prefecture-level
cities by the end of 2015 (Wu Wencong/China Daily 16/17.03.2013: p. 3).
New media are an important factor for raising awareness on pollution and other climate related
information as they reduce costs of information sharing drastically.
Meijer elaborates on their role as facilitator of both individualized and community forms of
co-production (Meijer 2012: 1170). He argues that new media also transform practices by
making communication more playful (Meijer 2012:1169). However, patronizing of social media
by political authorities, Government departments or other expert groups may be
counterproductive. Meijer (2012: 1170) refers to arguments of Habermas 1994 when
discussing public space
4. Three Examples
Climate change awareness, the role of different kinds of institutions and the potential of
citizens’ contributions are still under-researched areas but receive growing attention. The
following cases provide insights into initiatives by Xiamen University’s School of Public Policy
on climate protection issues. The examples of two climate protection conferences and the
climate protection network study in Xiamen show that state-market-civil society interaction in
climate protection is still at an infant stage. The topic is complex and sensitive and cuts across
bureaucratic turf of different agencies. There is, however, a fair degree of openness when it
comes to exchange of ideas and good practices. Growing citizens’ concerns of pollution issues
and acknowledgment by the political leadership may lead to more state-market-civil society
co-operation in the near future. The study on climate change awareness, the role of NGOs and
citizens’ participation which was based on an expert survey and dialogue events confirms the
growing media attention to climate protection issue and the relevance of social media. This
study underscores the dominant role of the Government as change agent for awareness
raising, policy formulation and implementation. However, it provides evidence that NGOs also
play an important role in raising awareness on the complex and abstract issues of climate
protection by relating it to people’s daily life through interaction with citizens. Furthermore,
green volunteer work seems to have a good potential in China, especially according to the
assessment of younger experts.
4.1 Climate Protection Conferences in Xiamen
The title of the first conference organized in the low carbon city of Xiamen in December 2012
was: The way after Rio+20: Sustainable economic development though improved resource
efficiency and climate protection. This Chinese-German conference was followed by an
exposure visit to the waste management facilities of the city and another conference on waste
management in the context of climate protection.
The purpose of the two subsequent conferences was to invite academics and practitioners
from different academic disciplines and professional background to discuss political-regulatory
17
frameworks in China and Germany, to learn from good practices of sustainable development
with focus on resource efficiency in China and Germany and to discuss contributions from
society to sustainable economic development and resource efficiency. The second conference
focused on sustainable waste management in the context of climate protection.
What are the lessons learnt from these conferences? The conference organizers experienced
that climate protection is still a sensitive topic, especially in the context of international
cooperation. Approval of three Ministries and the National Development and Reform
Commission (NDRC) was required and only obtained shortly before the event. The innovative
concept of the conference to discuss the issue not only among academics but also with
representatives from Government, private sector, NGOs, media, including bloggers proved to
be intellectually stimulating and enlarged the horizon of many participants but it was also made
clear that this could be classified as an exceptional activity.
Exchanges across disciplines, between different types of institutions and experts of different
backgrounds are rare, especially in China. This is a limiting factor for developing and
spreading new ideas and products of technology development and to increase awareness and
coproduction of goods and services. Exceptions are only highest level global conferences and
expositions which do not need approvals by national level authorities and attract experts and
activists from different backgrounds. Consequently such global summits seem to be evaluated
more positively by Chinese than by international experts as the following expert survey project
found out.
4.2 Study on Climate Protection Network Xiamen
This study aimed at understanding the development of climate protection policies in the city of
Xiamen which is today one of eight pilot low carbon cities in China. It was supported by the
Konrad Adenauer Foundation, Germany. Xiamen is a relatively wealthy city and was
designated special economic zones in the 1980s. The green image of Xiamen fits well with its
natural beauty and the promotion of tourism. Following new policies at the central government
level from the mid-1990s onwards, the city has passed a series of laws and regulations to curb
carbon dioxide emissions. It has launched campaigns and activities in the field of low carbon
industrial production, low carbon traffic and green energy construction. Waste prevention and
recycling are not yet among the priority areas of low carbon policies. Responsibilities under the
city's top leadership spread over a number of departments. The Economic Development
Bureau and Xiamen Development and Reform Commission are amongst the key actors.
Others include the Construction Office, Garden and Forests, Environment and Sanitation,
Science and Technology, Maritime Affairs and Agriculture. The allocation of specific tasks
between the departments, the steering process and coordination mechanisms remains
opaque. The research indicated that coordination and communication between the various
departments and with other stakeholder would need improvement if Xiamen aims to maintain
its status as one of the model low carbon cities in China.
4.3 Study on climate change awareness, role of NGOs and citizens’s participation in
China
18
This study was based on an expert survey and dialogue sessions with researchers and
practitioners from June 2012 to March 2013. It analyzed key factors and institutions that
influence citizens’ attitudes and their participation in climate protection in China. The findings
are based on a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the survey carried out by the School of
Public Affairs and School of Public Policy of the University of Xiamen among different groups
of 133 Chinese and foreign environmental and climate protection experts. The survey analysis
was complemented by interviews with key experts from different Chinese cities and focus
group discussions conducted in December 2012 Beijing and in March 2013 in Chengdu.
The findings suggest that the current attention paid to climate change is not as low as initially
presumed by the research team. Media attention has contributed most to raise awareness but
Government policies and laws follow closely. The fast growing social media communications in
China are already seen as an important factor regarding the growing awareness of citizens on
environmental and climate protection issues. The factor Government (political system, law,
policies) figures – together with the factor Citizens’ Awareness and Education – highest with
regard to obstacles to climate change awareness although the more pro-active policies of the
Government are recognized.
The answers confirm the general trend that the Government is
the key reference point for respondents.
The differences between the expert categories are pronounced on the question of the impact
on the Rio+ 20 summit on the climate change discourse in China. Despite the relatively small n
(133), a statistically significant difference occurs between the positive evaluation of the group
of Chinese researchers (3.20) and the low level of evaluation of international experts (2.0).
All expert groups regard the role of the Government (political freedom, regulations, policies) as
most crucial factor for the potential of NGOs role in climate protection. However, the factors
“own capacity and competence”, “own image and identity in society” and “citizens support”
also rank high among the challenges for NGOs. The 26 degree campaign that advocated not
to cooling down the room temperature in summer below 26 degree received the second
highest number of nominations, including nominations from international experts.
The potential of individual contributions of citizens’ to climate protection in the area of
consumption, transport and at household level is assessed between low and medium. The
potential for voluntary work receives a higher assessment, especially among young Chinese
experts with limited international experience. The cost factor is regarded as a decisive
obstacle to citizens’ participation according to all experts (mean 3.98). Experts refer more often
to NGO activities than to other factors when asked about the potential of institutions/
organizations to promote citizens’ participation.
The findings point generally in the same direction as other research projects, including recent
population surveys of Hong (2012) and Green Beagle (2012): Climate change awareness is on
the rise in China but it does not yet rank among top concerns. Media attention is growing. The
role of institutions matters a lot. Government policies and papers provide evidence for more
emphasis on sustainable development issues in the national level policy planning. Climate
change, however, is still a contested issue and of more abstract nature than other
environmental issues. Experts opinionated that the combination of top down and bottom up
19
initiatives may yield positive results. However, there may be significant local and regional
variations regarding the follow up and quality of implementation among different cities and
regions.
5. Conclusions
Climate Protection requires contributions from the state, from market players and from civil
society organizations. The complex and abstract issue of climate protection needs to be
tackled with a variety of measures from different angles. China has demonstrated interest and
willingness to take a series of actions including command-and-control, market-based and
awareness raising initiatives. Some of them, such as the designation of low carbon provinces
and cities and the launch of emission trading schemes, are still in an infant stage with regard to
standardized bench marking and effective supervision. Cooperation between state, market
and civil society has been promoted by some dialogue events but professional and sectoral
boundaries are still an obstacle to comprehensive partnerships for climate protection and the
effective implementation of low carbon policies. China’s deep involvement in global supply
chains and its growing role in world politics may provide incentives for the political leadership
to demonstrate political commitment. The potential for social unrest related to pollution issues
should not be underestimated. The term “cancer villages” has been spread by media of all
kinds. The growing use of social media may play a facilitating role for spreading information as
already observed during the air pollution crisis in Beijing in January 2013.
The following chart illustrates some essential roles of different types of institutions which may
guide decision-makers in identifying an appropriate institutional mix to address climate
protection. The different roles and activities need continued refection and assessment,
dialogue and exchange in order to adjust the tasks to specific problems, capacities and
potentials of actors.
The needs and constraints, the potentials and limitations of co-operation and co-production
20
should be assessed in the framework of the co-existing and overlapping spheres of
state-market-civil society organizations in China.
Hybrids
While the government and the state administration are powerful in China, the communist
leadership has recognized that market-based approaches and civil society activities have to
play an essential role in the process of transformation from the traditional growth model to the
green growth model of economic development. Hybrids – state-owned enterprises, social
enterprises and government-organised-NGOs (GONGOs) – receive special attention in China,
and elsewhere. Blending sectoral boundaries is considered to be an “institutional innovation”.
Operational reality of hybrid organisations often looks more sober. Hybrids are sometimes
accused of unfair competition, undue tax privileges and political patronage as they seek to
capitalize on multiple privileges. The case of the “Treberhilfe” in Berlin discredited the term
social enterprise in Germany a few years back. While recognizing the trap of the great
state-market divide (Ostrom, E. 1999), theories of comparative advantages and disadvantages
of different types of institutions (Kuhn 2005/2009) provide valuable guidance for designing an
appropriate climate protection policy mix. The ability of a society to protect the climate is
ultimately coupled with changes in life styles, with the prevention, re-use, recycling and
upcycling of waste, the use of low carbon transport, energy saving, and more conscious
consumption patterns. The creation of new trends and life styles takes place in the process of
dialogue, exchange and networking among state actors, market players and civil society
organisations.
Social media often play an important facilitating role. The level of motivation and commitment
of stakeholders is usually higher in the framework of co-production of goods and services than
in situations where most stakeholders are relegated to passive roles. The prospects for the
successful implementation of climate protection policies will depend on a deepened
understanding of the potentials and limitations of different kinds of stakeholders and
institutions, including the role of NGOs.
21
Bibliography
Adger, W. Neil (2010), Social Capital, Collective Action, and Adaptation to Climate Change, in:
Voss, Martin (ed.): Der Klimawandel. Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven, Wiesbaden: VS
Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, pp.327-346.
Adorno, Theodor W./Horkheimer, Max (1947/1972/2002 trans. Jephcott, Edmund): Dialektik
der Aufklaerung/Dialectic of Enlightenment. Stanford: Stanford UP (2002).
Barrett, Scott (2006), Environment and Statecraft: The Strategy of Environmental
Treaty-Making, Oxford University Press.
Barthes, Roland (1990), The fashion system, Berkeley: University of California Press .
Beck, Ulfrich (2012), Klima des Wandels oder Wie wird die gruene Moderne moeglich?, in:
Welzer, H./Soeffer, H.-G./Giesecke, D. (eds.) KlimaKulturen, Frankfurt a.M.: Campus, pp:
33-48.
Beyer, Stefanie (2006) Environmental Law and Policy in the People’s Republic of China, in:
Chinese Journal of Environmental Law, Vol. 5, No. 1, 185-211.
Boerzel, Tanja/Risse, Thomas (2010), Governance without a state: Can it work?, in:
Regulation & Governance (2010) 4, 113–134
Bojanowski, Axel (2012), Forscher fordern Ende der Weltklimagipfel, Spiegel Online
13.12.2012.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1984), Distinction. Cambridge: Harvard University Press
Brunnengräber, Achim (2012), Die neue Klima-Geopolitik. Konflikte und Chancen im
Klimaschutz durch Deutungsverschiebungen, in: Forschungsjournal Soziale Bewegungen,
Heft 2, Juni 2012, 21-28.
Cao Jing (2010), Reconciling Economic Growth and Carbon Mitigation: Challenges and Policy
Options in China; in: Asian Economic Policy Review, Vo. 5, Issue 1, June 2010, 110-129.
Cao Yin/JinHaixing/China Daily (25.1.2013).
Proposal would have Beijing Vehicles Tracked,
p. 7
Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) (2013), cdiac.ornl.gov
China Meteorological Administration 2012: Annual China Greenhouse Gas Bulletin 2012,
Beijing.
Conrad, Björn (2010), Bureaucratic Land Rush, in: Harvard Asia Quarterly, Spring 2012,
52-64.
Diekmann, Andreas/Preisendörfer, Peter (2001): Umweltsoziologie. Eine Einführung.
Reinbeck: Rowohlt.
Diekmann,
Andreas/Preisendörfer,
Peter
(1992),
Persönliches
Umweltverhalten.
Diskrepanzen zwischen Anspruch und Wirklichkeit, in: Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und
22
Sozialpsychologie (KZfSS) 44 (2), 226-251.
ESCAP, United Nations Environmental Programme, www.greengrowth.org, n.d.
Feng Jie/Wang Tao/China Dialogue (06.12.2012), Officials Struggling to Respond to China’s
Year of Environment protests; www.chinadialogue.net.
Francis, Barbara (2001), ‘Quasi-Public, Quasi-Private Trends in Emerging Market Economies.
The Case of China’, Comparative Politics, Vol. 33, No. 3, 275-294.
Green Beagle/Bei Jing Shi Chao Yang Qu Da Er Wen Environment Institute (2012), Carbon
Emissions In The Eyes Of The Public - Case Studies Of Impact Of Family Lifestyle On
Carbon Emissions In Pilot Provinces And Cities, Beijing.
Hong, Dayong (2012), Public Perception and Behavioral Trends with Regard to Climate
Change in China, presentation delivered at the Conference “The Way after Rio+20:
Sustainable Economic Development through Better Resource Efficiency and Climate
Protection, available at: Institut für angewandtes Stoffstrommanagement (IfAS):
http://www.stoffstrom.org/veranstaltungen/ veranstaltungsrueckblick/rueckblick-2012/
xiamen-workshops-china/
Hu Wei (2009), Sustainable Development and Synoptic Intergovernmental Policy-making: A
Public Policy Analysis with Reference to China, in: University of Maryland, School of Public
Policy, Centre for International Policy Exchanges, Environmental Policy: A Multinational
Conference
on
Policy
Analysis
and
Teaching
Methods
http://www.umdcipe.org/conferences/epckdi/conf_papers/index.shtml
Jänicke, Martin (2010), Die Akzeleration von technischem Fortschritt in der Klimapolitik –
Lehren aus Erfolgsfällen, in: Zeitschrift für Umweltpolitik und Umweltrecht 4/2010, 367-389.
Jakimov, Tanya
(2012), Peddlers of Information: Unintended Consequences of
Information-Centred Development for North Indian Non-Government Organizations, in:
VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations (December
2012), 23 (4), pg. 1014-1035.
Kay, Thornton (11 October 1994), "Salvo in Germany - Reiner Pilz", SalvoNEWS (99)
KPMG (2011), China’s 12th Five-Year Plan: Sustainability, Beijing.
Kuhn, Berthold/Wu Wei (2006), Civil Society and the Internet, Beijing: KAS
Kuhn, Berthold (2005/2009), Entwicklungspolitik zwischen Markt und Staat. Möglichkeiten und
Grenzen zivilgesellschaftlicher Organisationen (Development Policies between Market and
State. Potentials and Limitations of Civil Society Organisations), Campus: Frankfurt, 2005 (in
German), Beijing: Renmin Publishers, 2009 (in Chinese).
Kuhn, Berthold (2006), Government-NGO Cooperation in the People’s Republic of China:
Experiences from Yunnan Province, in: International Journal of Civil Society Law, Vol. 4,
Issue 3, July 2006, 62-72.
Kuhn, Berthold/Zhang, Yangyong (2013), Climate Change Awareness and Participation in
23
China. An Expert Survey, paper submitted to Journal of Current Chinese Affairs, GIGA,
Hamburg on 25 March 2013.
Li Jiabao/China Daily (26.03.2013), China Urges Prudent EU Solar Ruling, p. 13.
Liguang Liu (2013), Institutions of Renewable Energy Governance in China, paper presented
at the Earth Systems Governance Tokyo Conference: Complex Architectures, Multiple Agents,
28.-31. January 2013, http://tokyo2013.earthsystemgovernance.org/
Loh, Christine/Civil Exchange (2012), The Green Economy: Pushes and pulls on corporate
China, The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants, October 2012
Maniates, Michael (2002), In Search of Consumptive Resistence: The Voluntary Simplicity
Movement:
In:
Princen,
Thomas/Maniates,
Michael/Conca,
Ken
(ed.)
Confronting
Consumption. Cambridge: MIT Press
Medhi, Neelakshi (2009), Regulatory Matters: Which Factors Matter in Regulating the
Environment? in: University of Maryland, School of Public Policy, Centre for International
Policy Exchanges, Environmental Policy:
A Multinational Conference on Policy Analysis and
Teaching Methods, http://www.umdcipe.org/conferences/epckdi/ conf_papers/index.shtml
Meijer, Albert (2012), Co-production in an information age: Individual and Community
Engagement Supported by New Media, in: Voluntas, International Journal of Voluntary and
Nonprofit Organizations, Volume 23, Nr. 4, December 2012: pp. 1156-1172.
Mosbergen/The Huffington Post (23.02.2013), China Admits Existence of ‘Cancer Villages’ in
Report as Pollution Concerns Mount, www.huffingtonpost.com
Nemeskeri, R. L./ Mont, O. (2008), Actors Perspective on Consumption and Production, in:
Ken, T./Tukker, A. /Vezzoli, C. /Ceschin, F. (eds.): Sustainable Consumption and Production:
Framework for Action: 2nd Conference of the Sustainable Consumption Research Exchange
(SCORE!), Brussels.
Ostrom, Elinor (1999), Crossing the great divide: Co-production, synergy, and development,
Ch. 15, polycentric governance and development. In M.D. McGinnis (ed.) Readings from the
workshop in political theory and public analysis. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Ostrom, Elionor (2000), Collective action and the evolution of social norms. Journal of
Economic Perspectives, 14(3), 137-158.
Ostrom, Elinor (1999/2000), Crowding out Citizenship; paper presented on 2 October 1999
as an acceptance address upon receipt of the Johan Skytte Prize in Political Science
from the Skytte Foundation at Uppsala University and Scandinavian Political Studies, Bind
23 (New Series).
Pauli, Gunter (1999), UpCycling, Muenchen: Riemann.
Perstoff, Victor (2012):
Co-production and Third-Sector Social Services in Europe: Some
concepts and evidence, in: Voluntas, International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit
Organizations, Volume 23, Nr. 4, December 2012, 1102-118.
24
Peiyuan, Guo (2005), Corporate Environmental Reporting and Disclosure in China, CSR Asia,
June 2005.
PwC 2012: 15th Annual Global CEO Survey, PwC. www.pwc.com/gx/en/ceo-survey/pdf.com/
us/en/apec-ceo-summit/2012/index.html.
Qin Tianbao (2012), Climate Change and Emission Trading Systems (ETS): China’s
perspective and International Experiences, KAS-Schriftenreihe in China, No. 103, Shanghai.
Rehmeyer, Julie (2012), Game Theory Suggests Current Climate Negotiations Won’t Avert
Catastrophe, in: Scinece News Prime, 29.10.2012, online 13.11.2012.
Schreurs, Miranda (2010), Multi-Level Governance and Global Climate Change in East Asia,
in: Asian Economic Policy Review, Vol 5, Issue 1, June 2010, 88-109.
Schröder, Patrick (2012), Countries show low ambition on Rio + 20, China Daily 27 June 2012.
Schützenmeister, Falk (2010), Hybrid oder Autofrei? – Klimawandel und Lebensstile, in: Voss,
Martin (ed.): Der Klimawandel. Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag
für Sozialwissenschaften.
Tan Zhu/Lin-Che Lam (ed.) (2009), Environmental Impact Assessment in China, Research
center for Strategic Environmental Assessment, Nankai University and Centre for Strategic
Environmental Assessment for China, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Thauer, Christian (2009), Corporate Social Responsibility in the Regulatory Void – Does the
Promise Hold? Self-regulation by Business in South Africa and China. Unpublished PhD
Thesis, European University Institute, Florence.
Tukker, et. al. (2008), Fostering Change to Sustainable Consumption and Production: an
Evidence Based View, in: Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1218-1225.
Ulrich, Wolfgang (2013), Alles nur Konsum: Kritik der warenästhetischen Erziehung, Berlin:
Wagenbach.
Spiegel Online, (13.04.2013), UN Studie: Welt verliert Kampf gegen den Klimawandel.
Vamstad, Johan (2012), Co-production and Service Quality, in: Voluntas, International Journal
of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, Volume 23, Nr. 4, December 2012, 1173-1188.
Verschure, Bram/Brandsen, Taco/Pestoff, Victor (2012). Co-production: The state of the art in
research and the future agenda, in: Voluntas, International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit
Organizations, Volume 23, Nr. 4, December 2012, pp. 1083-1102.
Ward, Justin A./People’s Daily Online (14 .03.2013), Growing a Green Economy in China.
World Bank (2012), An Analytical Framework for Inclusive Growth, Washington.
Wu Wencong/China Daily (16/17.03.2013), 1,500 sites planned to monitor PM 2.5, p. 3.
Wu Wencong/China Daily (22.02.2013), Guideline Uses Market Approach to Curb Pollution, p.
3
25
Zhou, Zhijia/Kuhn, Berthold (2012), Climate Protection Network in Xiamen. Structure,
Competencies and Activities, presentation delivered at the Conference “The Way after
Rio+20: Sustainable Economic Development through Better Resource Efficiency and Climate
Protection, available at: abstract available at: http://www.stoffstrom.org/
veranstaltungen/veranstaltungsrueckblick/rueckblick-2012/xiamen-workshops-china/
26