China Environmental Law

While the Chinese media tend to act in a reflexively defensive fashion to any external criticisms of China’s environmental situation (particularly Beijing air quality), its internal coverage of environmental issues is fairly candid.  Most major papers seem to carry an article at least once a week discussing a local environmental horror story. 

I’ve attached an example from the April 4^th edition of Shanghai’s Oriental Morning Post.  My Chinese reading skills are pretty low, but (I think) it reports on a plastic factory in the Songjiang district of Shanghai which for years discharged toxic pollutants into the Zhou Family Creek.  Prior to these discharges, the creek was relatively clean; after the discharges, it turned into a black stinking mess.  Local residents began to suffer all sorts of terrible afflictions (including severe skin rashes when they came into contact with the water: see picture). The polluting factory hoodwinked the locals into thinking that its only responsibility was to pay the local collective a “pollutant discharge fee” of RMB 5000.  This was divided among the local residents who averaged payments of about RMB150-200 per year. To put this into perspective, a cab ride from Pudong airport to a downtown Shanghai hotel will average about RMB160 ($23). 

Finally, the local-level Environmental Protection Bureau (EPB) got involved, and required the installation of wastewater treatment equipment, but this equipment was frequently out-of-order; the district EPB stepped in and started to issue fines. It appears that the best hope for residents, however, is the completion of a regional wastewater treatment facility that can treat these and other industrial wastes in Songjiang. 

The candid coverage is not only at the local level, but extends to critiques of national environmental initiatives. One suspect part of Beijing’s drive for clean Olympic air has been the practice of simply moving the pollution away.  A factory is closed down in Beijing only to be reopened in some more remote location. This “move away” policy comes in for criticism in this China Daily article  (which is simply a reprint of a Chinese language People’s Daily article).  Here’s the heart of the argument:

For big cities, it produces an immediate effect. And it seems to be reasonable to move polluting enterprises to less populous places where the environment has a larger capacity to deal with pollutants. But this simple solution does not solve the pollution problem completely, and it only has a short-term effect.

The reason is quite simple: no matter whether in the city or in the countryside, the sky is the same and the land is no different. Pollutants may disappear, but in fact they are not completely dispersed. A sudden gust of wind can blow them back.

In addition, the “move-away” practice has other negative effects.

Remote areas have rather lax environmental protection measures, for the governments there are usually more concerned with GDP growth. Without adequate pressure on enterprises, less attention is paid to preventing pollution.

So, the fundamental way to solve our environmental problems is to adopt economic and legal measures, and raise awareness of the enterprises. The “move-away” method only delays the treatment of pollution.

Actually, I would quibble slightly with the conclusion of this article. Many older facilities are subject to less stringent pollutant discharge standards than newer facilities. To the extent the reopened facility is subject to the higher standards applicable to new facilities, then there would be some net improvement which results from the move.

What’s my point? The national government is serious about tackling environmental issues. China spent at least 3.2 billion dollars in 2007 to raise energy efficiency and cut pollutant emissions .  It continues to face any number of challenges in implementing its policies at the local level, and it hopes an unleashed press can support its efforts to change the mindset of hidebound local officials and expose local environmental scandals.  It also is willing to entertain an internal debate on how best to achieve meaningful pollution reduction. China may not be ready to allow all its dirty laundry to be aired, but on the environmental front some of it is being actively paraded around. That’s a good start.