As has been frequently noted on this blog and elsewhere, we are everyday negotiating and renegotiating the terms on which we will build a sustainable future. Without question, one of the most critical determinants in this unfolding process is how China will handle its rapid evolution toward consumerism. Already more than two decades in the making, the results of this undertaking have, thus far, been quite mixed. The quality of life of millions upon millions of urban Chinese has unequivocally improved and those achievements are, in leaps and bounds, now spreading across the country. Per capita income in China of $4,940 (2011) is still a fraction of that in Europe and North America (the comparable figure for the United States is $48,442) (The World Bank, 2013). The dilemma, of course, is that the country’s population of 1.3 billion people, voracious appetite for resources, and massive disgorgement of waste (most recently in evidence in the air-pollution emergencies that have gripped Beijing, Shanghai, and other cities) threaten, following two decades of environmental mismanagement by other countries, to tip the planet into unprecedented havoc.
There have been some notably
encouraging signs. China has become a global leader in the production of
renewable energy technologies and there has been no shortage of enthusiasm
surrounding its innovative potential in clean technology. The country’s
leadership has, for more than a decade, invoked the notion of a circular
economy as a fundamental tenet of its intention to strike out on a decidedly
different development path. Multiple plans have been conceived for a new
generation of eco-cities.
At the same time, China has hurtled
forward to put into place the key building blocks of a fully Americanized
consumer society. Against sage advice, the government made the fateful move to
embrace the automobile, both as a source of manufacturing employment and urban
(im)mobility. As problematic as this political decision has been, it should be viewed
against the historical circumstances of the time, namely that once China
committed itself to join the World Trade Organization in the mid-1990s, it was
inevitable that the country would become an automobile society. Without a homegrown
car industry, China would have been quickly overwhelmed—even to a greater
degree than is the case today—by imported models.
As China now pivots to wean itself
from producing cheap goods for export markets, it is desperate to bulk up its
domestic consumption capacity. This task is not as easy as it may sound. To be
sure, the Chinese, like most people, are enthralled by the enticements of a
modern consumer society. Malls are sprouting across the length and breadth of the
vast country and the marketing inducements of familiar international brands are
festooned everywhere. Yet countervailing resistance, especially of the cultural
variety, should not be underestimated. Given their patchy healthcare and
pension systems, it is no wonder that the Chinese are the world’s most stalwart
savers. Using data from the World Bank and the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development, Bloomberg Businessweek calculated that the household
savings rate for the country in 2010 was 38% (compared to 3.9% for the United
States). It is difficult to speed up the velocity of consumptive throughput
when such a substantial amount of money is being salted away for a rainy day.
As a result, the Chinese government
has embarked on a series of initiatives to persuade the public to adopt more freewheeling
spending practices. In particular, access to credit is being liberalized and
new programs to finance retirement are coming on line. As part of the process
of engineering their own consumer societies during the second half of the
twentieth century, Western countries deployed similar techniques (and many
more) to break down preexisting cultural norms favoring thrift. There is no
reason to suspect that, with enough effort, China will be any less successful.
Or will it? While it would be a mistake
to underestimate the strides that the Chinese public is making to become fully
fledged consumers, other currents are cutting in different directions. The
government is in the midst of working out its own expression of sustainable
development under the guise of creating an “ecological civilization.” The concept remains notably vague
and gauzy, but this is no different from the way Western views of sustainable
development have taken shape. Of further potential interest is the fact that
the recently concluded 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China heralded
a plan for a “moderately” prosperous nation, a declaration that suggests a
willingness to ease back a bit on the consumption throttle (ChinaDaily, 2012). Preliminary efforts to display resolve for
this aspiration took the form of pre-New Year pronouncements calling on senior
government officials to discourage excessive holiday displays at the bureaus
and state companies under their jurisdiction. This move is equivalent to the
White House telling Americans to put away their credit cards during the run up
to Christmas.
All of this may seem like idle chatter
coming from someone based in a country (the United States) that for more than two
decades has had extreme difficulty even pronouncing the words sustainable
development. Any suggestion that America’s consumptive throughput needs to be
steered downward has been summarily rejected as politically softheaded (even management
of firearms sales in the wake of repeated national tragedies seems to off the
table). I am by no means oblivious to these charges. We should, though,
recognize that whether Americans are cognizant or not, consumer society in the
United States is starting to unwind in the face of political paralysis,
outsized debt, middle-class shrinkage, military overreach, and perhaps tedium
as well. As any shopper knows, it takes a lot of work to consume prodigiously. It
requires similarly incessant exertion to maintain the large raft of supportive
public policies that keeps consumerist lifestyles afloat: subsidies for housing
and automobility, ample supplies of consumer credit, and free-flowing resources
to name just a few of the most obvious inputs. It is becoming increasingly
apparent that the predominant global challenge is less about how the United
States will reinvigorate its faltering consumer society and more about how
China will manage its ascent to this developmental stage.
Maurie J. Cohen is the editor of Sustainability: Science, Practice, &
Policy. He is also Associate Professor in the Department of Chemistry and
Environmental Science at the New Jersey Institute of Technology and Director of
both the Graduate Program in Environmental and Sustainability Policy and the
Science, Technology, and Society Program. Dr. Cohen has held prior positions at
the University of Leeds, Binghamton University (State University of New York),
Mansfield College (Oxford University), and Indiana University. His books
include Innovations In Sustainable Consumption: New Economics, Socio-technical Transitions and Social Practices (with Halina S. Brown and Philip J. Vergragt), Exploring Sustainable Consumption: Environmental Policy and the
Social Sciences (with Joseph Murphy), Risk in the Modern Age: Science,
Social Theory, and Environmental Decision Making, and The Exxon Valdez
Disaster: Readings on a Modern Social Problem (with J. Steven Picou and
Duane Gill).

[re-posted with permission from LinkedIn Group: Sustainability Collaborative]
ReplyDelete• I visited Shanghai last summer, what i saw was NYC on steroids, and the huge gaps between rich and poor. The rich in China don't trust their own food, water and air. The rich in China will likely have higher foorprint than rich in US....China has to feed its 1.3 billion people..... If you don't have money, you bearly get by, and if you are poor and very sick, the odds are all against you. China burns more coal than the rest of the world combined....they also generate more electric with sun and wind, than any other country. Imagin a world with majority of Chinese living like Americans......willl need 7+ earths....
• Materialism is like a drug, we all take the "pill," and we need it to survive. To get off the "pill," we will need to recognize the problem, and its long term negative impacts.....we need a new set of values that we practice, and slowly reset the course....sustainability is lens in which we can create shared social values to improve quality of life of all. My think tank, the Sustainability Collaborative, which we are all members of is set to define a set of shared values, and an operating system, Universal Sustainability. I am co-authoring a book on Universal Sustainability, which is set to publish in May of this year.
-- Ann Lee-Jeffs