Environmental Policies in Asia: A North-South Dilemma, Thesis of Science education

Download Environmental Policies in Asia: A North-South Dilemma and more Thesis Science education in PDF only on Docsity! Environmentally Sustainable Development in Asia: Challenges and Choices Jing HUANG The deterioration of the global ecosystem, noticeably indicated by climate change, poses an unprecedented threat to human security. According to a recent report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the UN, “(W)arming of the climate system is unequivocal, and s 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to mil- lennia” (IPCC, 2013 p. 3).! Of equal concern is the finding that “(H)uman influence on the climate clear” (op. cit., p. 10) as evidenced by ng concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere empha- od the need for immediate global action to re’ climate change. Such concerns had also been raised by the Bali Action Plan of 2007 which stated that a delay the risk of more severe climate change impa However, despite growing global convergence on the need for urgent action on a range of environmental issues, there especially between the developed (North) and developing (South) countries on actions that need to be taken to deal with these burgeoning problems. ce the the current trend in e in action would “significantly ... [increase] 2 substantial divergence This divergence ranges over a number of issues from environmental stan- dards to greenhouse gas mitigation targets and from financial arrangements to technology transfer, to name a few. These differences arise from differ- ing perceptions and explanations of the for our wors and hence caus sponsibility, ning ecological environment, and also substantial conflicts of sed essentially by the gap between the North and South in inter ic and political developments. 4 Environmental Policies in Asia The developing countric economies like China and India, argue that the North has to shoulder major ponsibility in reversing the decay of the ecosystem. This is not only because of their lion’s share in consumption of energy and other natural > the pos trialised, developed countri responsible for most of carbon dioxide emission since the dawn of indus- trialisation. The South insists that the developed countries, given their predominance in technology, finance, and capacity of research and develop- ment, should provide ass rather than shifting the responsibility, to the developing countries in our endeavour to improve the ecological envi- ronment. While the dramatic especially relatively rapidly growing 1 -indus resources but also because Ps are istance, increase in carbon emi: sions in the developing countries, especially China and India, may be a cause for future concern, their demand that the North should shoulder the main responsibility in addressing the ecological degradation, especially climate change, is morally and economically justified in terms of poverty eradi opment. The South demands that the North should adopt a higher emission standard or equitable allocation of global atmospheric commons (carbon cation and human devel- space), provide more financial and technical assistance to developing coun- yle. Developed countries (especially the European Union (EU) and Japan) on the other hand, argue that the North has already endeavoured to com- bat ecological degradation. Moreover, polic tries and alter their consumerist life initiatives and increasing com- mitment by countries such as EU countries and Japan to greater energy efficiency and tougher environmental policy standards have helped to gen- erate a global momentum to reve tem. As emerging economic powers, China and India are large carbon emitters in the aggregate (though not in per capita terms). They are also increasingly large consumers and there is a growing concern that their formula of rapid development will aggravate environmental degradation. Hence, the North urges the South, especially countries like China and India, to be ‘responsible stakeholders’ in the global effort to improve the ecological sys Essentially, the difference between North and South on the ecolog- ical challenges reflects a fundamental dilemma in the effort to achieve economic modernisation, which is an inalienable goal for human devel- opment. Since industrialisation has been the only way for a human soci- ety to achieve this goal effectively, virtually all the developing countries have, to various degrees, embarked on the path of indu efforts to modernise their societies as well as economic se — or at least contain — the decay of ecos) of other natural resources such as minerals em. trialisation in their Ironically, while Environmentally Sustainable Development in Asia 7 trong leadership and effective state intervention are necessary to overcome the challenges to the environmentally sustainable development. Policy interventions can not only improve the environment across Asia, but can also offer win-win opportunities and yield positive net benefits in economic development. For example, investments in improving air and vater quality (controlling air and water pollution) lead to significant health benefits (reduced mortality and morbidity) and also improve productivity of the labour force. Given the enormous stake and inevitable conflicting interests, envi- ronmental policymaking always involves various stakeholders and vested Thus, a good understanding of the environmental policy and its implications requires a close examination of not only the policymaking process, but also interactions among various stakeholders in a given pol- icy structure. Moreover, policymakers need to explore the available policy options that can optimise the incentives and mitigate conflicting interests intere in our effort to sustain the development. After all, environmentally sustain- able development could not be achieved but for a sustainable policy that the joint effort of the international community. reflec With this in mind, the Centre on Asia and Globalisation of the Le Yew School of Public Policy convened an International Workshop on envi- ronmental policies namely China, India, Japan, Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam. This group of countries is representative and captures the essence of Asia with regard to its growing economic clout, population and its environmental and natural resource between them, these seven countries account for approximately 30 per cent of world GDP (in PPP) and 44 per cent of world population. Four of them (China, Japan, India and Indonesia) rank 2"4, 3"4, 4° and 15', respectively, in the world in terms of size of their economies and are also among the world’s ten most populous countries — ranking 1°*, 284, 10°" and 4", respectively.® With regard to environmental and natural resource endowments and policy challenges, these countries are again highly repre: They encompass a wide range of unique ecosystems and biodiversity and of mineral wealth. Indonesia and Malaysia, for example, are ‘megadiverse’ (a select group of 17 countries that harbour the majority of the plant and animal species).7 Two-thirds of Malaysia (and about 60 per cent of Indonesia) is forested. It is estimated Malaysian forests con- tain 20 per cent of the world’s animal species, notable since it has only 0.002 per cent of the world landmass, a little smaller than Germany (Alexander, 2006). The rainforests of Indonesia and Malaysia date back to 130 million Kuan of seven different Asian countries entative of Asia. world’ 8 Environmental Policies in Asia sars and are the oldest in the world. On the island of Borneo, shared two countries and Brunei, a 25-acre plot of rainforest can a number equal to the total tree between the contain more than 700 species of tree diversity of North America. What this suggests is that planners and policymakers in Asia (as rep- ) face a number of challenges as the con- 1 even countri nted by thes tinent undergoes rapid economic growth. At the workshop, exper these countries deliberated upon the environmental challenges Asia faces. Instead of the black-and-white reading of the North-South environmen- tal debate, this workshop aimed to examine the more complicated policy which involves not just various views and positions of Asian constrains of from making proc policymakers but, more importantly, the internal debates, the policymaking structure, and interactions of various stakeholders in the endeavour to overcome the environmental challenges they confront in their respective countries. The aim is to channelize the North-South debate in the Asian country-specific context, placing major focus on policymaking, implementation and implications on development. The volume hence remains empirically heavy, with each chapter focusing on a different country and an within a given policy framework. ment of its environmental challenges Structure of the Volume Based on the above mentioned themes, the volume has been broken into three main sections for the sake of s . The first part assesses key issues involved in combating environmental concerns. Shreekant Gupta’s chapter on ‘Environmental Policy and Governance in a Federal from India’ and Ryuzo Yamamoto’s chapter on ructure and coherence Framework: Perspective ‘Japan's Role in Climate Change I former throws light upon the question of how national governments should respond to what has been dubbed a ‘race to the bottom’, which describ: the tendency of businesses to move to places where wages are low‘ laws are weak. He explores this notion in the Indian context and discuss environmental policy and its role in intergovernmental relations in India. the challenges facing Japan’s aim , especially in the wake of the Fukushima sion to reduce its dependence on nuclear energy would and fall within this section. The ul t and ‘Yamamoto on the other hand, discus to reduce its carbon emission: mishap. The de invariably mean a rise of carbon dioxide emissions from thermal power plants. orts that there is a need to “reduce [Green Hout Gas] emissions domestically, to assist the growth of developing countries Yamamoto as and le: internationally with more effective energy use Environmentally Sustainable Development in Asia 9 chapters hence focus on how the source and solution of environmental con- cerns lie within the policymaking agendas of people in power and how the need to be addressed in the light of economic development. The second part of the book discuss outcomes of fast development in countries through chapte: and China. In his chapter titled ‘Policy for Environmentally Sustainable Development: Perspectives from Vietnam’ Nguyen Huu Ninh states that the Vietnamese economy has grown remarkably in the past decade. This has put a major environmental impact due to the knock-on effects of deforestation, land es the inevitable environmental s on Vietnam strain on its natural resources and had an adver degradation, water pollution, overfishing, pollution and so on. Similarly in the case of China, both Zhu Shou-xian and Wu Fuzuo raise similar concerns in relation to its development in their respective chapters. Zhu’s chapter on ‘Resource-Environmental Foundation for Green and Low-Carbon Develop- ment in China’, states that poor management of r protection can, in fact, become a stumbling block for the next stage of the country’s economic development, if left unchecked. The author exempli- fies the need for stronger policy making mechanisms and technology inno- vations to hasten China’s transition to a green and low-carbon society. Wu's chapter, ‘China’s Environmental Governance: Evolution and Limita- tions’, identifies three key limitations for this phenomena: the mind-set that prioritises economic development over environmental protection; institu- tional limitations, especially those faced by local Environmental Protection Bureaus and the Cadre Evaluation System; and legislative barriers in terms of penalty for noncompliance, and weak public involvement. She contends that addressing these limitations is critical for the improvement of China’s environmental policy. Chee Yoke Ling and Lim Li Ching expre: first limitation in the Malaysian context. In their chapter titled ‘Frag- mentation to Integration: Environmental and Sustainable Development Challenges in Malaysia’, they argue that despite Malaysia’s intention to maintain the three dimensions of sustainability ice. and economic, the policy framework in practice remains economic-heavy. The failure to integrate the environmental dimension into development planning is a key concern and this is reflected in Malaysia’s ministerial set-up. For instance the ‘macro’ branch of Malaysia’s Economic Planning unit has an Environment and Natural Resource section; however its influ- ence remains weak. The authors also discuss the environmental challenge 's and environment pure! a similar concern as Wu's environmental, social ia’s posed by Free-Trade Agreements (FTAs), with particular emphasis to the asymmetry between North-South FTAs like the Trans-Pacific Partnership