China’s tourism’s march forward: towards a green transition or

unsustainable tourism.

Abstract

Tourism has been and will continue to be a significant driver for

growth for the world economy in terms of GDP and job creation.

However, the development of tourism has been accompanied by

significant challenges (GHG emissions, excessive water

consumption, intensive energy usage, the generation of waste,

threats to local cultures, built heritage and traditions). Twenty

years on from the 1992 United Nations’ Earth Summit in Rio de

Janeiro, progress on greening tourism has been slow. Since the

demise of the Kyoto protocol and co-ordinated global action, the

role of governments and their commitment and investment in the

greening of tourism has become to be seen as central to the

process of achieving low-carbon inclusive sustainable growth in

the sector, so as to improve human well-being and reduce

inequalities while not exposing future generations to significant

environmental risks and ecological scarcities. This chapter looks

at the role of China given its rapid growth as a world leader in

inbound, outbound and domestic tourism (with its accompanying rise

in resource consumption). This chapter clarifies by way of facts,

figures and examples of initiatives, China’s embrace of the green

economy concept even as the costs of environmental degradation are

evidently still rising. The chapter also asks whether such an

embrace can influence and/or be influenced by a greening of

tourism, described as tourism activities and services that can be

maintained indefinitely in their environmental, social, economic

and cultural contexts.

Introduction

Since the United Nations’ Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro forged

landmark agreements on climate change and biodiversity in 1992,

global carbon dioxide emissions have risen by nearly 50 per cent

(Rogers and Harvey, 2012). In the intervening period, global co-

operation has become harder to secure. The demise of the Kyoto

protocol and the nonbinding document, "The Future We Want," that

emerged from the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20)

in 2012 has illustrated the halting co-ordinated action on

climate change. Given that Rio+20 ended with merely the promise to

launch a process to develop Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

without environmental goals, targets and deadlines, the unilateral

actions of individual countries such as the United States and

China (along with Brazil and India) have become more vital to the

transition towards a greener world, given their growing economies

and a middle class ready to consume.

China’s extraordinary economic growth, whilst pulling millions out

of poverty, has come at an enormous environmental cost over the

twenty years since the 1992 summit. The ‘externalities’ of

economic growth from industrialisation and urbanization long

ignored, has in more recent years become an issue for the general

public and policy makers. After the Yangtze floods in 1998 caused

death, displacement and financial cost, which were partly the

fault of extreme logging, erosion of land cleared for farming;

China could no longer ignore the cost of destroying its natural

resources by prioritizing economic interests (Lang, 2002). Whilst

growth remains the priority for the local-regional-central

government, the multiple crises in recent years – in climate,

biodiversity, energy, as well as water shortages, even though the

all sectors of the economy expanded, mean environmental issues now

receive increased attention in the media and in policy circles.

Speaking to reporters at the end of the 2013 National People’s

Congress, Chinese premier, Li Keqiang told reporters that China

shouldn’t pursue economic growth at the expense of the environment

and spoke of building of a “beautiful” China (Kaiman, 2012). This

and other policy pronouncements in relation to transport,

infrastructure and new energies indicate that the national

government has sought to address the externalities of economic

growth.

However, China has largely done so alone, and has rejected

environmental rules imposed by other countries. This has brought

on criticism that China is not commitment to coordinated global

action on climate change (Lynas, 2009; Kirby, 2011). For example,

Chinese state airlines, with the support of the government, face

the prospect of fines and exclusion from airports in the European

Union for refusing to comply with rules aimed at regulating

resource and energy use. Top Chinese political advisor Yu

Zhengsheng, chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese

People’s Political Consultative Conference made a speech at the

annual conference of the World Cultural Forum in 2013 so say that

there is no “one-size-fit-all” model for ecological civilization

because of the principle of “common but differentiated

responsibilities” (Zhao, 2013). As China seeks to reduce the

externalities of economic growth in the environment and other

areas, so as to match the resources efficiency of western nations

(Ma and Shi, 2013), the government seems willing to seek a

sustainable growth roadmap, or what the United Nations Environment

Programme (UNEP, 2011) calls a “green economy.” As many analysts

argue that China has the ability to combine environmental with

economic interests, with World Bank economist Carter Brandon

noting how “China can go green and continue to grow economically,”

(cited in Reardon, 2012), this chapter ask whether China’s embrace

of the green economy, without, can influence and/or be influenced

by a greening of tourism.

A Green Economy

The 2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development

(Rio+20), and the Green Economy Report compiled by UNEP’s Green

Economy Initiative in 2011 demonstrates that the greening of

economies is not generally a drag on growth but rather a potential

new engine of growth (net generator of jobs, increased growth,

economic development and/or diversification), and therefore can

lead to a reduction in levels of persistent poverty. The UNEP led

Green Economy Initiative (GEI), launched in late 2008, aims to put

forward strong and convincing evidence in support of the

transition to a Green Economy – one that is dominated by

investment in and consumption of environmentally enhancing goods

and services. Among the main GEI activities, the Green Economy

Report uses macroeconomic analysis to demonstrate that greening

the economy across a range of sectors, such as tourism can drive

economic growth and job creation, while tackling social

inequalities and environmental challenges.

A green economy is one that is low carbon, resource efficient and

socially inclusive, with the UNEP (2010) defining a green economy

as one that results in “improved human well-being and social

equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and

ecological scarcities.” A green transition, according to the UNEP

(2011) requires green public and private investments, catalysed

and supported by targeted public expenditure, policy reforms and

regulation changes so as to reduce carbon emissions, pollution and

enhance energy and resource efficiency. The UNEP Green Economy

Report identifies ten economic sectors best able to kick-start the

transition to a sustainable and inclusive green economy. While

many of the identified sectors such as agriculture, fisheries,

water, forests, transport and cities are inextricably linked to

tourism, through forms and types of tourism such as nature

tourism, urban tourism and coastal tourism; the report, in

recognition as a key sector of the economy and a contributor to

carbon emissions and environmental degradation, also identifies

tourism as a significant driver for growth for the world economy

and as one of the ten sectors that must be at the forefront of the

transformation to a green economy. According to the UN Green

Economy Report, the greening of tourism, which involves

significant investment in efficiency improvements in energy, water

and waste systems, would stimulate job creation, especially in

poorer communities, with increased local hiring and sourcing, with

a positive spill-over effect on other areas of the economy.

In conjunction with the UNWTO, the UNEP (2011: 416) report

describes the challenges and opportunities for tourism in a green

economy, which it defines as tourism activities ‘that can be

maintained, or sustained, indefinitely in their social, economic,

cultural and environmental contexts’. While it demonstrates the

benefits for investing in the greening of tourism (greater

spending, employment, local economic development, poverty

reduction, environmental benefits), it also identifies the

significant challenges (excessive water consumption, energy-

intensive transportation). Its greening, the report suggests,

under a scenario of green investments and adequate policies would

make an increased contribution to GDP, with significant

environmental benefits including reductions in water consumption

(18%), energy use (44%) and CO2 emissions (52%), which if

accomplished would reduce the cost of energy, water and waste and

enhance the value of biodiversity, ecosystems and cultural

heritage and reinforce the employment potential of the sector

(UNEP, 2011). An investment of 0.2% of global GDP per year until

2050 in the greening of tourism, can, according to the UNEP

(2011), allow the tourism sector to continue to grow steadily.

“Making tourism businesses more sustainable will foster the

industry’s growth, create more and better jobs, consolidate higher

investment returns, benefit local development and contribute to

poverty reduction, while raising awareness and support for the

sustainable use of natural resources” (UNEP, 2011: 438).

Greening China

Information disclosure online, a more open media and Non-

Governmental Organizations (NGOs) have transformed environmental

degradation into public issues in China. Reports, such as those

that estimate that China sees 350,000-400,000 premature deaths due

to outdoor air pollution each year (World Bank, 2007), have 1.2

million premature deaths in 2010 (Wong, 2013b)i, and hourly

readings of Air Quality Index (AQI) being reported by the United

States Embassy in Beijing, have all fed into pressure and momentum

for government action to improve air, water and soil quality in

China (Bradsher, 2013). Even though the economic cost of

environmental degradation arising from pollution and damage to the

ecosystem is notoriously difficult to measure in China, many

senior politicians within China now recognise the basic

environmental problem, its costs. the path towards sustainability

and the environmental legislation required to mitigate

environmental degradation

A 2007 World Bank and the State Environmental Protection

Administration of China (SEPA) report estimated the cost of (water

and air) pollution in 2003 was 2.68% or 5.78% of GDP depending on

if a Chinese or a Western method of calculation is used. The first

China Green National Accounting Study Report (Jing, 2006) issued

by the SEPA and the National Bureau of Statistics of China (NBS)

in 2006 showed that economic loss caused by environmental

pollution accounted for 3.05% of national GDP in 2004. According

to the Environment and Planning Institute of China’s Ministry of

Environmental Protectionii (MEP), the environmental cost was $248

billion in 2010, or 3.5 per cent of the gross domestic product

(Wong, 2013c). Greenpeace (2012a) pegged the cost of pollution in

Beijing at around US$328 million, based on levels measured in

2010. In Shanghai, the cost was even higher, at US$420 million.

There are issues with how these figures were compiled, and their

underlying accuracy given data related to chronic illness, lost

productivity and environmental degradation are so difficult to

measure. An analysis of the green accounting system by Li and Lang

(2009) found that the cost of resource depletion, hard-to-quantify

items like the impact of pollution on public health and workforce

productivity and loss of arable farmland (and agricultural

productivity) as a result of soil erosion were largely omitted,

with. Ma and Shi (2013) noting the costs of environmental damage

and ecocide could amount to 12% of China’s GDPiii.

Even in the face of these statistics, the proponents of China’s

“economic growth comes first” approach to development have

considerable influence in local-regional-central government and

special interest groups. Whilst the environmental cost reports are

now regularly published and the concept of “ecological

modernization” increasingly accepted by Chinese academia, Li and

Lang (2010: 58) noted that many officials are bound to the

‘‘treadmill of production.” They argue that “it is clear that

economic development, the mainstay of the regime’s political

legitimacy”; outweigh “environmental protection whenever it

appears that the two goals are in direct conflict” (.ibid).

Statistics and hard data are often not used by central-regional-

local governments to re-examine current models of development and

the economic and social case for investing in sectors of the

economy in order to shift development and unleash public-private

capital flows onto a low-carbon, resource-efficient path

development. While state environmental agencies, NGO’s and the

media are increasingly accept the concepts of sustainability,

given that pollution has had little effect on economic growth and

China’s dependence on physical capital expansion and increased

energy consumption, there is evidence that various state actors

are often resistant to change. Many state actors and agencies in

regional and local governments, apparently allied to proponents of

economic growth within the central government are tied to the

concept of economic growth (Xia, 2012). Given the past emphasis on

economic growth based on heavy industries, Greenpeace (2012b) note

that few cities in China have sought to implement “green” action

plans and targets. Cities often refuse to disclose basic

environmental data such as pollution discharges or refuse to

implement national directives, even though China’s Air Pollution

Prevention and Control Law (2011) stipulate that cities with

substandard air quality must have a legally binding plan to

gradually improve air quality. The Institute of Public and

Environmental Affairs (IPE) and the Natural Resources Defence

Council (NRDC)iv who have carried out an annual evaluation of the

state of pollution source information disclosure in 113 cities

across China note disclosure have slowed.

There are exceptions. The Beijing municipal government has put the

environment at the top of its work agenda, launching a 2013

campaign to tackle pollution by improving sewage disposal, garbage

treatment and air quality, as well as curbing illegal

construction. Beijing has sought (as has Shanghai) to introduce

policies to control the increasing number of vehicles and require

cleaner petrol (gasoline) and diesel (Greenpeace, 2012b). While

some of these city led initiatives have been adopted nationwide,

Chinese state-owned enterprises in the oil, transport, power

industries have often sought to block efforts by pro-environment

government officials to impose policies that would alleviate

pollution (Wong, 2013a). In 2013, the government released a time

table, mandating that new fuel quality standards for diesel and

gasoline be issued by the end of 2013. The policy was resisted by

state companies such the China Electricity Company, just as a

diesel standard endorsed by the State Councilv in 2009 was

undermined by the Ministry of Finance (Wong, 2013a). However,

given the lack of coordination, national green initiatives often

have unintended consequences. For example, a national scrappage

program that ran from June 2009 to May 2010 sought to inventicise

people to exchange old cars for new lacked funding. Beijing,

however along with Hong Kong, had its own better funded scrappage

program aimed at getting rid of half a million older vehicles by

the end of 2015vi, but many of these vehicles just get transferred

to other parts of China. Meanwhile, the number of passenger cars

is on track to hit 400 million by 2030, up from 90 million in 2013

(Wong, 2013a). Beijing’s attempt to reduce air pollution is also

undermined by the consumption of heavily polluting coal in the

nearby city of Tianjin and adjacent Hebei Provincevii (Jin, 2013).

The dependency on manufacturing and heavy industries in China mean

the ‘‘treadmill of production’’ (Li and Lang, 2010) ensure a

continuing steep decline of the environment for the next decade.

China is predicted to continue to grow using energy-inefficient

and polluting industries, which will increase pollution unless

environmental protection is increased and drastic action is taken

(Xia, 2012) on energy, automobiles, environment and public

transport.

The costs of mitigation with regard to energy, automobiles,

environment and public transport will be considerable; the

economics of environmental clean-up with regard to reducing energy

and GHG emissions; water consumption and waste management unclear.

Replacing urban coal consumption with clean alternative energy

sources, capping regional coal consumption, De-NOx retrofitting

existing coal-fired power plants, shutting down inefficient coal-

fired industrial boilers, improving environmental policies (i.e.

penalties), lowering expectations for future growth, limiting the

sales of passenger vehicles and increasing investment in public

transportation may lead to China maintaining a lower economic

growth rate. Changing policy measures would demand a shift in the

types of industry that drive the country’s economy, but create new

investment opportunities for Chinese companies, the preference

being for environmental measures that can be combined with

economic stimulus or alleviated through tax breaks (Ma and Shi,

2012). While this recipe could cause some industries to suffer,

others (energy conservation, pollution treatment, ecological

protection and recycling) have have new market opportunities.

It is hoped by government that the greening of the economy over

the period of the new 12th five year plan (Chen, 2013) will

provide investment opportunities for a developing energy-saving

sector. This is expected to provide more than $315 billion in

investment opportunities over the plans five years (Lan, 2012).

This follows the success of the Chinese government

“ecocompensation” scheme, in which $100-billion was transferred

to millions of farmers, which have added 1.6% to its forest cover

each year from 2000 to 2010 and restored 40 million hectares of

forest by 2020 (Reardon, 2012), providing a means to more evenly

distribute the benefits of economic growthviii. However, the

definition of energy-saving and environmental protection

industries are still ambiguous in China, which according to Lan

(2013) could lead to difficulties in evaluating their performance.

Many analysts point to the glut of overcapacity in the solar panel

industry which the government says it plans to develop further

(Du, 2013).

While the government’s approach is personified by the President,

Xi Jinping's (The Economist, 2013) vision of a “better

environment”, the issue isn’t the developing legislative measures,

but the gap between words and action on the ground (penalties,

convictions, attitudes, corruption). Despite popular support for

environmental protectionix, authorities still fight against

transparency. The country’s soil pollution levels are classified

as a state secret (Kaiman, 2013), a Greenpeace (Greenpeace, 2013)

reportx that criticised a state owned company was recently

censored, whilst the Green GDPxi project in early 2007 was

abolished due to widespread resistance from regional and local

governments (Sun, 2007).

Greening Tourism

A shift from energy-intensive manufacturing toward an increase in

the high-technology and service industries whilst leading to

significant economic costs could be partially offset by an

increase in more environmentally-friendly jobs, such as tourism.

Tourism is one of the most promising drivers of growth in China,

which has grasped tourisms potential to create new jobs, and

support the economy. However, the tourism industry faces a

multitude of significant sustainability-related challenges to

overcome barriers towards a green transition as well as a lack of

enabling conditions. While a vital sector of the economy in China,

tourism does not have a central role in driving a response to

environmental degradation. Whilst air, soil and water pollution is

driving a response by government, the explosive growth of inbound,

domestic and internal tourism has not been linked to progress on

adopting clean energy and new technologies, whilst reducing its

carbon outputs and energy consumption. Given that statistics from

the country’s tourism authorities show that domestic tourists

totalled nearly 3 billion in 2012xii, whilst the figure for inbound

tourist population according to the China Tourism Academyxiii is

estimated to be 133 million “person-trips” (Wen, 2013), various

promotions, laws and legislation focus on growth rather than

sustainability. The Chairman of China’s National Tourism

Administration (CNTA), Shao Qiwei affirmed that China’s actions to

counter the financial crisis would help global tourism. “Policies

from both central government and local governments to boost

consumption will sustain domestic and outbound tourismxiv”. This

has been reaffirmed in the Outline for National Tourism and

Leisure (2013-2020)xv (UNWTO, 2013) plan issued by the government

which speaksxvi about increasing consumption, with sustainability a

secondary concern. Issued by the State Council (2013) of China, it

speaks of promoting the taking of paid annual leave days and

boosting the development of the tourism sector in China.

Whilst there have been many research initiatives by Chinese

academia and NGO’s like Greenpeace that focus on greening the

economy, few have mentioned or sought to pressurise the government

to create the enablers conditions that might enable tourism’s

transition to a more sustainable path. Few reports address tourism

as a key sector driving the economy, seek to address how explosive

growth in tourism be transitioned or how a greening may impact

other sectors like transport, energy or how the other nine key

economic sectors might influence the tourism sector. A positive

development is China’s decision to issue revised administrative

regulations by the end of 2013 that make it easier for domestic

and overseas NGO to set up in China (Dan, 2013), which should

deliver an a more empowered civil society that focuses on the

tourism sector. Whilst public pressure has in recent years blocked

coal-fired power plants in Guangdong and Hainan, a copper smelter

in Shifang, a town in Sichuan Province and chemical plants in

Dalian, Tianjin and Xiamenxvii (Bradsher, 2012a,b), zero tolerance

for environmental harm has yet to coalesce into public protest or

organization that focuses on the tourism sector. However, NGO’s

such as the Society of Entrepreneurs & Ecology, Professional

Association for China’s Environment, Friends of Nature and the

Nature University may be a driving force for a more sustainable

tourism sector in the coming years by pushing businesses and

government to take a more proactive stance. While green tourism

has become one of the most vivid and promising business within the

travel industry, building a detailed picture of just how

unsustainable the tourism sector is, and the impacts it is having

may a critical step for those trying to amass the momentum

required to push for change. While green and sustainable tourism

has become one of the most vivid and promising business within the

travel industry, building a detailed picture of just how

unsustainable the tourism sector is, and the impacts it is having

may a critical step for those trying to amass the momentum

required to push for change. However, there is little evidence as

to how China’s legislature and state council will respond to hard

data and research that concerns sustainability within the tourism

sector.

In many ways, the government, if seeking to green tourism will

face many of the same problems faced with greening other sectors

when overcoming opposition from special interest groups, as well

as mobilizing private sector actions on green tourism, even though

economic potential for green tourism is to be increasingly found.

Since many of these regional and local governments are judged on

economic growth and due to a lack of central funding, must borne

greening effort costs by land sales, inappropriate development in

ecologically sensitive areas, and increased entry prices to

tourist attractions. This has made the investment for

conservation, restoration, protection and diversification

difficult. Comprised mainly of small and medium-sized enterprises

(SMEs), the private sector has little access to bank financing for

green investmentsxviii, and few in-kind support such as technical,

marketing or business administration assistance. Combined, with a

lack of central funding, destination planning, tourism strategies

and commitment by regional-local government’s, the private sector,

especially small firms to yet to be mobilised to support the

greening of tourism. The sector lacks information and often don't

recognise the opportunities in smaller, niche tourism areas

centring on natural, cultural and community resourcesxix. Tourism

businesses have not sought to incorporate recognised standards for

sustainable tourism, such as the Global Sustainable Tourism

Criteria (GSTC)xx. At a national level, China has not created any

collaborative platforms inside or outside government to support a

greening of tourism. There are no national tourism industry

stakeholder consultation groups, joint collaborative efforts

amongst or between government ministries, or any national

initiatives. Investment and policies supportive of a transition

are piecemeal, and don’t focus on areas which might support a

greening within tourism. There are no mechanisms by which industry

groups can coordinating with ministries responsible for the

environment, energy, labour, transport, finance and other relevant

areas with the government not making the cross sectoral linkages

between tourism and other economically important sectors.

Public policies and support such as subsidies, concessions and

direct funding could encourage investment in green tourism and

provide the conditions for the further development of green

tourism. Government spending on protected areas, cultural assets,

water conservation, waste management, sanitation, public transport

and renewable energy infrastructure could also reduce the cost of

green investments by the private sector and encourage further

private investment. Clear requirements in such areas as zoning,

protected areas, environmental rules and regulations, labour

rules, agricultural standards and health requirements particularly

related to energy, emissions, water, waste and sanitation would

also provide some foundation. Following the poorly implemented

seven-point strategy as a basic framework for sustainable tourism

development that sought to balance the rational use of resources

for positive economic impact along with environmental protection

(United Nations, 2001), legislation that et to get the balance

between growth and sustainability right. The new tourism lawxxi

approved by the Standing Committee of the National People’s

Congress (NPC) and took effect in October 2013 is designed to

regulate the tourism market, safeguard tourists’ rights and

interests, ensure reasonable use of resources, and foster the

industry’s sustainable and healthy growth. In theory, it is

designed to balance industry and tourists’ interests and but like

“Outline for National Tourism and Leisure (2013-2020), it doesn’t

offer any detail as to how it will spread the economic, socio-

cultural and environmental benefits of tourism. It largely

reflects public concerns over entry price increases, overcrowding

at tourist attractions and forced goods purchases, but without

defining what is “reasonable prices” or are the “sustainable”

limits to growth.

While difficult to imagine the sheer size of the tourism sector in

China, and its unsustainable practices that effect China and the

world, it is imperative than China succeed in greening it tourism

sector. As poor air quality, acid rain, toxic spills, worsening

air quality, water pollution, overcrowding and price rises (Yang

and Wang, 2013) that restrict its people’s access to its natural

and cultural heritage continue, China is already losing its

attractiveness to domestic and overseas tourists (Jin, 2013), with

environmental pollution even threatening its neighbours tourism

industries (Fackler, 2013). There is also the increasing worry

water and soil pollution will create fear in the hospitality

industry by way of polluted water river smells emanating from the

showerhead, and worries that pollution in the country’s

agricultural centers will effects the food chain, and consequently

tourist trust in domestic food productsxxii (Ma and Adams, 2013).

Given tourism contribution to small and medium-sized enterprises

and the creation of jobs in a tightening market (Bradsher and

Wong, 2013), the lack of a clear path to the greening of tourism

is sending a negative message to tourists, businesses and the

international community. While there is hope that China’s

leadership is listeningxxiii environmental and economic interests

remain on a collision course in China.

Conclusions

This chapter sought to look at China, and ask whether the country,

through policy and investment is transitioning to a green economy

and a more sustainable path in tourism. Since the 1992 United

Nations’ Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, the “growth first”

doctrine in China has led to great environmental costs to China

and the world. The 2012 Conference on Sustainable Development,

dubbed Rio+20 in advancing the sustainable agenda, also renewed

focus on China and its efforts in achieving sustainability. Recent

strategies, new methods and national policy pronouncements seem to

offer some mitigating processes to environmental degradation, and

offer enabling conditions for a transition to a green economy.

Whilst often innovative and progressive, their implementationxxiv

and enforcement have been poor.

Whilst the tourism industry is growing in China along with the

economy, the tourism sector is not a lead change agent in the

transformation to the Green Economy in China. A driver of growth

in China, the sustainability-related challenges accompanying

tourisms sustainable development in China have not received the

attention of policy makers, NGO’s or the public at large, even

though it could hasten transition towards a green economy and

reduce the cost of energy, water and waste and enhance the value

of biodiversity, ecosystems and cultural heritage. There is little

recognition of the role that tourism could play for the green

economy transition with few best practices, methods, strategies or

investments related directly to the tourism sector. Without

destination planning and specific development strategies, the

first steps to create the enabling conditions for increased

investments in a transition to a green economy have yet to be

taken. Whilst small changes towards greening could have

significant impacts, few public actors which have sought instil

the concept of sustainable development into the tourism sector. In

the short to medium term, the greening of tourism may come from

the increasing number of NGO’s with an environmental bent, the

demand of international tourists for green and ecological tourism

product, greener financing mechanisms options, and hard evidence

and statistics. Given that tourism development is influenced by,

and in turn influences society, both in Chin and globally, the

world needs China’s tourism sector to begin taking a more

sustainable path. Whatever China does next will have global

repercussions.

i The summary of analysis of scientific data was first published by the Lancet(http://www.thelancet.com/themed/global-burden-of-disease), a British medical journal.ii The MEP is a cabinet-level ministry in the executive branch of the Chinese Government.It replaced the SEPA during the March 2008 National People's Congress sessions inBeijing.iii There is no number on how much money would be saved by protecting natural resourcesrather than exploiting them with unsustainable practices (Reardon, 2012).iv http://www.ipe.org.cn/Upload/file/Notices/Reports/From-Bottleneck-to-Breakthrough-PITI-Evaluation-Results-Press-Release-March-28-2013-EN.pdfv The State Council can be considered China’s cabinet.vi http://www.knowledgeatwharton.com.cn/index.cfm?fa=article&articleid=2763vii While individual provinces have established trans-provincial environmentalcompensation, there is no state-level trans-provincial compensation mechanism.viii http://chinawaterrisk.org/opinions/watershed-services-in-china/ix A 2013 “Report of the Online Public Opinion” published by Wuhan University, thereenvironmental “zero tolerance” for environmental pollution.x http://www.grrenpeace.org/international/en/news/blogs/makingwaves/chinese-medua-censorship-shenhua/blog/46033/xi The Green GDP Project wasn't reinstated until the MEP became a full ministry in 2008.xii The number of domestic travellers in China was noted by Dai Bin, president of ChinaTourism Academy, http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/753565.shtmlxiii The China Tourism Academy (CTA) was set up in 2008 in accordance with Document No.[2007] 98 of the State Commission Office for Public Sector Reform and the Party Committeeof China National Tourism Administration (CNTA). It was set up as a specialized researchinstitute directly under CNTA.xiv http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-04/19/content_11215776.htmxv http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/pdf/the_outline_for_national_tourism_and_leisure_2013-2020.pdfxvi The outline does note that “We will be committed to putting the people and theirsafety first, improving people’s livelihood, encouraging green consumption, promotinghealthy, civilized and environment-friendly ways in tourism and leisure, and improvingand expanding national tourism and leisure for social harmony and better quality oflife.”xvii Concerns about protests over environmental disputes led the government to require a“social risk assessment” (Bradsher, 2013) before allowing major industrial projects toproceed.xviii While loans for clean energy, energy saving and other environmentally friendlyprojects are increasing (Chen, 2013), such loans usually go to the state sector andremain tied to the development policies of local government. Few banks implement a greencredit policy (Nan, 2013).xix To tempt tourists from heavily polluted Beijing to visit Fujian in the nation'ssoutheast, the tourism bureau ran a clean-air tourism campaign in 2013, with TV ads thatconcluded "Fresh Fujian, take a deep breath" (MacLeod, 2013).

xx The Global Sustainable Tourism Council (GSTC) serves as the international body forfostering increased knowledge and understanding of sustainable tourism practices, ItsGlobal Sustainable Tourism Criteria and the development of the GSTC Criteria forDestinations are the guiding principles that tourism business or destination can aspireto (http://www.gstcouncil.org/).xxi http://www.gov.cn/flfg/2013-04/25/content_2390945.htmxxii One-sixth of China’s arable land suffers from soil pollution, according to theMinistry of Environmental Protection (Wong, 2013d)xxiii Chinese Vice Premier Zhang Gaoli's address at the 2013 Fortune Global Forum (FGF) inChengdu, focused on the protection of resources, the environment and ecological systems“as part of our effort to build a beautiful homeland with a blue sky, green land andclean water” (Mu, 2013).xxiv China adopted its first environmental law in 1979 and has enacted over 30 such laws

to date. See, Wang (2007) for further detail on environmental law in China.

References

Bradsher, K. (2012a) ‘Bolder Protests Against Pollution Win

Project’s Defeat in China’,

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/05/world/asia/chinese-officials-

cancel-plant-project-amid-protests.html, accessed 5 July 2012

Bradsher, K. (2012b) ‘Social Risk’ Test Ordered by China for Big

Projects’, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/13/world/asia/china-

mandates-social-risk-reviews-for-big-projects.html, accessed 18

July 2012 GET PAGE NUMBER

Bradsher, K. (2013). ‘China Sets New Rules Aimed at Curbing Air

Pollution’, New York Times, 15 June, pA15

Bradsher, K. and Wong, S. (2013) ‘Faltering Economy in China Dims

Job Prospects for Graduates’,

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/17/business/global/faltering-

economy-in-china-dims-job-prospects-for-graduates.html, accessed

10 July 2013

Chen, D. (2013) ‘Green growth’,

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/799154.shtml#.UfhHZtI3v8k,

accessed 12 July 2013

Dan, H. (2013) ‘New rules for NGOs to improve operations’, China

Daily, 17 April, p1

Du, J. (2013) ‘Nation to maintain cap on energy consumption’, China

Daily, 25 January p16

Fackler, M. (2013) 'Scientist Says Pollution From China Is Killing

a Japanese Island’s Trees',

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/25/world/asia/japanese-scientist-

blames-china-for-yakushimas-dying-trees.html

Greenpeace (2012a) ‘Dangerous Breathing’,

http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/re

ports/climate-energy/2012/Briefing%20Dangerous%20Breathing%20-

%20Greenpeace.pdf, accessed 21 June 2013

Greenpeace (2012b) ‘Ranking Eastern Chinese cities by their “clean

air” actions’,

http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-

energy/2012/ranking-cities-air-action/, accessed 20 June 2013

Greenpeace (2013) ‘Thirsty Coal 2’,

http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-

energy/2013/thirsty-coal-two-china/, accessed 23 July 2013

Jin, H. (2013) ‘Beijing targets capital’s suburban smog’,

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2013-03/29/content_16355357.htm

, accessed 3 July 2013

Jin, H. (2013) ‘Beijing sees decline in tourists’, China Daily, 30

July

http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2013-07/30/content_16854194.htm

Jing, D. (2006) ‘Green GDP Accounting Study Report 2004 issued’,

http://www.gov.cn/english/2006-09/11/content_384596.htm, accessed

30 June 2013

Kaiman, J. (2013) ‘Activists voice doubts over politicians’ vow to

‘build a beautiful China’’,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/18/campaigners-sceptical-

china-environment-changes, accessed July 11 2013

Kirby, D. (2011) 'Made in China: Our Toxic, Imported Air

Pollution', http://discovermagazine.com/2011/apr/18-made-in-china-

our-toxic-imported-air-pollution#.UfjC2NJ0S2U, accessed 20 July

2013

Lan, L. (2012) ‘Green economy drive to deliver $315b in energy

saving investment,

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2012-07/05/content_15550031.htm,

accessed 28 June 2013

Lang, G. (2002) ‘Forests, Floods, and the Environmental State in

China’, Organization & Environment, vol 15, no 2, pp109–30

Li, V. and Lang, G. (2010) ‘China’s ‘Green GDP’ Experiment and the

Struggle for Ecological Modernisation’, Journal of Contemporary Asia, vol

40, no 1, pp44-62

Lynas, M. (2009) ‘How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal?

I was in the room’,

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/dec/22/copenhagen-

climate-change-mark-lynas, accessed 23 July 2013

Ma, J., and Shi, A. (2013). ‘Big Bang Measures to Fight Air

Pollution’, Deutsche Bank China Strategy, February 28th, 2013

Ma, D. and Adams, W. (2013). ‘If You Think China’s Air Is Bad ...’

The International New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/08/opinion/if-you-think-chinas-air-

is-bad.html, accessed 10 December 2013

MacLeod, C. (2013) 'In China, air pollution report brings despair,

humor’, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/07/09/china-

air-pollution-study-fujian/2503319/,

Mu, X. (2013) ‘Full text of Chinese Vice Premier Zhang Gaoli’s

address at opening dinner of 2013 Fortune Global Forum’,

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-06/07/c_124824012.htm

, accessed 10 July 2013

Nan, X. (2013). ‘Chinese Banks under ‘almost negligible’ pressure

to protect the environment’,

http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/5812-Chinese-

banks-under-almost-negligible-pressure-to-protect-the-environment,

accessed 30 July

Reardon, S. (2012) ‘China leads the march for the green economy’,

New Scientist, June Edition, pp8-9

Rogers, S. and Harvey, F. (2012) ‘Global carbon emissions rise is

far bigger than previous estimates’,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jun/21/global-carbon-

emissions-record, accessed 3 July 2013

State Council (2013) ‘Notice on the Publication of The Outline for

National Tourism and Leisure (2013-2020)’,

http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/pdf/the_outlin

e_for_national_tourism_and_leisure_2013-2020.pdf, accessed 28 July

2013

Sun, X. (2007) Green GDP shown the red signal, China Daily, 23 March,

p1

The Economist (2013) ‘Chasing the Chinese dream’,

http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21577063-chinas-new-leader-

has-been-quick-consolidate-his-power-what-does-he-now-want-his,

accessed 20 July 2013

United Nations (2001) Plan of actions for sustainable tourism development in Asian

and Pacific region (1999-2005): a progress report, United Nations Publication,

Bangkok.

UNEP (2010). Are you a green leader? Business and biodiversity: making the case for a

lasting solution, United Nations Environment Programme, Paris.

UNEP (2011) ‘Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable

Development and Poverty Eradication’, www.unep.org/greeneconomy,

accessed 15 July 2013

UNWTO (2013) ‘China’s new national tourism strategy set to

increase outbound tourism’, http://media.unwto.org/en/press-

release/2013-03-25/china-s-new-national-tourism-strategy-set-

increase-outbound-tourism, accessed 12 July 2013

Wang, A. L. (2007) ‘The role of law in environmental protection in

China: recent developments’, Vermont Journal of Environmental Law, vol 8

pp195-223

Wen, W. (2013) ‘China lags behind in inbound tourism’,

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2013-07/27/content_16839649.htm,

accessed 28 July 2013

Wong, E (2013c) ‘Cost of Environmental Damage in China Growing

Rapidly Amid Industrialization’, New York Times, 30 March, pA4

Wong, E. (2013a) ‘As Pollution Worsens in China, Solutions Succumb

to infighting’, New York Times, 2 March, pA8

Wong, E. (2013b) ‘Air Pollution Linked to 1.2 Million Premature

Deaths in China’,

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/02/world/asia/air-pollution-linked-

to-1-2-million-deaths-in-china.html

Wong, E. (2013c) ‘Cost of environmental damage in China growing

rapidly amid industrialization’,

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/30/world/asia/cost-of-

environmental-degradation-in-china-is-growing.html, accessed 27

June 2013.

Wong, E. (2013d) ‘With Pollution Rising, Chinese Fear for Their

Soil and Food’, New York Times, 31 December, pA6.

World Bank. (2007) ‘Cost of pollution in China: economic estimates

of physical damages’, Washungton D.C. - The World Bank,

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDS

P/IB/2007/03/30/000090341_20070330141612/Rendered/PDF/

392360CHA0Cost1of1Pollution01PUBLIC1.pdf, accessed 20 July 2013

Xia, Y. (2012) ‘An empirical research on the interactions of

China’s energy consumption, pollution emissions and economic

growth’, International Journal of Global Energy Issues, vol 35, no 5, pp411–

425

Yang, Y. and Wang, Q. (2013) ‘Paying the price to travel’, China

Daily, 30 April

http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2013-04/30/content_16464556.htm

Zhao, S. (2013) ‘China calls for intl green efforts’,

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2013-05/19/content_16509835.htm

, accessed 25 July 2013