Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Environment

China's Pollution Revolution

By Christina Larson, Washington Monthly. Posted January 8, 2008.


Contaminated rivers and farms are triggering peasant protests. Will it be enough to force real change?
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

In 2005, China was shaken by 51,000 pollution-triggered "public disturbances" -- demonstrations or riots of a hundred or more people protesting the contamination of rivers and farms -- according to the government's own statistics. (The real figures are almost certainly higher.) The Ministry of Public Security has ranked pollution among the top five threats to China's peace and stability.

One hotbed of such environmental unrest is Hunan Province, a former stronghold of Sun Yat-Sen's anti-imperial forces and the birthplace of Mao Zedong. This southern province has twice nurtured agitated peasant movements that have risen against the central government.

In October, I met the unlikely instigator of a pollution riot: an unassuming forty-seven-year-old farmer named Chen Li Fang. With her husband, Chen grows rice and raises pigs, chickens, and ducks in the village of Shutangshan, in northeastern Hunan. In 2001, a chemical processing plant opened less than a mile from their farm. The owner of the factory had first considered setting up shop in a neighboring town, but the local government badly wanted to attract both the jobs and tax revenue. According to China Economic Times, it offered the owner of the Hunan Jingtian Science and Technology Company generous financial incentives to open its plant there.

By 2003, Chen and other villagers had compiled a troubling list of problems that had materialized since the factory opened. Dozens of people reported stomach pains, migraine headaches, and vomiting. Local media reported ten new cases of cancer among people who lived within a mile and a half of the factory -- an alarming number for a village of only a few hundred people.

Farmers watched their cattle die and rice yields decline. Chen and other villagers believed that wastewater discharged from the factory had poisoned the Xiang River, a source for drinking water and irrigation, and that the dark smoke rising from the plant's chimney had fouled the air. (The factory owner insisted to the local press that while his plant had pollution problems, the villagers' ailments could not be traced conclusively to its emissions.)

Groups of villagers visited the factory repeatedly to talk to the management, requesting that the emissions-control equipment be upgraded or the most polluting production lines be discontinued. The owner offered small payments to those who complained loudest -- enough to temporarily placate poor farmers, if not enough to cover their losses. Gradually, even those who were initially satisfied with their compensation demanded that the factory close. They also petitioned the environmental protection bureaus of Wangcheng County, where the factory is located, and nearby Changsha City, but officials approved the factory to continue operations.

Having exhausted peaceful channels, the villagers turned to force. Twice in the summer of 2004, more than a hundred residents marched onto factory grounds to disconnect its electricity. Chen Li Fang organized the second effort. She split the villagers into two groups, with the first storming the front gates, the second approaching from behind. The manager cowered in his office and called the police. Someone ripped the power-supply unit off the wall. The factory was shut down for three days before the equipment could be replaced. Chen served a short jail term.

But Chen was undeterred, feeling that she had less and less to lose. In January 2006, she traveled to Beijing for the first time. She camped for two weeks in a train station's waiting room as she struggled to get an audience with the national environmental ministry. Finally, she met with an official from the State Environmental Protection Administration, China's understaffed and overstretched version of the EPA, and was sent home with a letter directing the provincial government to examine her case. Nothing much changed.

In November she returned to Beijing, but this time she met with an organization of public-interest lawyers, the Center for Legal Assistance to Pollution Victims. Founded in 1998, the center is staffed by volunteers -- mostly law professors and young law students -- and operates a free legal advice hotline. Since it launched, it has fielded about 10,000 calls. Lawyers from the center have personally taken up more than eighty callers' cases; they've won a third of those cases, lost a third, and a third are still pending.

China has had environmental laws on the books for thirty years, but teaching citizens to use them is a relatively new enterprise. So, too, is the expectation that laws should be enforced. Local environmental officials have surprisingly limited authority to implement Beijing's green regulations, as these cadres receive both their orders and their salaries from local government, which has an economic interest in shielding local industry.

In recent years, growing pollution concerns have prompted Beijing to pass stricter environmental legislation, including a 2003 law that requires factories gain approval for onetime "environmental impact assessment" reports from local authorities. At the moment, China's officials face what may appear to them to be an uneasy choice: allow citizens to use these laws to their fullest extent, or risk a precipitous rise in protests. The environmental minister said in 2005 that pollution-related protests had increased in recent years by an annual rate of 29 percent.

In 2003, the factory in Chen's village submitted the requisite report detailing its projected environmental impact and plans for pollution control, which the local environmental protection bureau then approved. But according to Zhou Guangming, an environmental lawyer who has examined the document, the report was flawed and misleading. Most obviously, the report claimed that no wastewater would be dis-charged directly into the Xiang River, although a walk around the factory grounds reveals a pipe that does exactly that.

Rather than planning another raid, Chen and other villagers -- aided by their new allies in Beijing -- are preparing a lawsuit that would force local officials to shut down the factory. In 2007, Xu Kezhu, an attorney from the legal aid center, visited the village. She collected evidence of factory conditions and interviewed residents, environmental officials, and plant workers. When the factory owner bragged that some of his technology had been imported from the United States, she retorted, "If you learned about commercial processes from America, why did you not also learn about environmental protection processes from America?"

Inspired by the U.S. system, in which Sierra Club lawyers routinely sue the EPA for administrative breaches, Xu plans to sue the local environmental protection bureau for rubber-stamping what she deems a faulty environmental-impact report. As she told me, it is easier to definitively prove administrative failure than to establish a direct link between the factory's emissions and the illnesses suffered by the villagers. The lawsuit is shaping up to be a test of China's tentative collection of environmental laws and accompanying oversight mechanisms.

I visited the factory one Sunday afternoon in late October, when the plant was closed for the weekend. But the metal gate wasn't locked, and Chen's husband, who has visited dozens of times, led me onto the premises for a tour. (He told me that when he last spoke to the factory owner, he was told, "It [would be] a good thing for you to be dead." That hasn't cowed him.) The walls inside the factory were black with soot; the equipment was rusty and looked poorly maintained. Sacks of chemical additives, ready to be shipped to customers, sat beside rusted barrels that oozed dark liquid onto the floor.

We were accompanied that afternoon by several villagers, all shouting. Each had a complaint to air. "We cannot endure anymore," yelled Li Qiu Liang, whose father-in-law has spent the last five years unable to work; she claims pollution has made him sick. A sixty-six-year-old farmer, Wen Yun Kai, showed me a series of wrinkled letters he'd sent to local environmental officials after his cattle became sick and died; a local veterinarian had "verified" his claims and written at the bottom, "It is truth." A sixty-year-old fisherman, Xiao Xiang Lin, said his nets were empty because the Xiang River had "no more fish."

Chen's husband and I also followed the pipeline that led from the wastewater holding basin into the river, a few hundred meters away. This is the pipeline the environmental impact report claims doesn't exist. Then he showed me a hole in the pipe where the villagers had smashed it open in order to confirm the presence of wastewater inside.

For the moment, the villagers are placing their faith in the lawyers. "I want them to make the law work," Chen told me, sitting at a table in her modest home. "If there is no government action to solve the problem, I will go to Beijing, again and again." Chen isn't going away -- and nor are millions like her -- until the problem does.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: china, water, pollution

Christina Larson is an editor of the Washington Monthly. She traveled to China in the spring and fall of 2007, visiting Beijing, Shenyang, Lanzhou, Chengdu, Kunming, Changsha City, and villages in Gansu, Sichuan, and Hunan provinces.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Good news
Posted by: saltoafronteira on Jan 8, 2008 2:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only fact of this kind of reaction starting to occur in the new world's factory (china) is a good prospect. Let's hope that common sense prevails there. It will be good news for the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Excellent Story
Posted by: All Roads on Jan 8, 2008 4:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Christina,

This is an excellent story. I have been in China for 6 years, and I work with a variety of issues related to the story you have reported, and your story is one of the most comprehensive I have seen in 750 words.

I would like to say that more than ever, I am encouraged that real change (good change) is occurring, and it is systematic.

As I have covered a China at the Crossroads , the recent events in Xiamen surrounding a large chemical investment have shown that there is a real focus on developing healthy outlets for citizens to voice their concerns.

If interested in learning more, please contact me. I would enjoy learning more about what oyu found!

Rich
www.china-crossroads.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This type of story has been around
Posted by: PaulK on Jan 8, 2008 6:56 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It just hasn't gotten too much mainstream press. Environmental rioting is apparently common throughout China.

What keeps the junta in power is the army. Fresh, ignorant troops had to be called in to commit the massacre at Tienanmen Square. The only question is, what happens when the Red people's army joins the people. This is what happened to the Shah of Iran. His army deserted. The Berlin Wall ceased to function when an individual soldier decided to let someone through.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

China Is Moving In The Wrong Direction ...
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman on Jan 8, 2008 2:28 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in every way regarding the environment. Its massive population continues to rise, it is building many new coal fired power plants, building massive dam(n)s, destroying massive amounts of natural land with urban sprawl, and is intent on getting at least 200 million people into cars and off bicycles. Peasant opposition to some of these changes has been around for a long time, but has done nothing to stop them.

As someone born and living in the U.S., I have to say that we have no one but ourselves to blame for many of China's current environmental transgressions. After all, they just want to be like us gluttonous Americans! The U.S. could have led the way decades ago by, for example, disallowing the dismantling of public transportation, prohibiting sprawl, and prohibiting private motor vehicles in urban areas. Now, when others like China and India do what the U.S. has been doing, the complaints from Americans can be heard all the way to the moon.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why the USA Opposes Reform in China and Supports the Communist Party
Posted by: sofla100 on Jan 8, 2008 5:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The USA is receiving from China billions of dollars in cheaply manufactured goods and US businessmen, together with their Chinese counterparts and the blessings of the Communist Party, sure don't want to see the apple-cart upset anytime soon. Of course, the USA doesn't want instability either. But, the last thing they want is a Chavez style revolution. The improvement of living standards and real democracy that gives workers rights and decent pay but guts corporate profits and the boys on Wall Street. Next, you have to consider that to finance the USA debt, China has purchased over a trillion dollars worth of US securities. If China did not do this, where would the money for the Iraq war come from? So, you can bet the USA sure does not want to overly upset China and see those dollars quickly dumped. You think the USA economy is bad now? Can you imagine. Therefore, the last thing the USA wants to do is rock the boat or see too much liberalization in China. It's a lot easier to deal with those guys in the business suits. And, if a few locals get a little out of control, they can easily be made to disappear, all the more to "keep China stable."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Modern society can not survive long without regulation
Posted by: PaulC on Jan 9, 2008 8:31 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The environmental hell in China and other developing countries like Mexico reflect the vision that right wing free market fundamentalists have regarding what is the proper relationship between industry and the people, as well as their government. It is no accident that CEO's sold out the US and moved their factories to these countries. This is precisely the working environment they have been looking for - basically a fun romp back in time to the early days of the American industrial revolution in the early 20th century.

This excellent article paints an ugly picture of life without effective governmental regulation and stands as a stark warning to citizens in this country to beware extremists like Ron Paul who share the Chinese leaders' same aversion to regulation, and would erase decades of environmental and worker protections won with the blood and tears of thousands of American victims through the years - victims, and heroes, just like Chen Li Fang.

peace,
Paul

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

China has good fighting chance
Posted by: herbal on Jan 16, 2008 2:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I farm organically in China on long term leased land. Fee simple ownership is not allowed. I found that, although China is being rapidly urbanized, the rural peasants own the seat of power that was bestowed on them in revolutionary times. China is now 30% urbanized. I have seen very logical highway improvements in China, that would never be held up under the US system of eminent domain, held up for 8 years because the local communist party had so much sway over provincial governments.

The ecological movement is not hopeless; but is promising even considering the tremendous degradation that has and is happening. The downside is that it will take time for them to change enough to stem the damage. Much favorable publicity is produced in the local and national media for environmental responsibiltiy. They are simply back at the Lady-Bird Johnson stage of ecological consciousness.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement