Reflecting on “Activism” China’s Environmental Movement

China Development Brief, No. 53 (Spring 2012)

中文 English

Editor’s Note

From 2010 to 2011, the “SEE Foundation,” members of Sun Yat-sen University’s “Institute for Civil Society” (ICS), and “Forward Works” organized a “green leadership” partner program. The program invited twenty-four young participants from environmental NGOs across the country to take part in a one-year series of training activities, workshops and cooperative projects.These activities were designed to allow for an in-depth exchange of their personal experiences and problems in an atmosphere of mutual support. Having gained some practical experience, these young participants are now reflecting on the problems and challenges involved in non-governmental environmental protection work. Being involved in non-governmental environmental protection work, these participantsare looking ahead to the future, and hope to promote the development of China’s environmental movement, and the non-governmental environmental protection field as a whole. The following articles bring together their analysis and recommendations regarding China’s current environmental movement.

China’s civil society has continued to grow over the last few decades. As civil society enters a new era, China Development Brief has published a group of valuable reflective essays in the hope that counterparts from related fields can benefit from their treatment of the question of what comes next for the environmental movement. These young participants are not burdened by the past, and although they may lack the depth of understanding and insight into environmental protection work of their predecessors, their sincerity and commitment cannot be questioned. Nonetheless, in the pursuit of balanced analysis, the editors have invited both Liu Detian from China’s first generation of environmentalists and researcher Wu Fengshi to provide their personal points of view on the following articles.

Reflecting on the “Activism” in China’s Environmental Movement

Judging by the development of local environmental protection organizations, the history of China’s environmental movement can be said to reach back some 20 years. The narrative of this period is however more than one of just theoretical involvement; rather, it also features a range of specific, targeted activism, both large and small. It is a period of history characterized by action.

Yet today’s participants in the movement tend to focus too much on individual action, and lack a more comprehensive perspective on the field. Even when reflection does occur, it is typically individual, private and sporadic, and thus powerless to influence the movement as a whole. This pattern is indicative of a series of critical deficiencies.

Pushing forward the environmental movement requires overcoming these deficiencies. It requires participants exercising a balance between ‘action’ and ‘reflection’ in order to cultivate a more cohesive and perceptive culture in the field.  It also requires furthering environmentalism’s mass appeal, influencing mainstream culture, and strengthening public approval. If achieved, these developments will, in turn, further enhance the effectiveness of their ‘actions,’ allowing the environmental movement to bring about genuine change in China.

Activism in the Environmental Movement

The rise of China’s environmental movement is the result of the efforts of diverse groups of people. The first group is comprised of the founding members of Friends of Nature (Liang Congjie, Liang Xiaoyan, Yang Dongping, Wang Lixiong) as well as Tang Xiyang, Liao Xiaoyi, and other intellectuals1. Together, this group collectively represents the elite of China’s environmental society, and provides a discursive space for those who have joined the cause of environmentalism.

The second group includes activists such as Liu Detian, Wang Yongchen, Ma Jun, Huo Daishan and Yun Jianli2. Owing to their extensive knowledge of key aspects of the field, these activists were some of the first to have a finger on the pulse of contemporary trends within the broader movement. As such, their relatively early exposure to environmentalist thinking ensured their acute awareness of the severe challenges facing environmental protection.

The third group is comprised of the victims of environmental pollution in China such as Zhang Changjian and Wei Dongying. This group of people, having overcome personal problems and fought to protect people’s rights, take a direct stand against environmental pollution.

Following in the wake of these three groups are the youth actively participating in China’s environmental movement, of which there are two subcategories. The first group are the elite youth, who have accumulated a strong capacity for, and a deep understanding of, environmental protection3. The second group includes young grassroots activists, whose abilities, vision and understanding are not fully matured, but who deeply identify with the cause of environmentalism.

Regardless of their specific roles, the aforementioned three groups serve as the  pioneers of China’s environmental protection movement. All are involved in targeted (if often small-scale) activism, environmental education, promotion of environmental awareness, and even in directly challenging polluters. They are recognized as having brought new tactics and strategies into the environmental struggle; they are also known generally to rely on emotion, intuition, knowledge and wisdom in deciding the correct course of action. Outside the first aforementioned group of intellectuals involved in the movement, however, typically little importance is attached to reflecting on the thinking behind the environmental movement as a whole and considering the future of  environmentalism in China.

Of the new participants in the environmental movement, the elite youth constitute a relatively small number, with the majority of young people coming from the grassroots. Grassroots youth have tended to struggle with abstract thinking about the movement, but they do have something in common with the first three categories of activists in that they often rely on emotion and life-experiences when taking action. They typically do not attach much importance to reflection or the theoretical constructs of environmentalism, even believing that they have no practical use.

We tentatively refer to this mode of thinking— the focus on specific environmental action without paying attention to comprehensive reflection and  the theoretical constructs of environmentalism-as the “activist” aspect of the Chinese environmental movement.

The Problem with Activism

China’s environmental movement is a general social force with its own mission and social responsibility. It should influence the public sector by ensuring that its organizational framework, decision-making methods, and ideologies foster environmental protection. The movement should encourage markets to be more environmentally aware, mainstream environmentalist culture  in China and pioneer environmentally-friendly lifestyles.

Although at present the environmental movement’s participants, values, actions, reasoning and tools are increasingly diverse, a series of problems still need to be addressed in the activist movement.

Selecting and prioritizing among a diverse range of underlying values; handling the movement’s public relations with the government and business; conveying the movement’s vision and direction while strengthening its internal cohesion; improving environmentalism’s public appeal and recognition; and deciding on strategies for action – these issues require the environmental movement’s participants to consider and discuss problems holistically and abstractly, so as to make convincing and logical judgments. Only actions based on these judgment will be effective.

However, in focusing on concrete actions, activists have neglected reflecting in a comprehensive manner. As a result, the Chinese environmental movement has fallen into a state where it blindly drives forward, a state in which not enough time is taken to clearly anticipate the future direction of the movement, what exactly the mission is, or which path is most appropriate.

Our group believes that, in addition to the above detailed discussion of the movement’s “lack of reflection and theoretical understanding,’ China’s environmental movement faces further issues of ‘atomization,’ isolated pockets of self-serving behavior, and inadequate levels of public approval.

So-called ‘atomization’ in the context of the Chinese environmental movement can be seen in the nebulous array of individual actors that have emerged thanks to the lack of organic links between individuals and organizations. For those who doubt the true existence of an environmental ‘movement’ in China, among their doubts is that these atomized individualistic actors have yet to form an integrated movement. Furthermore, these small self-satisfied circles, and low-levels of public approval, reflect a pressing problem, namely that China’s environmental protection movement occupies a social backwater, and has yet to enter the mainstream.

How do we evolve from these atomistic individual actors into an integrated movement? How do we become part of mainstream society, and make environmental protection a mainstream concern? These challenges faced by the environmental movement are not easily solved, and the reasoning behind the slogan ‘action is king’ needs to be revised.

If we do not reflect, we cannot build a unified movement, and China’s environmental movement will end up in a repetitive and endless cycle of action.


  1. Editor’s Note: Friends of Nature, established in 1994, is one of China’s earliest environmental NGOs. Tang Xiyang is a Chinese journalist whose 1993 book, A Green World Tour, about his travels through nature reserves outside of China, inspired many Chinese youth to take up the environmental cause.  Liao Xiaoyi is the founder of the Beijing-based NGO, Global Village. 

  2. Editor’s Note: Liu Detian is the founder of the Liaoning Saunder’s Gull Conservation Society which was established in the early 1990s and is often cited as the first environment NGO in China. Wang Yongchen is the founder of the Beijing-based NGO, Green Volunteers.  Ma Jun is the founder of the Beijing-based NGO, Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs.  Huo Daishan is the founder of the Henan-based environmental NGO, Huai River Guardians.  Yu Jianli is the founder of the Hubei-based NGO, Green Hanjiang. 

  3. Editor’s Note: The term “elite youth” refers to young people with a university education. 

分析中国环境运动中的“行动主义”

霍伟亚
中国发展简报2012年春季刊
编者按
2010~2011年,SEE 基金会、中山大学人类学系公民与社会发展研究中心(ICS)和前进工作室主办了“绿色领导力”伙伴计划。24位来自全国不同地区的环保NGO青年行动者参 与其中,在长达一年的系列培训、工作坊、合作项目的过程中,深入交流各自的工作经验和困惑,相互支持,共同成长。作为具有一定工作经验的行动者,他们正在通过回望与反思,正视民间环保工作的问题与挑战;作为参与民间环保的年轻人,他们更希望面向未来,推动中国环境保护运动以及民间环保行业的正向发展。以下 这几篇文章,就是该计划的成员们对当今中国环境运动做出的审视和建议。
中国公民社会从无到有,也已经有几十年的光景了。目前正在经历一个新的时期,何去何从?《中国发展简报》刊发这一组非常有价值的反思文章,希望能带给其他领域的同行一些借鉴。这些年轻 的行动者没有历史的包袱,可能对前辈当年所处的特定环境缺少理解,反思也许会偶尔偏颇,但这并不会遮蔽背后的真诚与热切。此外,为了让青年人的反思有所回应,编者特邀请中国第一代环保人刘德天和研究者吴逢时为这组文章做了点评。
篇一:分析中国环境运动中的“行动主义”
按本土环保组织发展的历程计算,中国环境运动有近20年的历史,这段历史不是一部清谈史,它饱含大大小小的各类具体行动,是一段行动的历史。
但这场运动的参与者往往过于注重单个行动,缺乏站在行业角度的整体反思。即使有反思,也是个体私下偶尔的零星思考,不是一种常态,无力影响整个运动。这种状况可以解读运动现状中的一系列不足。
推动环境运动向前走,需要克服这些不足,需要运动参与者平衡在“行动”与“反思”上投入的精力,加强反思,生成一个可感知的行业文化,增加行业凝聚力、吸引力,影响主流文化、提升公众认同感,进而强化“行动”的力量,让环境运动为中国带来实质改变。
环境运动中的行动主义
 中国环境运动的崛起是几类人的努力。一是“自然之友”发起人(梁从诫、梁晓燕、杨东平、王力雄)、唐锡阳、廖晓义等知识分子,他们是中国社会精英,有为中国思考、承担社会责任的情怀和勇气,环境保护思潮的进入,为他们提供了一个空间;二是刘德天、汪永晨、马军、霍岱珊、运建立等行动者,因职业特点而 “春 江水暖鸭先知”,较早接触到环保思潮,并认识到环境问题的严峻性,进而行动起来;三是张长建、韦东英等一批中国环境污染的受害者,他们不畏困难,奋起维权,是直接与环境污染抗争的一群人。
接续这三类人,继而踊跃参与中国环境运动的是一批青年人,其中有能力强大、知识积累深厚的精英式青年,也有能力、视野、知识都不强大但深深认同环保的草根青年。
前三类人不管角色如何,在中国环境运动的源头,都是做一些具体甚至细小的行动,或环境教育、宣传等环保启蒙,或与污染者直接博弈。他们的特点是,利用以前非环保行动的思维介入环境运动,凭着情感、直觉、既有知识、智慧采取行动。除第一类知识分子型运动参与者外,一般不太看重对整个环保运动的思考和对环保运 动未来的思量。
新近介入环境运动的精英式青年很少,草根青年居多。草根青年对抽象的思考一向不大喜欢或者不擅长,他们和前三类有一些共同点,往往凭着朴素的环保情感、直觉、生活经验采取行动。他们对行动反思或者理论建构不在意,甚至觉得无用。
我们可将这种侧重具体环保行动、不注重整体反思和理论建设的一类思维暂称中国环境运动的“行动主义”。
行动主义的不足
中国环境运动作为一股社会力量,它有自己的时代使命和社会责任。它应该影响公共领域,使其组织框架、决策方式以及意识形态都有利于环境保护,它应该绿化市场,应该将环境文化的基因嵌入中国的文化主体当中,应该创新出一种环境友好的生活方式。
现在虽然运动参与主体日众,价值观、行动思路和工具也日益多元化,但行动主义的运动氛围中也有一系列需要弥补的问题。
如何梳理、选择多元化背后的价值观,如何处理运动主体与政府、市场的公共关系,如何描述我们的愿景和方向,如何加强内部凝聚力,如何提升运动的公众吸引力和公众的认同感,每一个行动的策略如何选择等等,这些问题都需要环境运动参与者通过整体的抽象思考和讨论,做出一个有逻辑说服力的判断。基于该判断的行动 才是有效率的。
但行动主义者,注重具体行动,不重整体反思,使中国环境运动陷入“低头赶路”的状态,不“抬头看路”,无法明晰运动方向在哪里,使命是什么,路径是否合适。
本小组认为中国环境运动除了上述详细讨论的“缺乏反思、不重理论”,还有行业原子化、小圈子内自我陶醉、公众认可度低等不足。
所谓原子化,即观察中国环境运动,看到的是一个个原子状的机构个体,个体间缺乏有机联系。怀疑中国是否存在环境运动,其中一个怀疑层面就是,这些原子个体尚未进入到一个运动的整体。
小圈子内的自我陶醉和公众认可度低,反映的其实是一个问题,中国环境运动偏居社会一角,没有进入主流社会的舞台。
 如何从原子式的机构个体群进化成一个整体的运动?如何融入主流社会,让环境保护成为主流?中国环境运动遇到的这些问题,都不是简单的行动能够解决的,“行动为王”的思路需要调整。
不反思,不构建一个有方向的整体,中国环境运动会在一个简单重复的行动怪圈中打转。
(执笔人:霍伟亚,小组成员:沈尤、刘晨、刘毅、方明、费晓静)

Translated by Tom Marling

Reviewed by Lauren Gloudeman

No related content found.

Share: