IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i7p702-d587775.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Situating China in the Global Effort to Combat Desertification

Author

Listed:
  • Zheng-Hong Kong

    (Department of Environment and Geography, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK)

  • Lindsay Stringer

    (Department of Environment and Geography, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK)

  • Jouni Paavola

    (School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK)

  • Qi Lu

    (Institute of Desertification Studies, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China)

Abstract

International efforts to tackle desertification led by the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) support participatory approaches. The emphasis has been on dialogue between different perspectives, which are often grounded in individualism rather than prioritizing society as a whole, and as a result progress in implementation has been slow. China has made substantial progress in tackling desertification, but its approaches have been controversial, and the sustainability of its achievements has been questioned. While China has been active in UNCCD processes, its approach to addressing desertification has differed from those of other countries. China can thus offer important insights into the international campaign, while acknowledging that China can also learn from the efforts of others. We compare the UNCCD’s “bottom-up” approach and China’s “top-down” approach to better understand the challenges of tackling desertification. We examine the evolution in how desertification has been addressed and shed light on the context behind the changes, focusing on the role of science, policies, and public participation. We find a convergence between top-down and bottom-up approaches and that similar challenges have been experienced. Constant communications with outsiders have enabled adjustments and changes in both China and the international community, even though their approaches remain distinct. We conclude that both approaches are moving toward solutions that start from proactive investments of governments in financial, legal, institutional, and organizational aspects, draw on scientific insights, and which are grounded in the motivated and voluntary participation of non-state actors. Improved sharing of lessons across these approaches would help to create a better enabling form of environmental governance that contributes to tackling desertification.

Suggested Citation

  • Zheng-Hong Kong & Lindsay Stringer & Jouni Paavola & Qi Lu, 2021. "Situating China in the Global Effort to Combat Desertification," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-22, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:7:p:702-:d:587775
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/7/702/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/7/702/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elinor Ostrom, 2010. "Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 641-672, June.
    2. Paavola, Jouni, 2007. "Institutions and environmental governance: A reconceptualization," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 93-103, June.
    3. Chi Chen & Taejin Park & Xuhui Wang & Shilong Piao & Baodong Xu & Rajiv K. Chaturvedi & Richard Fuchs & Victor Brovkin & Philippe Ciais & Rasmus Fensholt & Hans Tømmervik & Govindasamy Bala & Zaichun , 2019. "China and India lead in greening of the world through land-use management," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 2(2), pages 122-129, February.
    4. Lindsay C. Stringer & Mark S. Reed & Andrew J. Dougill & Mary K. Seely & Martin Rokitzki, 2007. "Implementing the UNCCD: Participatory challenges," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 31(3), pages 198-211, August.
    5. Yanli Lyu & Peijun Shi & Guoyi Han & Lianyou Liu & Lanlan Guo & Xia Hu & Guoming Zhang, 2020. "Desertification Control Practices in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-15, April.
    6. Ning Liu & Lihua Zhou & J Scott Hauger, 2013. "How Sustainable Is Government-Sponsored Desertification Rehabilitation in China? Behavior of Households to Changes in Environmental Policies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-8, October.
    7. Xu, Jintao & Yin, Runsheng & Li, Zhou & Liu, Can, 2006. "China's ecological rehabilitation: Unprecedented efforts, dramatic impacts, and requisite policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 595-607, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yan Xu & Zhaoyang Cai & Kaige Wang & Yuwei Zhang & Fengrong Zhang, 2022. "Evaluation for Appropriate Tillage of Sandy Land in Arid Sandy Area Based on Limitation Factor Exclusion Method," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-12, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yakovleva, Natalia & Vazquez-Brust, Diego Alfonso, 2018. "Multinational mining enterprises and artisanal small-scale miners: From confrontation to cooperation," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 52-62.
    2. Musson, Anne, 2012. "The build-up of local sustainable development politics: A case study of company leaders in France," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 75-87.
    3. Eckehard Rosenbaum, 2017. "Green Growth—Magic Bullet or Damp Squib?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-18, June.
    4. Jiayi Sun & Deqing Tan, 2023. "Non-cooperative Mode, Cost-Sharing Mode, or Cooperative Mode: Which is the Optimal Mode for Desertification Control?," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 61(3), pages 975-1008, March.
    5. Svartzman, Romain & Dron, Dominique & Espagne, Etienne, 2019. "From ecological macroeconomics to a theory of endogenous money for a finite planet," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 108-120.
    6. Wolsink, Maarten, 2020. "Distributed energy systems as common goods: Socio-political acceptance of renewables in intelligent microgrids," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    7. Christoph Oberlack, 2017. "Diagnosing institutional barriers and opportunities for adaptation to climate change," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 805-838, June.
    8. Eloi Laurent & Jean Jouzel, 2018. "The Well-being Transition: Measuring what counts to protect what matters," Sciences Po publications 35, Sciences Po.
    9. Moeliono, Moira & Brockhaus, Maria & Gallemore, Caleb & Dwisatrio, Bimo & Maharani, Cynthia D. & Muharrom, Efrian & Pham, Thuy Thu, 2020. "REDD+ in Indonesia: A new mode of governance or just another project?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    10. Górriz-Mifsud, Elena & Olza Donazar, Luis & Montero Eseverri, Eduardo & Marini Govigli, Valentino, 2019. "The challenges of coordinating forest owners for joint management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 100-109.
    11. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    12. Martin G. Kocher & Fangfang Tan & Jing Yu, 2018. "Providing Global Public Goods: Electoral Delegation And Cooperation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 381-397, January.
    13. Tong Zhang & Chaofan Chen, 2018. "The Effect of Public Participation on Environmental Governance in China–Based on the Analysis of Pollutants Emissions Employing a Provincial Quantification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-20, July.
    14. Gani, Azmat & Scrimgeour, Frank, 2014. "Modeling governance and water pollution using the institutional ecological economic framework," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 363-372.
    15. Jorge M. Streb & Gustavo Torrens, 2011. "Meaningful talk," CEMA Working Papers: Serie Documentos de Trabajo. 443, Universidad del CEMA, revised May 2017.
    16. Xiaojun Zhang & Weiqiao Wang & Yunan Bai & Yong Ye, 2022. "How Has China Structured Its Ecological Governance Policy System?—A Case from Fujian Province," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-22, July.
    17. Andy Gouldson & Rory Sullivan, 2014. "Understanding the Governance of Corporations: An Examination of the Factors Shaping UK Supermarket Strategies on Climate Change," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(12), pages 2972-2990, December.
    18. Na Zhang & Jinqian Deng & Fayyaz Ahmad & Muhammad Umar Draz & Nabila Abid, 2023. "The dynamic association between public environmental demands, government environmental governance, and green technology innovation in China: evidence from panel VAR model," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(9), pages 9851-9875, September.
    19. repec:gat:wpaper:1509 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. David Klenert & Franziska Funke & Linus Mattauch & Brian O’Callaghan, 2020. "Five Lessons from COVID-19 for Advancing Climate Change Mitigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(4), pages 751-778, August.
    21. Thomas Vendryes, 2014. "Peasants Against Private Property Rights: A Review Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 971-995, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:7:p:702-:d:587775. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.