Introduction: Chinese Development
There
is little doubt among economists, politicians, developers and environmentalists
alike that China
is a rising power currently in the midst of an unprecedented period of
growth. The China Modernization Report
2005 predicts that China
will join the ranks of “developed countries” by 2080 (China View, 19 Feb. 2005). This is an impressive prospect in a country
where the average annual income is still only $5,300, one seventh of United
States’ average of $38,000 (China View, 17 Feb. 2005). The growth of China’s economy is evidenced by
is recent replacement of the United States as the world’s top consumer of food,
energy, and industrial commodities as well as consumer goods (China View, 17
Feb. 2005). China
remains second to the U.S.
only in oil and cars (China View, 17
Feb. 2005).
The
economic boom in China
has opened the floodgates to development of equal proportions. Although estimates of the human population
(around 1.3 billion) vary due to questionable reports from rural areas where
statistics are doctored to create the appearance of low birth rates, there is
an unquestionable urban migration underway (China View, 19 May 2004; Hertsgaard, 1997).
The government has decided to increase urbanization by one percent
annually (China View, 19 May 2004). This plan translates to 400 million new
city residents in the next 12 years (Pedersen,
2005). The urban drive has created the
demand for new housing, new power plants to provide electricity to those
houses, new commercial and industrial centers to deliver goods to the
homeowners, and new roads to transport the goods and people. Essentially they’re rebuilding the housing
stock of two Americas
in 12 years (Pedersen, 2005). Beijing
alone built 225 million square feet of housing (roughly equal to that in all of
Florida) in 2003 and is currently constructing its sixth ring road, sure to be
a massive bottleneck upon completion (Steinglass,
2005).
The
breakneck pace of development in China
has turned the country into a land of opportunity for architects from around
the world. Designers from Russia,
the United States,
Switzerland, France,
the United Kingdom,
and Germany
have joined the effort largely due to China’s
inability to meet its own demands (Steinglass,
2005). Chinese-American
architect and businessman James Jao along with other
industry insiders points out that, “China
is the only place in the world where talented architects have the opportunity
to experiment with their design ideas because of the booming economy and real
estate market.” (China
View, 19 May 2004). Among those
implementing new ideas in China
is William McDonough whose vision I will discuss below.
During a time so
narrowly focused on the new China,
there are several Chinese and foreigners who are raising questions about what
will happen to the old China. Although there is much debate over the
importance of preserving historical buildings and traditional facets of design,
there seems to be a consensus among the Chinese that it is time to move into
the modern world of universally available amenities and high levels of
consumption modeled by Westerners (Steinglass, 2005;
China View, 19 May 2004). Many foreigners have asked the Chinese to
reconsider this goal and learn from the mistakes of those who have come before
them to which Chinese authorities respond, “We have every right to make all the
mistakes you made.” (Steinglass, 2005; China
View, 19 May 2004). The development that is underway symbolizes
not only China’s
entry into the ranks of developed countries but also the shedding of a past filled
with poverty, hunger, and struggle (China View, 19 May 2004; Steinglass, 2005; Hertsgaard,
1997). In a country used to chaos and
instability this is simply the most recent in a long line of dramatic reforms
(Kaplan, 1999; Steinglass, 2005).
The decisions that
the Chinese make during this growth have the potential to write economic and
environmental history. Old patterns
could be followed, leading to an unprecedented level of environmental and
cultural destruction or revolutionary new models could be used in designing
China’s infrastructure and economy, leading to a new world outlook on
sustainability. One of these new models
has been proposed by what may seem to be an unlikely pair, William McDonough,
an American architect, and Michael Braungart, a
German chemist.
Cradle to Cradle Model
Albert
Einstein suggested “the world will not evolve past its current state of crisis
by using the same thinking that created the situation.” (McDonough
& Braungart, 2002). McDonough and Braungart
propose a new way of thinking that has the potential to bring us out of crisis
in their 2002 book, Cradle to Cradle. The book acts as a manifesto for the next
industrial revolution, proposing dramatic revisions to the way that we think
about nature and humans’ place within it.
In order to understand the magnitude of the revolution McDonough and Braungart are proposing, let us first look at where
environmentalism is today.
The
modern environmental movement has been characterized by complaint-based
activism and is largely driven by guilt (Shellenberger
& Nordhaus, 2005; Polonsky,
2005; McDonough & Braungart, 2002). This is not a new phenomenon, however. George
Perkins Marsh, among the first to understand the human power of destruction,
wrote (ca.1860), “When I submit these thoughts to a printing press, I am
helping cut down the woods. When I pour
cream in my coffee, I am helping to drain a marsh for cows to graze, and to
exterminate the birds of Brazil. When I go birding or hunting in my Ford, I am
devastating an oil field, and re-electing an imperialist to get me rubber. Nay more: when I father more than two
children I am creating an insatiable need for more printing presses, more cows,
more coffee, more oil, to supply which more birds, more trees, and more flowers
will either be killed, or…evicted from their several environments.” (McDonough & Braungart, 2002, p.46).
Environmentalists
are perpetually the bearers of bad news, reporting on the results of our
destructive behavior and calling on us to be less bad by pushing for
regulations of the industrial and consumer systems that are already in
place. This stance has pitted
environmentalists against industrialists and business people in a battle that
has convinced both sides that they are on opposite ends of a spectrum on which
the middle ground requires dangerous sacrifices from both groups (McDonough
& Braungart, 2002). In a society that traditionally values
financial success and industrial growth over water quality and pristine
wilderness, environmentalists have grown into the enemies of the GNP.
McDonough
and Braungart’s vision is based on a positive, rather
than a guilt-ridden outlook. A similar
stance is taken by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus, liberal political activists and authors of “The
Death of Environmentalism: Global-Warming Politics in a Post-Environmental
World.” (Shellenberger & Nordhaus, 2005).
Shellenberger states that, “As a rule, hope is
more sustaining than fear,” (Polonsky, 2005). McDonough and Braungart
(2002) provide that hope with the revolutionary idea that the human footprint
on the Earth could be positive and nourishing just as that of a cherry tree or
ants. “As long as human beings are
regarded as “bad,” zero is a good goal.
But to be less bad is to accept things as they are, to believe that
poorly designed, dishonorable, destructive systems ate the best humans can do. This is
the ultimate failure of the “be less bad” approach: a failure of the
imagination. From our perspective, this
is a depressing vision of our species’ role in the world. What about an entirely different model? What would it mean to be 100% good?” (McDonough & Braungart, 2002).
In
a world where humans have a positive effect on the Earth, government regulation
is considered a sign of bad design, “eco-effectiveness” is chosen over
eco-efficiency, and “waste equals food.” (McDonough & Braungart, 2002).
These phrases coined by the designing pair may sound extremist and
idealistic but fundamental to the Cradle to Cradle model is that barriers
between different groups in society are broken down. Only when environmentalists, economists, and
those battling for civil liberties work together and think beyond the box which
has traditionally defined their thinking, will a sustainable, or even better,
an enriching system be established.
Speaking of Adam
Smith’s 1776 Inquiry into the Nature and
Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engles’ 1848 The
Communist Manifesto, and Rachel Carson’s 1962 Silent Spring, McDonough and Braungart
(2002, p.149) write, “All three of these manifestos were inspired by a genuine
desire to improve the human condition, and all three had their triumphs as well
as their perceived failures. But taken
to extremes—reduced to isms—the stances they inspired can neglect factors crucial
to long-term success, such as social fairness, the diversity of human culture,
and the health of the environment. Carson
sent an important warning to the world, but even ecological concerns, stretched
to an ism, can neglect social, cultural, and economic concerns to the detriment
of the whole system.”
Perhaps the most
revolutionary aspect of McDonough and Braungart’s
vision is their integration of economics, ecology, and equity into the design
process, thereby bringing environmental design out of its “ism” corner
(Fig.1). No design is considered
sustainable under the Cradle to Cradle model if it is not judged as beneficial
to all three sectors. Therefore the
cultural and environmental context of each design must be considered and
diversity is respected; what works in California
may not work in China. Likewise, the economic needs of the client
must be met. In a world where
environmentalists and industrialists have traditionally butted heads over the
issue of growth, this is a refreshing perspective.
The inclusive
nature of the Cradle to Cradle design model has appeal to members of our
society who are stereotypically unconcerned with environmental issues,
including industry and political leaders. McDonough has worked with both the Clinton
and the Bush administrations (Gillies, 2004). He stated in an interview with a reporter
from Forbes magazine, “We don’t focus on politics, because they come and
go. Republicans are very attracted to
what we do.” (Gillies, 2004).
McDonough and Braungart’s firm, McDonough Braungart Design Chemistry (MBDC), have also been hired by
companies like BP, Nike (redesigning the materials that make up their shoes and
the methods used to produce them), and Ford (overhauling the infamously
environmentally damaging River Rouge plant and conceiving new cars). When asked, “How can you work with them?” regarding their willingness to
work with every sector of the economy, including large corporations, McDonough
and Braungart sometimes reply, “How can you not work with them?” (McDonough
& Braungart, 2002, p.149). Working with political and industrial leaders
is essential to making broad and lasting changes and, amazingly enough, Cradle
to Cradle design “…might drop sustainability issues right onto the CEO’s desk,
which is precisely where they need to be.” (Clifford, 2002).
Cradle to Cradle to China
By
far the largest group that McDonough with his firm, William McDonough &
Partners, has worked with is China,
a nation searching for its new identity amongst the ranks of the developed countries
of the world. McDonough grew up in Hong
Kong and returned to China
in 1994 to begin work redeveloping the country (Pedersen, 2005). McDonough’s presence in the development of China,
along with important government declarations, provides hope that the Chinese
are ready to embrace sustainability.
In
November of 2004, China’s
Ministry of Construction announced ambitious objectives for the sustainable
growth of China
(Libby, 2004). Among the goals is for
energy use in existing buildings to be reduced by 65 percent by the year
2020. In addition, 25 percent of
existing buildings in China’s
large cities will be retrofitted with more eco-efficient technology by 2010
(Libby, 2004). Some are doubtful that
such ambitious targets will be met since doing so means a commitment to
rebuilding a sizable portion of their built environment (Libby, 2004).
The
motivation for such measures is very real for China,
however, and is not simply part of an effort for political correctness. Like many Americans, environmental issues are
not a priority for most Chinese until their welfare is directly affected; they
are usually willing to put up with filthy air and polluted water if it means
more jobs or better pay (Hertsgaard, 1997). Practically speaking, however, issues surrounding
powering the increasingly power-hungry nation must be considered. Qio Baoxing, vice minister of China’s
Ministry of Construction, put it frankly, “It is urgent for China
to promote energy-efficiency and green buildings since the fast pace of China’s
industrialization has posed great pressure on the supply of energy resources,”
(China View, 23 Feb. 2005). Coal is China’s
primary source of energy but the time when their reserves will run out is in
sight. A mass energy study showed that
if the country were to build all of its planned new buildings out of brick,
they would burn all their coal and lose all their soil (Pedersen, 2005). A more viable path must be realized.
Pollution
levels that many believe to be a horror of the past are still a reality in
parts of China. As reported by Mark Hertsgaard
(1997), when stretched out in front of you, your fingers can disappear from
sight on a bad day in Chongqing. While government officials have been aware of
the dangers posed by the environmental degradation taking place in China,
they most often have favored short-term economic considerations over
environmental goals in fear of the social revolts that could ensue if factories
were closed and jobs were lost (Hertsgaard,
1997). Now, however, officials have come
to realize that environmental degradation costs money, as much as 10 to 15
percent of the GDP (Hertsgaard, 1997). If this estimate is correct, the celebrated
growth of the Chinese economy is essentially being cancelled out by the cost of
recovering from the hazards that growth has inflicted (Hertsgaard,
1997). This is where Cradle to Cradle
design comes in as a practical solution to the very complicated problems of
powering a country in a cost-effective way.
McDonough
is currently working with the China Housing Industry Association (CHIA) to
develop design planning templates that could be used by others for their own
projects and is also working to upgrade rural housing (Pedersen, 2005). New, toxin-free, energy efficient, and low
cost building materials are being developed as an alternative to brick and
entire cities are being planned (Pedersen, 2005). McDonough & Partners have developed the
master plan for a new administrative and cultural
center for the government of the Licheng District in
rapidly growing Eastern Industrial Zone east of Jina. The urban district will be home to 180,000
people and embodies the principles of Cradle to Cradle design through its
attention to the local environment, its planning for future technological
developments, and the “ultimate goal of building a safe, healthy, and
delightful solar-powered city” (McDonough & Partners). This plan also provides the framework for
designing other Cradle to Cradle cities (McDonough & Partners).
In
addition to his architectural design work, McDonough co-founded the China-U.S.
Center for sustainable Development (CUCSD) with Madame Deng Nan, vice minister
of China’s Ministry of Science and Technology, in April of 1999 (CUCSD). The Center’s mission “is to accelerate
sustainable development in China and the United States through a new form of
cooperation among the business community, governments, universities, research
institutions, and non-governmental organizations—based on nature’s design
principles and focused results” with the purpose of creating “sustaining
enterprises using Cradle to Cradle models that enable commerce, communities and
nature to thrive and grow in harmony.” (CUCSD).
Also in line with
Cradle to Cradle design, the United Nations Development Progamme
(UNDP) supports the Chinese government in integrating
its environmental commitments with national development goals and microeconomic
policies (UNDP). Cooperation amongst
industry and governmental leaders such as that fostered by the CUCSD, the UNDP,
and other agreements like the US-China Energy Policy Dialogue formed in 2004
(China View, 17 Dec. 2004), have the potential to create systems that are
designed to encourage growth of ecology, economics and equity, as called for by
the Cradle to Cradle design model.
McDonough
maintains a realistic outlook on the projects underway in China. “Our job is to work with reality.” (Pedersen, 2005). He
knows that change will not happen immediately or even as quickly as he might
like but sustains his optimism that our imaginations will bring us into the
future. “This is going to take us all
and it is going to take forever. But
then, that’s the point.” (McDonough & Braungart, 2002, p.186).
Conclusions
The
implications of China’s
commitment to sustainability and the subsequent decisions that are made to
reach that goal are far-reaching. On the
one hand, the rest of the world would feel the direct environmental impacts of
an increasingly pollution-ridden China
if poor decisions are made, but on the other hand, a sustainable China
would redefine the way the world thinks about environmentalism. The sheer magnitude of the development has
the potential to develop new technologies and increase the availability and
lower the prices of existing technologies.
According to McDonough, “If China could use its ability to mass-produce
things at very low cost, then allow local communities to access their abundance
or resources in healthy, delightful ways, that’s a gift that China can give the
rest of us, and we’ll be very happy to outsource the production.” (Pedersen, 2005).
An example
McDonough uses is photovoltaics. In a country where the only forms of energy
available widely enough to meet soaring demands are coal and solar, the
question is not if but when China
will go solar (Pedersen, 2005). If China
were to produce solar panels on a large enough scale to power the country,
solar would become a more viable option for the entire world simply because the
technology would have become more available and cheaper. And since solar is an inherently local form
of energy, there is no need to worry about job loss because every job produced
making a solar collector produces four local jobs (Pedersen, 2005).
China
can also set the example for the rest of the world that environmentally
friendly changes can be made on a large scale and not just be economically
viable but also encourage economic growth.
McDonough & Partner’s plan for the Licheng city gives “China
the opportunity to redefine cities in ways that lead the world in the
realization of truly “sustaining” future.” (McDonough
& Partners). In the
not-too-distant future when China
rises to a world super-power, the country will have a new level of influence
that, if she chooses, can be used to guide the rest of the world towards
eco-effectiveness.
This figure is available separately in room 259.
Figure 1. This fractal, developed by McDonough and Braungart (2002), is used as a design tool to help
conceptualize and creatively examine the relationship between the equally
important factors of Economy, Ecology, and Equity. While designing a project or system, the pair
moves around the fractal, asking questions and looking for answers. It is key to note
that the fractal has no apparent scale and that it is made up of self-similar
parts, no corner having more weight than the other two.
References
China-U.S.
Center for Sustainable Development:
http://www.chinauscenter.org
China View, 2004,
Culture Helps Shape Cities: http://www.chinaview.com,
19 May 2004.
China View, 2004,
US, China not
competitors for energy: US
energy secretary: http://www.chinaview.com,
17 December 2004.
China View, 2005,
China overtakes
US as world’s top consumer: http://www.chinaview.com,
17 February 2005.
China View, 2005,
China to be
“developed county” in 2080: http://www.chinaview.com,
19 February 2005.
China View, 2005,
China to see
green, energy-saving building boom: http://www.chinaview.com,
23 February 2005.
Clifford, H.,
2002, Better, By Design: Grist.org (http://www.grist.org), 25 July 2002.
Gillies, A.T., 2004, Cradle to Cradle to Washington:
Forbes.com (http://www.forbes.com), 15 December 2004.
Libby, B., 2004,
Is China Ready to Embrace Sustainability?: Sustainable Metropolis.com (http://www.metropolismag.com), 30 November 2004.
McDonough, W. and Braungart,
M., 2002, Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the
Way We Make Things: New York,
North Point Press, 193 p.
Pederson, M.C.,
2005, Eternal Optimist: Metropolis.com
(http://www.metropolismag.com), 24
January 2005.
Polonsky, M., 2005, Michael Shellenberger
On Why Liberals Need to Abandon Complaint-Based Activism: The Sun, February 2005, p. 4-11.
Shellenberger, M. and Nordhaus,
T., The Death of Environmentalism: The Sun, February 2005, p. 12-15.
Steinglass, M., 2005, Foreign Growth: Metropolis.com (http://www.metropolismag.com), 24 January 2005.
United Nations
Development Programme in China:
http://www.undp.org.cn.
William McDonough
and Partners, architecture and community design: http://www.mcdonoughpartners.com.