2nd Asia-Europe Forum on Methods and Perspectives of Risk Analysis

The Hong Kong Advanced Institute for Cross-Disciplinary Studies of the City University of Hong Kong organised the 2nd Asia-Europe Forum on Methods and Perspectives of Risk Analysis on 8-9 November 2012, in collaboration with the IN-EAST Institute of East Asian Studies of the University of Duisburg-Essen in Germany, coordinator of the EastAsiaNet thematic research network that includes the East Asian Studies & Research Centre of the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Inter-Asia and the CIDOB Foundation of Barcelona think tank. Seán Golden, a member of the Inter-Asia research group, spoke on the topic of A Discourse Analysis of the Official and Non-official Communiocation of Ecological Risk and its Subsequent Management in the PRC:

Abstract
This paper will present a case study of three sources of discourse for the communication of ecological risk in the PRC and its subsequent management. The three sources are: the discourse of informal, nongovernmental or emergent civil society communication of ecological risk (social movements, protest movements, critical analysis of risk and governmental policy); the discourse of formal or academic, nongovernmental communication of ecological risk (academics, advisers, opinion-makers); the official, governmental communication of ecological risk (official think tanks, ministry documents). These three kinds of communication will then be compared and contrasted with the results of official management of ecological risk in the PRC. The working hypothesis of this study is that even though awareness of ecological risk is high among the emergent civil society, the ministry advisers and the policy-makers, the management of ecological risk is hampered by contradictory priorities and criteria in the meritocratic evaluation of performance by government and Party officials, on the one hand, and the generation of wealth, on the other. This debate is analogous to the debate on efficiency (the generation of wealth) and equity (the redistribution of wealth) in the field of economic planning and performance.

Constructing a Discourse of "Scientific Development" and "Ecological Civilisation" in China. Ecology and Ideology in Chinese Thought

Seán Golden, member of the Inter-Asia research group, spoke at the 9th EastAsiaNet Research Workshop at Universidade de Aveiro (Portugal, 19-21 April 2012) dedicated to risk and the environment in East ASia on the subject of Constructing a Discourse of "Scientific Development" and "Ecological Civilisation" in China. Ecology and Ideology in Chinese Thought.

Abstract

Hu Jintao introduced the concept of “scientific development” into official Party discourse. This is understood to refer to the need for better environmental management, the reduction of environmental degradation and conservation of the environment. Think tanks of the Central Committee have elaborated a discourse of “Ecological Civilisation” to accompany the previously constructed discourses of “Material Civilisation” (the economy), “Spiritual Civilisation” (culture) and “Political Civilisation” (democracy and the rule of law). References to Nature in an environmental or ecological context are rare in the history of Chinese thought, much more associated with Daoism than with Confucianism, but they do exist. Lynn White (“The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis”) pointed out long ago that the book of Genesis lies behind Western notions of the exploitation of nature. Frans de Wahl (The Ape and the Sushi Master) suggested that Japanese primatologists made important discoveries about the role of culture among primates earlier than their Western counterparts because of their grounding in a Shinto perception of the natural world. This study proposes to compare and contrast the ideological bases of Euroamerican and East Asian approaches to the environment.

"China's Perception of Risk and the Concept of 'Comprehensive National Power'"

The Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies has recently published an article by Seán Golden, member of the Inter-Asia research team, in a special volume dedicated to Political and Economic Decoupling and Risk Assessment in Contemporary Asia.

Abstract 

This article approaches the concept of risk from a Chinese perspective and traces its evolution throughout the history of Chinese thought, from the classics to the present. It analyzes underlying elements that have given rise to its current form, in comparison with elements of the same concept in the West, and describes how the perception of risk has helped shape the guidelines of China's ongoing transformation, as in the case of "peaceful development" and a "harmonious world". It identifies the main domestic and foreign risks that threaten the sustainability of China's development, and discusses the concept of "comprehensive national power".