|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Konigsberg
Posts: 1,554
Country: 
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostInTranslation
Your solution (banning the production of single-use chopsticks) is not only impractical, but also naive. Here is a quick run-through of some vital facts related to the controversy surrounding the disposable chopstick industry.
First of all, starting in 2004, China no longer issues the 13% tax refund for single-use wood chopstick exports. As a direct result, in the first quarter of 2005, the wood chopstick exports increased by a mere 0.8% to ~23,000 tons, while the bamboo (see below) chopstick exports increased by a whopping 55.5% to ~12,000 tons. More importantly, on April 1st, 2006, China started to tax the single-use chopsticks as a way to discourage its use and exports. In April 2006, chopstick exported from Dalian (70% of single-use chopsticks exported to Korea and Japan leaves China from Dalian) decreased 40% to 1773.2 tons from 2969.3 tons in April 2005. On the other hand, one of the biggest reason restaurant owners chose the single-use chopsticks is its low cost, thus heavy taxation on its use would definitely help convince them to switch to the more environmentally friendly reusable ones. Does this look like a government who doesn't give a damn on the deforestation problem it faced?
|
That's for export, now to the biggest market for these chopsticks
And none of this explains why it isn't outright outlawed. I thought the reason for China's authoritarianism was to do things quicker, why is it imposing a gradual and slow resolution against chopsticks when it could single handedly ban it.
Quote:
|
Secondly, the problem is not simply how many chopsticks are made, but also how they are made. Bamboos are considered as rapid replenishing resources, with an average growth time of ~3-4 years. Wood disposable chopsticks are often made out of birch and poplar, which take over 20 years to grow. Ideally, they should be made out of the more sustainable bamboos, or out of scraps. Unfortunately, because of the higher cost associated with making chopsticks out of scrap materials, many disposable chopstick manufacturers use the whole wood with low efficiency (only ~60% of material from the round wood are used) because of the low technology employed. Further, unlike in Japan, where the timber industry applies the 间伐 (cutting one tree while leaving many surrounding it untouched) method, some Chinese logging companies did in a destructive way by cutting down acres of trees leaving few untouched. Moreover, in Japan, many of the single-use chopsticks are washed and recycled to make paper. China needs to learn a lot from Japan in efficient use of the wood resources.
|
All the more reason to simply ban the industry.
Quote:
|
Thirdly, the wood consumed in the disposable chopstick industry made up only a small percentage of the total consumption in China, which if regulated properly (i.e. using exclusively scraps or bamboos, and recycle after use), can be turned into efficient use of natural resources rather than an environmental disaster. On the other hand, your single stroke of pen will put 100,000 people (that's how many people who were employed in the single-use chopstick industry in 2001) out of job instantly, and that’s something you failed to take into account. A radical approach like yours may look good on the paper, but is not necessarily the best approach.
|
Need to save every tree with that growing desert in the west. 100 000 is nothing to the amount of farmers that lost their land and will lose their lands due to desertification. Further, there are many viable substitute industry these people can go into (manufacturing plastic/metal/bamboo chopsticks whose demand for workers will grow enormously due to the lack of disposable chopsticks) since they have the experience and expertise, whereas there is little substitute to growing food and arable land. It's not like China will switch to forks and knives because there are no more disposable chopsticks. So the benefit of the industry is far lower than its environmental cost to the people and to the country as a whole (look at the cities invaded by sand storms). Hell, they can even hire them to replant trees if any are left unemployed, and if the state really gave a damn more than facade taxes.
Quote:
|
Fourthly, consumption is the driving force of the production. If no one is using the single-use chopsticks, no one will be making them. I think it is important to let people know the severity of the problem, and let them make an informed decision. In this sense, Japan is every bit responsible for the environmental problem associated with the disposable chopsticks (200 pairs consumed per person annually!). Japan invented the single-use chopsticks, and started moving plants to other countries in the 1990s. When the first batch of Chinese made chopsticks entered the Japanese market, some manufacturers in Japan suggested to the Japanese government to limit the quota imported. However, in 1999, Japan lowered the tariff for chopstick imports from 5.2% to 4.7%. I think that reflects Japan’s attitude towards imports that may cause environmental problems in other countries. So yes, China will have to help itself instead of relying on other people's virtues (but that doesn't mean that we should just ignore problems in other places). It is unfortunate that China is going through what many developing countries went through: economic development at the cost of the natural resources and environment. Luckily, the government has realized the problem, and started to put a curb on this kind of destructive mode of economic development. The root of the problem, however, still lies in the consumption. China may one day ban the disposable chopstick manufacturing, but as long as we don’t tackle the problem of consumption, the desert may just emerge in Russia, or Chile, etc.
|
You conveniently forget that without supply, there is no consumption either. Considering the concentration and adherence of the supply to the rule of law, it is far easier to attack the problem at its roots. Excepting people to do the virtuous thing is not always the best way to go for matters of the environment (look at people's negligence in the US or Canada in matters of polluting despite knowing its bad effects). The fact of the matter is that the disposable chopstick industry is a market failure. The private individuals involved have very little responsibility to the problem as they are only looking out for their best self-interest, rightfully so. The state is in charge of fixing market failures and the biggest culprit in failing to respond adequately is the CCP. You went through all these troubles, trying to point your finger at individuals and did EVERYTHING to point your finger at Japan, yet not a SINGLE mention of the CCP's fault in all of this. Does that not baffle you? No matter what Japanese entrepreneurs or consumers did, ultimately, it's the CCP that allowed them to do it, ultimately, it's the CCP that is the most affected, it's the CCP that allows the desertification to happen and ultimately, the CCP is the main culprit, yet NOT A SINGLE MENTION OF THEIR MISTAKES! Instead it's this long of a solution trying to contour around the CCP's involvement.
Quote:
|
Finally, if you insisted on believing that my intention was to divert the blame away from the CCP by bringing up Japan, I wouldn’t be able to change it for you. I can only hope one day you will see it that not all Chinese supporters are nationalists or apologists.
|
You can support individual policies from the CCP, but when it's so obvious that it's the CCP's main fault in every single aspects, and you do everything in the world to refuse that simple fact, that is being an apologist because of nationalism. There's no other explanation.
If you disagree, I want you to say "the CCP is the one most at fault in this matter"
Last edited by smallpox; 05-13-2008 at 08:39 PM.
|