Leer en español

Wen Bo is one of China's leading environmental activists and one of the most critical voices. He speaks slowly, listens attentively and is well aware of the environmental difficulties facing Latin America due to the pressure on its natural resources. China is Peru's main trading partner and one of the main destinations for timber (which in many cases is illegally extracted from protected natural areas), fishmeal, squid and minerals such as copper.

In this exclusive interview with OjoPúblico, Wen Bo, 53, talks about the opacity in the supply chains that supply China, the Trump impact on the new global geopolitics and points out that broad political will is required on the part of the Chinese government to boost transparency and accountability in the traceability of imported products.

Between May 19 and 22, he participated in the global meeting People For Forests, which brought together more than 80 local leaders from the Americas, Europe, Asia and Oceania to discuss the current challenges to address the climate crisis. At the event –where OjoPúblico was also invited to share the findings of our research on illegal mining and organized crime– Wen Bo spoke about the work of the China Environmental Paper Network, an international network that brings together hundreds of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) dedicated to promoting environmental and social responsibility in the paper industries.

He has been an advisor to various organizations such as Rainforest Foundation Norway and National Geographic Society. His commitment to the environment came early on, when he was inspired by Greenpeace's actions against whaling ships. Wen Bo is a graduate of Zhongnan University in Changsha, and a graduate of International Relations at the KDI School of International Management in Seoul, South Korea.

China is one of Latin America's main trading partners and has built a mega-port with investments in Peru. Is China talking about the environmental impacts of the growing demand for natural resources and food from Latin America? 

I think people in China are aware of the growing trade relationship with Peru. We import a lot of minerals and other materials, but understanding about the country is still relatively uncommon. There is no frequent travel. Business people travel to Peru, but other people do not have as many opportunities to visit their country. We receive a lot of information about some world heritage sites, such as Machu Picchu. In the impression of ordinary Chinese people, they know that Peru is a beautiful country, very exotic, with beautiful landscapes and very nice people. But not many have the opportunity to travel there. So the understanding of the culture, the landscape, the heritage, have been limited to media coverage. I think an increase in exchanges would definitely help to improve the understanding of Peru within the Chinese population.

Do you think that in recent years there has been an increase in environmental awareness among the Chinese population about the origin of the resources they import? For example, wood, one of the main resources that Peru sends to China.

There has been an increase in environmental awareness by the Chinese population. There are people affected by pollution and environmental destruction within China. So people are aware of these problems. And the younger generation has more information. And there is also much more coverage about these problems, including climate change, rainfall and destruction, the impact of mining, and so on. However, what is the direct impact of China importing, for example, minerals from Peru, or what is the local impact in Peru? This may not be widely publicized in China. So people are not aware of the problem in their country.

In our research on traceability in end buyers of products that Latin America sells to Europe, the United States and China, we found information on the former, but not on China. How to make supply chains transparent in China?

It is a very interesting question because in China we probably have easy access to buyer information. In China we know who the importers are, who the big distributors are.

What is the impact of mineral imports from Peru? This cannot be widely publicized in China. People are not aware of the problem in their country.

But only from local companies.

Yes, in China. It's easier for us, inside China, to find out information about the buyers, the importing companies, because in the Chinese media, in our yearbook, the customer yearbook, and other information available, we can find them easily. But what we don't have in China, which you probably do have more information, is the impact of the supplier. Who are those companies that supply the traders, and then transport through sea routes to China and Europe? What is the direct impact on the local ecosystem and on the local community? We do not have that information.

Why is there no interest in making this information transparent?

I think there is a lack of contact, because we understand that, if China imports a large volume of minerals, they will have an impact. But who do we contact to find out this information? We don't know. So this kind of opportunity to meet face-to-face is real. We don't have the opportunity to meet in person with Peruvian environmental organizations, Peruvian media channels, researchers, etc. to communicate. If we have questions about the origin of these minerals, whether they would have an impact locally, we don't know who to go to. I think communication is very important. Communication between people in both countries to share that information and make sure that the supply chain is green and sustainable. Consumers, buyers, want to be responsible consumers. They don't want to buy things that are actually more harmful to the people of origin in these producing countries.

You mentioned that the law in China does allow to know the origin of products, such as wood, sold by local suppliers within China, but that this does not apply to companies that import from other countries. How long do you think it will take for this law to be applied to foreign companies and for more transparency to be achieved?

Of course it takes time. It also requires political will on the part of the Chinese government to ensure that the supply chain is transparent, but also accountable. It takes an effort on both sides, both from exporting countries like Peru, and importing countries like China, to work together. Because we want to ensure that the supply chain is transparent and also that the sourcing and the consumer are responsible. I think there are already environmental guidelines in China proposed by various institutions, including government ministries, but because it involves different countries, if we want to enforce the law and standards, we cannot enforce them outside China. So we just provide suggestions and recommendations that we should have certain good practices. But would it be mandatory or enforceable? That is always an unknown. I think there are already economic frameworks like APEC [the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation]. Responsible, green supply chain has been discussed extensively there. 

One of the most discussed topics at a commercial level has to do with the environmental standards that Chinese companies comply with. What is your analysis on the comparison of these standards with those set by European or North American companies?

My opinion is that we should not differentiate standards by country. Even in the most developed countries, there can also be bad companies. Even in the United Kingdom, the United States, North America and Northern Europe, there are also bad companies that do not do business with high ESG [Environmental, Social and Governance] standards. 

In China, we have good companies that try to meet good standards. Also, when they go to invest in other countries, they try to be very careful, to obey local laws and regulations, because they know they are being monitored by international watchdogs, and by local governments in Peru. Of course, in day-to-day business, it depends on each company's own organizational culture. Do they want to do business exclusively from an entrepreneurial perspective or would they prefer an approach in which multiple deals can be closed on the table? It depends on each company. We cannot say that Chinese companies have lower standards than European companies. That should not be a common understanding because the countries have different companies.

What we don't have in China, and you do have, is the impact [on the environment] of the local supplier.

What do you think is going to be the main problem in discussing the challenges around the climate crisis, with this new global geopolitical scenario with President Trump in the United States and the other changes in Europe?

I find it tragic that some political leaders do not recognize the environmental challenges facing the planet. I think they probably need to understand the science and the environmental crisis better. But, it also shows a trend: people in different countries are more nationalistic. People are starting to look out for their own interests, their own local and national interests, rather than in the interests of humanity as a whole. I think the environmental crisis is getting worse compared to the past. We need to work together. Global problems can only be solved with global efforts. If the different governments in the West and East encourage us, people should unite. Finally, it is the people who suffer, not the government. Of course, the government may have crises, but ultimately it is the people who pay the price and bear the burden of environmental problems. 

Are there any regulations or restrictions for environmental NGOs to work in China? What is the work of an environmental NGO like?

There have been policies impacting civil society in China. For example, the government recently enacted the foreign NGO law, which controls foreign NGOs. If they want to carry out activities or operate in China, they need to comply with the foreign NGO law. There are many restrictions. For example, they must have a registered status in order to organize any activities. There are also restrictions for Chinese NGOs that receive funding from international sources. But there is plenty of funding, especially in the environmental world. People want to support Chinese organizations to protect nature and fight pollution. But the Chinese government tends to be suspicious of foreign NGOs.

The government makes it more difficult for foreign organizations to work in China. There is also a great restriction on Chinese NGOs receiving funding from international sources, which is very unfortunate. Also, there are some restrictions for Chinese groups on the type of activities they can work on. If you work on issues like data collection, that can be very problematic because they would think that those data can be used for other purposes. In a way, the working space for many civil societies in China has been reduced. But there are other forms of social organizing, such as generating impact through social networks. Young people are more adept at publicizing issues in the new media.

There are other ways to communicate with the public and also to show a particular problem, such as an environmental problem. I think people need to be more creative in fighting these problems and try to work together to hold polluters accountable. There are also alternatives to working with organizations in other countries.

CHANCAY MEGAPORT. In Peru, Chinese state-owned company Cosco Shipping Ports Limited has built a huge port that aims to accelerate trade from Latin America.

Photo: OjoPúblico / Omar Lucas

But can a Chinese NGO make a partnership with a European NGO and receive foreign funds to develop projects inside China?

Yes, they can. They need to go through a project registration process. It does not mean they are banned. Chinese NGOs are not prohibited from working with international partners. But under the new foreign NGO law, which came into effect in 2017, they need to first register their activities, and submit their work plan or activity plan in advance. Then the government approves it. It is not prohibited, but it is more complicated.

The COP30, to be held in November in Brazil, will be very weakened by the exit of several governments from the Paris Agreement. How do you think the geopolitical rearrangement and the influence of China will influence it?

I would say that China's presence and influence will be strengthened. Because of the new Trump administration in the United States, it is less likely that aid will be provided to Latin America. But China continues to have a strong interest in Latin America because there is a mutual benefit. If China continues to engage through trade, diplomatic relations, cultural exchanges; this would bring benefits to both China and the countries in Latin America. China wanted to do business with Latin America.

China wanted to have a better relationship, both economically and socially. I think the common understanding in the Chinese population and also in the Chinese government officials, is that they know that maintaining trade with Latin American countries, having a good relationship, could bring common prosperity. During this trade, we wanted to make sure that we do not generate damage. If we continue to extract materials and minerals, without taking into consideration the consequences, that can be bad.

Increasing trade just to get raw materials, without investing in the education system, without having a health system, means you just get materials without investing in people. I think the Chinese government needs to realize that. Realize that we don't just want one good, one raw material: beef, soybeans, copper, etc. We also want to bring good things to the people of Latin America. China seems to me to have financial resources, technology and a big market. So I think it can be a good thing because it is precisely what Latin American countries need. The Chinese government and the Chinese people are thinking long term.

Science tells us that we cannot continue to grow at the rate and manner in which the world is currently growing because that is what is generating the climate crisis. How far are we from the great powers, China, the United States, India, reducing their emissions?

China is already committed to reducing its carbon emissions. We set ourselves the 30-30 target. China has its own emissions reduction target and is enforcing it. Of course, there is a problem with verification. You set a big target, but how can you verify it? There is also a target for many years down the road. Is this target going to continue to be enforced or attempted by future generations? It is not always this particular administration that has to implement it, but it also needs future generations to continue to achieve this target. Will this commitment be fulfilled? It is an unknown, because there are many pledges, even at COP meetings, UN meetings, such as the two-degree pledge, that have been broken.

I think politicians tend to set a big target, but then fail to meet it. So far we don't have this international compliance mechanism. A country can join an international agreement and it can also withdraw from it.

I believe that we cannot rely solely on government commitments. People must organize. As a non-governmental organization, people should unite and put pressure on the different governments in their countries.

I find it tragic that some political leaders fail to recognize the environmental challenges facing the planet.

How do you think the COP will end in Brazil without the presence of the United States, one of the main emitters of greenhouse gases? 

I don't think the United States will withdraw completely from this process. They will probably send a smaller delegation.

But there is no certainty that he will make the commitments?

Exactly, that's possible. I think even the Trump administration probably doesn't recognize climate change as a big problem that needs to be addressed. But I have enormous confidence in the American people. There are a large number of environmental organizations. Over the last several decades, they have been very active in advocating for environmental movements and environmental agenda. You can't take a single nation in isolation. It is still a very sophisticated country. And in the United States there are different social institutions that have been actively promoting this agenda. So the federal government may have a policy, but I think what really matters is the choice of the American people as a whole.

The government makes it more difficult for foreign organizations to work in China.

Do you think that the U.S. rapprochement with Saudi Arabia or Russia, which drive fossil fuel extraction, will result in greater difficulties in combating the climate crisis?

Fighting the climate crisis has never been easy. And the relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia, of course, can be seen, because they have a lot of energy agreements. They're probably more active in extracting fossil fuels and using fossil fuels as an engine to sustain the economy. 

But other than that, I think the environmental crisis, including the climate change crisis, was caused by a number of factors. I think people should sit down together, without fighting as happened between Russia and Ukraine - where huge resources have been invested on the military front and there has been a huge loss of human lives - all this represents a big crisis, because it translates into economic losses and personal losses for many families. And if money is spent on this, other countries have to support Ukraine, and Russia, of course, has spent enormous resources on maintaining its military. That money could be put to better use. That money could be used for other purposes instead of feeding this war machine. Today's world is different: success is no longer found by conquering more territories.

People should live in peace and value life, and find ways to solve common challenges, such as infectious diseases –like Covid and others–, fight desertification, save water sources, and also produce food to reduce starvation, fight poverty, and also the trade in native species and drug trafficking. These are the security problems that governments should take seriously, instead of trying to conquer more land and turn the agenda upside down.

Due to the new Trump administration in the United States, it is less likely that aid will be provided to Latin America.

In your presentation during People for Forests you said that when they went to school and were shown a map of the world, they saw Chile and related it as a country with a lot of copper. How do you think the information gap can be reduced from China to Latin America so that they can understand the impacts generated by the demand for natural resources?

I think the book was quite outdated, out of date. Basically, the geography lesson was about mountains and minerals. It reflected the thinking of the former Soviet Union, a kind of Soviet thinking. I think people, children in China, should be educated about the people of Latin America: where they come from, what their lifestyle is, what their cultural heritage and ecosystem is, what wildlife is there. 

If they were educated about the culture and the natural heritage of these countries, and if they were evaluated on that instead of what mineral resources are there, what things you can buy or sell, then people would have a real appreciation for the land, the water, the air and all those ecosystems.And if they develop that appreciation, they will understand that, if we do something bad, it's harmful to people and hurts their feelings. So I think that, in a way, education - environmental education, nature education and cultural education - should be more humanist-oriented, focused on human interest rather than commercial interest.