National Science Review
4: 140–143, 2017
doi: 10.1093/nsr/nww082
Advance access publication 3 December 2016
FORUM
The role of geography in sustainable development
By Jane Qiu
China has achieved unprecedented economic growth in the past decades. This has had serious consequences on the
environment and public health. The Chinese government now realizes that it is not just the quantity, but the quality
of development that matters. It has begun to instigate a series of policies to tackle pollution, increase the proportion
of clean energy, and redress the balance between urban and rural development—in a coordinated effort to build a
harmonious society.
Building a harmonious world was also the theme of the 33rd International Geographical Congress, which was held
in Beijing last August. At the meeting, Bojie Fu, a member of National Science Review’s editorial board, shared a
platform with geographers from Australia, China, Canada and France to discuss the challenges of urbanization,
the roles of geographers in sustainable development, as well as the importance of food security, safety and diversity.
Dadao Lu
Economic geographer at the Institute of
Geography and Natural Resources Research,
Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing
Mark Stafford Smith
Ecologist at the Commonwealth Scientific
and Industrial Research Organisation
(CSIRO) in Canberra, Australia
Jean-Robert Pitte
Historical and cultural geographer at the
University of Paris-Sorbonne in Paris, France
Bojie Fu (Chair)
Physical geographer at the Research Centre
for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese
Academy of Sciences, Beijing; President of
Geographical Society of China
Mark Rosenberg
Health geographer at Queen’s University in
Ontario, Canada
Fu: Welcome to the 33rd International Geographical Congress
in Beijing. The theme of this forum is about geography and sustainability development. Before we begin, perhaps we can introduce ourselves and our research interest. I’ll start. I’m trained in
physical geography and landscape ecology. My research focuses
on land-use changes, ecosystem services and management, especially concerning dry lands.
Stafford Smith: I work with the Commonwealth Scientific and
Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) in Australia, the federal government agency for strategic applied scientific research.
My background is also in system ecology of dry lands. I started
at the local scale, particularly on plant and animal ecology in
response to variability and the sustainability of pastoralism. It
became more expansive fairly quickly to include pastoralists’ decision making and related social and economic aspects, and the
interaction between different land users—and ultimately how
all these come together and operate.
More recently, I’ve been working on climate change adaptation, which also has to do with uncertainties and future variability. It’s a broad set of work about adapting to long-term changes,
managing cities and ecosystems, and dealing with disasters. I’m
also strongly involved in Future Earth, which concerns how various issues of global change come together in a systems way. This
is in line with my long-term interest in how we can inform decision making by bringing together the social and environmental
aspects of development issues.
Pitte: I’m the President of the Geographical Society in France—
which, created in 1821, is the oldest in the world. Formerly I was
the President of the Univeristy of Paris-Sorbonne. I also teach
food studies in the agricultural school of Hokkaido University in
C The Author(s) 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of China Science Publishing & Media Ltd. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail:
[email protected]
FORUM
Five experts gathering together after the forum discussion. First row from
left to right: Mark Rosenberg, Dadao Lu; second row from left to right:
Mark Stafford Smith, Jean-Robert Pitte, Bojie Fu.
Japan. My main field is historic and cultural geography. I did my
PhD on the history of chestnut trees in Europe. Since then, I’ve
been working on the geography of the quality of food, including
wine, for over 25 years.
Lastly, I helped the French government to gain the recognition by UNESCO of the French gastronomic meal [a customary
social practice for celebrating important moments in the lives of
individuals and groups, such as births, weddings, birthdays, anniversaries, achievements and reunions] as part of the world’s intangible heritage. We are now working with many countries on
this topic. China also has a long and rich gastronomic heritage.
Perhaps it should also consider to apply for such recognitions.
Rosenberg: I’m a professor of geography and public health sciences. I’m also the Canada Research Chair in Development
Studies. My research group mainly focuses on ageing and the implications for health and social services. We have a large research
programme on that topic. I also have a big project on the access
to health and social services by the aging population in Beijing
with my Chinese colleagues at Beijing Normal University. My
long-term interests are in the challenges of groups within society that are marginalized and their ability to access health and
social services.
Lu: I’m an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences
(CAS). I’m a former director of the CAS’ Institute of Geography. I’m an economic geographer, focusing on sustainable development, especially the East-to-West development in China,
and advises the government on such issues.
GEOGRAPHY AND FUTURE EARTH
Fu: Future Earth is a very influential international programme
on global change. What roles can geographers play?
Stafford Smith: China’s goal to build a harmonious world is in
line with that of Future Earth. The attributes of geographic research map very well with issues that Future Earth is trying to
tackle. The need to link different disciplines, especially to link
social and environmental elements, has become very important
not only for analyzing the problems but thinking about the solutions. An intent of Future Earth is to be more engaged with
Qiu
141
policy makers, especially in coordinating opinions and policies.
It’s also very important to be able to visualise a future that everyone, especially leaders from different countries, can sign up
to. Geography is uniquely positioned to link different disciplines
together. That would be a nice starting point.
Pitte: I’d like to comment on the setup of National Science Review (NSR). Why specialising only in natural science? Today,
it’s not possible to isolate natural science from global science.
Global science is not just about natural science but about humanity, society and culture. I noted there are no social scientists
in the editorial board. This is a big problem. In France, human geographers work closely with physical geographers. Geography is
very important for unifying social and natural sciences.
Stafford Smith: I totally agree. It’d be wonderful if NSR could
broaden its explicit engagement by taking a more integrative approach and by bringing in an element of geography and sustainable science.
Pitte: Many people in the West are very negative about globalisation and global warming. They definitely present challenges to
mankind, but there are also opportunities. Geography is a good
way of thinking the world today and identifying opportunities
and challenges. The theme of this congress is to live together in
diversity. This is very important. The role of geography is not
only to describe but also to understand the world in a holistic
way. In France, I’m in the minority who believe that the world is
better today than yesterday. If we want, we can have a better future. Geographers can do many things to make the future better.
Rosenberg: I share your optimism. I think the challenge is how
the scientific community, especially geographers, will respond in
the coming years to the UN initiative on Sustainability Development Goals (SDGs). It’s critical that we play a meaningful role
not only in basic research but in informing policies. We should
focus on the positive aspects of moving forward on SDGs, and at
the same time not to ignore areas where we are not succeeding.
The need to link different disciplines, especially to link
social and environmental elements, has become very
important not only for analyzing the problems but thinking about the solutions.
— Mark Stafford Smith
Lu: China has invested heavily in the past decades on various aspects of climate change research, such as atmospheric
science, oceanography and ecology. But the involvement of
geographers has been rather limited. Future Earth is an important platform for geographers because it concerns the relationship between the natural environment and human society. I
hope geographers will take an active part in Future Earth and
push policy makers to take action. This is especially important in
China, which faces many development challenges. Chinese geographers should help the government to succeed in sustainable
development and building a harmonious society.
142
FORUM
Natl Sci Rev, 2017, Vol. 4, No. 1
Fu: Future Earth aims to close the gap between environmental research and current policies and practices. Future Earth
presents a great opportunity for geographers because geography
is in essence a system science that links nature with society and
links science with policy. We can contribute a lot. Geographers
have rich datasets of observations (from monitoring networks),
inventories, interviews and surveys. In China, such studies are
closely linked to social implications because many projects are
funded by the country’s science ministry and must be relevant
to national needs.
Stafford Smith: A challenge to get that interdisciplinary work really happening, connecting science with social science, is our incentive and award systems that focus on publications and are
not set up to help integration very well. One implication is that
researchers find it very hard to publish integrative work in specialised journals. Perhaps journals should be more open to that
kind of papers, and there should also be more integrated, sustainability journals. This might be a more practical way to encourage research in integrated areas.
ROLES OF GEOGRAPHERS IN SUSTAINABLE
URBANIZATION
Fu: Let’s move on to the topic of urbanisation, which is also
closely related to geography. It’s a hot topic in China. A big
question is how to build sustainable cities, especially in developing countries. What’s the relationship between geography and
urbanisation?
Lu: Big cities need to be supported by economic development.
Increases in population and city expansion have to be supported
by energy and clean air and water. Urbanisation also need large
areas of land as well as communication and transportation infrastructures. It’s geographers’ job to assess how much energy
a given level of urbanisation requires, how much land and
clean water this needs, and how to go about infrastructure
construction.
Urbanisation in China started much later than the West—
only after it instigated economic reform 40 years ago when only
20% of the population lived in cities. Now it’s over 50%. The pace
of urbanisation is very rapid, which has caused a lot of problems.
Until recently, insufficient attention has been paid to protecting
natural resources and environment. Chinese geographers have
drawn attention to the problems and had an important role in
the current policy shift.
Geographers should start creating longitudinal
datasets that will allow us to answer the process
questions and causal relationships in sustainable
development.
— Mark Rosenberg
Top leaders now realise that sustainable urbanisation must
go hand in hand with environmental protection and that this depends on the geographical attributes of particular regions. Now
the pace of urbanisation has slowed down. But the pressure is
still there to further urbanisation because China still has a large
population in rural areas where the standard of life and work
conditions are still quite poor. Further urbanisation is inevitable.
Fu: Indeed. Rapid urbanisation in China has caused many environmental problems. The West has passed that stage, you have a
lot of experiences that we can learn from. So how can we move
towards sustainable urbanisation?
Pitte: Developed countries don’t have mega cities like Beijing,
Shanghai, Mumbai and Tokyo, which have 12–14 million people. It’s crazy. The biggest cities we have probably have several
million population. I should say mega cities, or big cities in general, are very useful. They have better job and education opportunities; if well planned, densely populated areas can reduce land
conversion and use energy more efficiently; they are also good
places for brainstorming.
But there is a limit to the number of people a city can sustain.
I was in Beijing for the first time 22 years ago. I think it’s a much
better city now, but it’s reaching its limit. We have to try to stall
the further growth of mega cities. This is a great challenge for
China. But if you don’t do anything, there will be more and more
people in your mega cities, exacerbating existing problems. It’s
impossible from many perspectives—both environmental and
social.
Rosenberg: The level of urbanisation is certainly an important
parameter. In Canada, 85% of the population live in cities. Another key parameter is the nature of populations. In Europe and
Japan, 25% of the populations are over the age of 65. Canada is
also moving towards that direction. It’s projected that this will
also be the case in China by 2050. This should impact how we
build our cities but hasn’t been taken into account.
Water is another challenge. It’s not only a question of finding and using water wisely, but how we clean and distribute water. Canada, for instance, has abundant fresh water, but the reality is many communities don’t get enough water, especially
in summer months—because they don’t have the infrastructure
to clean the water they need. In Canada, we often joke that it’s
much easier to convince politicians to build a new hockey arena
than a new waste-water plant.
Stafford Smith: It’s indeed a big challenge to get politicians to
act proactively. Australia has just come through a mining boom,
but we did not reinvest that money in infrastructure. There is a
great need to really be able to deliver convincing analyses of the
benefits of proactive action, which is surprisingly difficult.
Pitte: The challenge for geographers is to rethink land planning.
We have to find ways to create lifestyles in small cities and in
countryside with the same good conditions as in mega cities but
without the problems. It’s not easy. In France, land planning
was considered only as urban planning for a long time. Today,
we have to take a holistic approach towards land planning, encompassing rural planning, small-city planning, and mega-city
planing.
FORUM
Stafford Smith: I agree. The challenge is not only about how
you organise things within cities, but how we organise patterns
of settlement across the whole country. Chinese social geographers have conducted surveys to find out whether things are get
steadily better as you move from rural areas to large cities. They
found that things are better in rural areas and in mega cities and
worst in intermediate-sized cities. China has to find ways to improve the infrastructure and communication in those mediumsize cities, so people can enjoy both the benefits of big cities and
the close proximity to the countryside.
As populations aggregate in big cities, so does the political focus. The rural areas, especially in remote regions—which
are often managed by people in big cities—are increasingly
marginalised. It’s a common trend. But it’s in those more remote
regions that many of our resources come from and activities such
as carbon sequestration take place. So another big challenge is
to think about the connectivity between the central governance
and more remote rural areas.
Rosenberg: Another issue is that geographers should start creating longitudinal datasets that will allow us to answer the process
questions and causal relationships about what happens when
people move through the life course and how their life changes.
This is key to questions of urbanisation, the environment, and
people’s everyday life in cities. It will also put us in a better position to plan for the future. The health science communities
in Europe and North America are starting to invest significant
funds to build such longitudinal data.
Fu: China faces many development challenges. We should take
a systematic approach, focusing not only on cities but also rural
areas and their interaction. We must ensure that rural people,
like city dwellers, can enjoy good social provisions in education,
healthcare, communication and infrastructure.
FEEDING THE WORLD: FOOD SECURITY, FOOD
SAFETY AND PUBLIC HEALTH
Fu: Some of you have been working on food and public health.
Let’s talk a bit about these topics. China faces serious challenges.
We have 1.3 billion people and need to produce enough food,
which sometimes is in conflict with urbanisation and industrialisation. We also have serious problems with food safety, which
impact our health.
Rosenberg: I’m an optimist on this for two reasons. First, this is
an area we often learn from our mistakes. If we look at the data,
it’s clear that globally we certainly have the ability to produce
enough high-quality food to feed the world. The challenge is how
you organise societies in a way that allow safe production and
distribution of food.
Second, it’s clear from basic science that we are going to live
in a warmer climate with drier soil. We are going to have to find
ways to adapt our food-production systems to that reality. I think
we are finally getting beyond the early debate of genetic modification. Ultimately, scientists will need to use genetic modification to find new crop varieties that can grow under new sets of
conditions. But governments have to work together on this.
Qiu
143
Pitte: I’d like to make several points. First, I don’t think food
safety is a big problem. Life span is increasing in most parts of
the world, including China. The situation is not getting worse
compared to 50 years ago. Second, to improve the situation, we
must advance greatly in clean energy. Third, regarding food security, I agree with you, we are clever enough to produce enough
food for everyone in the world. But we do have problems in
terms of food quality in terms of not only nutrition quality but
culture quality. Food is an important part of culture. It’s a pleasure of life. When you eat, you communicate with other people.
If I eat with you in China, I eat Chinese food and I understand
much more about China. When you come to France, you eat
French food and you understand much more about France.
Food diversity is very important for the future of humanity.
The global food market is good and necessary, but we also need
locally produced food. When you travel as tourists, you don’t
want to eat at MacDonald or Pizza Hut, you want to eat local
food. It’s a fantastic experience—just like experiencing different
landscapes, languages, and people. It’s good for the future of humanity to maintain this diversity of food. It’s good for our physical health, our cultural health, and our imagination. There would
be no future for humanity without imagination.
Food diversity is very important for the future of
humanity.
— Jean-Robert Pitte
Stafford Smith: I agree. It’s about food distribution as much
as about food production. The truth is that no country in the
world has done well in sustainable development. Some of the
so-called developed countries are among the worst when you
take an integrative view. When you look at individual SDG targets, you can find all sorts of imperfections. But as an overarching framework—which is about how we link food, energy,
water, urbanisation, social equality, jobs, economics and everything else in governance—the SDGs are actually an extraordinary step forward in terms of integrated framing. It’s important
that we use that framing without getting lost in particular indicators. In China, we also need to make it resonate with the idea
of building a harmonious society.
Lu: The issues of food security and safety are much less acute
in developed countries. In China, the situation of food safety is
getting worse. It’s the same in other developing countries. Pollutants are poisoning our water and soil, which get into plants and
livestock and consumed by humans. An urgent task is to establish causal relationship between pollutants and diseases. There is
little research on this in China. This is why people who sue the industries for causing public health problems rarely win. Without
a clear causal relationship, the government cannot force the industries to compensate. It requires a multidisciplinary approach
to tackle this—with geographers, environmental scientists and
medical professionals working together.
Jane Qiu writes for NSR from Beijing.