Understanding ecological civilization in China: From political context to science

Abstract

China’s concept of “ecological civilization” can be understood as a new system of development and governance based on the perspective of political decision-making. Environmental management, ecological restoration, and green development are its primary principles—distinctly different from industrial and agricultural-oriented civilizations. In this paper, we evaluate the evolution of political connotations of the ecological civilization concept in China over the past 15 years through a textual analysis approach. Additionally, we systematically outline an ecological civilization indicator system and analyze its evolutionary process, applicable scales, and role in guiding the implementation of the ecological civilization concept. Eco-civilization demonstration sites and experiences are also discussed, followed by a review of academic research and policy-making responses. Finally, we propose different perspectives on the outlook for the future of ecological civilization development in China.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13280-023-01897-2.

Introduction

“Ecological Civilization,” or “Eco-civilization”, is part of a significant state-initiated Chinese vision of our global future (Hansen et al. 2018). In China, the concept of ecological civilization is both ancient and contemporary. Its fundamental principles can be traced back to Laozi’s Taoist notion of “uniting humans and the universe,” implicating a harmonious connection between people and nature (Schönfeld and Chen 2019). Throughout the “ecological civilization” of ancient China, the core principles of development emphasized unity and symbiosis between man and nature, which suggests that human beings are fundamental to its construct. Human beings were perceived to not only change nature but also have the responsibility to protect and respect nature. At the same time, ancient Chinese society made great progress toward ecological civilization, such as establishing the idea of systematic ecology, progressing theories and laws aiming toward ecological resource protection, and exploring technical methods for ecological farming (Zeng 2008). All these achievements have important implications for the formation of contemporary discourse on ecological civilization governance systems (Diao 2022). The modern concept of “ecological civilization (生态文明)” currently being discussed in a Chinese policy context is largely based on the Report of the 17th National Congress of the Community Party of China (CPC) published in October 2007—the first instance of the term appearing in policy documents. Currently, the semantics of the term “ecological civilization” in China can be understood as a new paradigm of governance and development based on a political perspective—with environmental management, ecological restoration, and green development as the primary principles—distinct from industrial and agricultural-oriented civilizations. Over the past 15 years—from October 2007 to the present—the political reports of the 17th, 18th, 19th, and 20th CPC have focused on ecological civilization and have continued to raise its status as a guiding principle in social development strategies and governance. Notably, in the above-mentioned political reports, the Chinese expression of “ecological civilization” remains the same throughout (in Chinese, “生态文明 [shengtai wenming]”). However, in corresponding official English reports, different translations of the term are used. For example, it translated as “conservation culture” in the English version of the 17th Report1 and “ecological progress” in the 18th Report.2 In the subsequent 19th Report, it translated as “ecological civilization,”3 but in the latest 20th Report, it translated as “ecological conservation.”4 It is also worth noting that in 2012 the term “生态文明” was written into the Party Constitution of CPC, which adopted the translation of the 18th Report—“ecological progress.” However, the 2022 revision of the Party Constitution adopted at the 20th National Congress of CPC translated the term as “ecological civilization”5 despite being expressed as “ecological conservation” in the 20th Report. Correspondingly, in 2018 the term was written into the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China for the first time (Section 3, Article 89), but the English version used the translation “ecological conservation.”6 This inconsistency in terminology has resulted in confusion for some international readers, but it also reflects the way that the term has been evolving in Chinese political discourse. However, in the context of Chinese state media, the term still translates from Chinese to English as “ecological civilization”—for example, “Xi Jinping’s Thoughts on Ecological Civilization.”7 Therefore, we could conclude that when the term is understood as a development concept or paradigm, it could be translated as “ecological civilization.” In contrast, when interpreted as a “work task and development plan,” it is more likely to be expressed as “ecological conservation.” Overall, the term “ecological civilization” can be accepted as a generalized English expression of the Chinese term “生态文明,” which is the expression we use in this article.

The evolution of the ecological civilization concept has reached a new stage with many positive outcomes and has contributed to key debates on new developmental concepts. The Chinese path to modernization proposed in the 20th Political Report redefines ecological civilization as a means of achieving harmony between humanity and nature in a modern context. Simultaneously, this vision also emphasizes promoting the Beautiful China Initiative, accelerating green approaches to development, and actively contributing to the global governance of climate change action.8 In the scholarly work, Janicke proposed the concept of ecological modernization (Janicke 1985; Hajer 1995; Mol 2001), which aims to maintain or restore environmental quality through resource-efficient innovation. After 40 years of development, ecological modernization has become a comprehensive technology and environmental policy strategy, from front-end ecological governance to overall social reform and other aspects, which has profoundly influenced the policy trend of Western society. In addition, similar concepts, including “ecological economy” and “green economy,” have also been employed in Western countries (Costanza 1989; Daly 1990; Jacobs 1991). These international theories and experiences have played a significant role in promoting the development and practice of ecological civilization development in China. However, due to differences in cultural background and developmental conditions, China’s ecological civilization progress is fundamentally distinct from Western ecological modernization. As a concept, ecological civilization is dissimilar from previous national sustainable development strategies as it integrates environmental protection into the national political system through governmental administrative reforms while motivating relevant stakeholders to protect the environment (Gu et al. 2020; Jiang et al. 2019). According to related research, the emergence of ecological civilization can be interpreted as recognition from political leaders of the significant environmental and climate-related challenges that China faces. The concept represents the Chinese government’s response to environmental degradation and its vision for a sustainable future that can be applied globally (Hansen et al. 2018). Thus, there is optimism among many commentators that the concept of ecological civilization will be integral to developing practical solutions for the future in China and beyond. On the website of the United Nations Environment Program, ecological civilization is defined as an “ethic and ideology that embodies the harmonious coexistence and sustainable development of people, nature, and society and the progress of civilization” (UN 2020). Simultaneously, China is emerging as a potential “green power” in the twenty-first century (Cribb 2017).

As the largest developing country in the world, China has attempted to develop strategies to resolve the seemingly opposing forces of development and environmental protection that has remained pertinent since the Industrial Revolution, and the remarkable efforts are that of “lucid waters and lush mountains are invaluable assets” (Zhang et al. 2018; Zuo et al. 2021). This marks a stark contrast to previous development and growth approaches that did not consider potential by-products, such as pollution and lack of governance. Moreover, the concept acts as a vivid manifestation of the maxim that “environmental protection is a 100-year plan for the benefit of the people.” However, as ecological civilization becomes better prominent worldwide, it necessitates an in-depth understanding to be successful. Moreover, it is vital to promote the harmonious coexistence of economic development and environmental conservation, where maintaining the good ecological status of nature and its resources is an essential foundation for economic growth. We may ask—what is the political significance of ecological civilization in China’s decision-making system? What values and visions are involved in the process of its full realization? Moreover, how can we balance the competing forces of science, policy, and practice? At the same time, we may consider integrating the development of a “Beautiful China” with the conservation of ecological systems on a global scale. This could potentially be achieved by promoting China as a participant, contributor, and leader in constructing a global ecological civilization. Thus, to truly understand the wider connotations of ecological civilization in China, we must assess the political implications and academic response to ecological civilization in the last 10–15 years, evaluating the associated indicator system and demonstrating the construction of the concept. Furthermore, we need to understand any future development trends in the context of Xi Jinping’s notion of ecological civilization and its governance on a local scale.

The political connotations of ecological civilization

Ecological civilization has significant political connotations and developmental paradigm implications in China (Zhang et al. 2011). The introduction by the Chinese Communist Party (CPC) of ecological civilization stimulated the exploration of the potential for the harmonious growth of the economy and society alongside natural ecosystems (Gu et al. 2020; Wang et al. 2023). Subsequently, ecological civilization has become one of the core ideas of China’s development paradigm in the last 15 years (Fig. 1). In 2007, the CPC’s 17th National Congress first proposed ecological civilization, establishing it as a fundamental framework to build a moderately prosperous society in all aspects with the political aim of “foster(ing) public awareness of conservation culture.” The goals of the concept describe the intention to “…promote a conservation culture by basically forming an energy- and resource-efficient and environment-friendly structure of industries, the pattern of growth and mode of consumption, and promote a large-scale circular economy and considerably increase the proportion of renewable energy resources in total energy consumption, as well as bring the discharge of major pollutants under the effective control and notably improve ecological and environmental quality.”9 The 18th National Congress of the CPC elevated ecological civilization construction to a particularly prominent position in 2012, integrating it with economic, political, cultural, and social construction to form a “five-in-one” framework. The political status of ecological civilization was promoted to the status of “…a long-term task of vital importance to the people’s well-being and China’s future,”10 and advocated for green, circular, and low-carbon development. Regarding ecological civilization, China was also given a global governance and contribution role of “…playing our part in ensuring global ecological security.” In 2017, the CPC’s 19th National Congress developed their interpretation of ecological civilization and clarified the green development idea of “lucid waters and lush mountains (as) invaluable assets.” It was stated that the concept “…requires more quality ecological goods to meet people’s ever-growing demands for a beautiful environment”11 as part of the modernization of ecological civilization. This marked a significant political milestone based on 10 years of ecological civilization research that integrated new ecological values into the concept, promoting sustainable mutualism between ecology and the economy to achieve its goals. Simultaneously, the political status of ecological civilization was further elevated to “the millennium plan related to the sustainable development of the Chinese nation.” In 2018, Xi Jinping made a specific summary of the ecological civilization system, with an “ecological culture system with ecological values as the guideline, an eco-economic system with industrial ecology and ecological industrialization as the mainstay, a target responsibility system with the improvement of ecological environment quality as the core, an ecological civilization system with the modernization of the governance system and governance capacity as the guarantee, and an ecological security system focusing on the virtuous cycle of the ecosystem and the effective prevention and control of environmental risks.” At the same time, the political positioning of the ecological civilization concept developed from “the millennium plan related to the sustainable development of the Chinese nation” to the “fundamental plan for the sustainable development of the Chinese nation.”

Fig. 1.

Evolution of the political connotation of ecological civilization

In 2022, the 20th National Congress of the CPC further proposed to “plan development from the perspective of the harmonious coexistence of human beings and nature” and to “build a modernization in which human beings and nature coexist harmoniously.”12 This was a political expression of the CPC that aimed to lead society as a whole (including people of all ethnic groups) to fully realize the Chinese path to modernization through the concept of ecological civilization. At the same time, the green transformation of development, prevention, and control of environmental pollution, enhancement of ecosystem diversity, and promotion of carbon peaking and carbon neutrality became the most vital practical necessities of ecological civilization for the future (Yang et al. 2021; Wang et al. 2022; Zhang and Fu 2023; Zhang et al. 2023). Moreover, it is anticipated that this concept will continue to provide direction for China’s ecological civilization practices in the global governance of climate change in future (Liu et al. 2020). The construction of ecological civilization thus marked a paradigm shift in development. However, its political connotation is constantly changing in the context of China’s social needs. Moreover, there is evidence that the concept is gradually improving in terms of its global governance system, which has resulted in it more successfully fulfilling human needs.

Ecological civilization system and indicators

In general, indicators are the parameters used to evaluate goals (Yan et al. 2021). Understanding China’s ecological civilization more fully requires the knowledge of what specific indicators are typically evaluated when assessing its potential impact, whether they change over time, and how they reflect decision-making, planning, or development. However, there is not currently a systematic or unified set of ecological civilization indicators in China. Nonetheless, a series of associated indicators have emerged that are characterized by temporal and spatial changes, ultimately reflecting the changing priorities of different implementation periods and their varying development visions. Based on the compilation of political reports, government planning documents, and central ministries’ decision-making documents, we systematically compiled a unified ecological civilization indicator system based on this literature. We also examined the evolution of these indicators, their applicable scales, and their role status to assemble a guide for the practical implementation of ecological civilization.

In 2007, the Ministry of Environmental Administration of the People’s Republic of China published the Ecological County, Ecological City, and Ecological Province Construction Index (Revised Draft)—the first policy document based on an ecological civilization index system. The document was intended to outline the intentions of the 17th CPC National Congress to develop ecological civilization. Indicators directly relating to ecological civilization first appeared in 2013, with the “Indicators for Pilot Demonstration Zones of Ecological Civilization Construction (for Trial Implementation),” issued by the Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China (MEP).13 This contained two sets of indicators for demonstration counties (including county-level cities and districts) and demonstration cities (including prefecture-level administrative districts). It should be noted that the ecological civilization indicator system in 2013 was established based on ecological counties/cities/provinces pilot projects that were introduced in 2007. Categories of indicators for this policy were conceived in 2007 by measuring economic development, environmental protection, and overall social progress across multiple scales. These were further developed in 2017 into five categories—ecological economy, ecological environment, ecological habitat, ecological system, and ecological culture—which all echoed the 2012 political Report of the 18th CPC National Congress. In 2014, the MEP published the “National Ecological Civilization Construction Model Village and Township Indicator System” that used model villages and townships as case studies to develop indicators. Indicator categories for this included “production development” (quick explanation), “sound ecology” (quick explanation), “affluent living” (quick explanation), and “civilized village style” (quick explanation). Introducing this indicator system further developed the basis for a Chinese ecological civilization indicator system and the developmental requirements at an administrative level. In 2016, the National Development and Reform Commission, the National Bureau of Statistics, the MEP, and the Organization Department of the Central Committee of the CPC jointly released the Ecological Civilization Construction Assessment Target System, which served as a foundation for evaluating and assessing ecological civilization construction. It consisted of five categories: “resource utilization,” “environmental protection,” “annual evaluation results,” “public satisfaction,” and “ecological and environmental events,” marking the first time that a comprehensive assessment of the ecological civilization concept was conducted at a national level. In 2016, the MEP upgraded the “National Ecological Civilization Construction Demonstration County and City Indicators” (for trial implementation) based on the 2013 version. This contained the categories of “ecological space” (newly added), “ecological economy,” “ecological environment,” “ecological life,” “ecological system,” and “ecological culture.” This index system endeavored to determine whether a specific settlement meets the standards of counties and cities used for national ecological civilization construction demonstration.14 In 2019, to accelerate decision-making, the implementation of ecological civilization, and the requirements of the National Conference on Ecological Environmental Protection, the State MEP released the “National Ecological Civilization Construction Demonstration City and County Construction Indicators.” This was based on the 2016 version, which contained categories of “the ecological system,” “ecological security,” “ecological space,” “ecological economy,” “ecological life,” and “ecological culture.” In 2019, increasing recognition and awareness of ecological civilization in China’s national development strategy resulted in constructing a “measurement standard,” based on 15 years of research and refining of the concept. The city- and county-level indicator systems underwent four revisions in 2007, 2013, 2016, and 2019 (Fig. 2), more details see the supplementary information. Regarding indicator categories, “ecological system” was listed as the fourth point in the 2013 version but rose to first in the 2019 version. The emphasis of China’s ecological civilization concept shifted from “economic development” and “environmental governance” to “institutional construction” and “ecological security.” Moreover, the broad measure of “social progress” transitioned to the more specific separate categories of “ecological life” and “ecological culture.” Since 2019, the notion of “ecological space” has stimulated and accelerated the reform of territorial spatial planning in China, ultimately becoming a critical tool for implementing facets of ecological civilization.

Fig. 2.

Evolution of ecological civilization indicators

China’s ecological civilization indicator system has evolved dramatically over recent years, with only five indicators from 2007 and three from 2013 remaining in the 2019 version. Compared with the original version of 2007, the newest index system of 2019 is more targeted and assessable, both in terms of categories and the setting of specific indicators. Moreover, the 2019 index more adequately achieves more of the objectives of the ecological civilization concept. In addition, the “ecological system” category includes six binding indicators that measure the target responsibility system and institutional construction. The indicator defined as “the proportion of ecological civilization construction in Party and government performance assessment” is extracted from the 2013 version, and the indicator “planning for ecological civilization construction” from the 2016 version. “Plans of Party committees and governments on major targets and tasks for ecological civilization construction” and “river chief system” were new indicators in 2019. The indicators “ecological environment information disclosure rate” and “carry out an environmental impact assessment of planning under the law” were developments of the 2013 versions “environmental information disclosure rate” and “environmental impact assessment rate and environmental protection completion acceptance rate.” This indicator shift reflects China’s growing political emphasis on the ecological civilization concept, with planning to emerge as a critical foundational aspect. Moreover, the “ecological security” category evolved from “ecological environment” in the 2016 version. Deploying governmental goals through specific tasks also became essential to promote ecological civilization, with critical tasks including environmental quality improvement, ecosystem protection, and ecological environment risk prevention. The 2019 version established a total of ten specific indicators, of which the “proportion of coastal waters with excellent water quality (first and second grade)” and “coastal ecological restoration” were the first ocean-related indicators incorporated in any document thus far. The “ecological economy” category primarily focuses on “resource conservation and utilization” and “industrial recycling development”; “eco-life” aims to enhance human living conditions and green lifestyle indicators; while “ecological culture” focuses on popularizing ecological concepts and awareness, evaluating the opinions of party and government leaders and the public. In general, China’s ecological civilization indicators are vital for decision-making for Party and governmental innovations in development. This is reflected in four evolutionary processes and in how they are planned and executed.

Ecological civilization demonstration construction and experience

It is a unique feature of China’s governance system to implement “demonstration construction”—a town or region that provides an empirical example showcasing the successful implementation of an emerging issue or concept. For example, this might take the form of a pilot case to test the principles of the circular economy that also demonstrates the benefits of ecological protection (Shang et al. 2022; Zhang et al. 2022a, b, c). This same method can be used for ecological civilization in a demonstrative process that is implemented through China’s governance system. Under the leadership of the Ministry of Ecology and Environment of the People’s Republic of China (MEE), six batches of demonstration construction zones of ecological civilization have been built across the country since 2012. There are a total of 468 counties, districts, and cities designated as demonstration bases (Fig. 3), more details see the supplementary information, the majority of which are located to the southeast of the Hu Huanyong Line (Hu’s Line). Overall, in Southeast and Central China, the distribution of demonstration bases is more concentrated—all of which are primarily non-industrial clustering areas.

Fig. 3.

Ecological civilization demonstration areas and case distribution map

Our indicator analysis revealed that there are significant differences in the measurement criteria for the selection of the six batches of demonstration areas, ranging from a primary focus on the environment in an economic sense to the specific enhancement of ecological systems. Overall, 267 demonstration construction cases are included and align with the ecological civilization demonstration construction cases included by the Ministry of Ecology and Environment on their governmental website. 206 cases of demonstration counties and districts (Fig. 3) can be classified into two types based on the local practices.

The first type is largely concerned with the restoration of the natural environment and is represented by Dongguan City, Panjin City, Ertok Qianqi of Ordos City in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, and Guyuan City in Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region. These case studies reflect a focus on ecosystem protection and “end-of-pipe” management of environmental issues that emerged during the industrialization process. For example, Etukqqian Banner has created a unique grassland habitat as part of a major ecosystem restoration project that encompassed wind and sand resource management, natural forest resource protection, and the introduction of herbivore grazing to naturally maintain the grasslands. Meanwhile, Dongguan City has invested 75 billion yuan to implement the “Dongguan pollution treatment model,” which has significantly improved environmental quality.

The second type of demonstration focuses on natural resource product development and eco-industrialization, with Baishan City, Jiuzhaigou County, and Zhouning County providing pertinent examples. This type of area emphasizes natural resource product development through the exploration and continual adaptation of various avenues of growth. For example, this is achieved by developing sustainable agriculture, maximizing the economic benefits of the forest, and promoting eco-tourism. For example, areas with more than 72.9% forest coverage (including Zhouning County, Ningde City, and Fujian Province) have concentrated efforts on developing the notion of “forests can conserve water, bring in economic benefits, and boost grain production.” This has entailed the cultivation of 10 000 mu of high mountain potatoes and 10 000 mu of ecological organic tea, becoming a model case and example for farmers to increase their income. As the development of ecological civilization continues, ecosystems are concurrently protected and conscientiously managed with the aim of sustainable resource utilization. As a result, these two categories may coalesce in future. Moreover, this perhaps shows that the construction of the ecological civilization concept in China at a local level remains dominated by traditional practices of sustainable land restoration and the product development of natural resources. These grassroots elements are vital as a practical basis for China’s ecological civilization construction in the present and future, reflecting its commitment to “maintain harmony between humanity and nature when planning our development,” as proposed in the 20th National Congress report.

The construction of the ecological civilization concept also includes industrial ecology. However, in the current Chinese policy context, industrial ecology is largely implemented by the Development and Reform Commission and the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, which focuses on the “greening” of traditional industries through the circular economy conceptual framework. Environmental modernization research has often asserted the importance of adapting environmental practices toward economic growth and industrial growth (Jänicke et al. 1997; Jacob and Jänicke 2006; Jänicke 2008) and promoted the theoretical development of industrial ecologization. In contrast, in the current Chinese political governance system, the Ministry of Ecology and Environment is responsible for ecological civilization practices and promotes the belief that ecological civilization is necessary to remedy various environmental issues. However, many cases of sustainable industrial processes in China’s major cities are not included as demonstration zones of ecological civilization. In future, we perhaps anticipate forming a more macro-scale management system of ecological civilization based on the sustainable use of ecological resources and best ecological industrialization practices.

Academic response to ecological civilization research

Ecological civilization has been (and remains) a pertinent research topic in China, with a series of studies conducted from the perspective of environmental, ecological, geographic, economic, and planning sciences (Li et al. 2011; Geng et al. 2012; Bian et al. 2020; Ye and Kuang 2022; Hu 2022; Zhang 2022a, b; Zhai et al 2023). Moreover, it has been viewed through the lense of engineering, technology, education, and other research sectors (Jiang et al. 2019; Gu et al. 2020; Zhang 2021; Dong et al. 2021; Zuo et al. 2021; Zhang 2022a, b; Xue et al 2023a). We argue that academic analysis has largely focused on the necessity of the development of the ecological civilization concept and its core principles, its scientific connotations, path selection, the advancement of system models, the systematic methodological requirements in its construction, and assessments of mechanisms to promote its ideas (Ehrlich et al. 2012; Yu et al. 2020; Huang and Weatman 2021; Zhang et al. 2022a, b, c; Xue et al. 2023b). Key terms frequently cited within these publications included “ecological civilization construction,” “resource conservation,” “green development,” “environmental protection,” “climate change,” “sustainable development,” “industrial structure,” the “Chinese path to modernization,” “harmonious coexistence,” and “life community” (Mathews and Tan 2016; Li et al. 2017; Yang and Wang 2019; Guo et al. 2020; Raza and Lin 2020; Dong et al. 2021; Yu and Zhang 2021; Chen and Shi 2022; Luo et al. 2022). Moreover, we note that prevailing problems in the study of ecological civilization include the fair division of land-use space, the transformation of the paradigm of ecological civilization development, the legal system of resource conservation and ecological environment protection, and the demonstrative value of pilot work (Liu 2010; Zhen et al. 2020; Wu et al. 2021; Huang and Weatman 2021).

Diverse patterns have emerged from research assessing ecological civilization indicators. For example, ecological evaluation and system simulation are used in ecological assets accounting, ecological compensation standard accounting, and ecological civilization science and technology contribution accounting (Yang et al. 2022). The index system was developed to evaluate ecological civilization demonstration cities relating to indicators of cultural awareness levels, economic operation, environmental support, ecological habitat, and institutional guarantees (Meng et al. 2021). Moreover, combining policy documents including the Degree of Physiological Equilibrium, the Degree of Psychological Imbalance, the Degree of Human and Environmental Imbalance, and the Degree of Human Development Disharmony helps to analyze the potential development of ecological civilization construction in China (Yan et al. 2021; Zuo et al. 2021). We conducted a literature review of articles from 2019 relating to the categories of “ecological civilization model cities” and “counties construction.” “Ecological security” is an idea that serves as a link between land-use patterns that provide for ever-increasing human needs and the detrimental environmental repercussions of these land uses (Cheng et al. 2022). Ecological security (as defined by…?) can be achieved through a combination of particular ecological and socio-economic conditions, exemplified by the basic paradigm of “source identification—resistance surface construction—corridor extraction.” Regarding regions, the southeastern part of the Hu Huanyong line is significantly more “ecologically secure” than the northwestern part (Li et al. 2023). However, there remain challenges for further research on these locations, such as the inability to capture the spatial heterogeneity within the region (Daly 2017) and how to utilize the model to improve land management (Thygesen et al. 2017). In terms of ecological space, based on the minimum-scale ecological space prediction framework of linked socio-ecological system analysis, a complete index system of “construction constraint and ecological relevance” was built (Hong et al. 2023). The findings from the index system indicate that ecological improvement in Western China is showing signs of success; however, the stability of forests is still ecologically declining yearly (Qiu et al. 2023). The eco-economy in China is largely measured through energy values; for example, the Beijing eco-economy interface is constructed based on three energy value indicators—the import/export ratio of energy, profit made in an energy-to-dollars ratio, and the ratio between investment and energy. These indicators can be applied to the resource structure, economic condition, and trade status of Beijing (Jiang et al. 2009). The distinct notion of “ecological culture” stems from deep roots in traditional Chinese culture, which allows for flexibility and inclusivity in the creation and implementation of a shared vision by basing its principles on grassroots practices. For example, the “Azequo Transformation Project” in Yunnan Province features an integrated “forest–water–terraced–village” system with a distinct four-fold cultural landscape (Huang and Weatman 2021). Furthermore, as the role of different ecological systems in the concept of ecological civilization in China has grown more prominent, ecological compensation systems (Zhang et al. 2022a, b, c), ecological environmental damage compensation systems (Yang et al. 2022), ecological red line systems (Li et al. 2023), arable land protection systems (Gong et al. 2020), and territorial spatial development systems have emerged as key aspects. Together, these categories have become vital facets with achievable goals as part of advancing ecological civilization.

Additionally, the establishment of ecological civilization indicators is closely related to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). For example, some scholars have measured the UN SDGs in ecological, social, and economic terms, and China’s policy instruments account for 24.64%, 46.45%, and 28.91% of these goals, respectively (Xie et al. 2021). In this paper, ecological civilization indicators were found to correspond to the SDGs, such as the indicator “Proportion of clean energy in rural household energy consumption” in Table 1-S1; the “Ecological Environmental Protection Catalogue” corresponds to SDG 7 “Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all”; “Water environment quality,” “Quality of coastal water environment,” and “Water quality of centralized drinking water sources up to standard rate” correspond to SDG 6, “Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all”; and “Biodiversity conservation” corresponds to SDG 15, “Halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.”

Notably, to develop a more comprehensive and systematic analysis of ecological civilization, many research institutes have been established at national and local levels in China. This has made it possible to shift gradually from individual research to collective research, which enables working together for ecological civilization through a combination of national strategic tasks and local implementation methods. For example, at the national level, the central government approved the establishment of the first legal research institution dedicated to ecological civilization research—the Institute of Ecological Civilization of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. This institute focuses on Xi Jinping’s thoughts on ecological civilization, the economics of ecological civilization (and its applied theory), the relationship between environment and economic growth, the relationship between ecological civilization and spatial development, the influence of major global environmental agendas (e.g., UN SDGs and “One Belt One Road”), and five other major research areas. The Chinese Academy of Sciences is the highest academic institution in science and technology in the People’s Republic of China and the national center for comprehensive research and development in natural sciences and technology. Moreover, this institute established the first innovative research agency on ecological civilization, focusing on the mechanisms of the concept and thus redevelopment. At a local level, relevant research institutions have also been established, such as the Institute of Ecological Civilization of Zhejiang University, the Institute of Ecological Civilization of Renmin University of China, and the Institute of Ecological Civilization of Sichuan Academy of Social Sciences. These establishments have gradually formed dedicated research teams oriented toward local central think tanks. We must note that, from local universities to the formation of national level think tanks, it is a complex task to compile the work into a unified system, particularly as the concept is in constant adaptation and transformation. The field of ecological civilization still requires more in-depth research to clarify its essence and appropriate mechanisms to contribute to global sustainable development.

Outlook and discussion on the development of ecological civilization in China

China’s ecological civilization indicators are policy-oriented top-down measures that are typically considered dynamic and thus more effective, formed by continuous adjustment and optimization based on changing national strategic needs and practical goals. They reflect both the national focus on (and direction of) the ecological civilization concept, as well as operational practices adopted by localities to carry out elements of the national strategy. In terms of scale and judging by the several versions of the indicator system that have been released, China has continuously focused on the city and county levels to promote the construction of ecological civilization. In terms of content, it has gradually developed from traditional ecological indicators to more specific indicators that reflect ecological civilization across more disparate fields. Furthermore, China has conceived new ecological civilization indicators with distinctly Chinese characteristics, such as “The proportion of ecological civilization construction work in the performance assessment of the party and government.” At the same time, ecological civilization indicators also respond to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and a shared global responsibility for addressing climate change, such as “carbon emission intensity,” “biodiversity conservation,” “government green procurement ratio,” “green procurement ratio,” and other similar indicators. However, the current ecological civilization indicators in China lack methods to accurately measure ecological values, often failing to comprehensively assess each administrative level across multiple scales. Furthermore, some indicators are particularly challenging to quantify. For example, the indicator of “Public participation in the construction of ecological civilization” is observed through sample questionnaires in the official document. In future, ecological civilization indicators will remain top-level design-oriented and incorporate local practical experience. As the construction of ecological civilization matures, more emphasis should be placed on establishing assessment indicators at different scales. At the same time, specific indicators should be established that relate to the value of ecological products, accurate accounting of carbon emissions, and the enhancement of ecosystem carbon sink capacity. Furthermore, ecological civilization indicators with local characteristics should be explored to increase the quality of data (including the comparability and continuity of indicators, means of utilizing traditional Chinese wisdom to inform global sustainable development, and assessing the efficacy of various responses to climate change).

After years of efforts, the implementation of China’s ecological civilization concept has resulted in a series of valuable experiences that can be easily replicated across national or global boundaries and scales. For example, the practice of implementing demonstration regions has been successfully adopted in the east, middle, and west of China to drive a more unified national effort toward ecological civilization. Some scholars have divided current demonstration cases into “system-led,” “green-driven,” “eco-friendly,” and “eco-beneficial” development models (Lu et al. 2020; Meng et al. 2021; Tian et al. 2021; Wang et al. 2021). However, they can also be summarized into the two types mentioned above. China is a vast country with diverse land resources, and the positioning of each location in terms of its function is distinctly different. Therefore, in demonstrations of ecological civilization, China should fully examine the specific characteristics of local resources, the relative developmental conditions in each area, and adapt the most appropriate growth trajectory of ecological civilization to suit each locale. At the same time, areas of ecological civilization demonstration, green transformation, and industrial ecology of traditional industrial zones should be expanded and strengthened. In addition, after the 20th Congress of the CPC, China’s ecological civilization concept is anticipated to progress to a stage where empirical experience will be popularized nationwide and potentially exported globally. In future, there should be increased focus on the assessment, supervision, and management of ecological civilization demonstration areas. Moreover, ecological civilization data should be consolidated and the information disseminated as a contribution of Chinese experience for use in global governance.

The implementation of ecological civilization in China is a significant part of a long-term plan for the well-being of the people and the future of the nation. Observing the development of ecological civilization in the past 15 years, it is clear that successful results have been achieved in terms of connotation analysis, policy formulation, and implementation paths. To promote the development of the ecological civilization concept in China in future, we believe there is also a need to strengthen research in the following areas: (1) Research on system integration in the conceptual construction of ecological civilization: Currently, ecological civilization has achieved much at the sub-sector and sub-discipline levels; however, there remain many insufficiencies in integrating systems and resources. How to realize the integration and development of ecological civilization across multiple disciplines and sectors—as well as how to construct a new vision and value system to form a new coordinate system for human behavior in ecological civilization—are still topics that need to be thoroughly researched in future. (2) Transforming the development paradigm of ecological civilization: The United Nations SDGs are dedicated to addressing poverty, inequality, and climate change. However, many of the 17 goals are difficult to reconcile. The development paradigm stimulated by ecological civilization logic could establish a mutually reinforcing relationship between these goals and become a framework for building sustainable communities. Furthermore, the circular economy’s evolution through research and policy should be improved by transforming material cycles and energy functions (Krause and Rotter 2017). (3) Increase the consistency and integration of ecological civilization in institutional and academic systems: Institutional systems largely focus on the feasibility of implementation and emphasizes unity and standardization. Therefore, there is still a need for ongoing research into how to ensure academic freedom and achieve institutional unity. It would also be beneficial to expand research methods to achieve consensus and ultimately serve the Chinese path to modernization. (4) The construction of the ecological civilization concept should be closely coordinated with economic, political, cultural, and social development in China. The country has a huge population; moreover, the density curve divided by the Hu Huanyong line shows an imbalance in geographical distribution causing disproportion in the economic development of eastern and western regions. Based on population distribution, economic layout, land use, and environmental protection, the path of ecological civilization bridges the gap between industrialization and speed transformation. Furthermore, it is also a key foundation to achieve major national strategic goals and long-term growth aims. Ultimately, ecological civilization is anticipated to provide myriad solutions to regional (and potentially) global development problems relating to the environment.

Conclusion

We expect that a systematic summary of China’s ecological civilization over the past 15 years will act as a primer, providing readers with a deeper understanding of the concept with relevant knowledge and references for constructing ecological civilization globally. China’s ecological civilization is characterized by its political-minded design and institutional influences. The political connotations of its development and indicators for monitoring have evolved over time and space, becoming more systematic and comprehensive in recent years. The construction of China’s ecological civilization has gradually shifted from previous basic focus on environmental management and protection and ecological restoration to a more unified and multifaceted theory. This has encompassed ecological economy, multiple institutions at different scales, and culture, profoundly reflecting the significance of ecological civilization as a comprehensive development paradigm. Simultaneously, this concept has also been fundamental to China’s contribution to international sustainable development and global governance system, including combating climate change and the “Belt and Road” initiative. However, ecological civilization also faces a series of challenges and must integrate additional perspectives, such as issues with the integration of the concept, element coupling, and research-practice integration.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Biographies

Bing Xue

holds a doctor degree in human geography and his research mainly focuses on regional sustainability and governance, human-natural coupled systems, and human geography.

Bin Han

is a research assistant at the Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and a Ph.D. candidate in industrial ecology at the University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Her research interests include regional food–energy–water–land system and regional eco-civilization.

Hongqing Li

is a Ph.D. student in circular economy at the Chair of Circular Economy and Recycling Technologies, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany. Her research interests include circular economy and urban–rural eco-civilization.

Xiaohua Gou

is a Changjiang Scholar and Full Professor at the College of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Lanzhou University. Her research interests include ecology and geographical sciences.

Hong Yang

is a Professor at the Department of Geography and Environmental Science at Reading University, United Kingdom. His research interests include air pollution, water pollution, carbon cycle, climate change and education for sustainable development.

Heiko Thomas

holds a Ph.D. in physics. His works on sustainable energy systems, environmental impacts and public acceptance, climate change mitigation measurements, including socio-economic analyses and considerations of accompanying policies.

Stefan Stückrad

affiliate scholar at the Research Institute for Sustainability (RIFS), Helmholtz Center Potsdam—GFZ German Research Center for Geosciences. Stefan coordinated as Scientific Manager the largest social science research initiative on energy transition in Germany, “System Integration and Networks for the Energy Transition.”

Declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare that might have influenced the content of this article.