CAN CLIMATE CHANGE CAUSE EARTHQUAKE?

Can climate change cause earthquakes?

A new book suggesting a link between man-made climate change and increased seismic events has got some stick. A look at the science shows the theory isn't nearly as mad as it's made out to be - but it doesn't necessarily merit the apocalyptic publicity spin.
When Professor Bill McGuire of University College London introduced his new book Waking the Giant: How a changing climate triggers earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanoes on the Guardian's science weekly podcast a few weeks ago, he started with a warning: "It does sound a bit mad, but it isn't..."
So do we face an age of "geological havoc" thanks to man-made climate change, as  McGuire told his audience at the Hay literary festival last week? Motor journalist and climate skeptic Jeremy Clarkson doesn't buy it, labelling McGuire's theory "science fiction" in the Sunday Times yesterday.
It's hard to see how anyone could invoke climate change and earthquakes in the same sentence without getting some stick, and Clarkson isn't the only person to treat the notion that a changing climate can affect the ground beneath our feet with derision. But a closer look suggests the theory not only makes sense, it also appears to have historical precedent.
Waking the Giant
McGuire's book examines what the planet has done in the past as the climate has changed naturally, and makes a convincing case for a historical relationship between natural climate change and some geological activity. Given the speedy nature of current climate change, it seems reasonable to take from this that our current human-driven climate change will have geological consequences - indeed, Clarkson concedes that the "theory that global warming can affect the fabric of the planet is based in fact".
However, some of the publicity around the book has prompted headlines which ask if climate change might " unleash geological mayhem". This seems quite unhelpful; after all, one man's imminent geological mayhem might be another's long-term rumble.
We had questions about exactly what kind of changes might occur, and when. So we got in touch with McGuire and asked him if he could give us a more precise view of what he thinks might happen.
The argument
First, though, the theory. The argument goes like this: when the climate changed naturally in the past, and the planet emerged from an ice age, large ice sheets covering much of the planet retreated. They were so heavy that the resulting release of pressure on the earth's crust caused it to 'bounce back', triggering earthquakes, tremors, and even volcanic activity along pre-existing fault lines.
Right now, the Earth is still responding to the end of the last ice age some 20,000 years ago when temperatures began to rise, causing large ice sheets to retreat, as shown here:

Rate of crustal bounce-back following the end of the last ice age, as modelled by Paulson et al. (2007). Source: NASA.
McGuire suggests that if man-made climate change leads to more large ice sheets disappearing - like the one covering Greenland - this could lead to more shakes, rattles and rolls.
What's the scientific evidence?
It's worth noting here that although the historical relationship between ice sheet retreat and geological change is pretty well documented, research looking at more recent man-made climate change is rather sparse. A 2009 meeting at University College London concluded that, since climate change in the past has probably increased some 'geological hazards';

"Anthropogenic climate change therefore has the potential to alter the risk of geological and geomorphological hazards through the twenty-first century and beyond. Such changes in risk have not yet been systematically assessed."

To us that does sound like an endorsement of the general theory. But the last part says that the risks of dangerous changes in the earth's surface due to man-made climate change haven't yet been intensively investigated. Roland Burgmann, a geologist at the University of California, Berkeley, told Live Science (in 2007) that changes in ice cover can affect the earth's crust, but more research is needed to work out the scale of the risk and where effects like earthquakes might happen.
What's the timeline?
It's also not very clear from the publicity around the book when exactly we're supposed to be worried about any 'geological mayhem' occurring. Are we talking in the next century, or the next millennium?
When asked on the Guardian Science podcast whether his worries about Greenland could materialise this century, McGuire says:

"Not by the end of this century, no [...]."

But contrast this with a video promoting the book, where McGuire says:

"[T]he worry is, that if we don't act very soon, then the Earth is going to bite back with a real vengeance over the next 70-100 years."

We put it to McGuire that this wasn't particularly clear. He replied that, although the Greenland ice sheet is not going to fully disappear by the end of the century (it would need to be kept at a sufficiently warm temperature for a few thousand years for that to happen), there is a study suggesting that we could see more earthquakes in Greenland in coming decades.
He also said that in Alaska "the response - in the way of earthquake activity and giant landslide frequency - is already apparent". Here he's probably referring to research like this paper showing an increase in small earthquakes between 2002 and 2006, thought to be down to ice loss.
Of the potential for volcanic activity triggered by climate change he told us:

"[W]e don't have a handle on how quickly we will see a response [...]. It may, however, be a while before we can distinguish any elevated level of activity from the normal background. In many ways, pinning down how quickly the solid Earth will respond this time round is no easy task and has to be speculative to some degree."

Essentially, this is the 'it's complicated' caveat so common in scientific conclusions. But as you will have spotted, these explanations are couched in considerably more careful language than some of the publicity for the book.
Following the Hansen model?
There does seem to us to be a disparity between McGuire's publicity for the book, with its emphasis on the most dramatic possible outcomes from his hypothesis, and the more careful statements he's made in scientific papers and outside the publicity circuit.
In discussing temperature change this century in his book, McGuire's predictions err towards the upper end of the scale, and he also talks of facing sea level rise comparable to that at the end of the last ice age, when sea level rose at an average of one metre per century - within the range of projected sea level rise for high-end scenarios of temperature rise. In both this, and his tendency to talk in stark language, McGuire seems to be borrowing a leaf from James Hansen's book.
McGuire told us in an email:

"We are currently on a high-end emissions scenario track and prospects for getting off this any time soon look pretty bleak [...]. These scenarios are Met Office Hadley Centre scenarios that build in carbon feedbacks, and are - in my opinion - very realistic. In relation to sea level, the consensus now is that a 1 - 2m rise is most likely by 2100."

McGuire is also clearly coming from a particular viewpoint:

"The language used in scientific papers is always careful, but released from the constraints of peer-reviewed journals we are able to express our thoughts in a more personal manner - as James Hansen in the US has done so effectively. My personal opinion is that climate change will be catastrophic - even without any geological response."

Perhaps it's not that surprising that book authors will try and make their work sound exciting. But there are no end of newspapers willing to pounce on catastrophic visions of the future in order to perpetuate the 'it's an apocalypse/it isn't happening' see-saw that makes up the worst end of climate reporting.
McGuire is not shying away from discussing high-end scenarios, which is fair enough. But in our view he should make clear that this is what he is doing, and also more carefully communicate the uncertainty in his work. After all, it appears to be decidedly early days for this research.
(Source-The Carbon Brief)

How the Nepal Earthquake Happened

(wall street journal)
 

A little before noon Saturday in Nepal, a chunk of rock about 9 miles below the earth’s surface shifted, unleashing a shock wave—described as being as powerful as the explosion of more than 20 thermonuclear weapons—that ripped through the Katmandu Valley.
In geological terms, the tremor occurred like clockwork, 81 years after the region’s last earthquake of such a magnitude, in 1934.
Records dating to 1255 indicate the region—known as the Indus-Yarlung suture zone—experiences a magnitude-8 earthquake approximately every 75 years, according to a report by Nepal’s National Society for Earthquake Technology.
The reason is the regular movement of the fault line that runs along Nepal’s southern border, where the Indian subcontinent collided with the Eurasia plate 40 million to 50 million years ago. 

Damage from Saturday’s earthquake in Katmandu, Nepal. Photo: Agence France-Presse/Getty Images 

 

“The collision between India and Eurasia is a showcase for geology,” said Lung S. Chan, a geophysicist at the University of Hong Kong. The so-called India plate is pushing its way north toward Asia at a rate of about 5 centimeters, or 2 inches, a year, he said. “Geologically speaking, that’s very fast.”
As the plates push against each other, friction generates stress and energy that builds until the crust ruptures, said Dr. Chan, who compared the quake to a thermonuclear weapons explosion. In the case of Saturday’s quake, the plate jumped forward about 2 meters, or 6.5 feet, said Hongfeng Yang, an earthquake expert at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Saturday’s quake was also relatively shallow, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. Such quakes tend to cause more damage and more aftershocks than those that occur deeper below the earth’s surface.
After an earthquake, the plates resume moving and the clock resets. “Earthquakes dissipate energy, like lifting the lid off a pot of boiling water,” said Dr. Chan. “But it builds back up after you put the lid back on.”

‘Earthquakes dissipate energy, like lifting the lid off a pot of boiling water. But it builds back up after you put the lid back on.’
—Lung S. Chan, geophysicist at the University of Hong Kong

Nepal is prone to destructive earthquakes, not only because of the massive forces involved in the tectonic collision, but also because of the type of fault line the country sits on. Normal faults create space when the ground cracks and separates. Nepal lies on a so-called thrust fault, where one tectonic plate forces itself on top of another.
The most visible result of this is the Himalayan mountain range. The fault runs along the 1,400-mile range, and the constant collision of the India and Eurasia plates pushes up the height of the peaks by about a centimeter each year.

Despite the seeming regularity of severe earthquakes in Nepal, it isn’t possible to predict when one will happen. Historic records and modern measurements of tectonic plate movement show that if the pressure builds in the region in a way that is “generally consistent and homogenous,” the region should expect a severe earthquake every four to five decades, Dr. Yang said.
The complexity of the forces applying pressure at the fault means scientists are incapable of predicting more than an average number of earthquakes that a region will experience in a century, experts say.
Still, earthquakes in Nepal are more predictable than most, because of the regular movement of the plates. Scientists aren’t sure why this is.
The earth’s tectonics plates are constantly in motion. Some faults release built-up stress in the form of earthquakes. Others release that energy quietly. “Some areas, like Nepal, release energy as a large earthquake, once in a while,” said Dr. Chan. “These regions all have different natures for reasons geologists don’t really know.”

 

Reinvigorate Trade to Boost Global Economic Growth

 

Reinvigorate Trade to Boost Global Economic Growth

By Christine Lagarde, Managing Director, IMF
Address at the U.S. Ex-Im Bank Conference
Washington, DC, April 23, 2015

Good afternoon. I would like to thank Susan Axelrod for her kind introduction, and thank you to the U.S. Ex-Im Bank for giving me the opportunity to speak about the importance of expanding global trade – especially at this point in time.
Let me start by saying something that often gets lost in the nitty-gritty of trade discussions. If you care about growth and innovation; if you care about jobs and the real incomes of the middle-class; if you care about poverty reduction and greater economic fairness; if you do care about all these things, you need to be serious about fostering global trade.
The IMF cares deeply about these issues and has been committed to the idea of open trade that is – ideally – underpinned by multilateral agreements and institutions. More than 70 years ago, the founding fathers of the IMF created an institution that was designed to prevent a return to the self-defeating economic policies of the Great Depression – including trade protectionism and competitive currency devaluations.
Let me quote Article 1 of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement: “The purpose of the IMF is to facilitate the expansion and balanced growth of international trade, and to contribute thereby to the promotion and maintenance of high levels of employment and real income.”
Fast-forward to the global financial crisis of 2008, which marked the latest turning point in global trade. When that crisis struck, trade protectionism became the dog that did not bark. Contrary to some expectations, the world did not see a rampant rise in old-style trade barriers. And trade volumes rebounded after a sharp initial drop. This was a reflection of the unprecedented level of international cooperation that prevented a global economic meltdown.
But the financial crisis has helped put a damper on growth in global trade. 2015 is likely to mark the fourth consecutive year of below-average trade growth, with at least one more year of disappointing growth to come, according to the latest WTO predictions.
In other words, one of the engines of global economic growth has slowed down, because of cyclical forces but also because of structural factors. This trend must be reversed.
Reinvigorating trade is not just a “nice-to-have”. It is an “essential-to-have” – to help prevent what I have called the “new mediocre” of low growth over a long period. This is why the international community, including the G-20, is pushing for trade reforms as part of a comprehensive policy package to lift growth and employment.
With this in mind, I would like to touch on three issues:

• Why do we need a better trade engine?
• How can we shift global trade into a higher gear?
• Which trade policies should economies pursue?

1. Why do we need a more powerful trade engine?
Let me start by briefly outlining the case for a better trade engine. This audience knows it well, but sometimes we get so involved in the details that the big picture gets lost. Trade is good for growth. How?
a. Reforms – including new trade agreements – encourage countries to further specialize in the goods and services in which they have a comparative advantage. By using their existing resources more efficiently, they can help lift world production and consumption.
In other words: specialize in what you do best, trade for the rest. The classic gains from this strategy include lower prices for consumers and companies – and therefore higher real incomes – and a greater variety of goods and services available for purchase.
b. Trade reforms can also have a powerful indirect effect on growth by igniting and amplifying other structural reforms. For example:

• Trade reforms can increase external competition in product and services markets.
• They can encourage key infrastructure investments – think of new ports and new roads.
• They can spur innovation through R&D and “learning by exporting”.
• And they can strengthen institutions by encouraging better governance and a better business environment.

c. All this would help policymakers to reverse the decline in productivity growth in advanced economies and boost productivity in emerging and developing economies. Recent IMF research shows that lower productivity is a key driver of declining potential growth rates in advanced economies and – perhaps even more so – in emerging market economies.
What this means is that we have reduced our estimate of the speed limit at which economies can currently drive. In advanced economies, for example, potential annual growth fell to 1.5 percent in the past two years, down from 2.2 percent in 2001-07. Reversing this trend is essential to lift global growth over the medium term.
d. In summary, open trade is an important contributor to job creation. As you, Fred [Hochberg] said yourself, “millions of American workers have jobs that depend on trade”. In 2014, for example, exports of goods and services directly and indirectly supported an estimated 11.7 million U.S. jobs. And by encouraging greater specialization, trade fosters industries that are more competitive and, therefore, more sustainable.
And let’s not forget the impact of trade on global poverty reduction. Hundreds of millions of people have been lifted out of poverty over the past three decades.
2. How can you shift global trade into a higher gear?
So, I think there is a compelling case for a better trade engine. But how can policymakers shift global trade into a higher gear – my second point.
For at least three decades before the 2008 financial crisis, global trade regularly grew at twice the rate of the global economy. It is now expanding at – or below – the rate of the global economy. This slowdown is largely because of two structural changes in global trade.
a. One is the maturing of existing global value chains – in North America, Europe, and Southeast Asia – while new value chains are not being formed.
To reverse this trend, policymakers need to unlock the trade potential of other regions. South America, South Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and the Middle East and North Africa: these are the regions that would greatly benefit from being better integrated into global value chains. It would be good for them and good for the world.
b. The second factor holding back trade growth is the slowdown in trade liberalization in recent years. For example, multilateral negotiations have stalled, and regional trade initiatives have not matched the transformative effect of, say, the North American Free Trade Agreement.
This is why policymakers need to press ahead with negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the TPP, as well as on its transatlantic cousin, the TTIP.
Research by the Peterson Institute finds that the TPP could boost world income by $295 billion per year over the next decade. It also finds that the TTP would raise U.S. incomes by 0.4 percent, or $77 billion, per year. The U.S. could gain a comparable amount from TTIP, according to estimates by the European Union.
We all know there are considerable discussions over the models that are being used to generate these hard numbers. But I think we get the point:

• Recent developments in the U.S. Senate suggest that these important trade deals can be areas of cooperation between the Congress and the President.
• On the other side of the Atlantic, progress on trade would be immensely helpful in lifting growth and confidence in the European Union.
• The Japanese government is also keen to use the TPP to inject greater competition into its low-growth economy.
• And emerging and developing economies would benefit from better integration into the global economy.

So, on all sides, there are good incentives to cut deals. Political leadership is now needed to push these deals over the finish line.
c. The same goes for the WTO deal struck in Bali at the end of 2013. This agreement, if fully implemented, would cut trade costs and deliver an economic boost of US$1 trillion annually. The Bali deal is particularly important for developing economies because of its focus on trade facilitation, which involves reducing red tape and streamlining customs.
Let me be clear: there are signs of progress on trade. But the global community can – and should – be much more ambitious.
3. Which trade policies should economies pursue?
Which brings me to my third point – what are the trade policies that economies should pursue?
The IMF has recently reviewed its own policy advice to make sure that trade remains an essential element of our operational work. This includes our technical assistance and our annual assessments of our members’ economies.
Of course, policy advice has to be country-specific. But let me give you our view on three broad categories:
First, most advanced economies will be largely focusing on the “21^st century trade issues” such as opening services markets and making regulatory systems more coherent. The TPP is a good example because it seeks to address crucial issues such as intellectual property protection and treatment of state-owned enterprises.
Second, many emerging market economies, especially in South Asia and Latin America, can still benefit greatly from integrating into the global economy through traditional trade liberalization. This may include unilateral efforts to open up trade and encourage foreign direct investment, especially in infrastructure. In Asia, in this decade alone, overall national infrastructure investment needs are estimated to be $8 trillion.
Third, for developing economies, trade and integration into global value chains should be a central plank of their development and growth strategies. Again, trade facilitation will be key. The IMF stands ready to support this transition to a less protected environment. Think of the fiscal implications of lower tariffs and the challenges of sequencing reforms. On all this, the Fund can provide hands-on advice and training.
Conclusion
Let me conclude by quoting one of the sharpest thinkers of his generation. Two hundred years ago, the French philosopher Montesquieu said – and I will give you the French version first:
“Le commerce guérit des préjugés destructeurs: & c’est presque une règle générale que, partout où il y a des mœurs douces, il y a du commerce; & que, partout où il y a du commerce, il y a des mœurs douces.”
“Trade is the best cure for prejudice. It is an almost general rule that, wherever there is good citizenship, there is trade, and that, wherever there is trade, there is good citizenship.”
The most destructive economic prejudice is trade protectionism. Policymakers must remain vigilant about the old-style, in-your-face protectionism and about the new protectionism that is based on non-tariff measures.
Smart efforts to reduce and dismantle these barriers should be strongly supported. This is why the IMF welcomes preferential trade deals such as the TTP – which we believe should eventually be open to other countries that meet its requirements.
The key question is how to make preferential deals more coherent with multilateral efforts. How can we achieve eventual multilateralization – preferably in the context of the World Trade Organization? How can we avoid trade fragmentation – the “spaghetti bowl” of competing regimes and preferences?
I strongly believe that global deals deliver far more than any other approach. Rather than simply bolstering existing trade connections, multilateral deals allow new trading relationships to be formed. They are a global solution to a global challenge.
The last major global trade agreement is now 20 years old. The world can do better than that. As I said at the beginning, if you care about growth, you need to be serious about global trade. It is now time to get serious about trade.
Thank you.

India's Saving Investment Gap

 

India’s saving investment gap

India’s saving rate at % of GDP is increasing at the rate of 2.10% per year from 2000 to 2012 , on the other hand  , Investment as % of GDP  is stepping up at the rate of 3.70% per year during the same period. This domestic imbalance creates several problems in macro  economic variables which ultimately produces disequilibrium of the economy.India’s saving Investment gap is accelerating since 2004 ,but it was favourable before 2004.In the figure the blue line shows the investment rate where as red line is the saving rate .It is very much clear in the figure that the gap is widening .

          The government should observe this situation seriously and take appropriate measure to restore balance in domestic economy. In China, Korea and in some other Asian economies the situation is reverse, that why they are easily overcoming the external balance. If we are able to balance this fundamental gap ,then we may tackle the unemployment problem more easily. Fiscal policy alone cannot make up this gap but needed suitable  monetary policy also. Obviously , the integration of external balance policy as well as fiscal monetary policy will be justified.Moreover, nobody cares.

   

Climate change and its impact on the economy of Sundarban

Climate change and its impact on the economy of Sundarban

Debesh Bhowmik

(INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT STUDIES,KOLKATA)

 Key words- Climate change , Sundarban , plan of action

JEL- O13,O21, Q54, Q58

Abstract

This paper draws attention to the brief account of the economy of Sundarban on which the effects of climate change due to global warming have been studied through the rise of sea level, sea surface temperature variation, variability of rainfall, behavior of cyclonic storms, destruction of mangrove, net decrease of area of land including forest area, increased in salinity, bulk of erosion, all of which induced to fall down the yields of agriculture and allied products including NTFP. All these impacts of climate change in Sundarban have negative influences on the access of food and livelihood.

The Government of India and Government of West Bengal with the help of the World Bank and India Canada Environment facility have undertaken several projects to revitalize environment and sustainable development of Sundarban with a great emphasis on objectives of 12^th Five Year Plan amending the 1991 Coastal Regulation Zone. Some experts’ recommendations like Coastal forestation, marine management, remote sensing and GIS technology and to construct a barriage across the downstream of Ganges-Gorai junction to store water for feeding into the Gorai river etc have been emphasized by the Government of India. 

*****See Full Paper at 

ARTHA BEEKSHAN - VOL-23, NO-2,SEPTEMBER,2014, PAGE-75-92

Dr.Debesh Bhowmik is presenting the following paper  in the 35^th Annual conference of Bengal Economic Association in Ramkrishna Mission Vivekananda University ,Narendrapur Campus on 22March,2015

BANGLADESH-INDIA TRADE FINANCIAL INTEGRATION LINKAGE

Dr.Debesh Bhowmik

(International Institute for Development Studies,Kolkata.Associate Editor, Arthabeekshan-the journal of Bengal Economic Association)

Key Words – trade financial integration linkage , cointegration, VAR,

JEL- C5,C32, F14,F15

Abstract

This paper seeks to explain the linkage between Bangladesh-India  trade and financial integration during the period of 1997-2014.To explore the linkage, the cointegration and VAR model have been tested between the Bangladesh-India export and Bangladesh India export GDP ratio and the indicators of financial indicators of Bangladesh viz, GDP growth rate, trade openness ,exchange rate of Rupee with US Dollar. Bangladesh’s FDI inflows and international reserves etc.The Engle and Granger(1987) test  of cointegration did  find poor linkage but the Johansen (1996) test of cointegration showed the similar results with one exception,ie, cointegration between Bangladesh’s ’s export/GDP ratio to India  with the indicators of financial indicators has only two cointegrating vectors. The above findings were tested through VAR model which showed that Impulse Response Function and variance decomposition emerged divergence including the stability tests ( Autocorrelation test, ARCH test and Normality test) of the residuals which are insignificant in both the cases of Bangladesh’s export to India  or Bangladesh’s export/GDP ratio to India .Thus poor linkage was verified which is unstable. Even the VECM showed that errors are corrected only for capital inflows insignificantly per year.  It was found because of nonconvergence of indicators of financial integration.

ASEAN-China Environmental Cooperation Forum 2014

 President Xi Jinping (right) visits the Chinese National Engineering Research Center for Control and Treatment of Heavy Metal Pollution at Central South University in Changsha, Hunan Province, on November 4, 2013 (WANG YE)
　　Among the 40,000 or so residents in Dapu Town in Hengyang, central China's Hunan Province, more than 300 children were diagnosed with excessive lead in their blood earlier this year. In the most severe cases, blood lead levels hit 322 micrograms per liter, far exceeding the limits of the healthy range—100 micrograms per liter. Since it is difficult to rid oneself of heavy metals through normal metabolization, the harm they inflict on these children could conceivably continue for years.
　　While the pursuit of effective approaches to alleviate environmental pollution are underway, similar scandals such as the German village of Wewelsfleth, dubbed "the village of cancer patients" as virtually every household in the area contains a member afflicted by the condition, have continued to rear their ugly head in almost every corner of the world, especially in relatively less developed countries and regions.
　　On September 17 and 18, carrying the theme "National Strategy and Regional Cooperation for Sustainable Development: New Challenges and New Opportunities," the ASEAN-China Environmental Cooperation Forum 2014 was held in Nanning, south China's Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region.
　　With the participation of more than 200 experts, entrepreneurs and government leaders from across the world, more opportunities have been created to facilitate exchanges of information and to introduce the relevant expertise and technologies to China.
　　"The Asia-Pacific region has contributed greatly to the momentum of the world economic recovery and sustainable growth. However, global challenges such as climate change, ecological degradation and the energy crisis have become increasingly formidable, calling for global economic and environmental governance," said Li Ganjie, China's Vice Minister of Environmental Protection, at the opening ceremony of the forum.
　　Teaming up in Guangxi
　　Since the forum was established three years ago, it has served as an important platform for high-level dialogues concerning environmental policies and cooperation. To reinforce regional green development, Li suggested pushing for the establishment of a regional community of environmental cooperation by building a "green maritime silk road" through concerted efforts of all concerned parties, shaping a multi-layer cooperative network through intensifying policy exchanges and capacity improvement, and taking the initiative to extend partnership on environment-related technological and industrial cooperation.
　　At the opening ceremony, Vice Chairman of the Guangxi Regional Government Tang Renjian, expressed hopes for the creation of a new pattern of cooperation to make regional sustainable development a reality.
　　Tang held that China and the ASEAN should promote the establishment of a green development demonstration area and focus on the development of low-carbon recycling economy, agritourism, as well as intensifying green trade and cooperation. Beyond that, he opined more input should be generated in terms of bilateral exchanges on biological diversity and ecological protection.
　　Inar Ichsana Ishak, Assistant Minister of Socio-Cultural and Environment Health of Indonesia, believed that all-round cooperation encompassing green food production and infrastructure should be carried out to achieve sustainable urban development. "In recent years, Indonesia has adjusted related legislation and policies to solve environmental problems," she said.
　　ASEAN members and China are facing three historic opportunities in intensifying environmental sustainability, said Kaveh Zahedi, UN Environment Programme (UNEP) Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific. "The prospective China-ASEAN economic community will propel the region into an engine for world economy and for green growth, which will significantly benefit local people," he said.
　　Sanath Ranawana, a senior specialist on natural resources management from the Asian Development Bank, suggested that the bank be prepared to give further consideration to regional cooperation and investment in building cross-border natural protection areas and safeguarding biological diversity.
　　Land contamination
　　A survey released in April by China's Ministry of Environmental Protection and Ministry of Land and Resources showed that 16.1 percent of the country's land had been affected by heavy metal contamination. It revealed that the quality of arable land in the wastelands of mining and metallurgical industries is worrisome.
　　Among all inorganic pollutants, heavy metals, a term referring to metals that weigh over 5 grams per cubic centimeter, present the greatest danger to the health of animals, plants and human beings. If mercury is absorbed by the root system of a plant and then disseminated, its leaves, flowers and stems will typically turn brown or black, its growth will be retarded and more importantly, its fruits will contain mercury.
　　"In China, land contamination is characterized by the coexistence of new and old pollutants and the mixture of organic and inorganic pollutants," said Zhang Weili, a research fellow with the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences.
　　Aside from the development of mining and mineral industries, agriculture is another source of pollution, for most Chinese farmers are preoccupied with the effects of chemical fertilizers on grain output.
　　Zhang Fusuo, a professor at the College of Resources and Environmental Sciences at the Beijing-based China Agricultural University, pointed out that China only accounts for 10 percent of the total arable land in the world, but consumes more than one third of the total chemical fertilizers used. While its grain output grew 150 percent from 1980 to 2008, its consumption of chemical manure also tripled.
　　Soil pollution affects the quality of surface and underground water, and contaminates agricultural products. However, the treatment of pollution necessitates huge inputs of funds and resources.
　　At present, most related remediation technologies are still in the experimental stage, and thus far, there has been no case of successful heavy metal pollution treatment in China, said Liu Shuai with the Hunan Provincial Environmental Protection and Resources Conservation Commission.
　　"China's environmental sustainability has captured the attention of overseas Chinese entrepreneurs who are willing to shepherd funds into related fields such as the research and development of environmentally sound technologies," said Qiao Lihua, an overseas Chinese who migrated to the United States in 1986 and went on to found his own real estate company.
　　"On the front of heavy metal pollution treatment, China is in its infancy, we can bring about our technologies and share it with Chinese and ASEAN people," said Michael Gianchetta, Vice President of Gianco, an environmental services company in the United States.
　　Gianchetta said that the United States has accumulated rich experience and developed advanced technologies in the field of heavy metal pollution prevention and control, which have been employed in the effective treatment of mining and metallurgical wastes. "We are expecting more concerted efforts from China as well as ASEAN members in combating heavy metal pollution," he added.