At what cost? The Economist draws backlash over ‘eco-authoritarian’ China label
British publication The Economist has come under fire across social media for calling China an “eco-authoritarian” state over its Yangtze River fishing ban, with some users calling out the outlet for its use. . .
British publication The Economist has come under fire across social media for calling China an “eco-authoritarian” state over its Yangtze River fishing ban, with some users calling out the outlet for its use of the “but at what cost” trope. In a piece published on July 27, the publication outlined China’s efforts torestore Asia’s longest waterway, which has experienced decades of environmental degradation, leading to a decline in fish and other species populations. “The Chinese Communist Party, once famous for pillaging from the natural world, has set to protecting parts of it. But the country’s ‘eco-authoritarian’ approach deserves scrutiny,” The Economist said in a social media post linking to the article. The article describes the government’s environmental approach as “top-down and intolerant of resistance” and alleges that at times officials did not listen to environmentalists or the people harmed by the policies. In 2021, China imposed a10-year fishing banalong with other measures in an attempt to restore the Yangtze River. A paper published by an international team in the peer-reviewed journal Science in February found that only half a decade on, the river was already undergoing a meaningful recovery. The Economist article acknowledged the results of the recovery efforts, stating that the river was making a “remarkable comeback” and could offer a lesson for other degraded watercourses in Asia.