Dr Chen Xiang - St Antony's

Could you tell us about yourself?

Hello! My name is Chen, and I am originally from Xiangxi, a close-knit region in western Hunan province, China. Currently, I am an Assistant Professor at Shanghai Jiao Tong University and a Nonresident Fellow at the Harvard-China Project at Harvard University. This year, I am honored to be a Swire Scholar and an Academic Visitor at St Antony’s College. My research focuses on the political economy of climate change and China’s foreign policy, aiming to bridge the gap between science and effective policymaking. I am also interested in the connections between domestic politics and foreign policy, particularly public opinion, nationalism, and the Taiwan issue. These areas are both professionally rewarding and personally meaningful to me.

How did you arrive at your current research interests?

My journey has been a blend of discovery, curiosity, and unexpected experiences. Initially, I did not have a clear vision of what I wanted to pursue in the social sciences. Growing up in Xiangxi, the world of global policy felt far removed from my reality. However, moving to Shanghai to pursue my bachelor’s degree at Fudan University opened up a world of possibilities. I took a “connect-the-dots” approach to my studies, exploring various courses and projects to discover what truly resonated with me.

The turning point came during my junior year when I had the opportunity to volunteer in Guatemala, working on clean water access for indigenous communities. This experience was transformative. Upon arriving in Antigua after a long journey (since Guatemala did not have diplomatic relations with the PRC), I saw firsthand how communities struggled with contaminated water – a critical issue that required more than individual effort. That was my “aha” moment: I realized that sustainable solutions necessitate a combination of grassroots action and systemic policy support. I saw the potential of environmental governance as a powerful tool for addressing real-world issues.

Following this, I pursued a PhD at the University of Hong Kong, focusing specifically on environmental management in China and how the Chinese government deals with air and water pollution within the complex local-central relationships.

At the same time, I developed a deep interest in international relations, particularly the complex dynamics between Taiwan and Mainland China. My work in this area explores how small states, such as Guatemala, Panama, and Belize, navigate diplomatic relationships across the Taiwan Strait amid great power competition from the Cold War to now. The intersection of environmental policy and foreign affairs became the core of my academic journey.

Could you explain your field of study and research?

Absolutely. My research examines how climate policies are implemented within China’s political system and what that means for tackling environmental challenges. Think of climate policy as a balancing act: there is a need for strict, centralized government control to enforce environmental regulations, but at the same time, local communities and industries need to be engaged and active participants.

In China, this balance is especially complex due to its unique governance system. I study how specific policies, like emissions trading systems (ETS) or Central Environmental Inspection Teams (CEITs), operate within this framework. It is fascinating because while China’s approach differs from Western democracies, it shares the common goal of reducing pollution and addressing climate change. My work explores the effectiveness of these policies and what lessons can be learned to guide both China’s and global environmental efforts.

For example, in one of my collaborative projects on the carbon market, we found that the Guangdong ETS (the province with over 100 million population) led to an anticipation effect and a short-term reduction in carbon emissions. Notably, emissions reduced substantially upon the announcement of the ETS scheme – a full two years before the carbon market was scheduled to begin. We did not find evidence of a statistical association between market indicators such as carbon permit prices and emission reductions attributable to the ETS. However, political signaling – measured through keywords in over 50,000 Chinese Party-led newspaper reports – was systematically associated with emission reductions.

This suggests that underneath its market veneer, the ETS mechanisms in China may not be qualitatively different from more direct forms of environmental regulation, which rely heavily on political will and resource mobilization and are effective only in the short run. Our study of the Guangdong ETS suggests that market-based mechanisms to reduce carbon emissions in China may effectively be operating similarly to more direct forms of environmental regulations, such as campaign-style enforcement and blunt-force regulation. This is an important finding that highlights the need to understand how market-based approaches to reducing emissions operate within an authoritarian environmental framework. While we acknowledge that direct regulation may be an effective strategy to enforce environmental regulations within China’s political landscape, we note that this approach has been shown to be unsustainable over time owing to the levels of political will and the deployment of resources required to sustain the enforcement of regulations.

Currently, I am collaborating with Professor Alex Lo on a book on China’s climate governance. This book aims to provide a comprehensive review and in-depth analysis of China’s climate policy interventions since 2012. It focuses on the use of market-based instruments and financial tools for addressing specific climate change challenges, as well as the role of the private sector and industry actors under the new leadership. I aim to present new arguments and evidence about the evolving climate policy strategies and multi-scalar governing practices of China during the political and economic transitions of the past decade.

What motivated you to pursue this research?

My motivation stems from a combination of personal experiences and academic insights. After my volunteer experience in Guatemala, I saw firsthand that addressing environmental issues extends beyond individual actions – it requires policies and systems capable of driving widespread change. Later, as a master’s student at the Free University of Brussels, I attended a class on the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme and learned how the EU collaborated with China to establish its own carbon market. This approach to climate policy excited me because it offered a way to reconcile economic growth with environmental responsibility. It felt like the perfect intersection of what I had been learning and what I aspired to contribute to.

How do you feel your research contributes to or builds on existing knowledge or work in your field of study?

My research in environmental governance in China contributes a nuanced perspective to the field of “authoritarian environmentalism.” By studying China’s unique approach to environmental governance, I have developed a framework called “Authoritarian Environmentalism 2.0.” This framework recognizes the co-existence and co-evolution of authoritarian and democratic elements of governance and their hierarchical but mutually reinforcing relationship. The government under AE 2.0 strategically employs both top-down and market-based tools for environmental projects. Furthermore, mass participatory initiatives have been adopted with a higher degree of non-state actor involvement. However, the use of bottom-up initiatives and decentralized mechanisms is still instrumental. They are used to achieve the state’s centrally defined environmental goals and targets, rather than promoting governance modernization and fulfilling universal values. The power between state and non-state actors remains imbalanced, but their relationship and role in environmental governance are becoming more dynamic, reflecting a process of political absorption of non-state actors and decentralized mechanisms into the state apparatus.

What excites you most about your research?

What excites me most is the potential for real-world impact. In environmental governance, understanding China’s approaches can influence how the world’s largest emitter pursues sustainable development, which has global implications.

I would like to share another exciting ongoing research project with our community. This is collaborative work I am doing with my colleagues at Harvard on the discrepancies between estimated and actual wind power generation in the U.S. and China.

The urgency of addressing climate change is evident, and wind energy plays a vital role in global strategies to reduce carbon emissions. Accurate assessments of wind resources are crucial for this transition. However, current wind energy development and research heavily rely on meteorological datasets which, despite their widespread use, exhibit significant discrepancies both internally and when compared to actual wind power generation. These discrepancies, though not widely recognized, can lead to ineffective decision-making, resulting in substantial economic and energy losses.

Based on this, my colleagues and I examine the wind gap by comparing estimates from multiple datasets to real-world wind power generation across 1,276 wind farm sites in the United States and 10,032 sites in China.

In the U.S., our analysis reveals significant regional discrepancies, particularly in coastal areas where actual generation far exceeds estimates. For example, in some regions, models project only one-third of the actual generation observed.

In China, the discrepancy between theoretical and real-world outcomes is also substantial, with regions like Inner Mongolia showing a theoretical capacity factor (CF) of 35%-60%, yet only achieving an actual CF of 25.9% in 2023 – surprisingly lower than Yunnan’s 32.4%. This research is essential, as more than one-third of wind power could be unlocked with existing turbines to accelerate carbon neutrality in China.

Such large gaps can lead to misguided planning and ineffective strategies for wind power expansion. China’s main issue lies in the underperformance of wind farms, with much of the wind energy potential remaining untapped. Integration of energy storage across different time scales and adapting the grid to serve emerging loads like hydrogen production, AI computing, and electric vehicles can help address this issue and accelerate China’s path to carbon neutrality.

The interdisciplinary nature of my research allows me to connect different fields, and I am driven by the possibility that my work can benefit both people and the planet. It is rewarding to think that my insights might contribute to policy discussions and academic discourse alike.

What do you hope the impact of your research will be?

I hope my research advances academic discussions and influences practical policy decisions. For climate policy, I aim to provide insights that help China and other countries implement effective environmental strategies. In foreign policy, I hope to enhance understanding of small states’ diplomatic choices, informing how larger nations engage with them.

Ultimately, I aspire to bridge the gap between academia and policy, contributing to governance and international relations in ways that promote sustainable development and peaceful cooperation.

Why did you choose St Antony’s?

St Antony’s College is renowned for its expertise in international studies and its interdisciplinary approach, which aligns perfectly with my research interests. The college’s global vision and vibrant intellectual community offer an inspiring environment where scholars from around the world exchange diverse perspectives. This collaborative atmosphere encourages curiosity and innovation, which I find both welcoming and energizing.

Being an Academic Visitor here allows me to engage with leading experts, collaborate on interdisciplinary projects, and contribute to a community that values both academic excellence and practical impact. It is the ideal place to further my research and make meaningful connections that enhance the reach and significance of my work.

Return to Research Reflections