[ad_1]
The political debate over a "Greater Australia" has resurfaced because of high immigration levels, increasing congestion and high real estate prices in Sydney and Melbourne, where 90% of migrants migrate to the country. 39; settle. In 2010, China surpbaded the United Kingdom as the main source of permanent migrants to Australia (now held by India). Since then, migrants born in China represent on average about 15% of the annual intake. This is an important factor in the Asianization of Sydney and Melbourne that Peter McDonald pointed out a decade ago.
In this context, our research focused on the neglected dimension of the environmental impact on cities of the population and immigration. Australian cities are world leaders – in the worst sense of the word – in terms of the size of their ecological footprints, the measurement of their use of resources and their greenhouse gas emissions. And we found that Chinese-born residents more than tripled their average consumption levels over their stay in China, even exceeding the consumption of Australian-born residents.
That found the study?
We were interested in understanding the urban consumption behavior of Chinese-born migrants born in the 21st century (measured by their ecological footprint) when they settled in Box Hill. It is a suburb of Melbourne's middle clbad, which has the highest concentration of residents born in China. We compared their consumption to their footprint before migration (when they lived in China) and that of Australian-born residents in the same suburbs.
Our findings are based on a comprehensive face-to-face survey of 61 Chinese-born residents and 72 Australian-born residents. The main conclusions are as follows.
A decade after their arrival in Melbourne, urban consumption patterns born in China were more than three times higher than their consumption prior to migration. They have even exceeded the consumption levels of other suburban residents. Their consumption of housing was 5.4 times higher than in China, their food consumption 4.7 times higher and their carbon footprint 2.7 times higher.
This is due in part to rising incomes, settling in a city whose size and housing costs are among the highest in the world and where the private car is the dominant mode of transportation. But cultural influences are also at stake.
Figure 1. The gap in the CALD index between residents born in China and Australia suggests a strong cultural influence on consumer behavior. (Click to enlarge.) Ting, Newton & Stone (2018), Author provided
It is clear that consumer acculturation is the main process by which Chinese migrants have become a reflection of the Australian host society. Cultural integration is less obvious – it is lagging behind the acculturation of consumers. This is clear from the comparison of the scores of a Cultural and Linguistic Difference Index (CALD).
The index included measures of place of birth, proficiency in English, religion, food preferences, participation in entertainment and festivals, means of social interaction and engaging with neighborhood communities. The difference between the scores of the Chinese and Australian groups on the CALD index was large (see Figure 1). This suggests that a strong cultural influence on the urban consumption behavior of the Chinese of this group was born.
Figure 2. Melbourne residents born in China tend to have much larger housing in all categories than in China. (Click to enlarge.) Ting, Newton & Stone (2018), Author provided
A comparison of the different components of the ecological footprint of residents born in China and Australia was also revealing. Footprints measuring the size and type of housing occupied by Chinese-born residents were overall 18% larger.
This may be due to the role that housing plays in the translation of an acquired status (mine-tzu, or "save the face") within the host society. Consumption levels higher than those born in Australia indicate the potential danger that home consumption will be used to indicate a "successful" establishment in Australia.
The fingerprints of people born in China were 16% larger than those born in Australia. This reflects increased consumption of meat and dairy products and lower consumption of locally grown vegetables.
The carbon footprints of people born in China were 37% larger, mainly due to more frequent trips abroad.
A growing burden on the planet
The global implications of these findings are potentially enormous. The increase in the incomes of the Chinese population among the populations of the developed countries should lead to new levels of urban consumption while this population aspires to the urban vitality enjoyed by the inhabitants of Australia and North America. In these countries, however, cities' quality of life indices are closely related to ecological footprints almost three times higher than those of China.
Based on the growth rate of the Chinese middle clbad and the increased consumption of the Chinese clbad born in China and currently living in Australia, the ecological footprint of the Chinese population of 1.4 billion residents should more than double in the next ten years. 20 years. This has important consequences for planetary ecosystems and geopolitics.
Written by Peter Newton, Research Professor in Sustainable Urban Planning, Center for Urban Transitions, Swinburne University of Technology; Christina Ting, Postdoctoral Fellow, Swinburne Business School, Swinburne University of Technology, and Wendy Stone, Associate Professor, Center for Urban Transitions, Swinburne University of Technology. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Source link
