Around 8.5 million pangolins are estimated to have been trafficked from Africa between 2014 and 2021, with many ending up in China

In March 2019, the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and China’s National Forestry and Grassland Administration co-hosted two workshops on reducing wildlife trafficking in Kenya and Botswana. These workshops, supported by the Chinese embassies in Nairobi and Gaborone, attracted over 200 Chinese nationals working for state-owned or private companies in the two countries. During the workshops, the international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) and Chinese government officials expressed their shared goal of reducing the illegal trade of products from rare and endangered African species to China, one of the world’s largest markets for trafficked wildlife products.

These workshops highlight how INGOs and Chinese actors are responding to Xi Jinping’s 2019 pledge at the second Belt and Road Forum to make the BRI  “open, green, and clean.” Although some experts have raised concerns about Beijing’s greenwashing of Chinese investments abroad, many international groups are attempting to make China’s overseas projects more environmentally sustainable. 

Since the 2010s, international NGOs and foundations have been pivoting their China-focused operations from activities within China to programs addressing the environmental and other impacts of Chinese overseas investment. The surge in Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs) investing abroad and their growing negative environmental footprint has created new drivers for collaboration. As a result of these trends and other factors (such as the 2017 overseas NGO law), INGOs and Chinese actors are now shifting from a donor-recipient relationship to one of partnership in overseas activities. These partnerships open the door for engagement on mutually beneficial projects; however, the projects still largely reflect the incentives and priorities set by Beijing.

INGO-China Green Projects Hit the Road

In our ongoing research, we have documented the trends encouraging INGOs and Chinese SOEs to jointly develop infrastructure projects abroad. We also have been examining the varying impact of the joint projects on the lives and perceptions of BRI host country citizens. We created a comprehensive dataset of all known INGO-China overseas development projects through December 2020 and found many are environment-focused and aimed at Beijing’s objective to “green” the BRI.

In our dataset, over half of the 133 projects are related to the environment, animal welfare, or sustainable development. The majority are in Africa and Southeast Asia, particularly Laos, Vietnam, Cameroon, and Ethiopia. Many projects are also broadly associated with the BRI, without a specified region or country location. 

Out of the 34 different INGOs and foundations appearing in the full dataset, 17 are engaged in environmental issues, including ClientEarth, Conservation International, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, and the Wildlife Conservation Society. 

These environmental organizations and their Chinese partners conduct environmental activities that most often include dialogues, research, and trainings. Workshops, conferences, or exchanges include INGOs, Chinese partners, and counterparts overseas. For example, TRAFFIC, a UK-based INGO focused on wildlife and biodiversity, hosted an online meeting in November 2020 among customs authorities in China, Cameroon, and the Republic of Congo to discuss strategies for countering illegal wildlife and timber trade from Africa to China. 

Numerous research collaborations have been investigating the impact of Chinese investments overseas. For instance, Greenpeace East Asia and the Sichuan Province Cyclic Economy Research Center co-authored a report in 2019 studying wind energy investments along the BRI. INGOs and foundations have frequently partnered with Chinese actors on environmental-related trainings. In December 2017, WWF and the China International Contractors Association held a conference and training seminar in Cameroon on new Chinese guidelines for overseas sustainable infrastructure aimed at Chinese SOEs.  

These joint projects have involved a wide variety of Chinese actors:

1. Chinese central government entities. The National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and the Ministry of Ecology and Environment have been the most frequent participants. 
2. Industry associations. Trade groups, such as the China Soybean Industry Association and China Timber and Wood Products Distribution Association, are the second most common types of partners. 
3. Research institutes and universities. Some high-level government affiliations, such as the NDRC’s Energy Research Institute and Peking University, are among top collaborators.
4. Chinese state- and private-owned companies, and NGOs. Companies, foundations and independent or government-organized NGOs are engaged in a smaller number of projects.

Future Pathways for Partnerships

Our data base provides a snapshot of INGO-Chinese environmental projects overseas. Early activities have tended to be low-stakes dialogues, including conferences, workshops, or joint research. However, we expect these projects to intensify in form and frequency in the future given China’s growing emphasis on environmental sustainability. Xi Jinping’s speech at the third Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation in October 2023 emphasized green development in infrastructure, energy, and transportation. Alongside Xi’s call for “small yet smart” infrastructure investment, INGO-China projects provide one additional pathway for addressing the environmental risks of Chinese overseas investment.

While there are many reasons to applaud the efforts of INGOs and their Chinese partners, there are also important caveats. These partnerships pose unique challenges, such as differing incentives and misunderstandings about the “value added” on both sides. For example, one INGO representative shared in an interview that different Chinese actors vary in their receptivity to working with INGOs overseas. The Ministry of Ecology and Environment was more responsive to their efforts, whereas the Ministry of Commerce, SASAC, and NDRC were less inclined to collaborate. Some agencies lack mandates to incentivize work with environmental INGOs. 

To build these partnerships, it is important for INGOs to try to understand the incentives and goals of prospective Chinese partners. INGOs should also prioritize monitoring and evaluation of these early partnerships to help share best practices and highlight areas of mutual benefit among Chinese partners and the broader global INGO community. 

Strikingly, we found these partnerships abroad often reflect the same constraints imposed on INGOs and their partners within China. For example, projects overwhelmingly involve INGOs with a registered representative office in China and – perhaps as a result – the projects focus on areas that are permitted and encouraged by the Chinese government, which includes environmental issues. 

INGO interactions with Chinese partners abroad also mirror their work dynamics within China, where there are more collaborations with central government ministries than with Chinese societal actors like NGOs, foundations, and GONGOs. INGOs should thus consider the potential limitations of these partnerships and how priorities set in Beijing continue to shape incentives for Chinese actors to collaborate with international nonprofit groups overseas.