漫步在有着中国“新能源汽车第一城”之称的深圳街头,你不会错过停放在路边的大量新能源汽车,以及宣传“绿色低碳”生活方式的标语。
深圳是一座紧邻香港的城市,有着1800万人口。这座城市因40多年前成为中国的改革开放试验田而闻名。
如今,它在碳减排方面也走在前列,是中国“低碳城市”建设的“试点”地区之一。
深圳是中国首个将公交车、出租车和网约车全部实现电气化的城市。2024年,深圳新车销量中有约77%为新能源汽车,远高于48%的全国平均水平。
深圳还率先设立了碳排放总量控制机制,推动“能耗双控”向“碳排放双控”转型——这比全国层面出台碳排放总量控制政策更早。

此外,深圳的地方性碳排放权交易市场(ETS)和“绿色债券”也都早于国家层面推出。
尽管深圳在碳减排领域很早就采取了措施,但一些专家对Carbon Brief表示,深圳的政策——这被当地政府称为“深圳模式”——很难在中国其他进行低碳转型的城市复制。
Carbon Brief回顾了深圳在低碳转型方面迄今为止所做的努力,并评估了其减排成效。
电动交通
官方智库中国(深圳)综合开发研究院财税贸易与产业发展研究中心主任韦福雷对Carbon Brief表示,深圳的低碳转型并非一蹴而就,而是建立在早期规划、政府支持和市场驱动相结合的基础上。
深圳的低碳转型始于21世纪初,当时该市的空气重污染天数达到峰值。
BBC新闻2017年的一篇报道称,经过十年的污染治理,深圳的空气污染程度“下降了近一半”。
报道称,这一成果很大程度上源于其“产业基础”的改变,也使深圳成为全国首批“低碳城市”之一。
这一时期,当地官员们制定了“低碳发展”战略,其中包括培育一批“战略性新兴产业”,如“信息通信技术”。这些产业后来为深圳包括新能源汽车行业在内的低碳行业提供了核心技术支持。
例如,目前全球领先的电动汽车巨头比亚迪,正是在这样的背景下诞生于深圳的。
韦福雷指出:“有了这种‘产业基因’,深圳只需把产业链重新梳理一遍,,就能快速满足新能源汽车行业(在2020年代)的新需求。”
尽管人口仅占全国约1%,但2025年深圳地方“两会”上的政府工作报告显示,该市在2024年的新能源汽车产量占到全国的22%。
报告同时称,深圳将在未来一年启动大约100个“气候投融资项目”,计划新增“绿色贷款”约1800亿元人民币(约合240亿美元)。
能源与清洁空气研究中心(CREA)分析师和中国团队负责人沈昕一对Carbon Brief说,深圳地方政府在扶持新兴产业方面经验丰富。
她说:“20年前,风电、太阳能发电,以及电动汽车,都还是需要大量投资和技术研发的新兴行业……当时的失败风险很高,但深圳市政府敢于推出很多创新政策加以扶持。”
新能源汽车企业的迅猛发展带动本地市场中新能源汽车占比持续上升。除了国家层面的补贴,地方政府也在生产和消费两端给予有力支持。
2024年,深圳销售的新车中约77%为新能源汽车,远高于48%的全国平均水平。
此外,深圳还率先实现了本市公交车、出租车和网约车全部电气化,是中国首个做到这一点的城市。
伦敦大学学院(UCL)可持续基建、经济与金融学讲师郑赫然向Carbon Brief指出,“更环保的交通车队”加快了深圳的低碳转型步伐,因为一座城市的低碳转型主要依赖两个关键方面——“交通转型”和“产业脱碳”。
他说:“一个城市在碳减排上的政策工具其实有限,但它可以推动更绿色的交通。比如,伦敦设立了超低排放区,鼓励人们使用公共交通和更清洁的车辆。城市也可以推动产业升级和减排,但这更难做到,因为很少有城市愿意放慢经济增长的步伐。”
郑赫然表示,深圳“与中国一些煤矿城市不同”,在产业转型方面具有“优势”,这使其可以设定“更具雄心”的排放目标。

碳控机制
中国将能源强度和碳强度(即单位国内生产总值GDP的能源使用量和排放量)作为其气候政策的关键指标。
此外,自2016年以来,中国一直实行“能耗双控”机制,即同时控制能源消费强度和能源消费总量。但中国政府已经宣布将在2024年起转向“碳排放双控”机制。
新机制将对二氧化碳排放总量设定约束性上限,并将成为2030年后的主要目标,而2030年前的主要指标——碳强度——将逐渐成为次要目标。
在这一领域,深圳依然是先行者。据“对话地球”(Dialogue Earth)报道,早在2023年,深圳就已成为中国首个明确承诺实行“(碳排放)双控机制”的城市。
为此,深圳市在2023年发布了两份《实施方案》,同时设定了市级碳排放总量控制目标。
与国家层面的方案相比,深圳在进程上更具雄心,其目标是在2025年建立起市级“碳排放双控”机制,并计划于2026年至2030年“全面实施”。
其中一份方案提出:“力争到2028年实现深圳碳市场制造业基本采用碳排放双控方式开展配额分配工作……力争到2030年实现市场调节能力显著提升。”
深圳还计划到2025年底,将能源强度在2020年的基础上降低14.5%,高于同期全国13.5%的目标。
郑赫然表示,深圳的这些目标是“量力而行的”。他解释道:“(就中国整体而言)碳减排主要集中在三个领域——钢铁、水泥和电力。深圳没有大型钢铁或水泥产业,因此只需将重心放在电力领域……而且它也不属于化石燃料城市,不位于供应链上游,无需担心煤炭开采等业务。深圳的产业结构主要以‘高附加值’行业为主,比如科技和新能源汽车,这些行业的碳排放更容易削减。”
“此外,深圳是科技中心,很多高碳排企业已搬到周边城市,比如汕尾。这就是所谓的‘排放外包’,受益于此,深圳的绿色转型面临的障碍更少。”
去年,郑赫然和同事在《自然》杂志上发表了一篇有关中国城市间碳排放外包的研究,指出“一些城市从其他城市的碳减排成果中获得大于其自身的收益”,并建议政策制定者正视其影响。
他还指出,深圳与其他城市相比还有一个“巨大差异”:“深圳拥有自己的核电站”,而这对深圳实现电力转型具有“重要”意义。电力行业是深圳在当前低碳转型中需要着力的最后一环。
低碳能源
根据2021年的一份报告,大亚湾核电站是深圳“最大的本地电力来源”,总装机容量达6.1吉瓦(GW)。
2021年,核电在深圳总发电量中的占比达到35%。
这也拉高了深圳的低碳能源使用水平。2024年,深圳一次能源消费中约47%来自清洁能源。
对深圳而言,核能发电量远超其他并入城市电网的清洁能源来源。市政府在2025年工作报告中提到,当前本地太阳能发电装机容量约为1吉瓦,风电装机并未被提及。
《深圳市应对气候变化“十四五”规划》写道,由于本地能源资源匮乏,加之风电、光伏“受土地和资源限制”,可再生能源的增长空间“有限”。
与此同时,深圳对外来电力的依赖程度也非常高——约七成的用电从外部进口。
这种依赖限制了深圳对电力行业碳排放的掌控,也给本地电网在用电高峰期的调度带来压力。
2024年,中国批准在毗邻深圳的惠州建设更多核电机组。
根据2022年一份研究报告,深圳市政府计划“到2025年将天然气、核能和可再生能源在能源结构中的总占比从当前的77%提升至90%,远高于全国52%的平均水平”。
郑赫然表示,“深圳与邻近的香港非常相似,香港的能源转型也不依赖太阳能和风能的建设”。
他补充说,深圳和香港应充分发挥自身作为“金融城市”的优势,以实现可持续的能源转型。

“绿色金融”
韦福雷表示,深圳一直善于利用“市场机制”,“在政府支持与市场驱动之间”成功找到平衡。其中,企业“担任主力角色,承担了90%的工作”,政府只在必要时出手干预。
在政府干预较少的情况下,深圳早在2013年就成为全国首批建立碳排放权交易市场“试点”的七个省市之一,远早于2021年全国碳市场的上线。
和全国层面的碳市场类似,深圳的本地碳市场并不以绝对排放量为基准,而是根据企业的排放强度(即单位产值的碳排放量),为企业分配可交易的排放配额。
深圳本地的碳排放权交易市场启动时覆盖了全市约38%的碳排放量。国际碳行动伙伴组织(ICPA)在一份报告中指出,这一比例到2020年已经提升至50%,并将进一步扩大。深圳还宣布将从2027年起为碳排放设置“绝对上限”。
(目前,国家层面的碳市场也未设置排放总量上限,但这也将在未来有所改变。)
不过,咨询公司ClearBlue Markets分析师秦炎对Carbon Brief说,虽然深圳碳排放权交易市场的覆盖范围还在扩大,但许多试点地区的碳排放权交易市场正在“收缩”,因为越来越多企业选择退出地方市场,转而加入国家碳市场。
国际碳行动伙伴组织的研究也发现,自2019年深圳碳排放权交易市场“向国家市场过渡”以来,发电已不再被纳入深圳碳排放权交易市场。
尽管如此,秦炎强调,这些地方试点“仍是一个重要的试验田,为国家碳排放权交易市场的成功落地铺平道路。(它们)会继续存在,覆盖中小企业以及国家市场尚未涉及的行业”。
国际碳行动伙伴组织称,截至2022年,深圳的地方碳排放权交易市场涵盖了水利、燃气、供热、制造业和交通等多个行业。
根据《深圳商报》报道,截至2024年,深圳已拥有全国最大的地方碳排放权交易市场,年交易量连续多年居全国首位。
与此同时,深圳也在“绿色金融”领域积极布局,将私人投资引入市场。
2021年,深圳在香港发行了中国首支面向海外市场的“绿色政府债券”,并出台了中国首部地方性“绿色金融法规”。国际绿色金融研究所(International Institute of Green Finance)在一份对该立法的评估中指出,其为规范“绿色市场”提供了“坚实的制度保障”。
相比之下,中国的首支主权绿色债券自2025年4月起才向国际买家发行。
深圳还推出了多种“绿色金融”产品。据官媒《经济日报》报道,2024年上半年,沪深两地交易所内新能源、新能源汽车及其他环保相关行业公司的市值达约4.6万亿元人民币(约合6,330亿美元)。
不过,郑赫然表示,“绿色债券”的效果“很难评估”。他说:“有很多项目,比如污水处理,也可以被归入‘绿色债券’的范畴。”
据官媒中央电视台报道,深圳2021年发行的“绿色债券”涵盖了“普通公办高中建设、城市轨道交通和水治理”等项目。
郑赫然表示,这些项目虽然在一定程度上与提高能效有关,但它们对碳减排的直接影响仍“有限”。
他补充说,市场引导在一座城市的低碳转型中“不可或缺”,但“目前尚无关于绿色金融产品在减排方面能发挥多大作用的研究”。
沈昕一则指出,“金融工具”在支持低碳转型方面仍发挥着重要作用。
她说:“低碳产业的成本往往高于化石燃料相关行业……通过政策支持和金融工具,才能够规模化,成本才能够降下来。”
“深圳模式”
深圳地方政府和媒体将深圳在气候领域取得的成就誉为“深圳模式”,意在其可以被推广到其他地区。
深圳市生态环境局党组成员许化表示,在去年的联合国气候变化大会(COP29)上,这一模式“向世界展示了成果”:“一是持续完善顶层设计,坚持立法先行,构建政策体系……二是聚焦重点领域转型升级……将新能源、安全节能环保等战略性新兴产业纳入重点产业集群,培育赋能……三是坚持开放共享,探索绿色低碳发展新路径。”
许化补充说,深圳的“绿色发展水平走在全国前列”,截至2023年底,深圳的“万元GDP能耗、水耗、碳排放分别降到了全国平均水平的1/3、1/8和1/5”。
不过,沈昕一指出,深圳的发展路径并非完全“可复制”,因为“深圳抓住了时代的机遇”。
她对Carbon Brief说:“比如,深圳的产业链优势和技术工人的聚集,给其高端制造业提供了很好的基础。”
郑赫然也认同这一观点。他认为,深圳只能代表中国一种特定类型的城市。
“深圳就像中国的硅谷,在高端科技领域投入巨大。它只能代表一线城市这一(特定)类别的中国城市,比如北京、上海、广州。中国有三百多个城市,每个城市都面临着独特的转型形势。依赖煤炭的工业城市照搬深圳的做法并不现实。”
与此同时,中国的其他城市也开始探索各自的可持续发展之路。
苏州建成了中国首批低碳工业园区试点之一的苏州工业园区。当地还建立了“市场化碳普惠交易体系”,鼓励居民和中小企业“自愿”参与碳排放交易。
据新华社报道,天津也与新加坡开展合作,“探索城市绿色低碳发展路径”。
沈昕一表示,其他城市必须“因地制宜地制定策略”。这种理念也体现在国务院于2023年发布的《新时代的中国绿色发展》白皮书中。
该文件指出,地方政府要“依托资源环境禀赋和产业发展基础……充分发挥各地区比较优势。”
The post 解读:何为中国城市低碳转型的“深圳模式”? appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Climate Change
Marine Parks Explained
Australia’s network of marine parks is the largest in the world, covering more than half (52%) of Australia’s Commonwealth waters. You could be forgiven for assuming that a marine park is much like a national park on land: a highly protected place where people can enjoy nature while conservation efforts help habitats recover and wildlife thrive. You wouldn’t expect someone to bulldoze a national park, so why should they be allowed to bottom trawl in a marine park?
The reality is that not all marine parks are equally protected. Australia’s Marine Parks Network is divided into different zoning categories, with each zone determining which activities are permitted and the level of protection provided.
More than half of the Commonwealth Marine Parks Network allows industrial activities like oil and gas mining, and industrial fishing.
Our survival, and the survival of our planet, depends on the ocean. The ocean produces more oxygen than all of our forests combined, sustains communities and regulates the earth’s temperature. It’s home to wondrous wildlife and important ecosystems like coral reefs and kelp forests.
We love our big blue backyard
Australia’s ocean is teeming with life that is found nowhere else on earth. Schools of colourful fish, vibrant coral reefs, endemic shark nurseries, pods of dolphins, families of whales, playful seal pups and threatened Jurassic-era turtles call Australian waters home.
Since time began, from the turquoise waves to the deep blue, the ocean has connected our shorelines and communities, fed us, guided us and grounded us. We are intrinsically connected to our big blue backyard – more than 85% of us live within 50km of the shoreline. For tens of thousands of years, people have lived in harmony with the ocean and the wildlife within it, caring for and being sustained by its rich waters. Australia’s waters are some of the most unique and abundant places on Earth but our Marine Parks Network is falling short to properly protect them.
Australia’s marine parks aren’t living up to their name

The Australian Commonwealth Marine Parks Network covers commonwealth waters 5.5km from the coast. The network is divided into 7 regional management areas, overall the network contains 60 marine parks. Zoning types determine what activities are allowed in each area. Over half of the network allows industrial activities, risking our most precious and threatened ocean wildlife.
Within many of our marine parks, destructive industries are allowed to fish, trawl, dig and mine using barbaric and cruel methods. Here are some of the zones explained:
- Bottom Trawling: Special Purpose (trawl) zones allow bottom trawling. This covers 10 marine parks totalling almost 13 million hectares. Bottom trawlers bulldoze the seafloor with weighted nets, deforesting our underwater forests; a cruel, indiscriminate and inefficient way to fish.
- Other Industrial Fishing: Includes “Habitat Protection Zones, ““Multi Use Zones” and “Special Purpose Zones.” Fishing methods vary from park to park but many marine parks in these zones allow industrial fishing like longlining. Longlining involves setting lines that can be 100km long, bristling with deadly hooks designed to catch a specific fish species. But longlining is not a selective method of fishing – significant numbers of sharks, rays, turtles, dolphins and seabirds can be harmed or killed as bycatch in the process.
- Oil and Gas Mining: Many “Special Purpose” and “Multi Use” zones allow seismic blasting and oil and gas mining. 30 marine parks or 65 million hectares of Australia’s highest conservation value areas for ocean wildlife are open for mining and exploration of oil and gas.
- Ocean Sanctuaries: National Park and Sanctuary zones are fully and highly protected marine parks designed to conserve wildlife and their habitat, where fishing, mining, and other industrial activities are not allowed.
Industrial fishing is one of the biggest threats to the ocean

In May, Greenpeace Australia Pacific sailed our campaigning vessel Oceania through some of Australia’s most beautiful and threatened marine parks. Our crew visited Jervis and Hunter marine parks to document their beauty, showcase what’s at risk and aim to expose the industrial fishing activities in these protected waters. Both of these marine parks allow bottom trawling and longlining methods of industrial fishing.
Industrial fishing is ripping the ocean apart across the planet. Longlining, also known as longline fishing, is an industrial fishing method that involves the use of a fishing line with thousands of baited hooks. These fishing lines can stretch over 100 kilometers in length and are set to capture a fish species, often tuna or billfish species. But it is not a selective method of fishing and often results in significant bycatch. This includes a range of non-target species like sharks, rays, sea turtles, marine mammals, and seabirds which are often injured or killed as bycatch.
Bottom trawling involves dragging heavy weighted nets along the ocean floor. This fishing method is popular with commercial fishing companies, because it makes it easy to catch large quantities of fish in one go. But it also damages the seafloor, releasing carbon and can kill or injure non-target ocean life like coral, fur seals, dolphins and seabirds. You may have watched the reality of bottom trawling (and the benefits of ocean sanctuaries) in Ocean with David Attenborough, if not, add it to your watch list!
Fully protected ocean sanctuaries that ban industrial fishing and mining can protect ocean wildlife and underwater wonderlands for generations to come. Vast, robust sanctuaries create blue havens where ocean wildlife are safe from nets and hooks, and can truly rest, recover, thrive and replenish out into the surrounding waters. Ocean sanctuaries ensure a healthy ocean full of life.
A once-in-a-decade chance to fix what’s falling short
We have a unique opportunity to turn the tide.
The Australian Government is asking for your feedback on how our Commonwealth Marine Parks Network is managed. This is our once-in-a-decade chance to protect ocean wildlife, ban industrial fishing and create more ocean sanctuaries.
As part of the review the Government is asking for submissions from the public to hear from you on what improvements are needed to better protect our vast network of marine parks. Writing a submission is a powerful way to influence government decisions and create real change.
This is the moment to ban industrial activities like bottom trawling and oil and gas mining. But only if they hear from YOU. Add your name!
Greenpeace is calling on the Australian government to:
1. Ban industrial activities from Australia’s Marine Parks Network: Ban industrial activities, such as industrial fishing, seismic blasting and oil and gas mining, from Australia’s marine parks.
2. Create more ocean sanctuaries: Increase fully protected sanctuaries in Australia’s marine parks based on science principles.
3. Connect Australia’s Marine Parks Network to the High Seas: mCreate seascape connectivity by linking Australian marine parks to new high seas ocean sanctuaries.
References
Substantiation that more than half of the Marine Parks Network permits industrial activity comes from a peer-reviewed systematic literature review (Phillips et al. 2025, PLOS One, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307324). The study found that within the Commonwealth Marine Parks Network specifically, “all zones are considered partially protected areas, meaning areas where extractive activities are permitted, except ‘Pink zones’ (Preservation Zones; IUCN Ia) and ‘Green Zones’ (IUCN II).” In other words, every Commonwealth marine park zone type other than the network’s strict no-take sanctuary and national park zones (IUCN Ia and II) permits some form of extractive industrial activity. Since no-take zones are the minority zone type across the network by area, this supports the conclusion that the majority of the network’s area is zoned to permit industrial activity.
DCCEEW Australian Marine Parks spatial dataset (https://fed.dcceew.gov.au/datasets/erin::australian-marine-parks/explore), filtered by zone type. This confirms that 38.43% of the network’s area is zoned as Sanctuary or National Park zones (IUCN Ia and II). These are the no-take categories excluded from the peer-reviewed study’s definition of partially protected/industrial-permitting zones. The remaining 61.57% of the network falls within the zone categories the study classifies as permitting industrial activity (per The MPA Guide definition of “industrial” applied in Phillips et al. 2025), directly corroborating the peer-reviewed finding with current Commonwealth-specific spatial data.
For further information on activities permitted within the Marine Parks Network Zoning, you can refer to the Management Plans zoning and rules for each Marine Parks Network area, for example: Temperate East, Coral Sea, North.
Climate Change
Report: Trawling the Bottom Line
A new report from Greenpeace Australia Pacific advocates for the closure of bottom trawling in Australia’s Commonwealth Marine Parks Network. Bottom trawling continues to be a pervasive threat to ocean life in Australia, with 10 marine parks totalling almost 13 million hectares, allowing bottom trawling.
Australia’s network of marine parks, which is the biggest in the world, covers more than half (52%) of Australia’s Commonwealth domestic waters, but not all parks are created equal. Australia’s Marine Parks Network is divided into different zoning categories, with each zone determining which activities are permitted and the level of protection provided. More than half of the Marine Parks Network allow industrial activities like industrial fishing and oil and gas mining. This includes zoning types that allow destructive fishing by longliners and bottom trawlers, who pillage underwater wonderlands, rip up coral and indiscriminately and violently catch any animal in their path, including turtles, seals and dolphins, all within areas labelled a marine park.
The Federal government has commenced a review into the majority of Australia’s Commonwealth Marine Parks Network management plans. This presents an opportunity to ban industrial activities from our marine parks and create more ocean sanctuaries.

Climate Change
Sewing and Painting the Future

© Harriet Spark / Grumpy Turtle Film / Greenpeace
The banner drop is a distinctive part of the Greenpeace repertoire.
The moment of the unfolding is intrinsically dramatic. It is the reveal; when the moral and scientific truth of a situation is unveiled to the world. The wrong is being labelled—not through a written submission, or a social media post, or a statement in a meeting—but in words emblazoned in real physical space, chosen and occupied with precision, for all to see. There is jeopardy and transgression. And there are consequences—for the activists and for Greenpeace, as well as for the target of the communication. One of the reasons the banner remains such an effective tool in our toolbox is because of its undeniable clarity in cutting through, driving change and accountability in a way that few other tactics can. It is naming the wrong: in giant, clear letters.
We’ve hung these massive messages at environmental crime scenes, corporate headquarters, and iconic landmarks; on government buildings, ships and planes—in locations all around the world, for years.
My own memories unfurl even as I write this, but because the campaign to stop Woodside at Scott Reef is so pressing, what immediately springs to mind are two of our banners in that campaign: one on a crane outside their Perth HQ, and another on some of their corroding industrial junk at sea. What about you? Is there a particular banner that you picture when you think of Greenpeace?
The banners can attract global attention, but they have quiet beginnings. Each one is made by hand, often by volunteers. It is the invisible labour behind each spectacular public moment. One of the key pieces of equipment in our workshop at Rainbow Warrior House is the sewing machine. Sometimes our workshop is full of people and noise; at others it is quiet, the only sound being the gentle, purposeful, whir and buzz of a banner being sewn. It is usually our warehouse manager, Kieran Holmes, on the tools, head over the machine, carefully pouring over the raw canvas or tarp as the banner takes shape. Kieran’s one of those people who seems to be able to turn his hand to almost anything, but you wouldn’t know it because he’s old-school modest. In addition to being incredibly skilled, Kieran’s an all-round beaut human to have in the heart of our headquarters; never too busy to take the time to show a newcomer, or curious visitor, around his domain.
Once the banner is sewn up, the lettering needs to be outlined. This is done on a magnetic wall—a fit-for-purpose feature at Rainbow Warrior House, where the banner is held up with magnets, and the edges of the letters neatly traced from a projection.
Next comes the painting. It usually starts late in the afternoon, sometimes going into evenings and weekends, with volunteers, staff, mates crowded around, brushes in hand. It is a calming meditative feeling of shared purpose, giving each letter its visual heft, the colour building power and presence with each stroke.
Then you stand back, stretch, and look at the message, now ready.
S A V E S C O T T R E E F
Throughout history, every great push for social change has required some form of invisible labour; preparation in the form of quiet things seldom seen, but vital. It is the enabling work of love instantiated in action. And of course, so much of the time it has been women who have done this labour, so that the men could get the chance to make the speeches and stand on the podiums. The inaugural Greenpeace voyage to stop nuclear testing in 1971 had a male-only crew, but wouldn’t have happened without the ideas and work of women behind the scenes.
It is what we do together, after all, that changes the world. Sometimes that work happens on a stage, a ship on the wild seas, or up the side of a building. But mostly, it is the hidden diligence of those who care and contribute to all the enabling work that makes a change once thought impossible, inevitable. It is Kieran at his sewing machine. It was Dorothy Stowe doing the administrative work of the ‘Don’t Make A Wave Committee’ that became Greenpeace.
When we think of social change, it is the sturm and drang that we remember. The drop of the banner, the chant of the crowd, the raising of the new flag. But look behind the curtain, and there’ll be a crew of people who are taking responsibility for the administration, the sewing and the painting, making the food, checking the bus timetables, getting stuff done. And behind them are even more handsinvisibly donating time and trust; the financial, material and expert resources that make it all possible. There’s love, camaraderie and know-how at every stage.
We are social and cooperative creatures by nature. And we human beings have been stitching for millenia, sewing the possibilities of our common future. Political and corporate bullies and algorithmically manipulative platforms would have us forget this, and abandon who we are. But we should be in no doubt that the brighter prospects for ourselves and life on earth continue to be stitched and painted; collaboratively and with love, by the diligent hands of millions of people who care, each day, in every community and city across the world.
With Love,
David
Q & A
I always get great questions when interviewing prospective new team members. One that came up again recently was: “Is Greenpeace actually one organisation?”
Around the world, people know Greenpeace by our one global name, united by a shared mission: securing an Earth capable of nurturing life in all its magnificent diversity, with a particular focus on climate and biodiversity. Behind the scenes, though, we’re organised as a network of 25 legally autonomous national and regional offices, including Greenpeace Australia Pacific, working alongside Greenpeace International.
That structure gives us the best of both worlds: we work together leveraging the power of a global network on the issues that matter most, while each office remains legally independent and deeply connected to the communities, cultures and political realities where we’re embedded. Local knowledge informs global action, and global collaboration strengthens and supports local campaigns.
It’s a model that has enabled Greenpeace to take on some of the world’s biggest challenges for over five decades–while withstanding challenges and attacks from governments and corporations. Global enough to tackle global problems, local enough to understand our communities and the natural places we love.
If you’re curious to learn more, you can read about the Greenpeace Global Network structure here.
-
Climate Change12 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases12 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy10 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits





