Reviving natural history, building ecological civilisation: the philosophy and social significance of the Natural History Revival Movement in contemporary China

China adopted ecological civilisation (EC) as a guiding, state-level sociotechnical imaginary to transform the relationship between society and nature, embedding it in the Constitution after being endorsed by top leaders in 2012 and 2018. This EC vision is closely tied to the Scientific Outlook on Development (SOD), which posits science-and-technology-driven governance as central to modernization. While the government emphasizes environmental S&T, market instruments, and infrastructural change to address pollution, resource degradation, and biodiversity loss, critics argue that this techno-managerial orientation falls short of transformative change. Against this backdrop, the paper analyzes an alternative perspective: the Natural History Revival Movement (NHRM), centered on reviving natural history/naturalism as both philosophy and social practice. The study addresses two research questions: (1) What are the intellectual roots and social contexts of the NHRM? (2) How does the philosophy of the NHRM relate to its potential social significance and its viability as an alternative EC sociotechnical imaginary? The paper positions the NHRM within China’s green public sphere, exploring its alignment with and critique of official EC pathways.

The paper situates EC within the framework of sociotechnical imaginaries (Jasanoff & Kim), noting China’s fusion of Marxist governance with S&T-driven modernization (Greenhalgh; Wu), and policy instruments for environmental governance (UNEP; Liao & Shi). It references critiques of the increasing alignment of environmental research with policy deliverables (Lord). As an alternative, the NHRM draws on multiple intellectual traditions: (1) Sociology of Scientific Knowledge (SSK; Bloor, Barnes) for symmetry and naturalism to legitimize natural history as a mode of knowledge; (2) Phenomenology (Husserl; Merleau-Ponty) to critique the abstraction of modern science and foreground embodied, lifeworld engagement with nature; (3) Revisionist, anti-Whig historiography of science (critiques of Needham’s unitary science trajectory; Métailié; Wu) to recover Chinese natural history as parallel rather than derivative; (4) Nonlinear systems, fractal geometry, and symbiosis (Mandelbrot; Margulis; Gaia) as conceptual supports for holistic, pattern-oriented understanding. The social context review connects NHRM to China’s green public sphere and civic environmentalism (Yang & Calhoun; Cooper; Lu; Tang & Zhan), and to environmental education reform debates (Zhao & Deng), while noting tensions with tightening civil society space.

Design: Qualitative interpretive study using hermeneutic analysis of a purposively assembled corpus obtained via snowball sampling. Sampling: Starting from the writings of Liu Huajie (the principal public advocate of the NHRM), the authors expanded the corpus by following references and media/social texts connected to NHRM philosophy and social practice. Final corpus: 25 entries total, comprising Liu’s writings and commentary (n=14) and texts describing the NHRM’s social context and impact (n=11). Rationale: Snowball sampling was chosen due to the vague and evolving definition of NHRM and to trace interconnected texts/actors. Analytical approach: Two-segment analysis. (1) Philosophical analysis: Decomposed NHRM into key intellectual strands (SSK, phenomenology, revisionist historiography, systems/symbiosis) through iterative reading, definition, and evaluation, relating them to dominant Chinese discourses on S&T and modernization. (2) Social-context analysis: Interpreted NHRM as a sociotechnical imaginary of EC, examining implied social order, role of S&T, and citizen/civil society participation. Hermeneutic framework: Employed the hermeneutic circle (interplay of parts and whole) and context fidelity, documenting interpretations transparently and allowing plurality of meanings.

Philosophical foundations: (1) SSK provides symmetry/naturalism arguments to legitimate natural history as a scientific approach distinct from experimental, hypothetico-deductive models; it foregrounds local knowledge, inductive learning, and emotional engagement. (2) Phenomenology critiques the dominance of mathematical abstraction, positing natural history as embodied, lifeworld practice that reconnects experience with nature; it rejects the idea that natural history is merely a relic. (3) Revisionist historiography challenges Whiggish narratives and the Needham Problem, positioning Chinese natural history as a parallel tradition with its own motivations (moral pursuits, love of plants) and continuity into the 20th century. (4) Nonlinear systems/fractal geometry and symbiosis (Gaia/Margulis) conceptually support the holistic, pattern-oriented, ecological orientation of natural history and highlight limits of mechanistic reductionism. Social significance: The NHRM operates as an issue-specific, largely apolitical civic movement within China’s green public sphere, advocating “living as a naturalist,” grassroots observation, and citizen-science-like engagement. It aligns with EC goals but critiques the authoritarian, S&T-centric means, advocating bottom-up transformation of mindsets and values. Education model (BOWU): Beauty, Observation, Wonder, Understanding—emphasizing non-interventionist, immersive observation, naming/classification to foster familiarity, and holistic connectedness. Religion/values: Natural theology is used heuristically (without requiring religious adherence) to articulate values of awe, humility, and non-anthropocentric respect for nature embedded in natural history. Civic mobilisation: Examples include bird-watching clubs and the China Bird Watching Network influencing local conservation, and NGOs such as Friends of Nature (over 10,000 volunteers) and Green Beagle Environmental Institute engaging volunteers in monitoring. Engagement and media presence for NHRM increased post-2011 despite tighter civil society space. Response to critique: The NHRM distinguishes anti-scientism (opposition to scientism) from anti-science, positioning natural history as complementary to S&T rather than a rejection of modernity. Data points: Corpus size n=25 (Liu/related n=14; social-context n=11); Friends of Nature membership >10,000 volunteers.

Addressing the research questions, the analysis clarifies the NHRM’s intellectual roots across SSK, phenomenology, historiography, and systems thinking, showing coherently how these strands justify natural history as a valid, locally grounded and embodied mode of scientific engagement with nature. It then links these foundations to social practices—nature observation, citizen mobilisation, and education—that can cultivate the values and sensibilities needed for EC. This positions the NHRM as an alternative sociotechnical imaginary: it shares the EC end goal but proposes different means, privileging bottom-up civil society participation and mindset transformation over top-down S&T-led, quantitative governance. The NHRM potentially complements official EC efforts by integrating citizen monitoring and local knowledge with formal environmental governance. However, it implicitly critiques scientism and authoritarian modalities, suggesting that EC requires freer association, educational reform, and a rebalancing of scientific approaches to include contemplative, non-interventionist natural history. In China’s constrained civic space, the NHRM’s philosophical richness and apolitical, value-driven framing may enable it to persist and provide pathways for public engagement in EC.

The NHRM offers a philosophically grounded and socially mobilizing alternative to China’s dominant EC pathway. It argues that S&T alone are insufficient and that scientism and reductionism have marginalized crucial forms of knowing. By advocating “living as a naturalist,” the NHRM emphasizes embodied, local, and holistic engagement, operationalized through BOWU (beauty, observation, wonder, understanding). As a social movement, it encourages civic association and bottom-up contribution to EC through nature study and environmental monitoring, potentially complementing official strategies. The movement’s viability lies in explicating its philosophical roots and implementing educational and ethical practices that connect widespread grassroots naturalist initiatives to EC goals. Ultimately, it challenges universalist, instrumental S&T and authoritarian governance by promoting changed mindsets, freer civil association, and respect for nature as co-requisites for achieving EC.

The study relies on purposive snowball sampling due to the vague and evolving definition of the NHRM; the resulting corpus (n=25) is not statistically representative and cannot support generalization beyond the analyzed texts. The hermeneutic approach is interpretive and context-dependent, subject to researcher pre-understandings. The work synthesizes secondary sources and public materials rather than new empirical fieldwork with participants; thus, claims concern meanings and imaginaries rather than measured social impacts. The lack of a formal, universally agreed definition of NHRM in the literature introduces conceptual ambiguity.