







































 

   

 

Corresponding author(s)  

Qing Guo, Faculty of History, Nankai University, gqyw@mail.nankai.edu.cn  

 

 

 

 

Climate Regionalization in China: A Historical Perspective on 

Scientific Development and National Building 

 

 

Qing Guo 

 

 

 

 

 

Introduction 

Climate regionalization constitutes a foundational component of China’s secondary 

school level geography curriculum. Through this framework, students can situate their lived 

climatic experiences within a broader climate zone, rapidly grasp national climatic 

characteristics, and—furthermore—comprehend global climate distribution patterns through 

comparison with China’s climate.1 In this process, China’s climate is rendered both unique and 

universal. 

The climate regionalization taught in this curriculum is not a product of contemporary 

China, but rather of early twentieth-century China. Taking this historical context into account, 

it may have exerted a far more profound influence on modern Chinese historical development 

than previously assumed. By the early 1900s, Chinese intellectuals were facing a foundational 

question: how could national redemption best be achieved? This discourse traced back to the 

1840s, when imperial collapse and territorial losses defined China’s trajectory. Key turning 

points included defeat in the 1895 Sino-Japanese War and the Boxer Rebellion in 1900, which 

symbolized China’s subjugation to colonial powers. 2  Such narratives pervaded early 

Republican-era discourse, as seen in textbooks depicting China as a leaf consumed by 

imperialism.3 

 

1 Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China, Yiwu Jiaoyu Dili Kecheng Biaozhun (2022 Nian Ban) [Compulsory 

Education Geography Curriculum Standards (2022 Edition)] (Beijing Normal University Press, 2022), accessed September 

15, 2024, https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/2022-04/21/content_5686535.htm. 

2 John King Fairbank, The Cambridge History of China: Volume 11, Late Ch’ing, 1800-1911, Part 2 (Cambridge University 

Press, 1980), 589–602. 

3 Xu Peng, “Qiuhaitang, Sangye, Xiongji yu Zhongguo” [Begonia, Mulberry Leaf, Rooster, and China], Bolan Qunshu 

[Chinese Book Review Monthly], no. 11 (2016): 111–16. 

mailto:gqyw@mail.nankai.edu.cn


 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

2 

 

 

Thus, amid national humiliation and a sense of responsibility, various proposals such 

as “industrial salvation,” “educational salvation,” and “scientific salvation” were successively 

put forward. The Chinese Science Society, founded in 1914 by Chinese students in the United 

States, aimed, among other things, to popularize science and enable China to become strong 

and respected in the international community.4 The Chinese Science Society was the most 

influential non-governmental organization in Republican China, whose members included 

leading figures from various disciplines and served as the representative institution for Chinese 

science before the establishment of the Academia Sinica in 1928.5 Reflecting the outsized 

influence of the Chinese Science Society on modern Chinese history, using science to change 

the country went on to become one of the central beliefs of modern China’s scientific 

development. 

To develop Chinese science, Ren Hongjun(任鸿隽), a leader of the Chinese scientific 

community, proposed that countries with weaker scientific foundations should actively develop 

local sciences rather than merely pursue the advancement of general sciences. Ren introduced 

a differentiated development strategy: nations with weak scientific bases should prioritize the 

development of disciplines with regional characteristics. 6  He emphasized that Chinese 

scientists bear an irreplaceable responsibility in advancing China’s local sciences. Another 

scientific leader, the meteorologist Zhu Kezhen (竺可桢), adopted a similar stance and further 

noted that foreign scholars’ research on China’s local sciences might risk exceeding their 

boundaries, particularly when such studies directly involve the infiltration of foreign powers 

into China’s border regions.7 China’s climate Regionalization research was fully aligned with 

Ren and Zhu’s scientific objective and became one of the central focuses of Zhu Kezhen’s 

work during the 1920-30s. 

This scientific objective embodies the conviction that Chinese scientists, being more 

familiar with China’s conditions than foreigners, could achieve effective scientific results in a 

shorter time frame. This confidence stems largely from their nationally relevant natural and 

cultural experiences. On the other hand, to achieve deeper scientific understanding, more data 

was required. Thus, it is evident that meteorologists of the era regarded meteorological data 

collection as an integral component of national sovereignty from both a nationalist and a 

technical perspective.8 

In this context, “local science” is used to refer to the study of the natural environment 

and phenomena across China as a whole, focusing on the distinctive characteristics of its 

various regions. While in climatological terms “local” might refer to more narrowly defined 

areas, Ren and Zhu were advocating for the development of a scientific approach that 

emphasized China’s unique, multifaceted natural environment. As subsequent research will 

demonstrate, one of their objectives was to establish the distinctiveness of “China” through 

scientific inquiry and elevate its national image and status. Initially, however, they framed the 

 

4  Wang Zuoyue, “Saving China through Science: The Science Society of China, Scientific Nationalism, and Civil Society in 

Republican China,” Osiris 17, no. 1 (2002): 291–322. 

5 Zhang, Jian. Sai Xiansheng Zai Zhongguo: Zhongguo Kexueshe Yanjiu [Mr. Science in China: A Study of the Chinese 

Science Society] (Shanghai: Shanghai Scientific & Technical Publishers, 2018), 1. 

6  Ren Hongjun, “Fan Taipingyang Guoji Xueshu Huiyi de Huigu” [A Review of the Pan-Pacific Scientific 

Conference],Kexue[Science]12, no. 4 (1927): 455–65. 

7 Zhu Kezhen, “Riben Qixiangxue Fada Zhi Gaikuang”[An Overview of the Development of Meteorology in Japan), Kexue 

[Science]12, no. 4 (1927): 455–64. 

8  Liu Xiao, “Understanding Sovereignty through Meteorology: China, Japan, and the Dispute over the Qingdao Observatory, 

1918–1931,” Annals of Science 81, no. 3 (July 2, 2024): 420–39. 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

3 

 

 

survey of the nation’s climate, flora and fauna, and mineral resources merely as scientists’ 

responsibility. 9 

Although the Chinese focus has largely been on climatic regionalization, this is actually 

a term that emerged later. In the 1930s and 1940s, climatologists typically used the term climate 

classification for their research. It was not until the 1950s that the term climatic regionalization 

began to be used more widely. While the results presented on maps may appear similar for 

both terms, in the context of the Chinese language, climatic regionalization refers to the 

division of climate into different regions, similar to administrative divisions, which has become 

a part of government management of populations and their economic development.10 However, 

Chinese climatologists’ climate classification was initially regional in approach, exhibiting 

distinctive regionalized characteristics. Thus, this paper incorporates climate classification into 

its analytical framework, deploying specific terminology appropriate to each historical period 

and contextual scenario. 

While regions are constructs blending natural and humanistic dimensions, 

regionalization analysis represents a rigorous scientific enterprise. Thomas Simpson’s inquiry 

into Andrew Herbertson’s “natural regions” theory—articulated in the early 1900s—

highlighted the intricate interplay between climate and regional categorization.11 Extending 

this line of research, Deborah R. Coen demonstrated how climate became the cornerstone of 

Austro-Hungarian natural regionalization, as Habsburg scholars employed systematic 

regionalization to map the empire into “natural regions” and “transition zones,” thereby 

synthesizing climate models at an imperial scale. Moreover, Coen uncovered adaptive 

dynamics between cultural practices and climatic conditions, underscoring the reciprocal 

relationship between human societies and environmental systems. Martin Brückner’s research 

highlights how geography in early American history transformed local experiences into 

national narratives12—a process that closely parallels the case under discussion here. Mark 

Frank argues that Chinese climatologists of the time constructed the concept of a “Chinese 

Climate” through meteorological observations and climate classification systems, thereby 

integrating the nation-state concept into meteorological knowledge production.13Whereas Qing 

Guo describes the evolution of climate regionalization methods in China during the first half 

of the twentieth century, constructing a technological model of introduction-integration-

absorption.14 

However, existing studies often focus on scientific processes while overlooking 

regions’ unique natural and cultural contexts. In particular, China’s climate regionalization is 

characterized by deep historical roots while also being aligned with the objectives of modern 

Chinese scientific development. This paper explores this uniqueness by examining how 

Chinese climatologists: (1) embedded regional boundaries—rooted in cultural traditions—with 

scientific legitimacy while adapting foreign climate theories to local conditions; (2) 

 

9 Zhu, Kezhen, “Wo guo di xue jia zhi Zeren”[The Responsibilities of Chinese Geographers], Shidi xuebao(Journal of History 

and Geography) 1, no. 1 (1921): 44–45. 

10 Deborah R. Coen, “Imperial Climatographies from Tyrol to Turkestan,” Osiris 26, no. 1 (January 2011): 47. 

11 Thomas Simpson and Mike Hulme, “Climate, Cartography, and the Life and Death of the ‘Natural Region’ in British 

Geography,” Journal of Historical Geography 80 (April 1, 2023): 44–57. 

12 Martin Bruckner, “Lessons in Geography: Maps, Spellers, and Other Grammars of Nationalism in the Early Republic,” 

American Quarterly 51, no. 2 (1999): 311–43. 

13 Mark E Frank, “National Climate: Zhu Kezhen and the Framing of the Atmosphere in Modern China,” History of Science 

62, no. 4 (December 1, 2024): 562–90. 

14 Guo Qing. Zhongguo Qihou Quhua Fazhan Yanjiu (1929–1966) [Research on the Development of Climate Regionalization 

in China (1929-1966)]. Master’s thesis, University of Science and Technology of China, 2023. 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

4 

 

 

universalized these studies to reconcile uniqueness with global scientific norms, thereby 

enhancing national scientific standing; and (3) operationalized their research in dynamic, 

practical contexts aligned with national needs, ultimately scientizing traditional perceptions of 

regions. 

The Uniqueness of China and the Right to Climate Classification 

In 1884, climatologist Wladimir Köppen proposed the first quantitative climate 

classification system.15 This classification system, along with its subsequent revisions, has 

been widely adopted in academic research. 16  From 1913 to 1918, Zhu Kezhen pursued 

meteorological studies at Harvard University. By that time, the Köppen classification method 

had already been incorporated into American geography and meteorology textbooks.17 To date, 

this system has remained the most widely utilized climate classification framework, 

maintaining its canonical status in numerous climatology textbooks worldwide.18 

On a climate map of China classified according to Köppen’s method, Zhu Kezhen 

found many discrepancies with his own understanding. For example, he observed that 

Köppen’s Cfa climate zone (C for temperate, f for uniform humidity throughout the year, a for 

the hottest month averaging above 22°C) was confined to a narrow coastal strip from Fuzhou 

to Shanghai19. Zhu believed this zone should extend along the Yangtze River into the Chinese 

interior. However, doing so would divide the Cwa climate zone (warm, dry winters) into two 

parts: the lower Yellow River region (North China)20 and South China. In reality, there is a 

significant difference in precipitation and temperature between the lower Yellow River region 

and South China. If these two regions were classified under the same climate zone, it would 

clearly not align with the actual observed climate conditions.21 Here, Zhu Kezhen saw an 

opportunity to revise and improve the Köppen climate classification. 

What gave Zhu Kezhen confidence was not abundant meteorological data; at the time, 

he had just proposed his own meteorological station network plan.22 His greatest reliance came 

from his cultural, historical, and geographical expertise. This was closely linked to a critical 

demarcation line: the Qinling-Huaihe Line. Chinese people over two millennia ago had already 

recognized the agricultural and cultural differences caused by the contrasting environments 

north and south of this line, as evident in the famous fable Master Yan Mission to Chu: 

The king looked at Master Yan and said: “Do the people of Qi enjoy stealing things?” Master 

Yan got up from his mat and responded: “I have heard it said that when an orange tree is planted 

 

15 Mark Stephen Monmonier, Cartography in the Twentieth Century, The History of Cartography, 6 1-2 (Chicago: The 

University of Chicago press, 2015), 227–29. 

16 Arthur A. Wilcock, “Köppen After Fifty Years,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 58, no. 1 (March 1, 

1968): 12–28. 

17 C. W. Thornthwaite, “Problems in the Classification of Climates,” Geographical Review 33, no. 2 (1943): 233–255. 

18 Michal Belda et al., “Climate Classification Revisited: From Köppen to Trewartha,” Climate Research 59, no. 1 (February 

4, 2014): 1–13. 

19 Zhu Kezhen, “Zhongguo Qihou Quyu Lun (Climatic Provinces of China),” Dili Zazhi(The Geographical Review), no. 2 

(1930): 1–14. 

20 This is the core region of north China; thus, it can also be used to denote north China in climate. See Wang, E., Q. Yu, D. 

Wu, et al. 2008. “Climate, Agricultural Production and Hydrological Balance in the North China Plain.” International Journal 

of Climatology: A Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society 28 (14): 1959–1970. 

21 Notwithstanding substantial climate changes over the past century, these regional disparities have persisted obvious both 

historically and at present, see Qian, W., and Y. Zhu. 2001. “Climate Change in China from 1880 to 1998 and Its Impact on 

the Environmental Condition.” Climatic Change 50, no. 4 (201): 419–444. 

22 Zhu Kezhen, “Quan Guo Sheli Qixiang Cehou Suo Jihua Shu” [A Plan for Establishing Meteorological Observation Stations 

throughout the Country], Zhongguo Qixiang Xuehui Huikan [Journal of the Chinese Meteorological Society], no. 4 (1928): 7–

10. 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

5 

 

 

south of the Huai River it produces oranges as fruit, but if you transplant it north of the Huai 

River, it produces bitter oranges. The leaves are the same, but the taste of the fruit is completely 

different. What is the reason for this? It is because the water and the soil are different. Now a 

person who is born and brought up in Qi would never think of stealing anything, but when they 

move to Chu they become thieves. Perhaps this is because the water and soil of Chu makes 

people enjoy stealing things?” The king laughed and said: “It is impossible to play jokes upon 

a sage. I brought this humiliation on myself.”23 

 

Fig. 1. According to the Köppen climate classification, parts of southern China and some 

northern regions are categorized under the same climate zone Cwa. A small portion of 

the southeast is classified as Cfa. Zhu Kezhen believed that the middle and lower 

reaches of the Yangtze River should be classified as Cfa. However, doing so would 

split the Cwa zone into two separate parts.24 

This fable has been widely disseminated in Chinese culture, and its narrative of 

environmental differences across the Huai River has gradually become a cultural trope. 

Moreover, during periods of political fragmentation in Chinese history, the Qinling-Huaihe 

Line frequently served as the boundary between northern and southern regimes. Southern 

regimes in particular emphasized the strategic importance of the Huai River’s defence, leading 

to the maxim: “[t]he key to defending the Yangtze is holding the Huai”25 

In 1924, Zhang Xiangwen (张相文), the first president of the Chinese Science Society, 

explicitly identified the Qinling-Huaihe Line as China’s north-south divide from a 

geographical classification perspective. 26  However, his rationale was rather tenuous—a 

 

23 Milburn, O. The Spring and Autumn Annals of Master Yan. Brill, 2015, 349–50. 

24 Zhu, “Zhongguo Qihou Quyu Lun.” 

25 Han Maoli. Dadi Zhongguo [The Land of China], (Wenhui Publishing House, 2023), 223–30. 

26 Shan Zhiqiang. “Nanbei Fenjiexian Shang de Miwu” [The Mist on the North-South Divide]. Zhongguo Guojia Dili [Chinese 

National Geography], no. 10 (2009): 34–51. 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

6 

 

 

tenuousness likely shaped by the longstanding cultural tropes. This cultural trope also 

influenced Zhu Kezhen. Therefore, when Zhu Kezhen made the classification of climate, three 

very important principles were adopted: 

(a) Classification schemata must maintain concise and unambiguous categorical definitions; 

(b) Delineation boundaries should correspond to natural geographical boundaries within 

national regions; 

(c) Within China’s cyclonic and anticyclonic systems, where meteorological impacts exhibit 

significant spatial heterogeneity, climatic regionalization must prioritize this dynamic 

framework as the primary determinant.27 

Compared to the Köppen method, the principles proposed by Zhu Kezhen cannot be considered 

quantitative or as empirically precise. However, in Zhu’s view, they more closely 

approximated the actual climatic conditions of China. These principles are simple, and we can 

observe a response to the Köppen method, especially in the second principle: that climatic 

classification should correspond to natural regions. Zhu divided China into eight climatic 

regions, with each named after a specific region in China. For example, the southern region is 

termed the “Middle China or Yangtze River Basin type,” while the northern region is referred 

to as the “Northern China type.” The boundary between these two regions generally coincides 

with the Qinling-Huaihe line, which is traditionally recognized as the dividing line between 

the north and south in China. This was also the first time that this boundary had been explicitly 

depicted on a Chinese climatic map. 

Fig. 1. In Zhu Kezhen’s climate classification map, northern China is largely within a single 

climatic region, while southern China is also characterized by a relatively unified 

climatic region.28 

Zhu Kezhen did not attempt to challenge the Köppen classification method, but rather 

its outcomes. This constituted the core essence of Zhu’s revision. Mark Frank argues that Zhu 

integrated the Köppen classification approach into a Chinese climatic framework—a pivotal 

 

27 Zhu, “Zhongguo Qihou Quyu Lun.”  

28 Ibid. 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

7 

 

 

step in asserting that any climate classification should align with China’s actual climatic 

conditions.29 The interpretive authority over what constituted China’s climate, however, rested 

firmly in the hands of Zhu and his colleagues. 

By the 1930s, Zhu Kezhen’s meteorological station network plan began yielding 

results, providing him with data for regional climate research. Zhu sought to give scientific 

legitimacy to traditional cultural and geographical perceptions through such research. In 1934, 

while analysing drought conditions and causes in North China, he identified the Qinling 

Mountains as the natural boundary between the North China Plain and the Yangtze River 

Basin. He further argued that, except in Sichuan Province, the Qinling’s climatic role primarily 

regulated rainfall rather than temperature, making it a critical factor in the region’s scant 

precipitation.30 

Fig. 3. A map of rainfall in China, in which Chinese climatologists use dark and light 

colours to clearly show the climate differences between northern and southern 

China.31 

 

29 Frank, “National Climate.” 

30 Zhu Kezhen and Li Liangqi. “Huabei zhi ganhan ji qi qianyin houguo” [The Drought in North China and Its Causes and 

Consequences]. Dili Xuebao[Acta Geographica Sinica] 1, no. 2 (1934): 98–109. 

31 Zhu et al., The Chinese Rainfall, 49. 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

8 

 

 

Concurrently, rainfall studies in China reached a milestone in 1936 when the Institute 

of Meteorology at Academia Sinica, led by Zhu, published The Chinese Rainfall.32 Despite 

poor printing quality and blurry images, the Qinling-Huaihe Line remained conspicuously 

visible. This graphical representation clearly reflected contemporary climatologists’ 

recognition of the line’s climatic significance. 

Zhu Kezhen and his colleagues’ work brought international recognition to the Qinling-

Huaihe Line’s role as a major geographic divide. Prominent geographers, including the famous 

American geographer and Zhu’s close friend George Babcock Cressey (1896–

1963),33commented on the line’s climatic and cultural significance.34 As Zhu himself noted: 

“[n]umerous scholars, both Chinese and foreign, have studied the climatic disparities between 

North China and the Yangtze River Basin.”35 

We must reiterate the mindset of Chinese climatologists represented by Zhu Kezhen: 

even if they did not attempt to rival the classificatory power of Köppen’s model, they believed 

their intimate familiarity with China granted them unique interpretive authority over its 

climate. 36  Thus, they leveraged their strengths to ensure that any climate classification 

framework respected China’s indigenous climatic characteristics.37  This conviction would 

manifest in subsequent classification schemes, regardless of their theoretical underpinnings. 

In 1936, Tu Changwang (涂长望) and Lu Wu (卢鋈) claimed to have refined Zhu 

Kezhen’s climate regionalization scheme by dividing his climatic regions into 8 primary zones 

(first-order divisions) and 22 subzones (second-order divisions).38 Interestingly, while they 

employed different criteria for regional demarcation, their results broadly aligned with Zhu’s 

original classification, most notably retaining the iconic Qinling-Huaihe Line. As colleagues 

of Zhu, Tu and Lu effectively carried forward his climatological work during the decade 

following Zhu’s assumption of Zhejiang University’s presidency in 1936, significantly 

advancing the climate regionalization project. 

 

32 Zhu Kezhen, Tu Changwang, and Zhang Baokun. Zhongguo zhi yuliang [The Chinese Rainfall]. Nanjing: Guoli Zhongyang 

Yanjiuyuan Qixiang Yanjiusuo [Institute of Meteorology, Academia Sinica], 1936. 

http://read.nlc.cn/OutOpenBook/OpenObjectBook?aid=416&bid=8435.0. 

33 Theodore Herman, “George Babcock Cressey, 1896–1963,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 55, no. 2 

(June 1, 1965): 360–64. 

34 Cressey, George B. “The Geographic Regions of China.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social 

Science152, no. 1 (1930): 1–9. 

35 Zhu and Li, “Huabei zhi ganhan ji qi qianyin houguo,” 100. 

36 Zhu Kezhen  And Lu Wu . “Zhongguo qihou zhi yaosu” [The Climatic Factors of China], Dili Xuebao [Acta Geographica 

Sinica] 2, no. 1 (1935): 1–9. 

37 Grace Yen Shen, Unearthing the Nation: Modern Geology and Nationalism in Republican China (University of Chicago 

Press, 2014), 46. 

38 Tu Changwang and Lu Wu, “Zhongguo Qihou Quyu” [Climatic Provinces of China], Qixiang Zazhi [Acta Meteorologica 

Sinica], no. 9 (1936): 487–518. 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

9 

 

 

 

Fig. 4. The boundary between southern and northern China is consistently reflected in various climate 

classification systems.39 

Dialogue with global science 

Zhu Kezhen and his colleagues appeared to construct a vision of China’s climate 

distinct from global standards, insisting that any climate classification scheme must align with 

this localized understanding. Such an approach risked rendering global climate classification 

systems irrelevant in China, potentially insulating the nation from international scientific 

discourse. This, however, was not their intention. On one hand, Zhu was acutely aware that 

atmospheric circulation knows no national boundaries, even as he sought to imbue meteorology 

with nationalist significance.40 On the other hand, the Chinese scientific community’s pursuit 

of localized climate science was fundamentally aimed at enhancing the nation’s scientific 

reputation and standing.41 In 1930, Zhu Kezhen exhorted his peers that scientific advancement 

could not rely solely on translating foreign works; it also required “speaking the Chinese 

language,” meaning producing indigenous scientific contributions that would ultimately 

establish Chinese as a global ‘lingua franca’ of science.42 Disseminating knowledge of China’s 

 

39 Liu Mingguang, ed., Italicized: Zhongguo ziran dili tuji [Atlas of Physical Geography of China], 3rd ed. (Beijing: Zhongguo 

Ditu Chubanshe [China Map Press], May 2010),50. 

40 Zhu Kezhen. “Qingdao jieshou zhi qingxing” [The Retrocession of Qingdao: Context and Implications], Shidi Xuebao 

[Journal of Historical and Geographical Studies] 2, no. 2 (1923): 85–90. 

41 Ren, “Fan Taipingyang Guoji Xueshu Huiyi de Huigu.” 

42  Zhu Kezhen, Zhu Kezhen Quanji [The Complete Works of Zhu Kezhen], vol. 2 (Shanghai: Shanghai Science and 

Technology Education Press, 2004), 55. 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

10 

 

 

actual climatic conditions, he argued, should be an integral component of developing Chinese 

climate science. 

In 1938, Tu Changwang and Guo Xiaolan (郭晓岚 ) published China’s Climate 

Regions According to the Köppen Paradigm.43 Köppen’s steppe climate (BS) zone grouped 

areas from Kulun (present-day Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia) in the north to Zhengzhou in the south 

into a single unit, despite their vastly differing climates. To align China’s regional boundaries 

with the Köppen system, the Tu-Guo scheme introduced the temperature-precipitation product 

(TR) as a criterion to subdivide the steppe zone into three smaller regions: the North China 

Plain, the Loess Plateau-Qinghai Highlands, and the Mongolian Steppe. For other boundaries, 

the scheme made adjustments where Köppen’s system clashed with China’s geography, most 

notably shifting the cool (D) climate zone—originally extending deep into North China—to 

the Rehe region. Other revisions were relatively minor. 

In 1939, Xu Erhao (徐尔灏 ), a young faculty member at National Central 

University, 44  published The Climatic Regions of China According to the Köppen 

Classification. 45 His revisionist approach resembled that of Tu and Guo, yet he focused on the  

humid and dry winter temperate zones previously identified by Zhu Kezhen. Xu’s revisionist 

intensity surpassed the Tu-Guo scheme, a consequence of denser meteorological station 

coverage in temperate regions compared to arid zones. 

Across these schemes, modifications to the Köppen classification system were 

consistently observed, yet these adjustments remained confined to China’s specific context, 

thus leaving the core Köppen framework intact. While the classifications appeared to be 

derived from Köppen’s methodology, they in fact adapted the system to China’s unique 

climatic regions.46 Given their China-centric starting point, these efforts can be interpreted as 

translating indigenous Chinese climatic regionalization into the Köppen framework. In Tu’s 

paper, he pointed out that his purpose was to facilitate comparisons with the climatic 

characteristics of other regions around the world and to meet the needs of those familiar with 

Chinese place names.47 Clearly, this was an effort to globalize local scientific knowledge to 

present China’s “truth” to the world. 

Such globalized practices still bear traces of nationalism. Xu Erhao expressed his 

nationalistic sentiments more directly. In the colonial context of the past, the temperate zone 

was considered the ideal environment for Europeans to live and develop, carrying positive and 

affirmative evaluations.48 Xu accepted this narrative and believed that the temperate zone, 

especially the warm temperate and humid regions, were where world civilization flourished 

the most. After his modifications, China was depicted as having vast warm temperate and 

 

43 Tu Changwang and Guo Xiaolan, “Koppen Fanshi de Zhongguo Qihou Quyu” [Climatic Regions of China According to 

Köppen’s Classification], Qixiang Zazhi [Acta Meteorologica Sinica], no. 2 (1938): 51–6 

44 It is necessary to introduce the relationship between the Institute of Meteorology, Academia Sinica, and the Department of 

Geography at National Central University. Before the Japanese occupation of Nanjing in 1937, the two institutions were 

located across the street from each other. Researchers from the Institute frequently taught courses and attended conferences at 

the university. Xu Erhao studied at National Central University from 1934 to 1938, thus we can infer he maintained close 

professional relationships with figures like Zhu Kezhen and Tu Changwang. 

45  Xu Erhao, “Keben Fenleifa Zhi Zhongguo Qihou Qu” [The Climatic Regions of China According to the Köppen 

Classification], Kexue [Science]23, no. 12 (1939): 728–46. 

46 Frank, “National Climate.” 

47 Tu Changwang and Guo Xiaolan, “Koppen Fanshi de Zhongguo Qihou Quyu” (Climatic Regions of China According to 

Köppen’s Classification], Qixiang Zazhi [Acta Meteorologica Sinica], no. 2 (1938): 51–6 

48 Deborah R. Coen, “Imperial Climatographies from Tyrol to Turkestan,” Osiris 26, no. 1 (January 2011): 47. 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

11 

 

 

humid zones, thus possessing the climatic conditions to stand as an equal with Europe and the 

United States.49 

Such modifications convey Xu’s nationalistic sentiment. He was once outraged by the 

expression of “Independent Manchukuo” in an atlas. Eventually, he wrote a short essay beside 

it in the atlas to admonish himself not to forget the humiliation.50 However, such modifications 

could at most serve as a form of psychological comfort. Therefore, like Tu before him the target 

audience of his article was still people outside of China. In this way, he articulaled China’s 

strengths in a “scientific”51 context to provide a basis for enhancing the nation’s image and 

standing.52 

In 1946, Lu Wu independently proposed his own climate regionalization scheme.53 He 

categorized China’s climate using two approaches: one global in scope (including China) and 

represented by Köppen, and another focused exclusively on China, exemplified by Zhu 

Kezhen. Regarding Zhu and Tu’s classifications, Lu acknowledged their strengths in “aligning 

with natural and human regions,” yet criticized their lack of systematic criteria and inadequate 

scientific explanatory power. Ultimately, Lu tasked himself with synthesizing the merits of 

both methods to create a hybrid framework compatible with both. His methodological approach 

was to “primarily follow Köppen’s system while adapting to local conditions.”54 

Lu Wu’s approach appears paradoxical, not as a personal inconsistency, but as a 

collision of two divergent paradigms among Chinese climatologists at the time. On one hand, 

they felt compelled to map China’s climate using Köppen’s global framework; on the other, 

they sought to safeguard the nation’s distinct natural and human-geographic regions. Here, 

Lu’s work can be interpreted as either adapting Köppen’s system within a Chinese 

epistemological framework,55 or rearticulating China’s climatic identity through Köppen’s 

terminology. Thus, the climate regionalization work of this period cannot be reduced to a mere 

introduction and adaptation of foreign classification methods, but actually included multiple 

processes of translating and promoting local scientific knowledge. Only through this path could 

the initially stated objective of fostering nationalist science be achieved. 

Academic Independence and National Sovereignty 

Following the founding of the People’s Republic of China, the terminology of “climate 

regionalization” quickly supplanted that of “climate classification,” signalling a shift in the 

function of climatic regionalization. In terms of identity and roles, Chinese climatologists 

transitioned from advancing national status through scientific development to more direct 

engagement in state governance.  

 

49 Xu, “Keben Fenleifa Zhi Zhongguo Qihou Qu.” 

50 Yang Zun, ed., Xu Erhao Jinian Wenji [Xu Erhao Memorial Volume] (Nanjing: Nanjing Normal University Press, 2000), 

XI (preface). 

51 If Xu were a geographical determinist, he would consider this scientific—though of course the theory has undergone 

significant revisions today，see：Anatolii Pavlovich Getman et al., “Geographical Determinism: History And Present,” 

Revista Notas Históricas y Geográficas, November 17, 2023, 303–18. 

52 Stephen Frenkel, “Geography, Empire, and Environmental Determinism,” Geographical Review 82, no. 2 (1992): 143–53. 

53 Lu Wu, “Zhongguo Qihou Quyu Xinlun” [New Study on China's Climatic Regionalization], Dili xuebao [Acta geographica 

sinica] (1946): 1–10 

 

54 Indeed, Lu himself was a participant in this classification a decade earlier，see Tu  and Lu , “Climatic Provinces of China”. 

55 Frank, “National Climate.” 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

12 

 

 

The 1956 publication of the Draft of China’s Natural Regionalization stated: “The 

purpose of this draft is to divide regions, not zones... Different objectives can lead to different 

results in regional division.”56 The goal of climatic regionalization is to provide reference 

materials for production and construction departments such as agriculture, forestry, animal 

husbandry, rural side-line production,57 and mining.58 However, the Chinese government of 

the time was dissatisfied with this draft, desiring a climate regionalization scheme more directly 

aligned with their imperatives for economic development. 

In 1956, China formulated a 12-year plan to stimulate development in its Outline of the 

Long-Term Plan for Scientific and Technological Development (1956-1967).59 The ranking of 

various fields in this plan reflects the government’s national priorities. The plan proposed 

thirteen major areas and fifty-seven important tasks. The first area was natural conditions and 

natural resources, with the first task being the natural regionalization of China and economic 

planning. In addition to this, there were five tasks requiring surveys of natural resources. 

State-organized natural resource surveys in China had begun as early as 1951. In 1955, 

the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) established the Committee for Comprehensive 

Survey of Natural Resources, with Zhu Kezhen serving as its director. Half of the committee 

members were CAS researchers, many of whom were CAS academics, while the other half 

consisted of deputy leaders from natural resource-related national ministries.60 During the 

1950s and 1960s, the committee organized nationwide large-scale comprehensive natural 

resource surveys. 61  The 12-year plan imposed clearer requirements on the committee’s 

mandate: to accept leadership from the State Planning Commission, undertake national tasks, 

conduct natural regionalization, and propose rational allocation of productive forces.62 

During this period, regionalization efforts began to exhibit characteristics of Maoist 

science, where scientific tasks became aligned with political objectives, and science itself 

emerged as a tool for social revolution. 63  While this alignment was partially driven by 

scientists’ proactive engagement,64 subsequent research will demonstrate that just as scientists 

leveraged their activities to advance state-building, they could also pursue their own 

disciplinary goals through national construction and political processes. 

 

56 Editorial Department of the Records of Chinese Geography, Zhongguo Ziran Quhua Caoan [Draft Natural Regionalization 

of China] (Beijing: Science Press, n.d.), 1. 

57 Rural sideline production refers to the other production activities that agricultural producers engage in in addition to their 

main production activities. Since 1993, the subdivision of sideline occupations has been cancelled, and the hunting of wild 

animals has been classified into animal husbandry, and the gathering of wild plants and commodity industry run by rural 

household have been included in farming. See National Bureau of Statistics of China, Explanatory Notes on Main Statistical 

Indicators, 2022, https://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/ndsj/2022/html/zbe12.pdf. 

58 Editorial Department of the Records of Chinese Geography, Zhongguo Ziran Quhua Caoan, 57. 

59 Department of Innovation and Development, Ministry of Science and Technology, PRC (eds), Kexue Jishu Fazhan Guihua 

Gangyao [Outline of the Program for Science and Technology Development] of the People’s Republic of China (1956-2000) 

(Scientific and Technical documents Press, 2018), 6. 

60 Zhang Jiuchen. Ziran Ziyuan Zonghe Kaocha Weiyuanhui Yanjiu [Study on the Comprehensive Survey Committee of 

Natural Resources]. (Beijing: Science Press, 2013),74-76. 

61  Sun Honglie, Cheng Shengkui, and Feng Zhiming, “From Integrated Surveys of Natural Resources to Comprehensive 

Research of Resources Science over 60 Years,” Journal of Natural Resources 25, no. 9 (2010): 1414–23. 

62 “Historical Evolution of the Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS.” Website of the 

Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS. Chinese Academy of Sciences, n.d. Accessed [March 

23，2025]. https://igsnrr.cas.cn/skjs/lsyg/. 

63 Sigrid Schmalzer, Red Revolution, Green Revolution: Scientific Farming in Socialist China (University of Chicago Press, 

2016), 5. 

64 Ibid., 28. 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

13 

 

 

During the 1950s, China was undergoing a fervent movement to emulate the Soviet 

Union, and these above-mentioned undertakings were characterized by extensive Soviet 

involvement. In July 1952, V.T. Zaychikov, Deputy Director of the Institute of Geography, 

USSR Academy of Sciences, visited China to discuss collaborative compilation on the 

Geography of China with Chinese scholars. 65  At Zaychikov’s suggestion, the Chinese 

Academy of Sciences established the Editorial Board for the Geographical Annals of China, 

marking the start of China’s natural regionalization efforts. In April 1955, a Soviet scientific 

expedition led by Innokenty Petrovich Gerasimov arrived in China. During exchanges, 

Gerasimov criticized the natural regionalization section of the Geographical Annals of China 

for lacking proper theoretical guidance and singled out the climate regionalization maps as 

poorly executed and subservient to other regionalization frameworks.66 In 1956, under the 

guidance of Soviet experts, the geography component of the 12-year plan was finalized, 

directing geographers to complete tasks accordingly. Led by the Soviet geographer Ivan 

Vasilyevich Samoylov (Самойлов，Иван Васильевич)—who would, in the years that 

followed, emerge as the leading figure among Soviet geographers working in China—more 

than fifty Soviet scientists provided direct or indirect guidance to China’s natural 

regionalization.67 By late 1958, after completing all components of the natural regionalization 

plan, Chinese scholars translated the scheme and its explanatory notes into Russian and sent 

them to the Soviet Union. The USSR responded with a 150,000-character written critique and 

dispatched a specialized expert group to China to provide feedback. The Soviet delegation 

engaged Chinese scholars in discussions spanning 17 issues, including the objectives of 

regionalization, zonal vs. non-zonal related problems, and methodological procedures. 68 

Regarding climate regionalization specifically, the Soviet side convened 20 meteorologists 

from Kiev, Moscow, Leningrad, and Voronezh for deliberations and organized subgroup 

discussions at institutions such as the Central Geophysical Institute and the Meteorological 

Group of the Institute of Geography.69 Amid these controversies, both eyewitnesses and Zhu 

Kezhen’s biographers have concurred that the subtropical zone issue was a significant 

disagreement between Sino-Soviet climatologists at the time. 

The subtropical zone issue perplexed Chinese scientists from the outset. As an imported 

concept, at the time its international definition remained ambiguous, as it inherently denoted 

regions ill-fitted to either temperate or tropical classifications.70 In addressing this, Chinese 

climatologists chose to maintain continuity with previous approaches: on one hand, they 

downplayed foreign-defined subtropical boundaries within China, asserting superior access to 

localized data; on the other, they refrained from deviating excessively from the general concept 

to ensure acceptance by international peers.71 

 

65  Zhu Kezhen, Zhu Kezhen Quanji [The Complete Works of Zhu Kezhen], vol. 13 (Shanghai: Shanghai Science and 

Technology Education Press, 2007), 659-661. 

66  Zhu Kezhen, Zhu Kezhen Quanji [The Complete Works of Zhu Kezhen], vol. 14 (Shanghai: Shanghai Science and 

Technology Education Press, 2008), 118. 

67 Working Committee of Natural Regionalization, CAS, Zhongguo Qihou Quhua Chugao[Climatic Regionalization of China 

(Preliminary Draft)] (Beijing: Science Press, 1959), II. 

68 Soviet Experts, “Comments and Summary on the ‘Draft Comprehensive Physical Regionalization of China’,” Dili Xuebao 

[Acta Geographica Sinica] 25, no. 3 (1959): 240–247. 

69 Kezhen, Zhu Kezhen Quanji [The Complete Works of Zhu Kezhen], 2008, 14:505，510. 

70 “Subtropics - Glossary of Meteorology,” accessed April 2, 2025, https://glossary.ametsoc.org/wiki/Subtropics. 

71 Huang Bingwei. “Zhu Kezhen Tongzhi yu Woguo Redai he Hainan Dao de Kexue Yanjiu (Yi) Woguo Redai、Yaredai 

Jiexian Wenti” [Mr. Zhu Kezhen and China’s Tropical and Hainan Island Scientific Research (Part 1): The Issue of China’s 

Tropical and Subtropical Boundaries]. Dili Yanjiu (Geographical Research) 1, no. 1 (1984): 8–18. 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

14 

 

 

The extensive involvement of Soviet experts introduced unforeseen complications. 

Soviet scientists’ theoretical frameworks ceased to be passive tools awaiting Chinese 

modification and instead became proactive agents shaping China’s climate regionalization 

process. Chinese climatologists could no longer afford to first establish domestic consensus on 

subtropical boundaries before applying foreign systems—as they had with Köppen’s 

classification—but were now compelled into a dynamic, real-time negotiation with Soviet 

science. 

Zhu Kezhen’s diaries contain extensive records of this period. At that time, the Soviet 

Union had climate classification systems such as those developed by Berg, Alisov, and 

Selyaninov, with Alisov’s classification being the most representative. Unlike Köppen, Alisov 

attempted to classify climates based on the movement of air masses, a tradition adopted from 

dynamic climatology.72 In Alisov’s climate classification, North China, Northeast China, and 

southern Xinjiang were categorized as subtropical regions.73 Nevertheless, these areas are 

currently classified as temperate zones. Take Northeast China, for instance; it is well-known 

for its snowy winters and fertile black soil, which clearly do not match the characteristics of a 

subtropical climate. In 1956, the Soviet experts who had just arrived in China exhibited a 

rather assertive stance, indicating that the boundary of the subtropical zone in China should 

conform to the Soviet Union’s will. 74  Perhaps unsurprising given that Samoylov, the 

representative figure guiding China’s natural regionalization, was a colleague of Alisov’s at 

Moscow State University. 

Huang Bingwei(黄秉维), Zhu Kezhen’s deputy, described the intellectual confusion 

of the time, noting that many Chinese scholars adhered to Soviet scientists’ viewpoints and 

even advanced more persuasive indicators and phenomenological justifications than their 

Soviet counterparts.75 Large-scale natural resource surveys provided Chinese academics with 

preliminary evidence, and accumulating climatic data suggested those regions should be 

classified as temperate zones.76 Additionally, after conducting on-the-ground surveys in China, 

some Soviet experts working in the country began to shift or soften their previously rigid 

positions.77  Some Soviet experts even expressed excitement at encountering tropical and 

subtropical regions for the first time.78 This reinforced Chinese scientists’ conviction that they 

possessed a superior understanding of China’s climatic realities compared to foreign 

authorities, whether Köppen or Alisov. 

China’s climate regionalization also followed an implicit trajectory: translating locally 

specific research into universal scientific language rather than resorting to protectionist 

adjustments. Alisov’s classification, based on air mass dynamics, could not be persuaded by 

so- called “Chinese climatic realities”.79 Meanwhile, by the late 1950s, Sino-Soviet tensions 

 

72 Boris Pavlovich Alisov (Борис Павлович Алисов), Klimaticheskie oblasti zarubezhnykh stran [Климатические области 

зарубежных стран; Climatic Regions of Foreign Countries] (Moscow: Gos. izd-vo geogr. lit [Гос. изд-во геогр. лит], 1950), 

37. 

73 Ibid., 79, 91. 

74  Zhu, Zhu Kezhen Quanji, 14: 374-375. 

75 Huang. “Zhu Kezhen Tongzhi yu Woguo Redai” 9. 

76 Zhu Kezhen, Zhu Kezhen Quanji [The Complete Works of Zhu Kezhen], vol. 3 (Shanghai: Shanghai Science and Technology 

Education Press, 2004), 420-429. 

77  Zhu Kezhen, Zhu Kezhen Quanji [The Complete Works of Zhu Kezhen], vol. 15 (Shanghai: Shanghai Science and 

Technology Education Press, 2008), 62-63. 

78 Zhu, Zhu Kezhen Quanji, 15:62–63. 

79 Huang. “Zhu Kezhen Tongzhi yu Woguo Redai,”12-13. 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

15 

 

 

emerged. Accepting Soviet subtropical boundaries would have directly impacted China’s 

agricultural restructuring, imbuing Chinese scientists’ actions with additional political 

significance. This necessitated Chinese climatologists’ entry into the previously unfamiliar 

field of dynamic climatology. Fortuitously, Chinese climatologists identified errors in Alisov’s 

dynamic classification through their analysis of the East Asian subtropical highs and 

westerlies.80 After synthesizing evidence from multiple disciplines, Zhu Kezhen definitively 

settled the debate with his landmark paper “Subtropics of China.”81 

Notably, the boundary between the subtropical and temperate zones eventually chosen 

by Chinese scientists is still the well-known Qinling-Huaihe Line. This boundary also closely 

aligns with the universally defined northern limit of the subtropical zone today.82  In the 

Climatic Regionalization of China (Preliminary Draft), this line has profound scientific 

meaning: 

It is advisable to use the accumulated temperature of 4500°C during the warm season (period 

with daily mean temperature ≥10℃) and the 0°C isotherm for the coldest pentad as boundaries. 

This line also corresponds to other climatic thresholds: a frost-free period of approximately 240 

days, an aridity index of 1 (precipitation equivalent to evapotranspiration), and an annual 

precipitation of 750 mm. Geographically, this boundary lies at roughly 34°N, coinciding with 

the southern limit frequently influenced by the summer polar front, the southern edge of the 

upper-level westerly circulation during midsummer, and the southern margin of the typical east-

west path of mid-path anticyclones.77 

Gone are the simplistic rationales of 30 years ago: the Qinling-Huaihe Line is the dividing line 

between north and south, so it should be a climate regionalization boundary. Today, this 

represents the most significant boundary in Chinese geography, one that every middle school 

student is required to understand. In this sense, Chinese scientists have achieved academic 

independence on two levels: one in using academic independence to bolster national 

sovereignty; the other in interpreting existing cultural and geographical understandings through 

universal scientific discourse. 

Conclusion 

The case of China’s climate regionalization presents intriguing dynamics. Early 

twentieth-century Chinese scientists adopted the development of “local science” as a strategy 

for a nation that was a relative latecomer to science. Natural geographic knowledge with deep 

indigenous roots, such as climate regionalization, became the focus of this strategy. National 

psychology served as the impetus for scientific development, while national culture provided 

its nourishment. 

Thus, Chinese climatologists sought to reconcile Köppen’s universalist framework with 

China’s distinct climatic and cultural regions, creating hybrid systems that ‘spoke Chinese’ 

scientifically. However, the goal of developing local science remained to elevate China’s 

scientific standing globally, ensuring Chinese science would be recognized internationally. 

Thus, we observe that Chinese climatologists have consistently demonstrated a general 

tendency—most notably by reinterpreting traditional boundaries through scientific lenses—

endowing them with rich significance. This necessitated a dual task: explaining China through 

 

80 Staff Members of the Section of Synoptic and Dynamic Meteorology, Institute of Geophysics and Meteorology, Academia 

Sinica, Peking, “On the General Circulation over Eastern Asia (I),” Tellus 9, no. 4 (1957): 432–46. 

81 Zhu Kezhen, “Zhongguo de Yaredai[Subtropics of China],” Kexue Tongbao, no. 17 (1958): 524–28. 

82 “Subtropics - Glossary of Meteorology.” 



 History of Meteorology 12 (2025) 

16 

 

 

globally dominant scientific languages while simultaneously preserving its uniqueness. 

Through this process, Chinese climatology also began to mature and achieve autonomy.  

Climate regionalization represents a successful case, with its achievements closely tied 

to scientists’ unique educational backgrounds. Most, possessed dual training in traditional 

cultural education and natural sciences, enabling them to draw insights from classical texts.83 

This approach was frequently adopted in the early development of certain Chinese disciplines, 

leading to a peculiar phenomenon: while historians debated the use of archives of nature versus 

social society,84 scientists of that era transcended such limitations. This successful case also 

invites reflection: what role have unsuccessful or non-universalized natural-cultural concepts 

played in the history of Chinese science? 

 

 

Acknowledgements 

This article extends my master’s thesis research. I am grateful to my MA advisor, Associate 

Professor Banghong Fu, who encouraged me to continue advancing my work on the 

relationship between meteorology and nation-building. I also thank the Archives of the China 

Meteorological Administration and the Zhejiang Provincial Archives, whose collections 

provided the most valuable sources for this article. During peer review, the reviewers and 

editors offered many constructive comments on both structure and language; as an early-career, 

non-native English-speaking researcher, I have benefited greatly from their guidance. 

 

83 In China, they are called "Jing Shi Zi Zu", which means classics, histories, philosophers and anthologies. 

84 Fiona Williamson, “The ‘Cultural Turn’ of Climate History: An Emerging Field for Studies of China and East Asia,” WIREs 

Climate Change 11, no. 3 (May 2020): e635. 


