120
Y. Du
and prevent fragmented efforts for pollution control. The latter covered all parts
of the agricultural industry, farmers’ ways of production and life, and the environment in rural areas. In 2018, China reorganized some of its ministries, establishing
the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, putting together the agriculture- and
rural-affairs-related functions previously scattered in multiple authorities. The function of environmental supervision in rural areas was transferred to the new Ministry
of Ecology and Environment. Such changes helped improve cross-departmental
coordination and the efficiency of pollution control in rural areas.
In terms of technical standards, standards for pollution emissions from the livestock breeding sector, rural domestic waste control and rural drinking water sources
have been put in place. However, these standards are not specific enough for China,
a country with great differences in resource endowment and economic development
across its vast rural areas. Taking rural domestic wastewater as an example. There
are no specific provisions defining the scope of application of the standard, and the
control indicators selected and the emission caps set were not quite appropriate. Many
provincial governments design standards and manage rural wastewater based on the
emission standard for urban sewage treatment. Some even adopted the one-size-fitsall approach in livestock breeding and agricultural production, banning breeding
and farming as a mandatory measure. Ecological protection was confronted with
farmers’ fights for livelihoods. Local conditions, economic development, population
conditions and people’s demands for the improvement of living environments were
not considered as they should be in environmental protection.
Furthermore, environmental protection in rural areas mainly depended on administrative forces or special campaigns such as that to improve the conditions in
contiguous polluted rural areas and build a beautiful countryside. Under the current
political system in which local governments face pressure from superior authorities
to finish various tasks, and with a prevailing decentralized fiscal system, the way
of environmental protection in rural areas is an appropriate and wise choice. On
the one hand, environmental protection in rural areas is a public good. The state
government transfers resources to fund local projects with the aim of spurring the
economy. In the meantime, the practice ensures effective input in or full coverage
of public services in the environmental sector in rural areas. It also stimulates local
governments’ enthusiasm. On the other hand, local governments face heavy debts.
Without specific projects, they will not be able to acquire special funds for environmental protection in rural areas and then use the fund to fill the gap in funding
for infrastructure construction projects. Moreover, most villages and townships have
very limited fiscal revenues at their disposal, and are unable to afford construction and
maintenance for environmental protection projects. They need specific projects to get
urgently needed financial support. There are also flaws to the practice of protecting
rural environment through specific projects, though. First, the current governance
capacity cannot meet the demand. In other words, getting projects approved and
reaching project acceptance standards become the primary goal of governments at
the basic level, and long-term operation and maintenance of the projects (whether
environmental governance is sustainable and whether the cost matches the returns)
Y. Du
and prevent fragmented efforts for pollution control. The latter covered all parts
of the agricultural industry, farmers’ ways of production and life, and the environment in rural areas. In 2018, China reorganized some of its ministries, establishing
the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, putting together the agriculture- and
rural-affairs-related functions previously scattered in multiple authorities. The function of environmental supervision in rural areas was transferred to the new Ministry
of Ecology and Environment. Such changes helped improve cross-departmental
coordination and the efficiency of pollution control in rural areas.
In terms of technical standards, standards for pollution emissions from the livestock breeding sector, rural domestic waste control and rural drinking water sources
have been put in place. However, these standards are not specific enough for China,
a country with great differences in resource endowment and economic development
across its vast rural areas. Taking rural domestic wastewater as an example. There
are no specific provisions defining the scope of application of the standard, and the
control indicators selected and the emission caps set were not quite appropriate. Many
provincial governments design standards and manage rural wastewater based on the
emission standard for urban sewage treatment. Some even adopted the one-size-fitsall approach in livestock breeding and agricultural production, banning breeding
and farming as a mandatory measure. Ecological protection was confronted with
farmers’ fights for livelihoods. Local conditions, economic development, population
conditions and people’s demands for the improvement of living environments were
not considered as they should be in environmental protection.
Furthermore, environmental protection in rural areas mainly depended on administrative forces or special campaigns such as that to improve the conditions in
contiguous polluted rural areas and build a beautiful countryside. Under the current
political system in which local governments face pressure from superior authorities
to finish various tasks, and with a prevailing decentralized fiscal system, the way
of environmental protection in rural areas is an appropriate and wise choice. On
the one hand, environmental protection in rural areas is a public good. The state
government transfers resources to fund local projects with the aim of spurring the
economy. In the meantime, the practice ensures effective input in or full coverage
of public services in the environmental sector in rural areas. It also stimulates local
governments’ enthusiasm. On the other hand, local governments face heavy debts.
Without specific projects, they will not be able to acquire special funds for environmental protection in rural areas and then use the fund to fill the gap in funding
for infrastructure construction projects. Moreover, most villages and townships have
very limited fiscal revenues at their disposal, and are unable to afford construction and
maintenance for environmental protection projects. They need specific projects to get
urgently needed financial support. There are also flaws to the practice of protecting
rural environment through specific projects, though. First, the current governance
capacity cannot meet the demand. In other words, getting projects approved and
reaching project acceptance standards become the primary goal of governments at
the basic level, and long-term operation and maintenance of the projects (whether
environmental governance is sustainable and whether the cost matches the returns)