Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development …
65
It is obviously very difficult for a single institution to oversee environmental governance issues in China, a large developing country with a vast territory and complex
and diverse environmental problems. However, no matter which reform solution is
adopted, it is necessary to establish a framework for coordination within the complex
environmental governance system.
2. Path dependence and cognitive inertia in China’s environmental governance system
China’s current environmental governance system, formed after evolution over a
long period of time, has the following characteristics: First, the system does not
have a comprehensive design due to a lack of proper understanding in the old days.
Instead, it has evolved as different problems emerged. Individual policies were issued
before there was any overarching legislation. Related management functions also fell
under different authorities and became departmental vested interests. Comprehensive
management is only expressed in words but not backed by deeds. Second, traditional
environmental management arose from a centrally planned economic system. The
system fails to reasonably and clearly assign functions and powers and there is significant overlap in responsibilities. At the same time, there is a lack of effective coordination mechanisms and institutional arrangements for solving cross-departmental or
cross-regional issues. Third, the system mainly adopts administrative methods, especially administrative approval and emission control yet penalties alone are inadequate
to deter potential offenders. Other problems include poor enforcement, lack of effective economic incentives, lack of environmental management targets, and insufficient
institutional arrangements for public participation in environmental governance.
Currently, efforts are made to break down the targets of the ecological civilization
system reform to share the responsibilities across different levels. Although this is
absolutely necessary for the reform, there are also potential concerns. Because stakeholders have different understandings of ecological civilization development, their
actions are probably not well-aligned. Insufficient planning and departmental misdirection may result in redundancy and inefficiency, thus affecting reform progress.
There are various signs that cognitive inertia remains one of the major obstacles in
the work of relevant departments, who, overly eager to secure their current status,
fail to think creatively.
At present, different departments have taken different paths in both the setting of
and targets and plans and the running of pilot projects. Conflicts will therefore be
inevitable. For example, different departments and local authorities have formulated
or are working on different indicator systems ecological civilization development that
are not compatible with one another. This not only reflects differences in perceptions,
but also shows that these government departments have forgotten the purpose of
formulating the indicator system in the first place. What the general public wants
may be just as simple as seeing blue sky or being able to swim in clear waters.
As for ecological civilization pilot projects, in addition to the first batch, China has
also launched water, ocean, forest, town, demonstration area, and national ecological
civilization pilots and national park system reform pilot projects, but not much has
been done to review the results, summarize the experience and learn the lessons.
65
It is obviously very difficult for a single institution to oversee environmental governance issues in China, a large developing country with a vast territory and complex
and diverse environmental problems. However, no matter which reform solution is
adopted, it is necessary to establish a framework for coordination within the complex
environmental governance system.
2. Path dependence and cognitive inertia in China’s environmental governance system
China’s current environmental governance system, formed after evolution over a
long period of time, has the following characteristics: First, the system does not
have a comprehensive design due to a lack of proper understanding in the old days.
Instead, it has evolved as different problems emerged. Individual policies were issued
before there was any overarching legislation. Related management functions also fell
under different authorities and became departmental vested interests. Comprehensive
management is only expressed in words but not backed by deeds. Second, traditional
environmental management arose from a centrally planned economic system. The
system fails to reasonably and clearly assign functions and powers and there is significant overlap in responsibilities. At the same time, there is a lack of effective coordination mechanisms and institutional arrangements for solving cross-departmental or
cross-regional issues. Third, the system mainly adopts administrative methods, especially administrative approval and emission control yet penalties alone are inadequate
to deter potential offenders. Other problems include poor enforcement, lack of effective economic incentives, lack of environmental management targets, and insufficient
institutional arrangements for public participation in environmental governance.
Currently, efforts are made to break down the targets of the ecological civilization
system reform to share the responsibilities across different levels. Although this is
absolutely necessary for the reform, there are also potential concerns. Because stakeholders have different understandings of ecological civilization development, their
actions are probably not well-aligned. Insufficient planning and departmental misdirection may result in redundancy and inefficiency, thus affecting reform progress.
There are various signs that cognitive inertia remains one of the major obstacles in
the work of relevant departments, who, overly eager to secure their current status,
fail to think creatively.
At present, different departments have taken different paths in both the setting of
and targets and plans and the running of pilot projects. Conflicts will therefore be
inevitable. For example, different departments and local authorities have formulated
or are working on different indicator systems ecological civilization development that
are not compatible with one another. This not only reflects differences in perceptions,
but also shows that these government departments have forgotten the purpose of
formulating the indicator system in the first place. What the general public wants
may be just as simple as seeing blue sky or being able to swim in clear waters.
As for ecological civilization pilot projects, in addition to the first batch, China has
also launched water, ocean, forest, town, demonstration area, and national ecological
civilization pilots and national park system reform pilot projects, but not much has
been done to review the results, summarize the experience and learn the lessons.