11.4 Discussion
251
environmental protection department. Gradually, the system was extended to water
resource protection and water and shoreline management and protection. Therefore,
the river chief system was at one point regarded as an extension of river basin water
pollution control responsibility in the Water Pollution Control Law, detailing targets
from the local government to its leaders, as well as responsibilities. To some extent, by
combining the river basin control target with the regional target, the system built links
between river basins and jurisdictional management and applied more comprehensive control measures (Li 2009). More importantly, the river chief system revealed a
powerful institutional capacity through the increase in coordination and mobilization
ability and the overcoming of the shortfalls of “multi-dragon managing water.”
5
Since the issuance of the national document in 2016, the river chief system has
been regarded as an innovative institutional mechanism for fulfilling governmental
responsibility to leadership. At the same time, the river chief system has developed a cooperation platform between the water department and the environmental
department without changing the departmental arrangements. Some researchers have
suggested that the river chief system is compatible with the administrative management system in China. In the country, selection and appointment of the local government leadership are conducted by senior-level governments based on certain criteria
and indicators. In the past, regional economic development has served as a key
indicator for assessing local government and leadership rather than environmental
protection and pollution control. The river chief system incorporated water quality
improvement into the assessment of local government leadership and even adopted
a “one-vote veto.” Thus, the system compels local leaders to emphasize water pollution control, which has the same importance as economic development, and requires
the setting up of a water pollution control management system (Wang 2009).
It can be concluded that the river and lake chief system is not a water resource
management system, but rather a leadership management system. The system is
designed to improve water resources management and water pollution control
through the river chiefs’ efforts to concentrate on particular activities. The development of the river chief system, to some extent, reflects the problems that have
underpinned water resource management and protection: scattered responsibilities,
departmental policies, low efficiency, and difficult to coordinate. Therefore, the
correct way is to improve public power arrangement and poor system design for
formulating long-lasting mechanisms. The river chief system can achieve short-term
effects, but cannot be incorporated into the present water resources management
system framework. The river chief system overlaps with the present water resources
management system. More seriously, the river chief system has weakened the water
resource management responsibility of local governments and departments (Liu and
Wu 2012).
Although the system has achieved some positive results, it is in its nature the rule
of man, rather than following the rule of law. Its implementation and effects do not
depend on legislation, but on local leadership. Therefore, the river chief system relies
on system development (Wang 2009). The river chief system is, therefore, an effective
5 http://www.mee.gov.cn/home/ztbd/rdzl/hzhzh/gfpl/200905/t20090526_152022.shtml.
251
environmental protection department. Gradually, the system was extended to water
resource protection and water and shoreline management and protection. Therefore,
the river chief system was at one point regarded as an extension of river basin water
pollution control responsibility in the Water Pollution Control Law, detailing targets
from the local government to its leaders, as well as responsibilities. To some extent, by
combining the river basin control target with the regional target, the system built links
between river basins and jurisdictional management and applied more comprehensive control measures (Li 2009). More importantly, the river chief system revealed a
powerful institutional capacity through the increase in coordination and mobilization
ability and the overcoming of the shortfalls of “multi-dragon managing water.”
5
Since the issuance of the national document in 2016, the river chief system has
been regarded as an innovative institutional mechanism for fulfilling governmental
responsibility to leadership. At the same time, the river chief system has developed a cooperation platform between the water department and the environmental
department without changing the departmental arrangements. Some researchers have
suggested that the river chief system is compatible with the administrative management system in China. In the country, selection and appointment of the local government leadership are conducted by senior-level governments based on certain criteria
and indicators. In the past, regional economic development has served as a key
indicator for assessing local government and leadership rather than environmental
protection and pollution control. The river chief system incorporated water quality
improvement into the assessment of local government leadership and even adopted
a “one-vote veto.” Thus, the system compels local leaders to emphasize water pollution control, which has the same importance as economic development, and requires
the setting up of a water pollution control management system (Wang 2009).
It can be concluded that the river and lake chief system is not a water resource
management system, but rather a leadership management system. The system is
designed to improve water resources management and water pollution control
through the river chiefs’ efforts to concentrate on particular activities. The development of the river chief system, to some extent, reflects the problems that have
underpinned water resource management and protection: scattered responsibilities,
departmental policies, low efficiency, and difficult to coordinate. Therefore, the
correct way is to improve public power arrangement and poor system design for
formulating long-lasting mechanisms. The river chief system can achieve short-term
effects, but cannot be incorporated into the present water resources management
system framework. The river chief system overlaps with the present water resources
management system. More seriously, the river chief system has weakened the water
resource management responsibility of local governments and departments (Liu and
Wu 2012).
Although the system has achieved some positive results, it is in its nature the rule
of man, rather than following the rule of law. Its implementation and effects do not
depend on legislation, but on local leadership. Therefore, the river chief system relies
on system development (Wang 2009). The river chief system is, therefore, an effective
5 http://www.mee.gov.cn/home/ztbd/rdzl/hzhzh/gfpl/200905/t20090526_152022.shtml.