442
19 Review and Outlook
The “resources-oriented water resources development” strategy and water rights
were incorporated into the 2002 revised Water Law, making the 2002 law the first
“water resources” law in China. The revised law clarified the water rights system,
defined water resources management institutions, strengthened water resources
protection, and provided more direction related to water resources allocation and
saving.
The revision of the law also facilitated the development of the water resources
management legislative system, including the release of a series of policies and
practice guidelines, such as the 2006 Regulation on the Management of Water
Abstraction Permits and Water Resources Fee Collection by State Council, the 2002
Management Methods for Water Resources Justification of Construction Projects,
the 2003 Management Methods of Water Function Zones, the 2005 Supervision and
Management Methods for Discharge Outlets into Water Bodies, the 2007 Interim
Measures for Water Resources Allocation, the 2008 Water Abstraction Management Methods, and the 2008 Water Resources Fee Collection and Use Management
Methods, all issued by the MWR. Supported by local laws and regulations, a multilevel water resources management legal system developed around the Water Law, and
the management systems for water resources development, use, saving, protection,
and management were defined.
The 2002 Water Law resulted in reforms to water resources management institutions. The law restructured the hierarchical and sectoral management arrangements
set out in the 1988 Water Law and stipulated that “the state implements a water
resources management institution combining river basin management with jurisdictional management”. This led to a shift away from the previous arrangements whereby
surface water and groundwater resources and urban and rural water resources were
administrated by different agencies: instead, the new law resulted in “one-dragon
administering water”. At the same time, the law defined for the first time river basin
management organizations and set out their responsibilities (Yang 2002). In practice,
the new institutions were developed as part of the 1998 governmental restructure,
aimed at supporting the idea that “one ministry is responsible for one issue”, and
river basin management organizations for major rivers and lakes had been in place
for many years.
During the implementation of water rights and water markets, two cases of water
trading were widely and deeply investigated and discussed. The first, as discussed in
Chap. 5, was the Dongyang–Yiwu water rights trade between two nearby counties in
Zhejiang Province. Yiwu had experienced quick economic development but lacked
an adequate clean water supply, and Dongyang had surplus freshwater resources in
its reservoirs. Therefore, the two counties signed a contract to trade 50 million m
3 of
permanent rights at the price of 200 million RMB. The trade changed the traditional
government-arranged water resources allocation mechanism and employed a marketlike method. The case was regarded as the first water rights trade in China, but several
similar cases were subsequently identified in the country (Shen et al. 2006b). Another
famous case was the water rights transfer in the Inner Mongolia and Ningxia regions.
In response to fast industrial development from the national energy basis development
in the two regions and limited water resources controlled by the Yellow River Water
19 Review and Outlook
The “resources-oriented water resources development” strategy and water rights
were incorporated into the 2002 revised Water Law, making the 2002 law the first
“water resources” law in China. The revised law clarified the water rights system,
defined water resources management institutions, strengthened water resources
protection, and provided more direction related to water resources allocation and
saving.
The revision of the law also facilitated the development of the water resources
management legislative system, including the release of a series of policies and
practice guidelines, such as the 2006 Regulation on the Management of Water
Abstraction Permits and Water Resources Fee Collection by State Council, the 2002
Management Methods for Water Resources Justification of Construction Projects,
the 2003 Management Methods of Water Function Zones, the 2005 Supervision and
Management Methods for Discharge Outlets into Water Bodies, the 2007 Interim
Measures for Water Resources Allocation, the 2008 Water Abstraction Management Methods, and the 2008 Water Resources Fee Collection and Use Management
Methods, all issued by the MWR. Supported by local laws and regulations, a multilevel water resources management legal system developed around the Water Law, and
the management systems for water resources development, use, saving, protection,
and management were defined.
The 2002 Water Law resulted in reforms to water resources management institutions. The law restructured the hierarchical and sectoral management arrangements
set out in the 1988 Water Law and stipulated that “the state implements a water
resources management institution combining river basin management with jurisdictional management”. This led to a shift away from the previous arrangements whereby
surface water and groundwater resources and urban and rural water resources were
administrated by different agencies: instead, the new law resulted in “one-dragon
administering water”. At the same time, the law defined for the first time river basin
management organizations and set out their responsibilities (Yang 2002). In practice,
the new institutions were developed as part of the 1998 governmental restructure,
aimed at supporting the idea that “one ministry is responsible for one issue”, and
river basin management organizations for major rivers and lakes had been in place
for many years.
During the implementation of water rights and water markets, two cases of water
trading were widely and deeply investigated and discussed. The first, as discussed in
Chap. 5, was the Dongyang–Yiwu water rights trade between two nearby counties in
Zhejiang Province. Yiwu had experienced quick economic development but lacked
an adequate clean water supply, and Dongyang had surplus freshwater resources in
its reservoirs. Therefore, the two counties signed a contract to trade 50 million m
3 of
permanent rights at the price of 200 million RMB. The trade changed the traditional
government-arranged water resources allocation mechanism and employed a marketlike method. The case was regarded as the first water rights trade in China, but several
similar cases were subsequently identified in the country (Shen et al. 2006b). Another
famous case was the water rights transfer in the Inner Mongolia and Ningxia regions.
In response to fast industrial development from the national energy basis development
in the two regions and limited water resources controlled by the Yellow River Water