Hard times for China’s local
environment officials
Gaoming Jiang
Caught between a rock and a hard
place, county-level environment bureaus follow local economic
diktats, yet are blamed for the ecological problems that ensue.
Gaoming Jiang reports.
“Conflicts often arise with local residents, who assume that
country-level bureaus will deal with polluters – since nobody else
will.”
China’s central government recently promoted “ecological civilisation” as an important
aspect of a developed society in the report from the Communist
Party’s seventeenth congress. This is encouraging news for
China’s troubled environmental movement, but questions remain.
Why, for instance, were trials of “green GDP” abandoned in 10 provinces? Economic
development still trumps environmental protection in China, and
without attention at the highest levels, there can be no
solution.
County-level environment bureaus are the grassroots of
Chinese environmental protection. Although some areas do have
departments at sub-county levels, these are rare. It is also at the
county level that most ecological damage is done, and from this
level that the pollution devastating China’s seven largest river
systems originates. The country’s many small-and-medium
enterprises, which are dirtier and harder to clean up than larger
firms, are also mostly located at the county level. But what do the
local environment officials have to say?
An old friend of mine was recently made director of a
county-level environment bureau. He recently paid me a visit and I
congratulated him on his appointment, but he simply shook his head
and told me he was troubled.
County-level directors, he said, are in a difficult
position. In theory, they are subordinate to higher-level
environment bureaus, but they are managed by the county Communist
Party and government committees, meaning they take orders from
local government officials. And while these officials may support
environmental protection, they are more worried about GDP, finances
and the evaluation of their performance. For instance, generating
income from taxes to pay public sector workers such as teachers is
accorded a far higher priority than the environment. The local
government will often side with polluters, but the environment
bureau is supposedly responsible for preventing pollution, so will
take the heat for any failure.
Conflicts often arise with local residents, who assume
that country-level bureaus will deal with polluters – since nobody
else will. When a major pollution incident occurs, they complain to
the local bureau. If the polluters are closed down, local
government officials will often fire the environment bureau chief.
(And if they do not, the locals often demand it.)
Attracting investment is the most important task for
county governments, because investment means tax income. Pollution
risks will be ignored: “attract the investment first and worry
about any problems later”. Polluters are thus treated as saviors
by the heads of poverty-stricken counties, and the environment
bureau is ignored. As far as local officials are concerned, the
environment authorities are there to make sure everything goes
smoothly. In one case, the county-level environment bureau was
required to carry out an environmental impact assessment for a new
project over the course of 24 hours. It is hard to imagine much was
assessed. Tax income trumps the environment, local government
officials and business people know it.
When a major pollution incident occurs, the government
will sometimes get involved, drafting in the police, prosecutors,
court cadres and environment officials. But legal authorities are
often quick to disappear again, leaving the environment bureau to
deal with the problem – and incur the wrath of local government
and business. On occasion, businesses will even find cause to sue,
and environment officials lose their jobs while the business goes
back to work.
Local environment bureaus make most of their money
collecting fines for excess pollution, but this money is
transferred to the local government. These fines do not amount to
much. Taxation is taken more seriously: tax collectors are the
heroes of local government and given respect by
businesses.
When firms have paid for their emissions, they often just
pollute more. China has strengthened its oversight of pollution in
recent years. However, a lot of treatment equipment has been
installed that is only turned on when someone is checking. Or
equipment is only turned on during the day, while pollution is
dumped at night. This is how China’s waterways continue to be
polluted. The polluters are often better connected than the
county-level bureaus, and may even know of inspections before the
environment authorities do, meaning they can make sure everything
is ready well in advance.
Breaking the law is cheaper than conforming
to it. Polluting pays; protecting the environment costs. That is
what gives my friend headaches. But the environment affects us all,
our children and grandchildren. That is why environmental
protection needs vertical management: local environment officials
should be managed by their superiors, not by local government. They
should also be granted greater powers. If we are to reclaim our
blue skies and clear waters – and build an “ecological
civilisation” – we need to empower our local environment
authorities.
Gaoming Jiang is a professor at the
Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Botany. He is also vice
secretary-general of the UNESCO China-MAB (Man and the Biosphere)
Committee and a member of the UNESCO MAB Urban
Group.
|