Environmental Protection Law of the People's Republic of China (1989)

In the post-Mao era, one highly significant dimension of China's official programme of reform and integration into the international economy has been a commitment to legal construction. This commitment has included a sustained effort to fashion a basic corpus of environmental protection law alongside supportive institutions, administrative norms and policies, in order to create a “basic legal system of environmental protection” (huanjing baohu de jiben falii zhidu).' In the eyes of the authorities in the People's Republic of China, such efforts reflect a degree of environmental concern that is unusually strong for a developing society.2 China's achievements, we are often told, must be placed in the context of the considerable difficulties the PRC faces in terms of the pressing need to raise living standards, a serious problem of over-population, a shortage of natural resources, an outdated industrial infrastructure and poor industrial management.3 Of course, viewed comparatively, the PRC's embrace of environmental protection law was somewhat belated,4 only properly commencing after its participation in the 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm. The subsequent expansion of environmental legislation and enforcement has been some-what erratic. Nevertheless, there appears to be a continuing intent to fashion a substantial body of environmental law, and concern with the construction and revision of this was further enhanced by China's participation in the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development, held in Rio de Janeiro. Following this, Premier Li Peng “made a commitment to conscientiously implement resolutions adopted at the Conference”5 and, given the PRC's very substantial size and population, a positive embrace of internationally acceptable standards of environmental welfare is highly significant for future global environmental protection. This article examines the principal features and significance of the PRC's domestic environmental protection law, and considers briefly the implications of the Chinese approach to environmental law for understanding the development of law more generally in post-Mao China.

Download Full-text

Partycypacja społeczna jako filar demokracji środowiskowej w Chińskiej Republice Ludowej

Studia nad Autorytaryzmem i Totalitaryzmem ◽

10.19195/2300-7249.43.3.16 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 43 (3) ◽

pp. 227-244

Author(s):

Justyna Bazylińska-Nagler

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Civil Society ◽

Public Participation ◽

Environmental Protection ◽

Environmental Law ◽

People’S Republic Of China ◽

Chinese Government ◽

The European Union ◽

People's Republic Of China ◽

Republic Of China

The latest revision from 2014 of the Chinese Environmental Protection Law introduced a new mechanism of public participation in environmental law-making. It forces the Chinese legislative process to be more transparent and inclusive, that is to say — involve civil society and NGOs. Generally, this development deserves support and approval; there are, however, several shortcomings that should be addressed in the future. For instance, neither the level of cooperation between legislature and civil society nor the outcomes of public participation do always meet social expectations. The purpose of this work was to research the Chinese model of public participation in environmental decision-making, bearing in mind the authoritarian governance of the People’s Republic of China. Then, to analyze the real impact of the international cooperation and standards on the application of this model. Specifically, the EU–China Environmental Governance Programme (2010–2015) was discussed as a very influential example. The outcome of the research shows that Chinese environmental law has been notably shaped by public international and European law. There are considerable similarities between the legal instruments of environmental democracy applied in China and public international law standards promoted by the United Nations and the European Union through the implementation of the Aarhus Convention of 1998. And, without doubt, it has to be recognised that the People’s Republic of China has its own rich and diversified, however contradictory during the course of history, doctrines and a jurisprudence body of work considering civil society’s participatory role in decision-making. Each of the successive Chinese forms of government — beginning with despotism, then a glimpse of democracy, totalitarianism, and, finally, authoritarianism — did leave their mark on the Chinese political thought and law regarding the desired participation level of society (i.e. various civil movements and NGOs) in state affairs. In this day and age, social interest and support for the environmental protection is well-accepted by the Chinese government, especially due to the current plan of the Communist Party of China (CPC) to build an “ecological civilization” in China.

Download Full-text