Tianbao Qin (fxyqtb@whu.edu.cn)
Research Institute of Environmental Law (RIEL) & China Institute of Boundary and Ocean Studies (CIBOS), Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Abbreviations
CBD Convention on Biological Diversity
COP Conference of Parties
MEAs Multilateral Environmental Agreements
FYP Five Year Plan
GEG Global Environmental Governance
It has been 27 years since the CBD was adopted, and 14 Conferences of the Parties (COP) have been convened. The mandates of each COP are, inter alia, to review the progress of the Convention, determine priorities for protection, and formulate work plans. As the host of the 15th COP and one of the 12 Mega-biodiversity countries in the world, China will take the opportunity to take on the major responsibility of contributing to global biodiversity conservation (Xinhua News Agency, 2016), because the 15th COP is a key link in the international process of the CBD to review and pass the “Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework”, and in line with the actual needs of domestic biodiversity conservation in China as well. However, the profile of implementation of China (and similar countries) in the past 27 years provided by traditional analytical framework is neither comprehensive nor accurate because the willingness and ability to implement of rapidly developing countries is always change and difficult to be distinguished. So, it is urgent to apply a new method to evaluate the (dynamic) implementation of the CBD by a country like China is raised.
The traditional “willingness + ability” analytical framework show three shortcomings:the analysis criteria is somewhat simple, the perspective tends to be static and there is a certain degree of convergence between “willingness” and “ability”. This article intends to introduce a new analytical framework, with a view to combine a vertical (temporal) dimension and a horizontal (elements) dimension to analyze a country’s implementation, especially its evolution. Elements of the new analytical framework include development philosophy and model, perception of national environmental interests, economic and technological level, attitude towards GEG attitude. The new framework makes implementation analysis more comprehensive, more dynamic, more structured. Under such a new analytical framework, China's role in implementing CBD transformed from “follower” to “main participant” and then to “active contributor” roughly in three successive stages.
Between 1992 and 2000, due to China’s insufficient understanding of biodiversity conservation, relevant domestic strategies, plans, policies, laws, institution building, and international exchanges are still at an initial stage, and China is in a state of passive and negative implementation of the Convention as “Follower”.
With China’s rapid economic growth and the accelerated development of heavy chemical industries, unprecedented pressure on the environment made China fully recognized that environmental problems restrict greatly social and economic development. The State Council have begun to implement total pollutant emission control and other actions, and become more positive in the international community”(Li and Xu 2006). So, between 2000 and 2012, China's Implementation was as “Main Participant” .
After that, facing the situation of tighter resource constraints, severe environmental pollution, and degradation of the ecosystem, China proposed "Ecological Civilization" in 2012. In March 2018, “ecological civilization” and “beautiful China” have been written into the Amendment to the Constitution of China. Under ecological civilization strategy, the biodiversity legal system domestic implementation mechanism are becoming more complete. China also redefined its diplomatic attitude to global environmental affairs. In 2015 China issued the “Integrated Reform Plan for Promoting Ecological Civilization”, where clearly states “actively participate in global governance”. China became an “Active Contributor” (2012-present).
Meanwhile, China still has a long way to go for a better implementation in the future, and China still faces many challenges as follows:
In development philosophy and models：development inertia is difficult to overcome in the short term. Although the ideology that values and prioritizes environmental protection continues to be strengthened, the relaxation of tension between economic development and environmental protection requires a long process, and the inertia of conflict between economy and environment still exists in a foreseeable future.
In perception of national environmental interest: mainstreaming process of biodiversity conservation still needs to be strengthened, which mainly refers to the further enhancement of the importance of biodiversity protection in the integrated decision-making of environment and development, with a view to becoming an integral element in national environmental assessment and even comprehensive strength assessment.
In economic and technological level: investment should continue to increase. the current level of economic and related technical inputs still restricts the protection of biodiversity. the funding gap is still large, especially in the biodiversity survey and monitoring, construction and management of nature reserves, and biodiversity restoration are very weak, and funds are seriously lacking.
In GEG attitude: the ability to international agenda-setting is still insufficient, which can be verified from two major actions. First, China proposed the notion of “community of shared future for mankind”, but has not clearly defined the concept and connotation. Second, China, as the host country of COP15, has not yet proposed a China's plan for the “Post-2020 Biodiversity Framework” which, as the core expected result of COP15, will be a programmatic document for the future global biodiversity process and guide the actions of countries in the global biodiversity in the next decade.
The new analytical framework answers why China undergoes a role transition from follower to major participant, then to active contributor when implementing CBD, which provides a dynamic (not static) profile of a country's implementation. And moreover, the analytic framework proposed could be applicable to examine China’s implementation of other MEAs, and to examine the implementation of MEAs of other similar countries that share the same or similar characteristics with China such as Brazil, India, South Africa etc.
Comments