some cases, local governments are unable to pay the monthly salaries of their
employees.^85 Worsening financial conditions limit capacities of local
governments to invest in environmental protection and sustainable develop-
ment. Financial difficulties also force local leaders to seek more development
projects to improve the local economic situation. Pro-enterprise policies are
natural choices under the current budget constraints of the local governments,
and this pits local interests for growth against national policies for species and
habitat conservation.
CONCLUSIONS
Both China and Taiwan have reasonably complete laws, regulations and policy
statements regarding biodiversity conservation. Coverage of law and
regulation is best for vertebrate species; it is worst for plants and other
invertebrates, particularly those without economic value. In Chapter 3 we
highlighted the role that scientists have played in identifying endangered and
threatened species and ecosystems. Legislative bodies (the National People’s
Congress in China and the Legislative Yuan in Taiwan) have essentially
ratified the results of the State Council and Executive Yuan. However,
democratization in Taiwan has made legislative ratification a political process,
with demonstrations of ENGOs and pressure applied to individual legislators.
This is a significant difference in the process of drafting legislation on
environmental issues.
Throughout this book we have noted that the rule of law is not yet
established in China; even in Taiwan, both forming and implementing the law
is subject to personal linkages (guanxi) as well as to rent-seeking behavior of
individuals and groups. Moreover, laws on biodiversity conservation, like
laws in general, tend to be ambiguous and quite general, placing greater
emphasis on regulations and interpretations of agency administrators.
A relatively large number of international conventions and treaties apply to
the biodiversity conservation area in environmental politics. The approach of
China toward these conventions and international regimes has been different
from that of Taiwan. First, China entered the UN, and participated in
international conventions, later than Taiwan. Second, China very early on
adopted the stance of leader of developing nations, and insisted on
‘coordinated development’. It sought, and generally received, favorable
financial terms as the price of its adherence, and also postponed effective dates
for as much as a decade. China benefits from participation in international
conventions by financial assistance, which has paid for a good part of its
environmental remediation and mitigation work. It also benefits through
development of a positive international image. Finally, China benefits through
The framework for biodiversity conservation 93