The PATF report emphasizes the deleterious, often indirect, effect of
‘insensitive’ infrastructure development:
‘Unlike most direct exploitation, this is legal and occurs with the backing of local
authorities. Funding is readily available to construct roads, power supplies and
tourist facilities, and consequences we have seen include forest clearance for
tourist-related activity (for example a deer farm and tourist bungalows), and the
building of a power line through a moderately small primary forest, effectively
cutting it in two for the endangered primates living there. Of particular concern is
river regulation, including both impoundment (dam building) and channelization
(direct modification of a river course). These can change the chemical, physical and
biological characteristics of rivers, and cause the loss of both habitat complexity
and natural mechanisms for flood regulation and waste-assimilation.’^33Although there have been some exceptions,^34 the general pattern has been for
infrastructure projects to proceed irrespective of the boundaries of protected
areas or zones within them.^35
One analyst responding to our question on dam construction near habitat of
endangered species commented: ‘The boundary of the core area in this nature
reserve was changed to accommodate dam construction.’^36
Financial Resources and Incentives
Groups and institutions from three levels direct funding to China’s nature
reserves – international, national, and provincial/local – and there are
problems at each level. First, China has become highly reliant on foreign
funding for management and training, which is unsustainable in the long-term.
Previously we mentioned GEF’s US$18 million investment in the manage-
ment of nature reserves. It has also invested in wetlands biodiversity
conservation and in the Lop Nur Nature reserve. As Xie notes: ‘By June of
2003, GEF has provided or approved about US$400 millions to China projects
... in which about 13 percent are used for biodiversity conservation’.^37 The
governments of Britain and the Netherlands, among others, have invested in
nature reserve projects, as have a number of international environmental non-
governmental organizations (ENGOs) such as the World Wide Fund for
Nature (WWF), Conservation International (CI) and The Nature Conservancy
(TNC). However, much of this funding is one-time-only. It tends to emphasize
capacity building, resource investigation, and environmental education efforts,
yet monies are used for infrastructure construction too. There is no guarantee
that international donor agencies will make long-term commitments to nature
reserve management.
The central government’s primary contribution to funding nature reserves
has been to pay for infrastructure – construction of buildings such as offices,
rescue centers, tourist facilities, roads, and sometimes zoos or botanical
Protected areas and biodiversity conservation 111