Governance of Biodiversity Conservation in China And Taiwan

The scale of the Binnan project would more than likely cause severe
ecological impacts in the Qigu region. For this reason, in May 1994,
Legislative Yuan member Su Huanzhi coordinated a public hearing, which
was the first episode in a decade-long struggle. Within months (in August
1994), the first anti-Binnan ENGO the Taiwan Coastal Protection Association
(TCPA)) was established. Most leaders of the TCPA were university
professors from southern Taiwan, and were closely linked to Su Huanzhi. The
TCPA and other anti-Binnan activists traveled to villages and organized public
hearings, holding at least 11 in October 1994.
In November 1994, TCPA and other ENGOs solicited support from the
DPP. They expected assistance because their cause was right environmentally
and, after all, the DPP had labeled itself a ‘pro-green’ party. Anti-Binnan
ENGOs planned to use their expected alliance with the DPP as a lever to
budge the new magistrate of Taiwan County (who was also a DPP member).
Reviewing the requests and demands from the ENGOs in March 1995 at the
sixth meeting of the standing committee, the DPP passed a mildly worded
resolution:

‘(1) The DPP supports the policy of sustainable development and improving the

quality of life; (2) DPP legislators must keep supervising the Binnan projects.

Legislators must urge the MOEA (Ministry of Economic Affairs), EPA, COA and

other governmental branches to take into serious consideration the sustainable

development of the region; (3) The DPP also plans to organize public hearings and

seminars to integrate opinions from all parts of the society. Results and resolutions

must be passed on to the DPP Magistrate of Tainan County, Tangshan Chen.’^18

This soft response was very disappointing to ENGOs. Essentially, the DPP
failed to provide substantive assistance and declined to play a leading role in
the Binnan case. Its response implied that the central party leadership was
empowering local Tainan leaders to make the critical decisions. The party
bureaucracy simply ‘reminded’ Magistrate Chen of the party’s position that
environmental protection was necessary; it did not order him to oppose
development.
In the Binnan case, two political figures within the DPP camp espoused
quite different attitudes toward the proposed development. In contrast to Su’s
anti-Binnan stance, Chen Tangshan, the DPP’s first elected magistrate of
Tainan County, adopted a different position. Chen argued that even though the
DPP was a green political party, it was not opposed to all economic
development projects, nor was it hostile to businesses. As the highest elected
official of Tainan County, Chen believed he had to listen to every voice and
make his decisions based on the interests of the people. The local government
could not reject an application for an industrial park without following
the procedures in a formal review. The review process did not permit

200 Governance of biodiversity conservation in China and Taiwan