the environmental movement was a casualty of intense political competition.
Thus, even though Taiwan’s democratization has permitted the involvement of
a large number of groups in processes that are far more transparent than those
in China, democracy itself did not lead in this case to the desired biodiversity
protection outcome – a permanent halt to industrial development planning in
the Binnan area. The real reason that the Binnan project has not gone forward
is change in business interests, not the endeavors of the incumbent DPP
government.
It is difficult to generalize (from these two cases alone) the future of bio-
diversity conservation in China and Taiwan. Yet they do illustrate challenges
and opportunities in the current environmental governance systems of both
states. Democratization in Taiwan by itself does not guarantee any particular
environmental outcome. It has made the state somewhat more porous to
penetration by groups, but these may be large business conglomerates as well
as environmental alliances. Definitely, the decision-making process is more
transparent. Fragmentation of power in China and the appearance of what
might be ‘softer’ forms of authoritarianism have created openings for
environmental organizations, scientists, journalists, and others in the general
public seeking a sustainable future.
BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION WITH CHINESE
CHARACTERISTICS?
No country has resolved competitive pressures between conservation of
endangered/threatened species and ecosystems and expansion of human settle-
ment and economic development. This book has emphasized the problems in
policy and practice of biodiversity conservation in China and Taiwan, but it
would be unbalanced if it did not mention those Chinese approaches that differ
from those of other nations and appear to have advanced conservation goals.
Five characteristics bear mention, and we qualify each with respect to its
applicability to Taiwan.
Mobilization by the State
China retains a Leninist system of government into the twenty-first century,
and the central government still has the capacity to mobilize the population
and direct it toward environmental protection goals. The devolution of power
and authority to provinces, special administrative districts, and local govern-
ments has weakened the implementation of policy, yet when the leadership
forms consensus on the urgency of an environmental issue, it has the
capability to act. Both reforestation and afforestation programs of the late
226 Governance of biodiversity conservation in China and Taiwan