transforming policy paradigms for · 2018-03-22 · damage caused by rapid urbanization and...

1

Transforming Policy Paradigms for Environmental Protection and Economic Growth: The Creation of Hangzhou Bay National Wetlands Park

CASE STUDY

Special thanks are due to Sing Cho (World Bank) and Dejian Li (Ningbo Project Management Office), who contributed crucial feedback and insights throughout the process. Nathaniel Brown translated the case study from Chinese to English. Many individuals contributed to the case study, starting with the interviewees within the Ningbo Government who provided context, details, and insights. Jacob Bathanti, Sarah Glavey, and Weiyi Wang contributed additional in-depth reviews and editorial support.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Tracing the Implementation Process . . 4

Field Research, Hands-on

Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Lessons from the Case Study . . . . . . . 11

Annex 1: Project timeline . . . . . . . . . . 12

Annex 2: Project Mapping . . . . . . . . . 13

Annex 3: Stakeholder Mapping . . . . . 14

Annex 4: List of Interviews . . . . . . . . . 15

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Executive SummaryThis case study examines the cooperation between Ningbo city and the Global Environment Facility (GEF) at the World Bank. Specifically, it looks at the Ningbo Water and Environment Project (NWEP), a project to develop water pollution control mechanisms in the Hangzhou Bay, which by extension also sought to protect local wetlands. The project focused on the serious environmental damage caused by rapid urbanization and industrialization across developed areas of China’s east coast over the past 30 years. Particularly, it focused on the pollution of water resources. This pollution has resulted in widespread damage to and destruction of coastal wetlands, many of which have been pushed to ecological extremes. Faced with severe environmental issues as a result of long-term, widespread industrialization, the city of Ningbo was faced with a series of urgent questions:

●● How can we mitigate environmental degradation while boosting economic development?

●● How can we continue to combat pollution and promote sustainable development?

●● How can we preserve wetland habitats while still fostering economic growth?

PROJECT DATA

PARTNER ORGANIZATION:Ministry of Finance, P.R. China

PROJECT TOTAL COSTS:US$23.76 million

ORGANIZATION TYPE:Government

DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGE:Water pollution; environmental protection

DELIVERY CHALLENGE:Coordination and engagement

SECTOR:Environmental protection

ORGANIZATION COMMITMENT:US$5 million (GEF grant)

COUNTRY:P.R. China

REGION:East Asia and Pacific

PROJECT DURATION:2006–2011

CASE AUTHORS:Yiqiang Liu, Zhuang Li, and Xiaohu Qi

WORLD BANK TASK TEAM LEADER:Meskerem Brhane

Ministry of Finance People’s Republic of China

December 2017

Transforming Policy Paradigms for Environmental Protection and Economic Growth: The Creation of Hangzhou Bay National Wetlands ParkGLOBAL DELIVERY INITIATIVE

2

This case study traces the development and implementation of a system for wetland preservation and describes how this was integrated by the NWEP. The study examines the difficult choices local governments are faced with when balancing the preservation of wetland ecosystems against the massive demand for land resources brought about by a strong desire for economic development. Moreover, it is a story of how an eventual shift in the ideas of policymakers was able to resolve conflict over the costs and benefits of environmental protection, eventually leading to a win-win model in which the sustainable development of wetland ecosystems and economic progress could move together on a common path.

IntroductionIn October 2012, an auto parts production company arrived in Cixi, a city of the Ningbo Municipality within the Hangzhou Bay region. The delegation had come to discuss building a factory with members of the local government. However, negotiations became caught up in details and the mood in the room began to change, becoming deadlocked. As host, representatives for the Hangzhou Bay’s New Zone Administration (HBNZA) had a suggestion to ease the tension: everyone should take a break, and go outside to relax for a while before coming back to talk.

As the group arrived at the nearby wetland park they found a place in a small pavilion, where they sat down for a quick lunch and tea. The reeds next to them swayed in the late autumn breeze as flocks of birds glided overhead; the sweet scent of sedges filled the air. The representative of the auto parts production company sat in silence, looking quietly around. After a while, he slowly put down the mug in his hands, and looking back with a solemn expression he began to speak:

“There is nothing more to talk about.”“Have you changed your mind? You don’t want to don’t want to build here anymore?”“No, here is the only place I want to be! It’s amazing the way you manage to keep this many birds around and how you’re able to preserve such a huge patch of wetlands, we believe the same care will be taken for an outside investor!”

This story illustrates both the emotional resonance of the wetlands’ natural beauty, and the success that Ningbo

has experienced balancing both economic growth and protection of important tracts of natural marshes. The National Wetland Park is located in the in the Northwest section of the Hangzhou Bay New Zone. It is China’s 8th biggest coastal salt marsh with a total area of 43.5 km²; it is also a world-class bird watching destination. The park was created as a component of the Ningbo Water and Environment Project (NWEP), a project undertaken with the support of the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility (GEF), which aimed to reduce water pollution, improve water treatment, and “encourage coastal zone conservation” along the cost of Cixi and in the Hangzhou Bay area (World Bank ICR 2012). The park, created as an ecotourism destination in 2011, is a wetland restoration project, a site for research, and center for environmental protection. The National Wetland Park, seen as a “golden name card” for the city—recognizing success in both protecting the wetland ecosystem and in encouraging economic development—was only made possible after four years of gradual progress and a series of hard decisions for policymakers.

The Development Challenge: Water Pollution and Environmental ProtectionNingbo is located on China’s Eastern coast, on the southern part of the Yangtze River Delta. Since the Tang Dynasty of the 7th-10th centuries, Ningbo has been an important port for foreign trade to and from China. After economic reforms known as Reform and Opening were launched in 1978, Ningbo became the fastest growing city in the Yangtze River Delta. Over the past 30 years the city has experienced long-term double-digit economic growth. The Ningbo has become host primarily to the heavy chemical industry and the specialized light industry, and its development has brought with it strong socio-economic growth.

This economic growth has come, however, at a heavy environmental price for the people of Ningbo. At one point, the city became one of the country’s most polluted coastal areas, with a majority of pollutants coming from non-point sources in urban and rural areas, such as runoff.

Insufficient wastewater collection and treatment and industrial pollution control resulted in water pollution that threatened the livelihoods and health of urban residents; discharge into the ocean became one of the principal sources of marine pollution in the area. All of


3

this was coupled with a rapid population growth and high-speed social-economic development, which brought with it an urgent need for space and available land. Over a 30-year period of land reclamation, Cixi’s once vast tidal flats and coastal wetlands diminished, causing a massive loss in coastal habitat and biodiversity for local species. This reclamation also reduced the buffer zone between land and sea, allowing agricultural fertilizers and industrial waste (especially nitrates and phosphates) to flow directly into the ocean. This resulted in widespread eutrophication problems and harmful algal bloom (HAB) outbreaks in the Hangzhou Bay, particularly after 2000. This, in turn, brought catastrophic losses to the fishing industry and caused the environmental situation of the surrounding areas to consistently deteriorate (Wu 2004).

The Delivery Challenge: The Need to Forge Consensus from Diverging Ideas on Development between Policymakers China’s past 30 years of economic growth have been referred to by some as the “China Miracle,” a title that reflects not only China’s development, but also its pursuit of poverty eradication and push towards creating a better society (Lin et al. 2002). Economic development and GDP growth have become embedded as the core objectives of policymakers and government officials, and are key components of the performance targets that government officials must meet. This has been especially true for Ningbo and Cixi. These areas are widely known for their rapid economic development, and are proud of their economic status. Government officials are rewarded for high rates of economic growth with good administrative positions, promotions, and assignment to departments in high-growth municipalities. Using these rewards fuses these attributes into a unified system that creates strong bonds around the pursuit of growth. At the same time, focusing on economic growth as the primary measure of development can come at the expense of other public goods (see Lin et al. 2002; Jun & Zhou, eds. 2008).

In the GEF NWEP, divergent opinions on how to prioritize economic development and the protection of wetlands near the smaller city of Cixi proved to be a challenge. On one side, some policymakers in Cixi were convinced that preserving some of Cixi’s wetlands should be an important priority: the tidal flats created a natural buffer zone, reducing pollution; the champions

of this policy also believed in the inherent value of this natural environment. On the other side, another set of policymakers and officials were concerned that preserving these wetlands would effectively forfeit the opportunity to create economic value from this land by building economic development zones or housing developments on the site.

Context

Ningbo’s Wetland and Water Resources Ningbo is one of the five regional centers in the Yangtze River Delta. The greater Ningbo municipality incorporates six districts, two counties, and three county-level cities (one of which is Cixi). The project location of NWEP was located in Cixi, on China’s eastern coast and the south bank of the Hangzhou Bay. Cixi is at the center of an economic “golden triangle” where three major metropolises—Shanghai, Hangzhou, and Ningbo—converge at the Yangtze River Delta. The topographical layout of Cixi’s portion of Hangzhou Bay begins with a flatland extending from the estuary to Zhapu, a port to the north. It has been said that Cixi is the “mud of the Tang turned into the land of the Song,” which refers to the massive dike system that defines the city and that took almost 300 years to complete. Cixi’s particular location has also given it the geographical characteristics of an island: river flows are short and seasonal, there are often serious water shortages from lack of availability, and it has issues with water quality (Cixi County 1992). Beyond this, Cixi has a rich ecosystem, with a coastline of vast wetlands and inter-tidal mudflats. The combination of a high concentration of suspended solids with tidal currents and strong river flows within the Hangzhou Bay has led to sediment being added to the northern coast of Cixi each year, often to a depth of several tens of meters. This has caused Cixi to have the largest mudflat wetlands in the Hangzhou Bay. These areas have historically been essential for local species diversity, providing a crucial stop for migratory bird species, and creating a key natural buffer between polluted runoff and the ocean.

China’s National Pollution PolicySince the Reform and Opening, and the rapid development that followed, China’s environmental pollution has worsened. However, the Chinese government has also continued to enact new laws and regulations to


4

combat pollution and contain its spread. The goal of these regulations is to progressively reduce pollution, eventually eliminating it at the source. Since the 1990s, the government has formulated a number of plans and projects to reduce water pollution. On July 31st, 1992, China joined the inter-governmental Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (the Ramsar Convention). On November 8th, 2000, China officially announced its “National Wetland Conservation Action Plan.” On February 2nd, 2004, China passed a “National Investment Plan for Wetland Conservation,” for the duration of 2004 to 2030. After 2007, China made a concerted push to preserve wetland habitats, which included establishing a new set of guidelines for Wetlands of International Importance and National Wetland Parks. At the same time, the central government created stringent measures to work on preserving wetlands across the nation, such as creating the “red line” defined as the minimum standard for implementing wetland protection. They also contained provisions ensuring that the “red line” wetlands would not be reduced in size, that their ecological functioning would remain intact, and that their protected status would not be subject to changes. With this, China pledged an active expansion of wetland areas, and pushed for projects to restore and upgrade the entirety of wetland ecosystems. Cixi was an early adopter of a comprehensive wastewater collection and treatment approach, responding to its own urgent need for wastewater controls. The Cixi Municipal

Committee and the Cixi City Government attached great importance to ecological and environmental issues, and worked hard to improve policies and regulations, control emissions, strengthen environmental regulation, and create a “Greener Cixi.” However, despite these efforts, the three water-quality-monitoring tests done before the NWEP was implemented showed that the level of contamination in Cixi’s rivers still remained high. The proposed improved and enhanced wastewater treatment programs would be extremely difficult, but were imperative (World Bank 2012).

Tracing the Implementation ProcessIn 2004, Ningbo city, the GEF, and the World Bank signed an agreement and began collaboration on the joint implementation of the NWEP, which aimed to improve water quality and counter marine pollution in the area. In 2005, a component was added to the project that led to Hangzhou’s wetlands receiving a US$5 million grant from the GEF and World Bank, as a part of the “Pollution Reduction in the Large Marine Ecosystems of East Asia Investment Fund.” The project included the revival of 330 hectares of freshwater wetlands (plot A1), 40 km2 of intertidal wetland protection, and the construction of an environmental education center.

Figure 1: Location of the Hangzhou Bay Wetland Park


5

Introducing New Concepts of Wetland Conservation The Hangzhou Bay wetland construction project originated in a chance discovery. Cixi, being one of the most important cities under the jurisdiction of Ningbo municipality, was incorporated into Ningbo’s program for urban sewage treatment. While preparing to work on the Cixi and World Bank wastewater treatment project, the environmental conservation specialists in the World Bank task team discovered that Cixi’s tidal flats along the Hangzhou Bay were one of the most important stopover habitats for migratory birds coming from Siberia on their way to Australia. This made these wetlands particularly worthy of preservation and restoration.

Meanwhile, in the face of increasingly serious pollution off the coast of Hangzhou Bay, and realizing the mutual benefit of ocean conservation and coastal wetland protection (such as the ability for wetlands to reduce pollution before it enters the sea), World Bank experts suggested wetland restoration as a way to deal with these interlocking issues. After careful consideration by World Bank experts, it was determined that the Hangzhou Bay wetlands protection project would be included as a recommendation within the NWEP. In order to refine this proposal and improve its design, the World Bank immediately organized experts to conduct repeated and detailed surveys, studies, and discussions in order to provide a new plan for the project. Wastewater treatment plant outflow would be used to purify polluted wetland bodies of water, and a 43.5 km2 section of wetlands would come under protection to create an ideal habitat for migratory birds. This aligned the project with China’s wetland conservation policy while also furthering the water purification goals of the NWEP. In order to make this possible, World Bank experts recommended and pushed to pursue funding from Pollution Reduction in the Large Marine Ecosystems of East Asia Investment Fund, which was established by the GEF and World Bank to provide an additional USD$5 million grant for the Hangzhou Bay wetlands project.

A Major Divide on Opinion within the Local GovernmentThe wetland conservation project was by this point well planned and poised to bring about tangible benefits, including improved water environments, better wetland

ecosystems, and increased biodiversity. However, as soon as the proposal was submitted to the Cixi City Government, it created a noticeable divergence and dispute between local government policymakers and the leadership of multiple government departments. Neither side had an advantage, either in support or power, and it became obvious this kind of contentious atmosphere would be a detriment to getting a smooth start to the project, let alone managing its continued implementation.

Those in favor of the project placed significant importance on environmental issues, and based their opinion on endorsement of environmental protection and ecological conservation. Yawei Chen, who worked in Cixi city’s Finance Bureau at the time, provided his recollections of the project: “I was the first one to receive the notice of the proposal of the wetland conservation. It came suddenly, and because it was rather specialized, I couldn’t say why [I necessarily supported it] either. However, I am someone who likes new concepts and innovations, and instinctively this is something I am willing to support.”1 Following this, Yawei Chen became an ardent supporter of project, when he first reported to the city government about the proposal, and later once work was underway where he helped coordinate all related departments.

Another supporter was Baifeng Cen, head of the Hangzhou Bay New Zone Wetlands Management Center, who recalled the story of his advocacy for the project: “I used to work in the Environmental Protection Bureau, there I saw many serious environmental issues. I’ve also been around to encounter many poorly managed projects. After a while, it became a common theme. ˜n to feel that we weren’t capable enough to solve these [environmental issues], it got to the point that I was really disappointed in our ability to have any significant impact on the environment. When I came across this World Bank proposal for a wetland conservation project, and was once again allowed the opportunity to help, you could say that I was completely for it—there was no need for second thoughts. I felt like this was a real hope for environmental protection.” Baifeng Cen has fully invested himself in the project since he first became involved in its outset. In an interview, he described how he can sometimes see the different colored birds of the wetlands

1 Interview with author, December 7, 2015.


6

flying outside his office windows, and feels grateful for what was made possible through his own hard work.2

Another official, Jianjie Hu, head of the landscape architecture division of the Cixi City Bureau of Housing and Urban-Rural Development at the time, enthusiastically gave his opinion about the project: “You could say that being able to take part in working on this project (preserving the Hangzhou Bay wetlands), is one of the things I’m most proud of in my life.” Jianjie Hu still feels emotional when he thinks back to those moments: “I majored in landscape architecture, which is learning how to apply engineered techniques and artistic methods through integration of aspects of ecology, landscape conservation in order to create a beautiful and pleasing natural environment. Isn’t that exactly what we were trying to do in the wetland conservation project?!” It was on these grounds that Jianjie strongly supported wetland conservation, and he urged all sides to agree to implement the project.3

From these examples, it can be seen that some of those who felt most strongly about environmental protection formed their opinion from their work experiences, from an emotional connection to nature, and from ingrained beliefs in the inherent value of the natural environment. However, they formed their opinions with relatively few concrete or quantifiable justifications. Their arguments did not dispel the misgivings of those opposed to the project. More supporting evidence would be needed if they were to convince their colleagues in city government that preserving the wetlands would not harm Cixi’s growth, and that they could even be a beneficial asset.

Officials who opposed the project based their arguments on economic interests. In their view, the wetland conservation project would permanently occupy a large area of tidal flats that could be reclaimed for industrial use. As opposed to supporting arguments that were seen as emotional or theoretical, those who opposed the project instead focused on the perceived costs and the principles of cost-effectiveness. They argued that creating a wetland protection area would sacrifice Cixi’s future economic growth for the concept of environmental protection. In their eyes, Cixi was a small southern city, accounting for only 1/8000 of the country’s land, yet feeding 1/800 of the country’s population living in the city. The revenue, GDP, and total import and export volume generated by the Cixi city were disproportionally high compared to other cities of similar size in China. Under this circumstance, land in a populated urban area

like Cixi was seen as being essential, and setting aside 43.5 km2 of it for a wetland was excessive.

Deputy Director of the Hangzhou Bay New Zone Area Bureau of Finance at the time, Jiangming Xie, was one of these people. He bluntly stated: “For years, Cixi has reclaimed land from tidal flats to create useful acreage. As Cixi’s economy began to grow at a rapid pace, urbanization and industrial construction began to move forward quickly too. There is not enough land for construction as it is. Cixi has a large population, but very little space. Throughout its history it has always followed a model where the tidal flats were put to use: the land was reclaimed, made usable, and developed. It’s through this that we have been able to make up for what we lacked to balance our performance targets.”4

Officials were used to relying on land reclamation to create space for industry to grow and develop, and this was not only linked with development in the minds of the people of Cixi, but entrenched in common practice and habit. Reclaiming wetlands for industry was seen as a low-cost option, and, since fewer people needed relocation, there were fewer issues with resettlement. Costs were low and returns were high. Consequently, local people and officials became accustomed to employing this solution, even though it was not necessarily the best one. Jiangming Xie added: “The resource the tidal flats provide has long been a major advantage for the development of the city of Cixi and its industry, providing a broad tract of land for industrialization and playing a large role in the growth of the local economy. This is a fact we cannot deny, and one we must seriously consider before we jump to hasty decisions about new projects that might block that path to development.”5

The CPPCC Chairman of Cixi at the time, who had been transferred from the Ningbo Municipal Bureau of Land and Resources, led the opposition to the proposal. Those supporting his position included the Directors of the Industry Bureau, the Agriculture Bureau, and the Forestry Bureau, along with the Deputy Mayors that supervised those Bureaus. Those who opposed the wetland conservation proposal suggested multiple other enticing uses for the wetlands: the area could be turned into multiple tracts of farmland; it could be used as a huge development zone; it

2 Interview with author, December 7, 2015. 3 Interview with author, December 7, 2015. 4 Interview with author, December 7, 2015. 5 Interview with author, December 7, 2015.


7

could be made into a golf course; or, because of its location by the Hangzhou Bay Bridge that connects Shanghai and the coastal areas of Zhejiang Province, it could be used for transportation. They even went so far as to suggest that since the scenery is so good on this plot of land, it should be used for high-end real estate or villas. In effect, this group argued that with so many potential uses for the land, there was no reason to support the wetland project (with its impact still unconfirmed) and thereby supersede and cancel out all the other possibilities?

The wetland project would, in fact, be a major challenge to long-held preconceptions of economic development. Some policymakers (such as the Deputy Mayors and Directors of bureaus) saw it as a challenge to the interests of the bureaus that they supervised, which would be affected most by the wetland conservation. Furthermore, their opinion was that the wetland conservation would impede economic development, and that the accompanying involuntary resettlement of local residents would cause social instability, both of which would have a negative effect on the performance targets of their respective bureaus.

This situation would certainly be a challenge to whoever was put in charge of the wetland project. He or she would be faced with questions and doubts from those in charge. Lacking a clear consensus, discussion of the project soon stalled, delaying the decision.

Cixi’s mayor found the circumstances of having to disparate voices among the officials in the City Government made it difficult to take a stand on the wetland conservation project.. Some time later a reporter for the Chinese Economic News recalled that in an interview the mayor had said: “At the time I felt intuitively that this was something worth doing. I had an overall idea of what to do. Our industry was well developed and we had an abundance of land in the tidal flats. But we couldn’t use all of that for industry. If all the mudflats could become development zones, that’d be terrible. But as far as I was concerned, even though I wanted to do something I wasn’t able to make the decision alone. It was hard to choose. There is a lot of pressure placed on urban and industrial development, and there isn’t enough land to meet demand. As head of the local administration, I have to ensure that economic growth will happen and improve, and also take into account social stability. But at the same time ecosystem management and wetland preservation are also extremely important. To balance the two is extraordinarily hard!” (Qi 2012).

Unsure of the ultimate outcomes of the project, the CPC Municipal Committee Secretary also proceeded cautiously and with careful consideration. In the end, decision-makers hoped to leave the decision to those higher up. The mayor of Cixi asked the superior Ningbo Municipal Government how to proceed, hoping that they would step in and make the final decision. If officials a level above decided that they wanted to take on the project, then responsibility for any negative impacts would be diffused—or at the very least, Cixi City Government might get some of their performance targets for development reduced.

However, the leaders of the Ningbo Municipal Government also were split in opinion. One side was strongly critical of the proposal to create a protected wetland. They saw Cixi as potentially squandering a “golden rice bowl” by proposing to use the Hangzhou Bay tidal flats for a protected wetland instead of valuable industrial land. Once the wetland was established, this designation would be irreversible. Moreover, even without taking into account the initial investment, the area would require continuous investment of money and management resources to keep it in operation.

On the other side of the debate, some Ningbo Municipal Government officials enthusiastically supported the wetland conservation project. They felt that it would advance the discourse on environmental protection and ecological conservation. Further, the contribution from the World Bank, including their planning and guidance, could become a positive factor for Cixi by boosting growth, investment, and the city’s reputation. Yet conversation remained in deadlock. The Mayor of Cixi stated: “There was still a large dispute and a conflict between different ideas and opinions. Its intensity is what made it tough to unify.”

After a series of fierce and lengthy debates, Cixi’s City Government and Ningbo Municipal Government were both still plagued by internal dispute, most of which was concentrated on two main points. Firstly, was there a need for wastewater treatment management to be extended to wetland conservation? Secondly, would wetland preservation hurt economic growth? Despite the lack of consensus within the government, the leadership from all departments engaged in a responsible, democratic discussion in order to work towards a rational conclusion. In the end, the principal leadership of the Cixi government and the Teak Team Leader for the World Bank were able to devise an interim measure: “First


8

investigate and research to provide enough evidence for decision making, enhance understanding of the issue, and then make the final decision.”

Resolving Differences and Creating Consensus

Because the time frame for the NWEP was fixed, deciding how to resolve the local government’s lack of common understanding and quickly move to the implementation phase of the project became a top priority. The project planned to redefine land that had once been set aside for industrial development as land for wetland preservation. This made it hard for the government to internally decide how to balance the decision with real results. While this was happening the World Bank remained supportive of the government’s process. Jiang Ru, an environmental specialist with the World Bank, said of their stance at the time: “Throughout that period, our team always tried to be understanding of the decision-making process of the Cixi government. We wanted to make every effort to allow them an objective, scientific evaluation of what would be entailed in wetland demarcation and construction.”6

However, the project team did not wait. The major obstacle, even before discussion began, was the conflict in ideas that had already formed within the local government over whether to prioritize ecological protection or economic growth. Therefore, the only feasible solution was to encourage the leadership in charge of the decision to find a comprehensive solution, and a new way of thinking that would create measures for ecological preservation and appeal to already established ideas of economic growth. It was the only way that the project could begin to establish a basis for implementation. The measures through which consensus was created, and these differences were resolved, can be summarized as “field research + expert panels + public opinion.”

Field Research, Hands-on ExperienceTo improve the evidence base for decision making on the wetlands project the World Bank put USD$100,000 from the NWEP’s project preparation fund towards research abroad and future seminars. This amount was to be used to cultivate the skills of local officials in charge of the project through research-based training

abroad, giving them a better understanding of the situation and familiarizing them with the issues at hand before they made a decision. Since understanding wetland preservation requires an extensive specialized knowledge, government officials would need to gain some of this necessary knowledge if they were to fully understand and embrace the value of the wetlands. The World Bank carefully arranged for the delegation in charge of the project to make research visits. Plans were structured so that the local officials would appreciate and realize the scope of the situation and it was made clear that this was not a sightseeing trip.7 The research tour and trainings focused on countries and projects most representative of successful wetland preservation. In addition, a group of specialists in wetland conservation and reconstruction were also hired to accompany the visits and answer questions from the members of the inspection team during the visit. Xiaohong Zhang, the deputy director of Wetlands International China,8 was one of the experts responsible for this task. For the year that followed this decision, a total of 35 Cixi government officials from various departments and bureaus involved in the wetland project visited the San Francisco Bay and the Chesapeake Bay wetlands in the United States; the Yatsuhigata Nature Observation Center in Chiba, the Tokyo Port Wild Bird Park, the Kushiro Marsh Observatory and Eco Museum, the Kiritappu Wetland Center, Tofutsu Cape, and the Akkeshidōritsu Natural Park in Japan; and the Mai Po Wetlands in Hong Kong SAR, China. Their visits to these well-preserved wetlands and environmental education centers impressed these policymakers and catalyzed a shift in mindset.

Holding Seminars with Expert Panels, Leading to Convergence of Opinions and Decision-Making Based on Evidence Observations and visits alone were not enough to really change the mindset of policymakers. While the field visits allowed policymakers to better understand wetland restoration processes, fully dispelling their pre-existing misgivings was a complex challenge. In order to encourage more openness to evidence-based policy

6 Interview with author, December 3, 2015.7 Interview by author, December 2015. 8 Wetlands International China is an organization dedicated to global wetland

research and exchange, conservation efforts, and the preservation, protection, and rehabilitation of wetland resources and biodiversity for future generations.


9

making, the World Bank team and the Cixi Government decided to devise a way to expand the scope of their strategy, allowing the policy-makers larger exposure to debates by experts on the topic. The World Bank team organized an international forum where experts from a multitude of disciplines were invited to discuss the value of the Hangzhou Bay wetlands, the idea behind the conservation initiative, and the future of the area. In June and November 2005, the World Bank delegation and the Ningbo Municipal Government (NMG) hosted two international symposiums in Cixi that were focused on the Hangzhou Bay wetlands. In addition, a conference from January 23rd to 27th, 2006 in Paris on the theme of the “Third Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands” was jointly organized by UNESCO and the GEF. In the conference’s keynote speech, “A Plan for Cooperation in the Seas of East Asia,” World Bank experts touched on how the conservation efforts in the Hangzhou Bay wetlands were innovative and signaled an advance in conceptual design. The experts’ presentations helped bring home the point that the NMG and Cixi City Government’s exploration of wetland restoration and conservation was forward-thinking and helped boost support and sway opinions among those in attendance. Experts and scholars at the conference approached the project from a strategic angle, stressing that the implementation of wetland conservation projects would bring long-term value and sustainable economic development in the area, and would be a force for economic growth. These discussions played a crucial role in building confidence in wetland conservation for high-level Cixi policymakers. The World Bank’s Jiang Ru commented: “We feel very fortunate that in a number of discussions the attitude of a key member of Cixi’s leadership convinced us that he firmly believes Cixi needs environmental protection and not just industrial growth. You could say that he’s made the right choice for this city.”9

Listening to Public Opinion and Adapting to Popular Sentiment

After a basic consensus was reached within the local government, and project approval neared, the Cixi City Government made the final preparations before work began. An extensive public opinion survey was distributed throughout the entire city of Cixi and the town of Andong, which were most affected by the

project. Focus group discussions and anonymous polls were conducted along with a citywide sample survey. A survey specific to Andong was also conducted to poll the residents who would be most affected by the project. Results showed that more than 90 percent of respondents supported the massive environmental undertaking, reaffirming that the public actually supported and had considerable expectations for the project. The results of the survey meant that not only had the government reached a consensus on wetland conservation, but that the strong base of support from the society indicated that it was in line with what people wanted.

After two years of research, field visits, seminars, and consultations the future of the proposal seemed increasingly clear. The functions of the project had been refined, the atmosphere surrounding the decision had improved, and gradually the opinion of key leaders had begun to unify around a particular idea: we and those who come after us will be able to live here for generations—we will care for these wetlands. Government leaders also came to realize that the value of wetland conservation was not restricted to environmental benefits, but the creation of a protected wetland area could provide a major, long-term economic boost to the area. Furthermore, there was the potential to bring a far-reaching social and cultural impact to the area, and improve the region’s overall development and relative competitiveness. Moreover, the spillover effects of wetland restoration would make the areas surrounding the wetland more attractive for development. This brings with it a socio-economic benefit, and forges an additional level of connectivity between positive environmental outcomes and economic growth. This consensus was reflected at the December 2005 2nd Meeting of the Cixi GEF Hangzhou Bay Wetland Protection Project Leadership Committee. The summary of the conference confirms that the Cixi and GEF Wetland Program is a world-class wetlands project that would increase the city’s international recognition, improve its investment in the environment, and play a significant role in raising public awareness towards environmental protection. By establishing a baseline for the scope of restored and pre-existing natural wetlands, an overarching plan was created to delineate the location and function of the wetlands in Cixi. With all disputes settled, the curtain closed on the Hangzhou Bay program negotiations.

9 Interview with author, December 3, 2015.


10

Results

The effect of the NWEP project on the Hangzhou Bay wetlands has been considerable. First, the ecological function of the Hangzhou Bay wetlands has been restored, and the area has returned to its original state: a natural wetland and birds’ paradise. The Hangzhou Bay in its original, natural environment began to attract an increasing amount of rare birds. At the time of writing, 220 different bird species had been spotted, including 13 on the national list of endangered and protected species in China, and nine on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. On December 2011, the Hangzhou Bay Wetland Park officially became a National Wetland Park.

Second, wastewater treatment measures have drastically improved the local water environment. The wetlands have become “purifiers” of water sources and “maintainers” of water quality. With the establishment of the Hangzhou Bay Wetland Park, the introduction of water-borne plants has begun to purify the water around it. According to the 2012 report of Ningbo’s Hydrological Monitoring Program, there is an obvious increase in purity throughout the water that runs from the project wetland: the removal rate of nitrogen and phosphorus is now at 32 percent and 79 percent, respectively.

Lastly, the economic impact of ecological revival has already become significant, thereby proving a complementary nature between economic development and environmental protection. As the restoration of this


11

section of Hangzhou Bay Wetlands came into full force, the intrinsic geographical and ecological advantages of the area have re-emerged. The multifaceted functionality that the project wetlands have within the Hangzhou Bay region, and even the entire Yangtze River Delta, has become even more significant. It has become an example locally, nationally, and even internationally of how to re-imagine the concept of development in order to protect the environment and grow the economy together. In 2005, before the project began, the Hangzhou Bay New Zone only got RMB 20 million in revenue; by 2015 the revenue of the region had already reached RMB 9 billion. This growth illustrates that wetland conservation did not have to be in opposition to economic growth.

Lessons from the Case Study

1. Local governments, through research visits and expert advice, can change policymaking hab-its and preconceptions to achieve innovative wetland conservation. Policymakers in Cixi had no previous experiences to draw on for the proj-ect. China had an existing paradigm of domestic wetland conservation, but only on a small scale and with wetlands that were for viewing pleasure only. In order to create awareness, experts from the World Bank had to work especially hard to pro-mote new ideas, including agreeing to provide a special provision for government representatives to go abroad and personally experience how other

countries have successfully accomplished wetland preservation. This experience had a deep-reaching effect on policymakers who at the time were divided over the wisdom of the project. In 2005, the NMG and the Cixi City Government concluded that envi-ronmental benefits were worth giving up 43.5 km2 of high-value land for wetland conservation. Cixi made this decision earlier than other heavy industry regions and cities in Hangzhou Bay, illustrating the forward-thinking nature of this intervention.

2. Public consultation, discussion with experts, and decision-making based on evidence are crucial to reaching a consensus acceptable to most stake-holders. In order to implement this project, a specific group of selected leaders from different departments was organized to focus on wetland protection. This made it easier to coordinate between the different departments that they represented. This kind of in-ter-departmental co-operation is a mechanism still in place today. During the project implementation, the different administrations in charge worked hand-in-hand, not only with one another but also with the World Bank team. Furthermore, the management of every local bureau made an active effort to simplify administrative procedures. At the same time, local governments, World Bank experts, and domestic re-search institutes worked not only to ensure that pol-icymaking was based on evidence, but also that it re-sponded to public needs and public opinion, assessed by using opinion polls and interacting with Cixi’s res-idents to determine their priorities.


12

Annex 1: Project Timeline

Event Time Period

World Bank Evaluation to Assess Project Feasibility September 2004–December 2004

Preliminary Research Begins May 2005

International Symposium June 2005

Overseas Visitations August 2005

Mid-period Assessment; Second Symposium November 2005

Technical Negotiations May 2006

Project Begins September 2006

Project Agreements Go Into Effect December 12th, 2006

Mid-term Review Field Visit September 2007

Overall Project Design October 2007

Mid-project Inspection May 2008

Project Bidding August 2008

Realized Completion Date December 2011


13

Annex 2: Project Mapping

Theory for Change: Use ecological restoration and sustainable development to promote water treatment and environmental protection

Path for Change: Create a base through scientific evaluation and democratic agreement to assess feasibility; make proposals better correspond to the implementation and management needs of wetland conservation sites in the project area.

Cause: Cixi city is located in Ningbo municipality on the south bank of the Hangzhou bay next to the East China Sea. It is one of the richest county-level urban areas according to Forbes China. At one point, the city was one of China’s most polluted coastal areas, with a majority of pollutants coming from non-point urban and rural runoff. Early in the 21st century, the Ningbo Municipal Government began having increasing concerns about how economic development was affecting water pollution.

Results: Ecological rehabilitation: recreate native wetlands, a paradise for birds; Improved water environment: water source "purifier" and water quality "maintainers;" mutual benefit for the economy and wetland preservation: created a platform for ecological reconstruction, and a "gold card" for promoting investment

Problem Point I: How to resolve divisions within the local government and stress the necessity for reaching consensus for wetland protection

Problem Point II: A lack of confidence in local government projects, conflict between economic, and environmental benefit

Problem Point III: When wetland conservation affects the livelihoods of fishermen, how should local governments enforce a relocation policy and make appropriate arrangements.

Turning Point I:" "Field research + expert panels + public opinion," resolves differences, and shows the need for consensus on wetland protection

Turning Point II: The World Bank and the local government make pragmatic compromises to resolve conflict; administrative processes are simplified, the project was efficiently launched

Turning pPoint III: A suitable resettlement policy is established after surveys by the World Bank delegation and repeated consultations with the local government

Achievement: In 2005 the Cixi government reached a basic consensus on wetland conservation through meetings and discussion, the "Summary of the 2nd Meeting of the GEF Wetland Protection Project Leadership Committee" was created

Achievement: After agreeing initially to use four km2 of wetlands, the Cixi government invests RMB 110 million and 330 hectares of construction land to bet set as a target. This launches project bidding

Achievement: The local government was able to re-allocate funds for necessary expenditures and to solve practical problems such as buying fishing boats, fishing gear, and compensating for losses. Many fishermen moved to other places to continue to fish, others started new businesses


14

Annex 3: Stakeholder Mapping

Secondary Stakeholders

Primary Stakeholders

Key Stakeholders

EnvironmentalProtection

Bureau

Core DecisionMaker:

Cixi City PartyCommittee

Agriculture Bureau,Urban Construction

Commission

FinanceBureau; ProjectOffice

World Bank Team

Residentsresettledfrom tidal

flats

Localbusinesses

Environmental Experts

PublicBenefit

(关�利益相关者)

Note:---- Solid line represents a close exchange of information, a singular intrest, tight coordination, and mutual trust - - - Dashed line is a weak or informal relationship Tension


15

Annex 4: List of Interviews

Time Place Respondent Position Interview Method

Project Manager Interviews

12/3/2015 10:30AM–12:30PM

World Bank China office, conference room

Jiang Ru Early-stage Project Expert Videoconference

12/4/2015 N / A Meskerem Brhane World Bank Project Team Leader E-mail

Provincial Symposium interviews

12/7/2015Morning

Cixi City Finance Bureau Yawei Chen Deputy Director Symposium

12/7/2015 2:00 PM–3:30 PM

Hangzhou Bay New Zone Wetlands Management Center in Ningbo

Baifeng Cen Director

12/7/20154:00 PM–6:30 PM

Cixi City Bureau of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, landscape architecture division

Jianjie Hu Director Symposium

12/7/2015 4:00 PM–6:30 PM

HBNZA Finance Bureau Jianming Xie Deputy Director

Interviews with Locals

12/8/20159:00 AM–10:00 AM

Zhouxiang town Yougao Sang etc. Fisherman (representative of resettlement)

Face-to-face interview

12/8/2015 10:00 AM–11:00 AM

Andong town Chun Lu and three others

Fisherman (representative of resettlement)


16

References

Author not identified. 1998. “Zhejiang Department of Water Resources Records.” Zhonghua Book Company.

Cixi County. 1992. “The Office of Cixi Committee on Publishing and Compilations.” Zhejiang People’s Press.

Lin, Justin Yifu, Fang Cai, and Zhou Li. 2002. “The China Miracle: Development Strategy and Economic Reform.” Shanghai People’s Publisher.

World Bank 2009-2011. “World Bank-GEF Ningbo/Cixi Wetlands Management Center project presentation.” Ningbo: World Bank Office,.

World Bank. 2007 “World Bank – GEF Ningbo Water Environment project application report.” Ningbo: World Bank Office.

World Bank. 2012. China – GEF-Ningbo Water and Environment Project. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Wu, Ming Zhang. 2004. “The Current Situation of the Hangzhou Bay Wetlands and their Protection,” Forest Resources Management. Issue 6.

Xiaohu, Qi. “Interview notes from the Hangzhou Bay Wetlands Park.” June 20th, 2012

Zhang, Jun, Li’an Zhou eds. Growth from below: The Political Economy of China’s Growth. 2008. Shanghai: Shanghai People’s Publisher.

Zhejiang Science and Technology Publishing House. 1995. “Summary of Surveys and Research Records of Zhejiang Province Island Resources”


17

Ministry of Finance People’s Republic of China

The Ministry of Finance (MOF) of the Government of the People’s Republic of China is the national executive agency of the Central People’s Government, which administers macroeconomic policies and the national annual budget. It also handles fiscal policy, economic regulations, and government expenditure for the state. The ministry also records and publishes annual macroeconomic data on China’s economy. This includes information such as previous economic growth rates in China, central government debt and borrowing, and many other indicators regarding the Chinese economy.

© 2017 Ministry of Finance, China. All rights reserved. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of the Ministry of Finance, China. The Ministry of Finance, China, does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work.

K8262

transforming policy paradigms for · 2018-03-22 · damage caused by rapid urbanization and...

Documents