China’s Forest History

In the Beginning

Hunting rightsPeasantsFarmers

Until… The Chinese government

stepped in!!!

China’s Government Debacle

Republic of China after the Qing DynastyStruggle= direct influence on environmentOnce Republic was established quick to notice necessitiesSide effect of necessities= so long trees

China’s Government Debacle continued…

National Forest Law of 1914New! Nationalist government= bye bye forest law until 1984New government attempts at reviving forestation efforts…

Yunnan Province

Before China’s government stepped in Yunnan was bush and grasslandsGreat Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution; both examplesNo restriction or protection + political confusion= forests uprooted

1980’s in China

National Forest Law revisited and government attempted to save forestsThese “landscapes” were in abundanceToo bad for timber productionAs a result plantation landscapes reserved for farmers= commercial purposes

Bibliography Heilig, Gerhard K. "China Timeline." China Profile. 2007. Viewed on 3 Apr. 2007 <http://www.china-profile.com/history/hist_list_1.htm>.Zhang, Peichang. “China’s Forest Policy for the 21st Century.” Science AAS 23 June 2003. Viewed on 3 Apr. 2007.

What’s Happening Now?

The Natural Forest Protection Program

and The Sloping Land Conversion

Program

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

http://english.gov.cn/2006-02/08/content_182514.htm

The Chinese Government’s Presentation

Recent History

1997 - Drought resulted in Yellow River drying up for 267 days1998 -Yangtze River floods killing 3,000 people

12 Billion Dollars of damage results

These crises are seen as resulting from massive erosion and deforestation

Natural Forest Protection Program (NFPP)

Program to reduce/ban logging

Also sponsors afforestation

Program plans to forest 8 million hectares - between 2 and 3 million have been planted so far.Government pays for local government losses from logging revenue

NFPP Progress

NFPP has led to 20 million ha reduction in production (out of 56 million)2 - 3 million ha have been planted: variance in dataBut paper products imports increased by 35% by 2002.

Sloping Land Conversion Program (SLCP)

Conservation of land on slopes at or above 25º Poverty Reduction Measures

Monetary compensationGrain Equivalent compensationSeed supplies and training

Effects of SLCP

Pilot phase: 1998 - 2002, then full implementationGoal: 14.67 million ha converted by 2010, of which 4.4 million are above 25ºAs of 2004 7.2 million converted15 million farmers participating

Chart of Areas Converted

% of type of land area converted All Plots 21.4% - 59.4% Slope > 25º 34% - 73% Low Productivity 20% - 81.8% Medium Productivity 43.4% - 67.2% High Productivity 27.6% - 61.5% Slope 15º - 25º 13.6% - 49.8% Low Productivity 12.7 - 70.8% Medium Productivity 21.8 - 67.1% High Productivity 8% - 11% Slope < 15º 12.1 - 28% Low Productivity 5.6% - 27.2% Medium Productivity 7.1% - 68.5% High Productivity 3.8% - 7.7%

Problems of Implementation

Subsidy payments: problems of equityEfficiency: conversion of some high-yield land, not converting some sloping low-yield landCommitment and expertise of regional governments

Trends in the Future

http://www.kylereed.com/Pictures/China/YunnanBeauty/BeautifulViewInYunnanChina.jpg

Governmental Influences

Multilevel political systemGood environmental laws, poor environmental performanceKey officials as administrators and entrepreneursImplementing the SLCP to make money

Ignoring what the program is meant to do

Corruption

An indicator of a lack of accountability on the part of local government officials to both their rural citizens and to central government departmentsDifficult to detect

Officials adapt to concealing evidence to meet quotas

Corruption Cont’d

In one study, evidence found that reduction and even cancellation of grain and cash subsidies for SLCP taking placeNo record of where the money was goingAuthenticity questioned

Over reporting values to meet quotas

Obstacles

Poor program budgetingLocal governments bear the burden of program coordination and compensationCentral government allocates funds for SLCP implementation

Insufficient

No benefits in the short term for farmersDo not always receive earnings

In Comparison

National Forest Protection ProgramContributed more than the SLCPProtects forests in areas with vulnerable ecosystemsComplicated, but establishes economic growth

New employment opportunities created

In Comparison Cont’d

SLCP does not establish commercial forest on a large scale, like the NFPPNFPP

Departments at various levels of the government and communities have responsibilities to implementation processOrganized and funding monitored

Achievements

Since the SLCP’s start in 2000, 7.2 million hectares have been converted as of 2004

Indicates almost half the program’s goal met in 4 yearsMost of the expansion in the past 2 years

Problems

These numbers reveal weaknesses in design and implementationProgram is too complex, long term, and entangled in competing economic interests to be effective

Misrepresentation and Survival

Forests aren’t just trees anymoreEcological forestsEconomical forests

Lack of diversityPossibility of disease wiping out everything

Low survival rate of forests planted under the SLCP

Changes to be Made

Plant a variety of trees and orchardsFollow up on afforested areasCommunity involvement

Wrap-up

Not all changes can be made by 2010 when the program terminatesCorruption, funding, payment of subsidies, and diversity too difficult to change in the next 3 yearsMuch of the work will be undone in the future