1. The Factual Record
Terms of Reference & Rules of Procedure
At its inaugural meeting, the Council unanimously adopted clear and uncomplicated Terms of Reference and internationally-accepted Rules of Procedure. These have proven to be entirely suitable for the needs of the Council and have not been challenged or modified in any way.
The Council also adopted the policy of preparing an early Summary Report of Council discussions for the information of its members and a later publication of Proceedings of China Council meetings in both the English and Chinese languages. T he latter have become an invaluable public record of the meetings and of all relevant papers examined by the Council.
Meetings of Bureau
The Bureau consists of the Chairman and the three Vice-Chairs of the Council. It has functioned as the executive or steering committee of the Council. It has consulted whenever necessary either in face-to-face meetings in Beijing or by tele-conference or by correspondence, with the assistance of the Secretariat. This flexible procedure has enabled it to deal efficiently with Council business in the interim between Council meetings.
Membership of Council
Council Members on the Chinese side are of Ministerial or Vice-Ministerial rank or are eminent experts; the international members are of comparable stature. International members participate as experts in their personal capacities at the invitation of the Chinese Government. The Chinese members come from ministries and Agencies directly concerned with the central issues of economic development and the environment. Many Chinese members are from the Environmental Protection Commission under the State Council. This has facilitated coordination of domestic and international issues.
At the inaugural meeting in 1992, the Council consisted of 22 international members (with 4 of them unable to attend) and 24 Chinese members. In the intervening year, some members had to drop out, one died and some new members were added. B y the time of the1994 meeting, the total numbers had changed slightly to 22 international members and 28 Chinese members. However, there was considerable continuity with 17 of the international members remaining on the Council. In the case o f the Chinese members, 17 individuals changed but the organizations they represented remained the same (and 4 new ones ware added). There has been little change since then, except for the introduction of two new international members in 199 5 and another two this year.
Meetings of Council
After some discussion about the optimum periodicity for meetings, it was decided that the Council should meet annually in order to sustain the interest of members and in order to introduce regularity in reporting to and by the Council. The Venue has been three times in Beijing, once in Hangzhou and once in Shanghai. The formal meetings normally last three days with some informal meetings scheduled on the day prior to the official opening. In 1995, the Council experimented with a shorter two-day session.
At each session, some Special Guests and observers have been invited by the Bureau. These were chosen because of their knowledge of or interest in the work of the Council. Some have been Chinese and some international. In addition, a few persons accompanying the Members have been invited to the meeting but the practice ha s been to limit the numbers in order to preserve the sense of collegiality which comes from a small group of peers meeting together.
The agenda of the meetings has featured some recurring items and some special topics. The standard substantive items have been:
Report by the Secretary-General on the Work of the Council;
Reports by Expert Working Groups;
Reports on China's Agenda 21;
Reports on China's Implementation of the Environmental Conventions; and Adoption of Council Recommendations to the Chinese Government.
Normally, there have also been statements by Members of the Bureau and Special Guests, administrative items and some special topics selected in advance, such a s:
Investment and Development of Environmental Protection in China; Analysis of Losses Caused by Environmental Pollution in China;
Strategic Alternatives for Coordinated Development of Energy & Environment in China;
Hainan International Advisory Board on Environment & Development; Research on Integration of Economic Planning & Environmental Conservation in China;
Costs of Water Pollution to the Chinese Economy;
Control of Desertification;
Impact of Environmentally-Related Health Costs on the Chinese Economy;
Policy Instruments & Measures for Environmental Protection under the Market Economy;
Role of Business in Environmental Protection;
Public Participation;
Clean Pulp and Paper Technology;
Modernization of Meteorology & its Contribution to Sustainable Development;
Public Education in China Relating to Environment & Development.
Formation of Working Groups
A critical decision at the first Council session was to establish expert Working Groups, which would be jointly chaired and staffed by the Chinese and international sides. The Council agreed on which Groups to establish, on an outline of their Terms of Reference and on the requirement that each Group make an annual report to the Council. However, it was left to the Secretariat and the Canadian Support Office to recruit the Group Co-Chairs and to work with the latter to finalize the Terms of Reference, the Work Plans, the expert member-ship and the logistics of arranging meetings and workshops.
Initially the Council established the following Groups and asked them to prepare final reports by 1996:
Energy Strategies and Technologies;
Pollution Control;
Monitoring and Data Collection;
Scientific Research, Technological Development and Training;
Resource Accounting, Environmental Economics and Pricing Policies;
Protection of Biodiversity.
Subsequently, there was discussion at several Council meetings about the desirability of adding new Working Groups but no consensus could be reached except to start a Group on Trade and Sustainable Development in 1995. There was also agreement that Transportation and Sustainable Development was an important topic for the Council but no consensus could be reached among Members on how to organize and finance such an expert Working Group and therefore, as a partial response, some existing Groups were asked to add aspects of this subject to their Terms of Reference.
In all cases, the Working Groups have been led by Chinese and international Co-C hairs and assisted by approximately five experts from each side, although additional experts are occasionally invited to attend special meetings or workshops. All of the experts are fully employed at their own institutions but have rearranged their heavy schedules in order to do part-time work for the Council.
Activities of Working Groups
The normal pattern has been for each Working Group to hold two meetings annually (mostly in China) and to prepare an interim report for each annual Meeting of the Council. Normally, the reports and recommendations have been presented in person to the Council by the Co-Chairs. All Working Groups have drawn up a multi-year work program which will culminate in a final report to the Council but they also have undertaken a series of useful workshops, seminars and short-term training courses to enhance dialogue between Chinese and international experts in their field.
Council Members have discussed how to avoid duplication and overlap among these Working Groups and how to enhance the flow of information and the discussion of cross-cutting themes among them. To this end, the Council has established an informal Committee on Working Group Coordination which meets just prior to each Council Meeting and brings together all interested Council Members and Working Group Co-Chairs. It facilitates dialogue and the flow of information about work plans. Because the Chair of this Coordination Group, Madame Julia Marton-Lefèvre, is presenting a separate paper on this subject, it is not necessary to give further details here.
Secretariat and Support Office
The National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA) was designated as the responsible Chinese organization for CCICED. It established a small Secretariat in Beijing to support the operations of the Council. Reflecting the importance attached to the Council by the Chinese Government, it has asked the NEPA Administrator, Mr.Xie Zhenhua himself, to be Secretary-General of the CCICED Secretariat. Assisted by his staff, he has prepared an annual report for each Council meeting on Secretariat operations.
The Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), which has been the principal financial supporter of the Council, has established a small Canadian Support Office at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver to manage contributions to CCICED form CIDA and another international agency which cares to use its services. The Support Office has worked closely with the NEPA Secretariat and with the international members of the Council and the Expert Working Groups to support their activities and has become a virtual international branch of the Secretariat.
The two offices have collaborated with the International Institute for Sustainable Development in Winnipeg, Canada to prepare an Information Brochure about the China Council and a Quarterly Newsletter on Council activities and relevant environmental news from China. This is circulated to all Members, experts and friends of the Council. In future, the English edition of the Newsletter will be supplemented by a Chinese edition.
Recommendations to State Council of China
A critical element of each annual Meeting has been the presentation of the Council's recommendations directly to one of China's Senior Leaders. In its first four meetings, the Council met once with President Jiang Zemin, twice with Premier Li Peng, and once with Mr. Li Ruihuan, Chairman of the National People's Consultative Conference. These high level audiences have been regarded by the Members as a high honor, a challenge to prepare a succinct, coherent and relevant set of proposals for direct presentation to the State Council and a unique opportunity to hear an initial response from the Leader. The knowledge that each Council session will culminate in a High-Level presentation has had the benefit of concentrating the minds of Members on producing a few priority recommendations and on making their work seem immediately relevant.
Response of Chinese Government
In keeping with the emphasis on direct rapport between the Council and the Chine se Government, the latter has prepared annual reports on the ways in which it has followed up on previous Council recommendations. These detailed reports have reflected the seriousness with which the Chinese Authorities have studied the Council recommendations and discussions and attempted to implement them to the extent that local conditions allow. They have been presented orally and in writing at t he beginning of each Council session.
Financial Support
The Council decided early to use the calendar year as its fiscal year and the US $ as its unit of account for the sake of convenience. Financial limitations have circumscribed the amount of activity which The Council could contemplate. The council started slowly with only $ 700,000 being spent in 1992 but gradually increased its annual expenditure to approximately $ 1,500,000 annually as the Working Groups became more active. It appears as if the cumulative total for the five year Council program will approximate $ 6,550,000. The Main costs have been as follows:
Working Groups $ 2,900,000
Council Meetings $ 1,700,000
Secretariats $ 1.700,000
Consultants etc. $ 250,000
The main contributions during the period 1992-96 have been approximately: Canada = $ 3,400,000; China = $ 915,000; Japan = $ 650,000; Germany = $ 470,000; Netherlands = $ 390,000; UK = $ 375,000; Norway = $150,000; Rockefeller Foundation = $ 133,000; Ford Foundation = $ 125,000; Shell Companies = $ 27,000. These figure s relate to cash disbursements and do not include many of the services in kind donated by Chinese and international experts and institutions. The European Union has also offered to contribute to a Working Group but it seems unlikely that any disbursements will occur until Phase II.
2. Assessment
While the foregoing factual record has tried to be as neutral and objective as possible, an assessment is bound to be more subjective. In weighing the achievements and shortcomings of Phase I of the CCICED, the author speaks for no-one but himself. He is obviously influenced by his close working relations with CIDA and NEPA but does not purport to comment on their behalf.
Unique Experiment
The first point to make about the Council is its unique and bold nature. Nowhere else in the world has a major power established a multi-year, high-level, international Council with a broad mandate "to further strengthen cooperation and exchange between[itself] and the international community in the field of environment and development". That China would invite a heterogeneous and outspoken group of foreign experts to comment critically on sensitive policy issues reflects well on China's maturity and self-confidence and its determination and aspiration to achieve sustainable development. Both the concept and the execution of this bold experiment are a tribute to the foresight and boldness of its founding fathers, both Chinese and foreign.
Three features of the original concept have proven vital to its success. First, that its mandate includes both environment and development. Five years ago when the Council was founded it was not axiomatic to consider the two subjects together. However, the dual objective has proven vital to ensuring the broad national policy thrust that was required if the Council was to avoid becoming simply a narrow environmental lobby. Second, the Council has become a true Sino-International joint venture in all aspects. The Bureau, Council, Expert Working Groups and Secretariats have become permeated with the concept that ideas and tasks are shared equally among Chinese and international members acting as partners in a common endeavor. Lastly, the custom of calling on a Senior leader has given prestige to the exercise and has helped keep it focused on reaching agreement annually on a select list of relevant issues to present to the Chinese Government.
Council Membership
How effective and how relevant has been the choice of Council Members in achieving Council objectives?
The first point to note is that the Chinese and international sides are chosen on a different basis. Most Chinese Members are chosen because of the position they hold in there relevant Ministry or other Chinese agency or academic institution and not on a personal basis. If the individual is moved to another Ministry, his successor replaces him at the China Council. Thus, many of the Chinese Ministries which have membership on the Environmental Protection Commission under the State Council are represented on the CCICED at the Ministerial or Vice Ministerial level. This seems very appropriate in the Chinese context and virtually guarantees the relevance of the Chinese membership to the aims of the Council.
The international members are chosen as individuals. In theory, they speak on a personal basis and not officially on behalf of their government, corporation or institution. They also come from many different countries. One might have expected that this would lead to some unevenness and imbalance in Council discourse but, in practice, it has not seemed to hamper the flow of useful dialogue among members.
However, there is an imbalance in functional representation with most international members coming from a background in government or international institutions and only a few from business. The absence of diversified business representation from different industries and countries has sometimes been a handicap to Council discussion on the role of business in environmental protection. This a matter which the Council might usefully correct in future, as the Chinese economy moves toward a greater reliance on the market system and international investment.
During the first two Council meetings there was a minor problem because most Chinese Members said little and merely listened while the international members did most of the talking. This puzzled the foreigners who thought that the Chinese side was disinterested and did not realize that their hosts were only observing traditional Chinese politeness in listening attentively to their visitors. Since that misunderstanding was cleared up, the Chinese side has been much more active in discussions.
Form most perspectives, the membership has been well chosen in terms of balance and expertise and the Members have inter-acted well with each other. They have even begun to develop a sense of collegiality. The Council might contemplate some minor membership modifications in future but basically it would be well advised to retain the current successful formula.
Working Groups
A distinguishing feature of the Council has been the establishment of a series of expert Working Groups. The latter have three distinctive features: they are jointly Chaired and jointly staffed on a basis of complete equality between the Chinese and international sides; they are charged with producing for each annual Council meeting interim reports on their work and draft recommendations for the Council to consider forwarding to the Chinese Government; and they have multi-year terms of reference and work plans. The first two features - joint staffing and annual reporting - have been critical to success and should definitely be continued. Multi-year work plans also make sense but there has been a tendency to make them automatically 5-year plans. In the light of this experience, he Council may wish to consider asking future Working Groups to begin with 3-year plans and only expand them to 5 year at the express request of the Council.
Impact of Recommendations
The main outputs of the Council are policy recommendations and analysis; CCICED is not a fund-raising organization. Therefore, it seems fair to analyze the benefits mainly on the basis of the efficacy of these recommendations in terms of effecting policy change in China, educating decision-makers and making the world community aware of China's serious efforts to achieve sustainable development.
If certain environmental experts were completely frank with us, they would probably admit they had hoped that some Council recommendations would have been less broad and more pragmatic, precise and tangible. Nor have Council recommendations always seemed very novel to them as compared to the prevailing wisdom expressed at the many international environmental meetings held over the past few years.
At the senior level of the Chinese bureaucracy, however, one might get a more positive assessment. There, the Council recommendations have been deemed important and useful for the following reasons;
(1) They were presented direct not Chinese leaders who have great power and influence. The fact that these Chinese leaders were exposed to these ideas form a mixed Chinese-international group of eminent experts is likely to make these leader s more knowledgeable and sympathetic whenever environment and development matter s come before them in future.
(2) They were backed by senior high-level experience from many countries. In Chinese culture (unlike the current Western obsession with youth), years of knowledge accumulated by people of mature years who hold or have held positions of authority and been tested by years of experience are considered to be important and relevant attributes which give weight and prestige to the views expressed;
(3) Most recommendations were supported by impressive study and field research carried out by the expert Working Groups. On close examination, it becomes clear that Council recommendations are backed by practical international experiences which have been examined for their relevance to China by Chinese experts.
(4) The fact that Council recommendations are often similar to those received from other national and international bodies is not a bad thing because this avoid s giving confusing signals to decision-makers and serves to reinforce the views from other eminent sources. The Council has aimed to give the best international advice on what policies are appropriate for China, regardless of whether they a re currently fashionable or not.
At the end of Phase I, the official Chinese comment about the output of the Council has been that it has provided a good and useful example of international cooperation in environment and development but should try to become more practical in future and include a wider use of demonstration projects.
Chinese Government Response
The most encouraging aspect of the Council has been the detailed and positive way in which the Government of China has responded to all of the Council recommendations made in the previous year. The Chinese authorities prepare a written annual report in which they recount how each recommendation was studied and what steps were taken to implemented it. May concrete illustrations are then given of how the Council proposals are being put into practice. On the other hand, the Chine se authorities are the first to admit that they continue to face a daunting task in fully implementing all the Council recommendations and in meeting China's own objective of achieving sustainable development.
Supplementing these direct responses to specific recommendations are the other annual reports to the Council on how China is following the spirit of the Council' s aims and objectives by implementing its Agenda 21 program and observing the various international environmental conventions.
Financial Support
International support for the Council has been a modest success. The Council has succeeded in attracting enough financial support to enable it to carry out a minimum program over a five-year period. Moreover, the support has been sufficiently widespread that the Council could function as a multilateral operation. Fortunately too, the Council has received many donations in terms of free services from many individuals and institutions which enabled it to provide outstanding intellectual input. The example was given by the Council Members themselves, to Council business. It has not been possible to estimate the monetary value of these services from both the Chinese and international sides but they have been greatly appreciated.
Nevertheless, despite these contributions, it is clear that the Council has been constrained in its output by its modest budget and the lack of significant multi-year pledges (except in the case of China and Canada). In an era of international financial restraint, it is unrealistic to expect large increases from existing supporters in Phase II but it is hoped that some of them will be able to make at least indicative multi-year allocations to facilitate long-term planning. Lastly, it is hoped that some new donors will join the Council in future.
In Summary
In summary, the Council can be judged a reasonable success from most perspective s but it probably needs to make some adjustments as it contemplates another term of five years. In the light of experience in Phase I, the Council might be advised to retain the present Terms of Reference, organizational framework, Modus operandi and cooperative spirit but to make its advice more practical and seek additional financial resources.