UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal

Over the last two decades, China has undergone an extraordinary transformation in environmental law and governance that remains insufficiently understood in the outside world. In April 2024, the UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal and the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the
Environment at UCLA School of Law held a symposium on China & the Environment – Taking Stock of Domestic and Global Developments in Law & Governance. Leading Chinese environmental law scholars, Chinese civil society actors, and international scholars gathered to shed light on cutting edge developments.2 As part of the symposium, UCLA Law also organized a public talk on Chinese Environmental Civil Society to explore the continuing role of environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in Chinese environmental protection.

This article outlines the three stages of the development of China’s environmental law. It emphasizes the current stage, which is characterized by the holistic perspective rooted in traditional Chinese philosophy and integrated with the theory of sustainable development. It examines the evolution of China’s environmental legislation, administration, and judiciary within this framework. This article argues that China’s environmental legislation has transitioned from fragmentation to systematization; administrative enforcement departments have optimized functions through institutional and mechanism reforms; and the specialization of the environmental judiciary and the application of environmental restorative justice principles in the adjudication of environmental cases have effectively improved both the efficiency and quality of case judgments.

As China continues to enhance its ecological civilization, emerging ecosystem laws have arisen. This paper aims to explore the characteristics of China’s emerging ecosystem laws as well as their practical application and challenges. The research focuses on two main backgrounds of these laws - the ecological civilization ideology that led to their emergence, and their legislative phases. This study primarily revolves around the legal characteristics and implementation challenges of the emerging ecosystem laws, recognizing the considerable innovation in legislating for large-scale ecosystems in China. The main challenge lies in the need for novel administrative and judicial coordination mechanisms across administrative regions and the detailed implementation of specific rules and regulations. By comparing these ecosystem laws to the legislation and governance of five representative large river basins in the United States, the research concludes that China’s emerging ecosystem laws are not fundamentally different from the watershed management laws and governance in the US. However, there is innovation in laws regarding other ecosystem types, such as the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. The key focus should be on coordinating current cross-administrative regional governance and judicial collaboration and innovating large-scale environmental regulatory measures to enhance the effectiveness of such laws in China.

Despite significant efforts towards decarbonization, China’s progress in climate legislation has been relatively slow. This paper explores China’s current climate laws and the institutional approach behind the legislating efforts, identifying a central challenge: the lack of coordination among laws enacted at different times with varied focuses. It argues that a dedicated climate law could enhance accountability for climate goals and address the gaps in climate litigation. The paper also reviews China’s lawmaking institutions, discussing the roles and interactions of key players in shaping climate governance. Additionally, it compares legislative models from other countries, proposing components that could be adapted for China. The paper concludes with recommendations for a comprehensive climate legislation framework in China.

China’s coal sector is the largest contributor to the country’s greenhouse gas emissions and a major cause of air pollution, which claims over 1 million lives annually.  Long-term climate commitments include a target to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060, which entails between a 60–90 percent reduction in coal use by mid-century. Of the many challenges associated with this transition, addressing the dislocation of coal and fossil fuel workers is perhaps the most challenging. While there are recognized efforts to achieve a “just transition” that works for fossil communities and workers, practices to date in China do not fully prioritize these groups.

The closest analogue to what will need to be achieved is the supplyside restructuring of mostly state-owned coal and other heavy industries concentrated in 2016–2018 and continuing to this day. The coal sector has shed over 2 million jobs since its recent peak of 2013—and, in contrast to earlier state-owned enterprise (SOE) reforms, did not result in widespread social unrest. Lessons were learned from earlier periods, and the increased institutionalization of labor contract law is a possible argument for the relatively smoother workforce reduction mandated by overcapacity reduction. In this brief commentary, we explore the workforce reduction strategies during this period and the legal basis for various practices adopted by SOEs.

The article critically examines the role of environmental law in China’s state-capitalist system from a structural Marxist perspective. The author argues that the Chinese environmental regulatory regime, often perceived as arbitrary and chaotic, is not a mere byproduct of a developing legal system but a deliberate strategy to legitimize state authority and control. Through case studies on integrated water resources management and the prevention of husbandry waste pollution, the article illustrates how environmental laws serve as both Repressive State Apparatuses (RSA) and Ideological State Apparatuses (ISA), enforcing social control and shaping public consciousness. The state’s top-down enforcement methods, reliance on technocratic solutions, and manipulation of legal and moral ideologies are shown to maintain and obscure the relations of production, reinforcing the state capitalist model of accumulation. The article also explores how China’s cultural products like the film, The Wandering Earth, normalize authoritarian state authority in global environmental governance. The analysis concludes that to fully understand China’s environmental governance, one must view it through the lens of state-capitalist accumulation, recognizing the role of environmental law in maintaining authoritarian state-society relations and shaping the broader political-economic landscape.

This article starts by overviewing China’s implementation and enforcement framework for the Montreal Protocol. It then examines the incident of the unexpected CFC-11 emissions, including the discovery of illegal production, the ensuing debate at the Montreal Protocol, and China’s domestic and international responses. The next section traces subsequent reforms at the Montreal Protocol and China’s involvement in emerging unexpected emissions. The concluding section evaluates China’s efforts in enforcement capacity building and ongoing challenges it faces.

While Chinese environmental NGOs have made progress in internationalization, they also face various challenges. China’s increasingly important role in global production, consumption, trade, and investment underscores the importance of its NGOs in global environmental governance and sustainable development. Moreover, there is a growing demand from both domestic and international stakeholders for Chinese NGOs to engage in global dialogue and foster collaborative efforts. 

As a China-based non-governmental and non-profit environmental organization focusing on environmental and developmental issues, the Global Environmental Institute (GEI) has prioritized promoting harmonious development of investment, trade, and environment since its inception. Since 2007, GEI has conducted research, implemented demonstration projects, advocated for the Chinese government to formulate policies on overseas investment, enhanced environmental governance capacity in host countries, and provided recommendations for the environmental and social work of Chinese investment enterprises abroad. However, the journey has been marked by challenges including a lack of supportive policy framework, limited funding channels, and a shortage of institutional capacity and professionals.

In response, this article proposes suggestions such as reformulating an overall strategy, planning, and incentive policy, encouraging multiple sources of funding, and developing an international environmental volunteer action plan. By addressing these challenges and promoting cooperation, Chinese environmental NGOs can play an even greater role in global environmental governance and contribute to global sustainable development.

This short paper analyzes China’s new green energy cooperation. Its main aim is to describe the scope, characteristics, and key themes of energy cooperation programming. To do so, I draw upon a systematic review of China’s energy cooperation activities in Global South countries (building upon work in Harlan and Lu, 2022) and participant observation in three cooperation programs – two in 2023, and one in 2018. The findings reveal a diverse set of motivations of Chinese actors and organizations that are delivering cooperation activities, but also a shared focus on promoting China’s technocratic expertise and innovation in green energy. I then argue that, rather than view China’s energy cooperation efforts as “greenwashing,” a more effective response is to see them as openings for engagement and collaboration in advancing Global South sustainability transitions.

Although once seen as irrelevant to environmental protection, financial regulation has become a critical component of global climate change responses, as recognized by the Paris Agreement. In addition, climate change and related environmental risks, such as threats to biodiversity and natural resources, are now recognized as potentially financially material to companies, investors, and entire economies, as well as to sustainable development. For these reasons, China has joined the many other governments and international organizations worldwide who are actively engaged in promoting regulatory reforms and voluntary initiatives to advance a green finance transition.