4. Politicized reefs
4.3. The growth of the environmental consciousness
In this section, the paper will analyse the development of the Taiwanese awareness of the environment on the backdrop of political transformations. The Taiwanese government has historically been a laggard in formulating environmental policies due to conflicting interests between economic growth and environmental protection. Thus, much of the island’s environmental protection progress has been instigated at the grassroots level. As this paper will show, the national government’s efforts in environmental protection were a direct response to the management of potential future conflicts instigated by the activities of the 1980s. However, much effort is needed in automating protection practices and making the process more efficient through its institutions.
The process of political liberalization and democratization in Taiwan is still a relatively new development. In 1949, Chiang Kai-shek retreated with the KMT party to Taiwan, an event that would alter the political structure of the island henceforth. The political realm was transformed into a corporatist state patterned after the Leninist communist system, with the party, government, and military in close alliance and penetrating systematically into every stratum of society.170 However, the KMT’s initial approach of seeing Taiwan as a stepping stone before returning to control the mainland was challenged by the PRC’s own consolidation of power. The 1960s thus saw the ruling elite re-examine its tactic, with economic development regarded both as a new domestic approach for long-term survivability as well as a political game plan strategically implemented to integrate the PRC into their political orbit. This way, the KMT could continue supporting military build-up whilst at the same time enhancing their legitimacy in the eyes of the citizens.
However, extensive environmental degradation due to rapid industrialization coupled with political suppression under the martial law period (1949 – 1987) has garnered grass root discontent. The imposition of the ‘three controls’ – martial law, single party system, and suppression of the media171 – had supressed channels to express dissatisfaction and the national government’s ability to identify social outbreaks. Environmental awareness and subsequent protest movements did not garner
170 Michael Ying-Mao Kau, 2016, Taiwan: Beyond the Economic Miracle, London: Routledge, p. 288.
171 Ibid.
much attention until the 1980s, when (i) the visibility and scale of environmental degradation had become difficult to ignore and (ii) more opportunities to travel abroad arose for leisure and study purposes.172 This combination of various factors led to the development of an environmental consciousness first among a certain elite of experts and scholars and then the general populace. Demonstrations at the local level emerged against polluting industries such as petrochemical factories and garbage dumps.
However, as under martial law such public displays of discontent were technically illegal, protesters were thus involved in small scale activities that rarely targeted the central government directly.173 Another characteristic of these protests was that they fit under the ‘not in my backyard’ (NIMBY) category, with the majority of grievances resolved through payment of compensation to be distributed by local politicians.174
Overall, while the KMT was occupied with directing the national economy around growth-oriented policies, environmental regulations were severely lacking. The picture of the 1980s was thus of a nation both hailed as an economic miracle as well as one that is being driven towards an environmental crisis: negligence of environmental considerations, a growing population, already restricted natural resources and physical space, increasing consumer consumption and demand, deteriorating water and air quality, acid rain, improper solid waste treatment, deforestation, soil erosion, noise pollution, destruction of wildlife and vegetation, as well as nuclear power plant discharge and waste.175 Therefore, whilst some enjoyed the benefits of rapid industrialization, others would organize sporadic protests against polluters. One case that stands out prominently is the Lukang anti-Dupont movement of 1986, marking a watershed moment in Taiwan’s history of environmental conflict.
Lukang, originally a seaport in the 18th century, is a commercial city in northwestern Changhua County. In March 1986, local residents organized to oppose DuPont’s plan to set up a titanium dioxide plant in their community176 in spite of the project being supported by the central government. Lukang residents’ fear over toxic
172 Simona A. Grano, 2015, Environmental Governance in Taiwan: A New Generation of Activists and Stakeholders, London: Routledge, p. 42.
173 Ching-Ping Tang and Shui-Yan Tang, 1997, ‘Democratization and environmental politics in Taiwan,’ Asian Survey 37:3, 1 March 1997, p. 284.
174 Dafydd Fell, 2012, Government and Politics in Taiwan, London: Routledge, p. 185.
175 Steve Hess, 2013, Authoritarian Landscapes, New York: Springer US, p. 66.
176 Ming-Sho Ho, 2013, ‘Lukang anti-DuPont movement (Taiwan),’ The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements, eds. David A. Snow et al., USA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., p. 1.
hazards spurred them to stage a series of protest both locally and in the capital – an unprecedented move considering the prohibition of mass gatherings under martial law.
The demonstrations ended without the use of force as DuPont voluntarily withdrew its construction plan, delaying it for two years before settling in northern Taiwan instead.177, 178 This incident, coupled with the lifting of martial law a year later, is generally regarded amongst scholars as a turning point of social activism and commencement of Taiwan’s environmentalism. Since then, environmental protests surged in both scope and scale as confidence in mass mobilization rose.
The 1980s did not just witness environmental protection activism, but social movements that called for women, aboriginal, and labour rights appeared as well. This decade is called a historical turning point and a time of transformative justice.179 The emergence of a plethora of new actors “challenged the long-standing authoritarian rule of the government and facilitated the creation of a public sphere;”180 this, coupled with the policy of indigenization and subsequent shift in ethnic balance were among some of the factors that slowly eroded the monopolistic traditional command of the KMT.
Furthermore, political changes such as the establishment of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), the emergence of political entrepreneurs, and the newly liberalized media all helped to fuel environmental interests in their respective ways.181
Significantly, the anti-DuPont incident served as a ‘wake-up call’ to the KMT government that there is a lack of proper institutional channels through which conflict may be resolved, especially when the interests of the local communities and the government collide.182 In response to the protest and to deescalate future conflict, the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) was formed in August 1987 and given cabinet-level status. At the time, some environmental activists perceived the EPA as a distraction and a public relations front that had no real agency. Indeed, although scholars were commissioned to write environmental impact assessments, there is evidence of reports being buried, such as the 1999 Meinung Dam survey report that was
177 Ibid.
178 Tang 1997:284.
179 Appendix 3 (Interview with CIP).
180 Grano 2015:42.
181 Helmut Weidner et al., 2002, Capacity Building in National Environmental Policy, Germany:
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, p. 383.
182 Tang 1997:288.
ignored despite discovering fault lines on the proposed site.183 Nevertheless, the EPA remains a significant executive agency responsible for environmental protection and conservation, and each city and county government contains an Environmental Protection Bureau to enhance departmental work and outreach.184
The prioritization of economic growth has for decades been on the national agenda of the Taiwanese government. Another case of this is visible in the KMT’s dependence on nuclear power to sustain industrialization with a large amount of cheap energy. Nuclear power generation was not only regarded as an indispensable source that fuelled high economic growth, but was also viewed as a matter of national sovereignty.185 Such measures to achieve self-sustainability were not extended to the environmental sphere. Decision making at the time of martial law under the authoritarian KMT rule was made by elite government officials at the expense of public opinion and technocratic knowledge. Consequently, such a regime facilitated the construction of nuclear power plants without prior discussion or attempt to search for consent among citizens.186 By 1985, the state-owned electric utility Taipower Company had already finished building three NPPs.
Nevertheless, it was the academics that pioneered and first raised concerns about the social and environmental costs vis-à-vis the use of nuclear power. The year 1979 marks the first nuclear debate in Taiwan between a university professor, Edgar Lin, and a nuclear engineer of Taipower Company over concerns for ecology, safety, and the problem of nuclear waste disposal.187 The years 1979-1986 show a proliferation of debate on nuclear energy, with an estimated 197 articles with anti-nuclear themes published by scholars and experts alike. However, due to domestic censorship, these writings were carefully framed as professional in nature and tended to avoid political innuendos or criticism. Instead, the political aspect of anti-nuclear writings were raised by the tangwai, the ‘nonpartisans,’ who made up the main opposition bloc against the
183 Linda Gail Arrigo and Gaia Puleston, 2006, ‘The Environmental Movement in Taiwan after 2000:
Advances and Dilemmas,’ What has changed? Taiwan Before and After the Change in Ruling Parties, eds. Dafydd Fell et al., Germany: Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, p. 167.
184 Environmental Protection Administration, Executive Yuan. Accessed 22 May 2017.
http://web.epa.gov.tw/en/
185 Grano 2015:60.
186 Jack Williams and Chang-yi David Chang, 2008, Taiwan’s Environmental Struggle, New York:
Routledge, p. 72.
187 Ming-Sho Ho, 2003, ‘The Politics of Anti-Nuclear Protest in Taiwan: A Case of Party-Dependent Movement (1980–2000)’ in Modern Asian Studies 37:3, p. 689.
KMT before they formed they formed the DPP in 1986.188 Finally, despite the sensitive political situation, a few KMT politicians were likewise sceptical about nuclear energy and raised their opposition against the construction of the fourth NPP.189 Then, the lifting of martial law created numerous previously-repressed outlets to vent discontent, simultaneously elevating public awareness on environmental issues.
There are two key elements that can be drawn from the growth of Taiwan’s environmental consciousness. Firstly, although the link between political and environmental issues is not unusual and often overlaps, Taiwan’s case shows that there exists a so-called ‘legacy of the one-party state’ within the current political structure that penetrates various strata of society.190 , 191 This is visible in the controversy concerning the fourth NPP, which is an apt example of “the degree of continuity characterizing numerous issues in the environmental sphere, in spite of changes taking place at the political level.”192 Since its inception, the fourth NPP has been nearly cancelled twice; scandals due to legal violations arose as people involved in its construction had been accused of corruption, document forgery, and fraud, and sent to prison (including death sentences for some);193 a long list of structural and operational problems have been discovered, including worries about seismic activities, as well as the plant’s location in close proximity of over 50 schools and within radius of approximately 70 underwater volcanoes, with 11 still active.194 Finally, chaos surrounding attempts to hold a national referendum that could at last settle the plant’s fate further damaged the parties’ political credibility (KMT, DPP) and deepened the social-political chasm. The unrelenting controversy over this NPP illustrates how old vested interests and traditional power structures continue to drive strategic decisions, even at the expense of social trust and environmental deterioration. The link between
188 Ibid, p. 690.
189 Ibid, p. 691-2.
190 Mikael Mattlin, 2011, Politicized Society: The Long Shadow of Taiwan’s One-party Legacy, USA:
NIAS Press, p. 237.
191 Fell 2012:27.
192 Grano 2015:66.
193 ‘Prosecutor seeks jail terms for 15 in nuclear plant scam,’ The China Post, 14 January 2003.
Accessed 24 May 2017 http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/detail.asp?ID=34079&GRP=B
194 Vincent Y. Chao, 2011, ‘JAPAN DISASTER: Underwater volcanoes pose risk to plant, activists say,’ Taipei Times, 15 March 2011. Accessed 24 May 2017.
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2011/03/15/2003498234
politics and environmental issues is especially apparent when the latter interacts and interferes with the former.
From this emerges the second point, that is, the management of environmental issues is the management of conflicts. Efforts in environmental conservation inevitably require coordination from various stakeholders across multiple sectors. This coordination is best achieved if the right incentives and values for each stakeholder are aligned in mutually supportive and beneficial ways.195 Tang and Tang’s study on the Twin Lake conservation case is a prime example of managing incentive dynamics and creating synergy between public, private, and non-profit actors for the purpose of ecological collaboration. Twin Lake is a small lake located in the mountainous region of north-eastern Taiwan. The ecosystem is of unique ecological value: (i) it serves as a relay station for migrating birds; (ii) it acts as a habitat for many rare species of aquatic plants and endangered animals; and (iii) it contains a distinctive floating island that is regarded as an uncommon ecological feature due to its formation from the clustering of plants and human materials.196
Despite its value, the lake’s existence was threatened by conflicting interests among private land owners, farmers, the government, and environmentalists. Briefly explained, the government and environmentalists sought to ensure the owner respected environmental laws and to preserve natural species, respectively, whilst the owner argued against the two actors’ interference in privately owned land. The farmers were likewise apprehensive of the possibility of having their lands taken away through eminent domain and with just minimal compensation, and opposed the government’s intrusion into their livelihoods. The environmentalists’ push to establish a wildlife refuge was deemed too financially and politically challenging, so the government proposed to turn the territory into a ‘protected area’ as an alternative. This in turn drew disapproval from the farmers, who believed such a system would severely limit their right to use the land, subsequently siding with the lake owner – a result which backfired for the government, who had hoped to isolate the latter from negotiations. The government then altered its policy and excluded private lands from the protected area, while environmentalists engaged with the farmers and helped them develop cash crops (such as cultivating the aquatic plant Brasenia), thus deepening their involvement in
195 Tang 2014:220.
196 Ibid, p. 223.
protecting the indigenous ecosystem. Finally, the lake and the surrounding wetlands were purchased by the government, the lake owner monetarily compensated, and the environmentalists involved in local ecological projects.197 In the end, collaborative governance was successfully achieved only after the employment of different incentives and adjustment of policies.
The Twin Lake case proves that collaborative governance requires intricate partnership; satisfying stakeholders’ interests, finding a compromise between short- and long-term gains, and limiting the free-rider problem involve extensive experimentation and flexibility on the part of certain actors. In fact, part of the Twin Lake’s success was the ability of the government to revise its policies and shift its approach. This ability and timing of governmental authorities to redraw or amend existing regulations or to introduce new ones are not widespread and conventional, and are subject to such factors as the trend of populist sentiment, local election cycles, material costs, scale of policy revision, and so on.198 Moreover, changes within public policy may backfire, damaging the government’s credibility among stakeholders and creating disincentives for future policy adjustments. Overall, a keen understanding of incentive dynamics is crucial if integrated management and cross-sectoral collaboration are to be accomplished.
In conclusion, the role of the Taiwanese government in environmental politics is a relatively new one. Traditionally, the economy-oriented KMT tended to side with business stakeholders in environmental disputes. Widespread dissatisfaction with the environment began to emerge in the early 1980s when martial law was still in effect.
As such, the movement was localized and did not directly target the ruling KMT government. The anti-DuPont demonstration in 1986 and the lifting of martial law the following year engendered a platform for the populace to more freely vocalize concerns over environmental issues. Simultaneously, this transition required the implementation of proper institution channels through which to legally resolve environmental disputes.
To this end, the newly-elevated EPA was granted additional resources and authority and commenced the drafting of more detailed environmental regulations and ordinances.
Beyond localized efforts, nationwide, membership-based environmental organizations
197 Ibid, p. 225.
198 Francisco G. Delfin, Jr., 2014, ‘Shaping Incentives Toward Effective Collaboration: Lessons for Conservation Practice,’ Public Administration Review 74:2, p. 232.
further played key roles in fuelling protests and garnering the attention of the liberalized mass media to issues such as wildlife conservation and anti-nuclear power demonstrations.
Nevertheless, cases such as the Twin Lake scenario illustrate how difficult it is to attain a win-win solution for all contending parties. The case demonstrates the need for the government to properly assess the incentive dynamics in place and be able to adapt to given situations, for there rarely exists a one-for-all conflict resolution.
Protection of the environment and common-pool resources brings about its own set of challenges, as short-term economic motives clash with long-term conservation incentives. To avoid Hardin’s tragedy of the commons, governmental intervention in and management of public goods has been a common trend among nations worldwide.
However, the implementation of new laws and policies does not translate into their success or proper enforcement. The political will of the government is most effective when there are institutional capacities to oversee and automate processes such as environmental protection. However, the authoritarian regime of the KMT still casts a shadow over the nation’s civil society and institutions, a challenge to the democratization process that will be expanded upon in the following section. Overall, the government remains an important stakeholder in environmental disputes and its efficiency is heavily aligned with strong institutions.