Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T21:28:38.847Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stabilizing Forests and Communities: Accommodative Buffering within China's Collective Forest Tenure Reform

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2018

John Aloysius Zinda  and
Zhiming Zhang
John Aloysius Zinda*
Affiliation:
Cornell University.
Zhiming Zhang
Affiliation:
Yunnan University.
*
Email: jaz65@cornell.edu (corresponding author).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

China's recent collective forest tenure reform is intended to clarify and certify forest rights, and thereby promote market circulation of forestland, encourage forestry production and safeguard conservation. Central policy statements prioritize parcelling tenure among households to promote efficient management. This study examines how participants experienced the programme in communities in north-west Yunnan. In the study area, rather than individualizing tenure, forestry agencies compelled communities to re-collectivize forests. Nonetheless, residents persist in using household forests despite restrictions. Local officials tacitly sanction these activities. In mountain hinterlands, forest tenure reform has been focused on “stabilizing” forests and communities. Rather than forcibly impose tenure designs, authorities perform what we call accommodative buffering. A set of formal institutions, rules and mappings enables projects like forest ecological compensation payments to go forward. However, state agents at local and higher levels tolerate informal practices that contain the trouble that poorly fitted formal institutions might cause. While potentially more resilient than by-the-book enforcement, these arrangements could leave residents vulnerable to political shifts that require a demonstration of policy adherence.

摘要

中国近几年实施的集体林权改革目的是理清森林所有权同时实行所有权的认证，并以此而推动林地的市场化流转，鼓励林业生产，并且促进森林保育。中央政策文件及发言重点强调要通过将林权分给农户来实现有效的森林管理。本调查分析了云南省西北部地区村民实行林权改革的经验。在调研的地区，当地林业部门没有把林权分到户，而是令村民小组进行林地的重新集体化。不过，社区的村民还继续按照从前的家庭分配模式使用森林。这些作法得到了当地官员的默认。在山区腹地，林权改革的重点在于维持森林及社区的稳定。当地政府部门不采取强制性的措施来推行某种林权模式，而应用我们所称的“容纳性缓冲”方法。依据一套正式的制度、规则、和制图方法来推进森林生态效益补偿等项目的开展， 同时，当地和上级政府机关容忍了一套非正式作法以缓解正式制度所可能带来的摩擦。这种作法，虽然比严格执行正式制度更具韧性，但是，如果出现政策变化，要求实践必须展示政策本意的时候，也有可能令村民陷入困境。

Keywords

forestsenvironmental policyrural governancelivelihoodsChinaland tenure森林环境政策农村治理生计方式中国土地所有权
Type
Research Article
Information
The China Quarterly , Volume 235 , September 2018 , pp. 828 - 848
Copyright
Copyright © SOAS University of London 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Banks, Tony. 2001. “Property rights and the environment in pastoral China: evidence from the field.” Development and Change 32, 717–740.Google Scholar
Bauer, Kenneth, and Nyima, Yonten. 2011. “Laws and regulations impacting the enclosure movement on the Tibetan Plateau of China.” Himalaya 30(1), 23–37.Google Scholar
CCP Central Committee and State Council. 2003. “Zhonggong zhongyang guowuyuan guanyu jiakuai linye fazhan de jueding” (Decisions of the CCP Central Committee and the State Council on accelerating forestry development), 25 June, http://www.forestry.gov.cn/Zhuanti/content_gzhy/267626.html. Accessed 12 April 2016.Google Scholar
CCP Central Committee and State Council. 2008. “Zhonggong zhongyang guowuyuan guanyu quanmian tuijin jiti linquan zhidu gaige de yijian” (Opinions of the CCP Central Committee and the State Council on comprehensively advancing reform of the collective forest tenure system), 8 June, http://www.gov.cn/jrzg/2008-07/14/content_1044403.htm. Accessed 9 May 2016.Google Scholar
CCP Central Committee and State Council. 2015. “Zhonggong zhongyang guowuyuan guanyu jiakuai tuijin shengtai wenming jianshe de yijian” (Opinions of the CCP Central Committee and the State Council on accelerating and promoting the construction of ecological civilization), 25 April, http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2015-05/06/nw.D110000renmrb_20150506_3-01.htm. Accessed 29 December 2016.Google Scholar
Chen, Jia-Ching, Zinda, John and Yeh, Emily T.. 2017. “Recasting the rural: state, society and environment in contemporary China.” Geoforum 78, 83–88.Google Scholar
Chen, Juan, and Innes, John L.. 2013. “The implications of new forest tenure reforms and forestry property markets for sustainable forest management and forest certification in China.” Journal of Environmental Management 129, 206–215.Google Scholar
Chuang, Julia. 2014. “China's rural land politics: bureaucratic absorption and the muting of rightful resistance.” The China Quarterly 219, 649–669.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Melvyn C., Childs, Geoff and Wangdui, Puchung. 2010. “Beijing's ‘people first’ development initiative for the Tibet Autonomous Region's rural sector: a case study from the Shigatse area.” The China Journal 63, 57–75.Google Scholar
Harkness, James. 1998. “Recent trends in forestry and conservation of biodiversity in China.” The China Quarterly, 156, 911–934.Google Scholar
Harrell, Stevan, Yang, Qingxia, Viraldo, Sara Jo, Hagmann, R. Keala, Hinckley, Thomas and Schmidt, Amanda H.. 2016. “Forest is forest and meadows are meadows: cultural landscapes and bureaucratic landscapes in Jiuzhaigou county, Sichuan.” Archiv Orientální 84(3), 595–623.Google Scholar
He, Jun. 2016. “Rights to benefit from forest? A case study of the timber harvest quota system in southwest China.” Society & Natural Resources 29(4), 448–461.Google Scholar
He, Jun, and Sikor, Thomas. 2017. “Looking beyond tenure in China's collective forest tenure reform: insights from Yunnan province, southwest China.” International Forestry Review 19(1), 29–41.Google Scholar
Ho, Peter. 2001. “Who owns China's land? Policies, property rights and deliberate institutional ambiguity.” The China Quarterly 166, 394–421.Google Scholar
Ho, Peter. 2006. “Credibility of institutions: forestry, social conflict and titling in China.” Land Use Policy 23(4), 588–603.Google Scholar
Jacka, Tamara, and Wu, Chengrui. 2016. “Village self-government and representation in southwest China.” Journal of Contemporary Asia 46(1), 71–94.Google Scholar
Jacoby, Karl. 2001. Crimes against Nature: Squatters, Poachers, Thieves, and the Hidden History of American Conservation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Lee, Ching Kwan. 2007. Against the Law: Labor Protests in China's Rustbelt and Sunbelt. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Lee, Ching Kwan, and Zhang, Yonghong. 2013. “The power of instability: unraveling the microfoundations of bargained authoritarianism in China.” American Journal of Sociology 118(6), 1475–1508.Google Scholar
Li, Ping, and Wang, Xiaobei. 2014. “Large-scale forestland acquisition in China: field findings and recommended improvements.” Paper presented at World Bank Conference on “Integrating Land Governance into the Post-2015 Agenda: Harnessing Synergies for Implementation and Monitoring Impact,” Washington, DC, 31 March–3 April 2015.Google Scholar
Liu, Pingyang, and Ravenscroft, Neil. 2016. “Collective action in China's recent collective forestry property rights reform.” Land Use Policy 59, 402–411.Google Scholar
Luo, Yaofeng, Liu, Jinlong, Zhang, Dahong and Dong, Jiayun. 2014. “Actor, customary regulation and case study of collective forest tenure reform intervention in China.” Small-Scale Forestry 14(2), 155–169.Google Scholar
Mathews, Andrew S. 2011. Instituting Nature: Authority, Expertise, and Power in Mexican Forests. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Merli, M. Giovanna, Qian, Zhenchao and Smith, Herbert L.. 2004. “Adaptation of a political bureaucracy to economic and institutional change under socialism: the Chinese state family planning system.” Politics & Society 32(2), 231–256.Google Scholar
Muradian, Roldan, Corbera, Esteve, Pascual, Unai, Kosoy, Nicolás and May, Peter H.. 2010. “Reconciling theory and practice: an alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services.” Ecological Economics 69(6), 1202–08.Google Scholar
O'Brien, Kevin, and Li, Lianjiang. 1999. “Selective policy implementation in rural China.” Comparative Politics 31(2), 167–186.Google Scholar
Peluso, Nancy Lee, and Vandergeest, Peter. 2001. “Genealogies of the political forest and customary rights in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand.” The Journal of Asian Studies 60(3), 761–812.Google Scholar
Provincial Government of Yunnan. 2012. “Yunnan sheng shengji gongyilin shengtai xiaoyi buchang zijin guanli banfa” (Yunnan province provincial-level management guidelines for ecological benefits compensation for public-benefit forest), 1 December, http://www.cxzly.gov.cn/newsco.asp?id=188&mnid=4995&classname=%C1%D6%D5%FE%B7%A8%B9%E6. Accessed 13 April 2016.Google Scholar
Ribot, Jesse C., and Peluso, Nancy Lee. 2003. “A theory of access.” Rural Sociology 68(2), 153–181.Google Scholar
Robbins, Alicia S.T., and Harrell, Stevan. 2014. “Paradoxes and challenges for China's forests in the reform era.” The China Quarterly 218, 381–403.Google Scholar
Siikamäki, Juha, Ji, Yonjie and Xu, Jintao. 2015. “Post-reform forestland markets in China.” Land Economics 91(2), 211–234.Google Scholar
Smith, Graeme. 2013. “Measurement, promotions and patterns of behavior in Chinese local government.” Journal of Peasant Studies 40(6), 1027–50.Google Scholar
State Council. 2010. “Quanguo zhuti gongneng qu guihua – goujian gaoxiao xietiao kechixu de guotu kongjian kaifa geju” (National outline for key ecological functional zones: constructing a high-efficiency, coordinated, sustainable spatial development pattern for our nation's lands), 21 December, http://www.gov.cn/zwgk/2011-06/08/content_1879180.htm. Accessed 25 April 2016.Google Scholar
State Council. 2013. “Guowuyuan guanyu shengtai buchang jizhi jianshe gongzuo qingkuang de baogao” (Report of the State Council regarding the situation of work on constructing ecological compensation mechanisms,” 24 April, http://zfs.mep.gov.cn/hjjj/gjfbdjjzcx/stbczc/201507/t20150715_306700.htm. Accessed 12 April 2016.Google Scholar
Su, Yufang, Zhao, Yaqiao, Gan, Tingyu, Xu, Wei and Ren, Xiaodong. 2008. “Collective forest tenure reform in southwest China.” The Rights and Resources Initiative, http://www.rightsandresources.org/publication_details.php?publicationID=698. Accessed 19 December 2013.Google Scholar
Urgenson, Lauren S., Hagmann, R. Keala, Henck, Amanda C., Harrell, Stevan, Hinckley, Thomas M., Shepler, Sara Jo, Grub, Barbara L. and Chi, Philip M.. 2010. “Social-ecological resilience of a Nuosu community-linked watershed, southwest Sichuan, China.” Ecology and Society 15(4), http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art2/.Google Scholar
Wang, Alex L. 2013. “The search for sustainable legitimacy: environmental law and bureaucracy in China.” Harvard Environmental Law Review 37, 365–440.Google Scholar
Whiting, Susan H. 2004. “The cadre evaluation system at the grassroots: the paradox of Party rule.” In Naughton, Barry and Yang, Dali (eds.), Holding China Together: Diversity and National Integration in the Post-Deng Era. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 101–119.Google Scholar
Xie, Yi, Gong, Peichen, Han, Xiao and Wen, Yali. 2014. “The effect of collective forestland tenure reform in China: does land parcelization reduce forest management intensity?” Journal of Forest Economics 20(2), 126–140.Google Scholar
Xu, Jintao, and Hyde, William F.. 2014. “Collective forest tenure reform in China: an overview.” In Bluffstone, Randall and Robinson, Elizabeth J.Z. (eds.), Forest Tenure Reform in Asia and Africa: Local Control for Improved Livelihoods, Forest Management, and Carbon Sequestration. New York: Routledge RFF Press, 28–55.Google Scholar
Xu, Jintao, and Jiang, Xuemei. 2009. “Collective forest tenure reform in China: outcomes and implications.” Paper presented at the World Bank Conference on “Land Governance in Support of the Millennium Development Goals: Responding to New Challenges,” Washington, DC, 9–10 March 2009.Google Scholar
Xu, Jintao, White, Andy and Lele, Uma. 2010. “China's forest tenure reforms: impacts and implications for choice, conservation, and climate change.” The Rights and Resources Initiative, http://beta.rightsandresources.org/publication_details.php?publicationID=1403. Accessed 15 March 2016.Google Scholar
Yeh, Emily T. 2000. “Forest claims, conflict and commodification: the political ecology of Tibetan mushroom-harvesting villages in Yunnan province.” The China Quarterly 161, 264–278.Google Scholar
Yin, Runsheng, Yao, Shunbo and Huo, Xuexi. 2013. “China's forest tenure reform and institutional change in the new century: what has been implemented and what remains to be pursued?” Land Use Policy 30(1), 825–833.Google Scholar
Yu, Lu, and Farrell, Katharine Nora. 2013. “Individualized pastureland use: responses of herders to institutional arrangements in pastoral China.” Human Ecology 41(5), 759–771.Google Scholar
Zhang, Qian Forrest, and Donaldson, John A.. 2013. “China's agrarian reform and the privatization of land: a contrarian view.” Journal of Contemporary China 22(80), 255–272.Google Scholar
Zhang, Qian Forrest, and Wu, Jianling. 2017. “Political dynamics in land commodification: commodifying rural land development rights in Chengdu, China.” Geoforum 78, 98–110.Google Scholar
Zhou, Xueguang. 2010. “The institutional logic of collusion among local governments in China.” Modern China 36(1), 47–78.Google Scholar
Zinda, John Aloysius, Trac, Christine J., Zhai, Deli and Harrell, Stevan. 2017. “Dual-function forests in the returning farmland to forest program and the flexibility of environmental policy in China.” Geoforum 78, 119–132.Google Scholar
Zinda, John, and Zhang, Zhiming. 2018. “Land tenure legacies, household life cycles, and livelihood strategies in upland China.” Rural Sociology 83, 51–80.Google Scholar