Exploring the Marine Ecological Environment Management in China: Evolution, Challenges and Prospects

Abstract

China’s management of marine ecological environments has experienced a development process that has gone from weak to strong. However, whether there are problems such as lack of systems, invalid systems, and system conflicts in the current management of marine ecological environments, and how to conduct collaborative governance among various complex subjects, remain to be answered. This paper first summarizes how China’s marine ecological environment management policy has evolved, which can be divided into five stages: the foundation stage (1949–1980), the initial establishment stage (1981–1995), the steady advancement stage (1996–2005), the deepening adjustment stage (2006–2010), and the strategic development stage (2011–present), and analyzes its characteristics at different stages. Then, this paper further explores the inherent dilemmas in the Chinese marine ecological environment management system. Finally, combined with the practical experience of marine ecological environment management in developed countries, this paper fully considers the division of responsibilities and mutual checks and balances of different subjects, flexibly configures various policy tools, and explores the mechanism of collaborative governance of marine ecological environment from the levels of government, market, the public and social organizations, so as to gradually improve the modern marine ecological environment management system and provide a reference for the government’s governance activities.

1. Introduction

The ocean is an important strategic location for high-quality economic development, as well as a new source of power for socio-economic transformation and upgrading and sustainable development under the new normal [1,2,3,4]. The essence of the marine economy is the further extension and expansion of land economy [5]. It is a comprehensive economic system and an integrated sea–land economic form, which gradually evolved with economic activities such as the utilization of marine resources, the development of marine industries, and the construction of marine economic zones [6]. Since the reform and opening up, with the rapid growth of the social economy, China’s marine industry has undergone fundamental changes and achieved leapfrog development [7,8]. The fact that the total amount of marine economy continues to rise, the proportion of gross ocean product (GOP) in the national economy continues to increase, and the marine economy has shown a strong momentum of rapid growth for many years demonstrates this outstanding performance [9,10,11]. Although during the “12th Five-Year Plan” period (2011–2015), faced with the downturn of the global economy and the pressure on the domestic economy, the growth rate of China’s marine economy gradually slowed down, it has maintained a good development trend slightly higher than the growth rate of the national economy in the same period [12,13]. The overall operation of the marine economy is steady and progressing, which has become a new engine and an important growth point for the stable development of China’s national economy [14,15]. With the continuous acceleration of marine development, the over-utilization of marine natural resources, marine environmental pollution, marine natural disasters and other problems have become increasingly serious [16,17,18]. Marine environmental protection is of great significance, which is a necessary measure to deepen the construction of ecological civilization, and is also the only way to build a community of marine destiny [19,20,21].

Environmental pollution is related to many factors, but in general, exceeding the marine environmental threshold caused by human over-exploitation is the fundamental cause of marine environmental damage [22]. On the surface, the marine environmental problem is engineering or technical problems, but in fact, it is a problem of management system [23,24]. Under different management systems, people’s behavior choices for development, utilization or protection of the marine environment are different. On the one hand, when people face different choices, they will compare their interests, so they always choose the opportunity that can bring them the most economic benefits. If the management system can bring greater benefits, people’s enthusiasm for participation will be improved. On the other hand, people’s responses are sometimes based on a collective unconscious “group agreement”, or on the basis of acquaintance, where society reluctantly follows because of “face”. If people are not aware of the benefits of environmental governance and only rely on the high pressure of the government to passively participate in environmental governance, once the government’s supervision is relaxed or ineffective, the effect of marine environmental governance will be greatly reduced. On the contrary, if people can realize the benefits of environmental governance and actively participate in environmental governance, supplemented by government policies, it will be easy to improve the governance effect. The occurrence of marine environmental damage behavior is the result of these subjects’ rational choices under a specific system [25]. Therefore, establishing a sound management system is the fundamental way to effectively protect the marine environment [26,27].

After years of construction and development, China’s marine ecological environment management system has experienced a development process that has gone from weak to strong. However, we should also be soberly aware that China’s marine ecological environment is still in its peak period of pollution emissions and environmental risks, the superposition period of ecosystem degradation and frequent disasters, and the existing foundation of governance effectiveness is not solid [28]. In particular, the ocean bears the dual pressures of land and ocean development, and finding the solution to marine environmental problems has a certain degree of lag and cannot be accomplished overnight [29]. With the new round of institutional reforms that began in 2018, the State Oceanic Administration, the competent authority for maritime affairs, had its management revoked, and the responsibility under the new institutional reform was readjusted, which brought new challenges to marine ecological environment management [30]. What kind of governance logic does marine ecological environment management under the new system follow, what are the drawbacks of the existing management system, how to deal with the challenges of marine ecological environment management under the new system, etc., require continuous consideration and research. In addition, in the process of marine ecological environment management, the government is no longer a unique governance institution [31]. In order to achieve the best efficiency of marine ecological environment management, it is necessary to establish a multiple co-governance system involving the government, the market, and the public [32]. Therefore, in the face of new situations and new tasks, marine ecological environment management should not only give full play to the leading role of the government, but also establish a new pattern of marine ecological environment governance with mutual coordination among governments, effective public participation, and in-depth assistance from social organizations.

Based on the historical practice of marine ecological environment management, this paper examines the evolution trajectory of China’s marine ecological environment management system from the time dimension and analyzes its characteristics at different stages. On the basis of summarizing the old and new changes in the marine ecological environment management system, this paper further explores the main problems and challenges existing in the current marine ecological environment management system. Finally, combined with the practical experience of marine ecological environment management in developed countries, this paper fully considers the division of responsibilities and mutual checks and balances of different subjects, flexibly configures various policy tools, constructs a marine ecological environment management framework from “fragmentation” to “integrity”, and attempts to propose the mechanism of collaborative governance of the marine ecological environment from the levels of government, market, the public and social organizations, so as to gradually improve the modern marine ecological environment management system and provide reference for the government’s governance activities.

2. Evolution of Marine Ecological Environment Management Policies in China

The effective supply of government policies directly affects the effect of marine ecological environment management [33]. Therefore, an in-depth study of China’s management of marine ecological environments should first grasp the overall situation of the policy system, clarify the historical context of policy evolution, and summarize the evolutionary laws and development trends of the policy system on the basis of descriptive research. Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China, marine ecological environment management policies in China have experienced a gradual development process, which can be roughly divided into five main phases (Figure 1).

2.1. The Foundation Stage (1949–1980)

From 1949 to the early 1960s, this was a period of national economic recovery and the country’s first to third five-year construction plans after the founding of the People’s Republic of China. During this period, there were only about 40 regulations on maritime treatment in China. Although these regulations were mostly administrative regulations, which did not belong to the laws formally formulated and promulgated by the national legislature, and the legislative level was relatively low, these regulations have promoted environmental protection from different aspects and laid a good foundation for marine ecological environment management in the future [34]. By the 1970s, offshore oil exploration had gradually developed, and environmental accidents such as ship collisions and oil spill pollution occurred frequently. In 1974, the state promulgated the “Interim Provisions of the People’s Republic of China on the Prevention of Pollution of Coastal Waters”, which was the first regulatory legal document on the prevention and control of marine environmental pollution in China. Subsequently, in 1980, five ministries and commissions carried out a comprehensive survey of coastal zone and tidal flat resources across the country, which opened the prelude to marine ecological environment management in China.

2.2. The Initial Establishment Stage (1981–1995)

In 1982, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress passed the “Marine Environmental Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China”, which was the first truly specialized marine environmental protection law in China. Its promulgation marks that marine environmental protection has entered the track of legalization and professionalization. Subsequently, relevant national ministries and commissions successively promulgated a series of laws and regulations as the support of the “Marine Environmental Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China”, such as the “Sea Water Quality Standard”, the “Ship Pollutant Discharge Standard”, etc.; these laws and regulations together constituted a standardized management system for marine environmental protection. In 1988, the “Decision on the Institutional Reform of the State Council” formally gave the State Oceanic Administration the functions of integrated marine management. In 1995, the central government clearly stated that the relevant marine ecological environment management of local offshore waters and nearby islands and coasts should be under the jurisdiction of the local government, further straightening out the relationship between the state and the local government in marine ecological environment management.

Overall, during this period, the rapid promotion of reform and opening-up policies and the development of maritime trade led to a significant acceleration in marine ecological environment management, which was not only reflected in the substantial increase in the number of laws and regulations on marine environmental protection, but also in the improvement of the legislative level [35]. Although the government’s mandatory administrative measures during this period played an important role in curbing the trend of China’s marine environmental pollution, the main policy measures for marine environmental protection and pollution control were supervision and fines, which reflected obvious characteristics of ex post control. At the same time, due to the excessive dependence of administrative means on the single leading role of the government, there were prominent problems such as insufficient social participation and excessive supervision costs [36].

2.3. The Steady Advancement Stage (1996–2005)

In 1996, the Chinese government formulated the overall action plan of “China Ocean Agenda 21”, which clarified the specific goals and action strategies of marine development in the new century. The white paper “The Development of China’s Marine Programs” released in 1998 further explained the main thought contents and action strategies of this agenda. In the same year, the State Council placed the State Oceanic Administration under the management of the Ministry of Land and Resources, clarified the basic responsibilities of the State Oceanic Administration, and promoted the transformation of the marine environmental management system to the comprehensive marine ecological environment management system. In 1999, the State Oceanic Administration established the Marine Supervision Corps, which exercised the power of marine supervision in accordance with the law and had the power to impose penalties on violations of laws and regulations, such as destroying the marine ecological environment. In 2001, the National People’s Congress passed the “Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Management of the Use of Sea Areas”, which formulated a number of important legal provisions such as the marine functional zoning system, the registration system for the use of sea areas, and the statistical system for the use of sea areas, marking the beginning of the legal standardized management of the use of sea areas.

In general, compared with the 1980s, marine environmental problems at this stage have undergone profound changes in terms of type, scale, structure, and nature. The major problems of the environment, disasters and resources coexist, overlap and influence each other, showing obvious systemic, regional, and complex characteristics, and making them more difficult to prevent and control [37]. The Chinese government attaches great importance to marine environmental protection, and has achieved certain results in local marine pollution control. Although the policy concept has gradually shifted from the government’s single subject supervision to the multi-subject coordinated governance, it has not got rid of the path of “pollution first, treatment later”, and the coastal marine ecological environment is still in continuous deterioration.

2.4. The Deepening Adjustment Stage (2006–2010)

With the gradual manifestation of the effect of policy implementation, more and more potential marine environmental problems have been exposed, and attracted the attention of the government as important policy issues. Therefore, during this period, the government mainly alleviated the contradiction between marine economic development and the ecological environment by constantly deepening and improving the policy system [34]. In this context, the central government included the ocean in the form of a special chapter for the first time in the “11th Five-Year Plan”. On this basis, maritime departments have added a large number of policy documents on marine environmental risk assessment and risk management, emergency management and emergency defense. In 2008, the State Council promulgated the “Outline of the National Marine Development Plan”, which clarified issues such as the sustainable utilization of marine resources, marine environmental protection, and overall coordination of the marine economy. This plan gave specific implementation measures and involved all aspects of marine sustainable development.

In general, through the introduction of a series of policies, the state has a high degree of sensitivity and awareness of environmental crisis events, and also established a corresponding emergency management system for the effective control of marine environmental emergencies. With the increase in public environmental resistance incidents caused by marine ship oil spills, and the continuous attention to the issue of marine environmental pollution harming people’s interests, the Chinese government has tried to establish a more flexible, diverse, and suitable marine eco-compensation system and environmental damage compensation system in addition to traditional administrative legal means such as control, approval, prohibition, and punishment.

2.5. The Strategic Development Stage (2011–Present)

With the promulgation of the “12th Five-Year Plan” and the establishment of a series of marine development strategies such as “Maritime power”, “The 21st century Maritime Silk Road”, “Sea and Land Coordination”, and “Integrated Marine Management”, China’s marine ecological environment management has officially entered the strategic development stage [36]. In 2018, the Third Plenary Session of the 19th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China passed the “Deepening the Reform of Party and State Institutions”. The original marine environmental protection function of the State Oceanic Administration was assigned to the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, and the marine resource management function was assigned to the Ministry of Natural Resources (Figure 2). In the same year, in accordance with the “Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on the Exercise of Maritime Rights Enforcement Powers by the China Coast Guard”, the China Coast Guard was transferred to the Chinese People’s Armed Police Force to perform the law enforcement task of marine environmental protection.

During this period, the marine ecological environment management policy system was more open. In response to new issues such as marine environmental risks, the Chinese government has encouraged management to pay more attention to predictability, targeting and foresight, instead of focusing on administrative coercive means such as approval, supervision and fines, and has paid more attention to comprehensive economic and legal means such as compensation, licensing, and taxation.

3. Realistic Dilemma of Marine Ecological Environment Management in China

Due to the long-term influence of the old system, the defects of the system have been affecting the improvement of the effectiveness of marine ecological environment management [38]. With the new round of institutional reforms that began in 2018, the State Oceanic Administration, the competent authority for maritime affairs, had its responsibilities revoked, and the responsibility under the new institutional reform was readjusted, which brought new challenges to marine ecological environment management in China.

3.1. “Single Center” Dilemma of Marine Ecological Environment Management Main Body

At the current stage, under the influence of traditional administrative management concepts, the main body of marine ecological environment management is the central government and local coastal governments. The central government formulates governance plans and issues them to local governments for implementation, and local governments convey and formulate corresponding detailed rules level by level. The operation of power is generally from top to bottom, along a one-way trajectory. The concept of coordinated management among multiple subjects of government, market and society has not been paid attention to, and the rights of other subjects to participate in marine ecological environment management, especially procedural rights such as the right to know, the right to participate in decision making and the right to judicial relief, have not been clarified. The existing legal provisions only express in principle, and lack the specific ways, forms, procedures and contents for other subjects to participate in marine ecological environment management.

In fact, on the one hand, marine ecological environment management needs a core and authoritative coordinator and organizer. A strong government is a reliable guarantee for the effective operation of marine ecological environment management. On the other hand, marine ecological environment management also needs an open market and society. Non-governmental governance bodies such as enterprises, social organizations and the public are the major grassroots actors in marine ecological environment management: (1) Compared with the public nature of government, enterprises have profitability characteristics. Due to the dual impact of the enterprise on the marine ecological environment, it determines the special position of the enterprise in marine ecological environment management. Without the participation of enterprises in marine ecological environment management, it will be impossible to achieve real results. (2) Various social organizations for environmental protection can not only establish a bridge between the government and social forces to reduce differences, friction and even conflict between the government and society, but also combine individual citizens into an organic whole by virtue of their grass-roots and organizational strengths, so that they can exercise effective supervision and control over the government and enterprises in a rational manner. (3) With the improvement of public awareness of environmental protection, the public’s demand for the environment is higher and higher. Public participation in ecological environment management is not only an important way for the government to make scientific decisions and build a transparent and service-oriented government, but also an effective means for the public to supervise environmental violations [39].

3.2. “Fragmentation” Dilemma of Marine Ecological Environment Management Authority

The “fragmentation” of marine ecological environment management authority mainly refers to the unclear definition of the administrative functions of the relevant departments in the vertical direction and the lack of coordination of management authority in the horizontal direction [40]. As far as the marine ecological environment is concerned, due to the fluidity of water bodies and relevance of marine environmental elements, many problems involved in marine pollution require the interaction and resolution of multiple layers of government and multiple departments. Among them, there are management conflicts between upper and lower levels of government, and interest conflicts among parallel administrative jurisdictions.

Vertically, marine ecological environment management requires the interconnection and cooperation of multiple departments such as economic management, environmental protection, arbitration and adjudication. Since 2018, the Ministry of Natural Resources has been reorganized. The Department of Marine Early Warning and Monitoring, the Department of Marine Strategic Planning and Economics, and the Department of Seas and Islands Management have retained some of the functions of marine pollution control, and the Ministry of Ecology and Environment is in charge of marine pollution prevention and control. From the expression of the division of functions, there are still overlapping and unspecific functions [41]. At present, marine ecological environment management authority is still divided by multiple management departments, and the coordination of interests is in a state of “fragmented” authority. Although the comprehensive functions of the marine system have been strengthened in recent years, it seems that unified law enforcement is on the surface, but it is difficult to implement substantive integration, and there are still multiple governance issues.

Horizontally, the phenomenon of “fragmentation” is manifested in the contradiction between cross-domain linkage and territorial management. As the core subject of marine environmental pollution control, how the relationship among local governments affects the effect of marine environmental pollution control to a great extent is important. On the one hand, marine environmental pollution is complex, difficult to manage and technically demanding, and it is difficult for a single local government to undertake all the governance activities. Especially when facing major marine environmental emergencies, it is difficult for a single local government to solve them in a timely and effective manner. On the other hand, due to the mobility and diffusion of marine environmental pollution, it will inevitably affect the marine environment of adjacent administrative regions. The current Marine Environmental Protection Law encourages coastal provinces and cities to establish regional cooperation organizations for marine environmental protection, which are mainly responsible for the implementation of environmental protection plans for key sea areas, marine environmental pollution prevention, and other specific tasks. However, China’s control of marine pollution has implemented a territorial responsibility system, and the management department is more complicated. Local governments at all levels along the coast can temporarily cooperate with each other to jointly control pollution after the outbreak of marine environmental pollution incidents. However, due to the lack of a long-term mechanism for joint prevention and governance, this short-term cooperation cannot effectively break through the territorial management limits, and cooperative governance of the marine ecological environment is unsustainable.

3.3. “Opportunism” Dilemma of Marine Ecological Environment Management Behavior

At present, China’s governance system for the utilization of marine resources, the prevention and control of marine environmental pollution and the protection of marine environment is mainly based on administrative region management. Since the reform and opening up, the state has continuously tried to decentralize and authorize powers in the division of functions between the central and local maritime governance institutions. The “strange circle” of reform has frequently appeared, with decentralization of responsibilities and upward shifting of power. The lack of unity of duties, powers, responsibilities and benefits weakens the enthusiasm and initiative of local governments in marine ecological environment management. In addition, under the management system based on administrative divisions, coastal local governments at all levels, which have the attribute of “rational economic man”, are still stuck in the objective function of economic development-oriented local performance enhancement, and lack of motivation for marine environmental protection, so marine ecological environment management has always been in a secondary position [42]. This kind of interest is reflected in the fact that China’s current assessment of local governments is still based on the completion of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and related economic indicators as the main content. If the emission standards are strictly enforced, it will not only require huge investment in facilities and costs, but also affect the business activities of marine pollution enterprises, and ultimately affect the performance evaluation of local coastal governments. Therefore, even if some pollutant companies cause pollution to the coastal marine environment, some governments often do not act, and even form a “mutual assistance” relationship with pollutant companies in order to pursue high taxes. In a nutshell, coastal local governments take local economic development as their axis, and it is difficult to achieve a balance between marine environmental protection and local economic development. Under the current system, local coastal governments are both “managers” and “destroyers” of the marine ecological environment, and local marine ecological environment management departments are mostly regulated by local governments, and their authority is limited, so they cannot effectively restrict the “destruction” of the government.

4. Design of Marine Ecological Environment Management Mechanism in China

After years of construction and development, China’s marine ecological environment management system has experienced a development process that has gone from weak to strong. However, we should also be soberly aware that China’s marine ecological environment is still in the peak period of pollution emissions and environmental risks, the superposition period of ecosystem degradation and frequent disasters, and the existing foundation of governance effectiveness is not solid. In particular, the ocean bears the dual pressures of land and ocean development, and finding the solution to marine ecological environment problems has a certain degree of lag, and it cannot be accomplished overnight. Therefore, marine ecological environment management work should carry on the past and move forward. Combined with the practical experience of marine ecological environment management in developed countries, this paper fully considers the division of responsibilities and mutual checks and balances of different subjects, flexibly configures various policy tools, constructs a marine ecological environment management framework from “fragmentation” to “integrity”, and attempts to propose the mechanism of collaborative governance of marine ecological environment from the levels of government, market, the public and social organizations [43], so as to gradually improve the modern marine ecological environment management system and provide reference for the government’s governance activities (Figure 3).

4.1. Establish the Market Subject Governance Mechanism

(1) Build the market-oriented operation mechanism with emission trading as the core.

As shown in Figure 4, the operational framework of emission rights trading includes the primary market and secondary market. The primary market refers to the allocation of emission rights from the central government to local governments, while the secondary market refers to the allocation of emission rights to industrial enterprises and residents by local governments as well as the trading of emission rights in the market. Specifically, in the first step, the central government assesses the current carrying capacity and damage status of China’s marine environment, and uses corresponding technical means to determine the total amount of pollutant emissions permitted nationwide. Then, the central government determines local pollution emission quotas based on the total amount of national pollution emissions and the allocation ratio of different regions. The second step of emission rights trading is to carry out the initial allocation of emission rights and form the emission rights trading market. After obtaining the corresponding emission rights in different regions, the internal allocation of the regions is carried out, and the objects of the allocation are industrial enterprises and residents. The proportion of industrial enterprises and residents’ emissions can be determined by local governments based on local development. At the same time, the allocation of industrial enterprises and residents’ emission rights should be distinguished. The allocation of industrial enterprises’ emission rights can adopt market-oriented means such as auctions and listings, while the allocation of residents’ emission rights can adopt an equalized method. After the initial allocation is completed, both the emission rights of industrial enterprises and residents can circulate freely in the market, and the flow of emission rights can be adjusted through price signals.

(2) Construct the marine eco-compensation model oriented by ecological remediation.

This paper builds the eco-compensation model oriented towards ecological remediation (Figure 5). Firstly, the marine eco-compensation fund is established with the initial investment from national or local finance, and a marine eco-compensation fund management agency is established to accept the supervision of the marine management department. Secondly, according to marine planning and local development needs, relevant departments select suitable areas and invest in marine eco-compensation funds to carry out ecological remediation and environmental protection. On this basis, the marine eco-compensation fund management agency measures the marine ecological loss of sea-using activities for the sea-using unit, proposes the eco-compensation quota, and informs the sea-using unit to pay the compensation fund in time. If sea-using units think that the eco-compensation quota value is too high, they can put forward their opinions on the amount of marine eco-compensation to be paid, communicate with the marine management department, and adjust the compensation amount appropriately after expert argumentation. Finally, sea-using units pay eco-compensation funds, which are used to offset the corresponding “marine eco-compensation quota”.

4.2. Establish the Government Subject Governance Mechanism

(1) Build the intergovernmental cooperation platform for regional ecological environment governance.

The horizontal division of administrative divisions has resulted in the fragmentation of the marine ecological environment management system. Local governments use their respective administrative divisions as barriers to promote local protectionism. One way to break the horizontal division of administrative divisions is to strengthen the horizontal connection among local governments by establishing the intergovernmental cooperation platform for regional marine ecological environment governance, and use platform integration to solve the fragmentation problem of regional ecological environment governance. The marine environmental protection departments and other relevant departments of various river basins and coastal local governments have selected personnel to jointly establish a regional ecological governance committee, share ecological environment governance information, and establish a matrix management model of regional coordination, departmental cooperation, and industry follow-up. If the regional ecological governance committee produces an intergovernmental ecological environment dispute that cannot be handled, it shall be handed over to the superior or the central government for adjudication. Under the organization of the regional ecological governance committee, the local governments in the region strengthen the construction of cross-administrative environmental protection projects, deal with cross-domain ecological environment damage, coordinate the implementation of the regional ecological environment governance joint plan, and make concerted efforts to protect and manage the ecological environment.

(2) Establish the reward and punishment mechanism linked to the performance assessment of green GDP.

Under the official promotion assessment system with GDP as the core, local governments mainly focus on economic growth and neglect the provision of public products such as the marine ecological environment. Therefore, it is necessary to change the assessment content of local officials’ promotion, transform the one-dimensional assessment centered on economic growth into the green GDP assessment with equal emphasis on economic growth and environmental protection, and reshape the incentive mechanism of local officials. It is worth noting that inland areas are also a major source of marine pollution. Therefore, the green GDP assessment needs to cover all administrative regions. The Organization Department of the Central Committee is responsible for assessing the performance of local officials, and divides the assessment targets into inland areas and coastal areas for separate assessments. The assessment content of the inland areas includes the maintenance of the emission rights trading market and the management of the total emission quota. Besides these contents, the assessment content of the coastal areas also needs to include the management of coastal development activities. Local governments and officials who actively promote the construction of marine ecological civilization will be rewarded in a timely manner, while local governments and officials who have failed to promote the construction of marine ecological civilization will be punished according to the severity of the situation. Even officials who have left office and retired should be strictly investigated for their responsibilities, so as to effectively change the one-sided view of performance development and firmly establish the view of performance development with ecological priority.

4.3. Establish the Social Subject Governance Mechanism

(1) Broaden the channels for public participation in marine ecological environment management.

The public goods attributes of the ecological environment and the existence of governance externalities make it easy for both market regulation and government control to fail in the real ecological environment governance situation, and public participation in ecological environment governance can effectively compensate for the market and government’s insufficiency, and promote the collaborative governance of ecological environment in the region. The operation of the people’s wisdom extraction system begins with the government’s request for public advice on the difficult problems encountered in the formulation of the marine ecological environment management plan. The problems raised by the government are processed technically through a third-party network platform, and specific problems are split, refined, and expressed in a popular manner, and then these problems are pushed to the cyberspace in the form of outsourcing. Netizens who have ideas about how to solve related problems can design their own plans after receiving the package. In this process, the network platform can provide professional background knowledge to those netizens who are interested in “contributing” to the government, and accept questions from netizens to help them give full play to their talents and improve the professionalism of the proposals. In response to the proposals submitted by the netizens, the platform first conducts a simple screening process to eliminate emotional extreme planning and decision-making schemes that are technically impossible to implement. In addition, it is necessary to carefully make explanatory responses to the eliminated proposals, so as to avoid frustrating the enthusiasm of relevant netizens who participated in the decision making of marine ecological environment management. The proposals that successfully pass the screening need to be classified, sorted, and published on the network in a timely manner. After the specified time arrives, the platform organizes selection activities for planning proposals. After that, a tripartite evaluation system can be considered, that is, the government makes evaluations from a practical business perspective, experts and scholars in relevant fields provide evaluations from a professional perspective, and netizens openly discuss and vote for evaluations through a third-sector network platform. Finally, the platform sums up the evaluation by weighing, and selects the best proposal.

(2) Vigorously support the development of marine environmental protection NGOs.

It is precisely because of the multifaceted functions of social organizations for environmental protection in ecological environment governance that they should become an indispensable and important actor in the process of marine ecological environment management and play a “lubricant” role. To this end, the first is to improve the laws, regulations and policies for the management of NGOs. At present, most of the laws on NGOs are administrative regulations, which cannot protect the rights and interests of NGOs in marine ecological environment management activities. The second is to improve the undertaking mechanism of NGOs. The government should build the mechanism for NGOs’ participation, actively incorporate NGOs in the system of marine management, measure the actual situation of NGOs and marine administrative organizations from the perspective of efficiency and fairness, and give priority to NGOs with excellent qualifications to achieve the “optimal choice”. The third is to implement relevant safeguarding policies for NGOs. In order to ensure the source of funds for the operation of NGOs, marine administrative organizations can establish special funds to purchase public services from NGOs. At the national level, the government paves the way for the development of NGOs by improving the dual registration system, thus increasing the motivation of NGOs to participate in marine ecological environment management.