Study on the Mechanism of Multi-Scalar Transboundary Water Security Governance in the Shenzhen River

Abstract

This paper examines the evolution and mechanism of multi-scalar transboundary water governance in the Shenzhen River, flowing through Shenzhen and Hong Kong since the 1980s. The research identifies three phases of governance: negotiation, consultation, and cooperation. It highlights the roles of the Shenzhen government as initiator, the Hong Kong government as collaborator, and the central government of China as participant and coordinator. The analysis indicates that severe flooding events, economic growth, and central government support are key consensus drivers. The research fills a gap in the understanding of transboundary governance, providing insights for improved cooperation and regional development between Shenzhen and Hong Kong.

1. Introduction

In the context of globalization, the impact of environmental issues has transcended the boundaries of a single city and is gradually spreading to a wider area, exhibiting transboundary characteristics that affect multiple regions and even continents, thereby necessitating collaborative efforts and international strategies to address the interconnected challenges of pollution, climate change, and biodiversity loss [1]. For transboundary regions, the challenges of achieving their environmental governance goals are becoming increasingly arduous. These environmental issues, such as air and water problems, not only span different political jurisdictions but also tend to trigger various contradictions and conflicts during the governance process [2,3]. As a result, public and academic attention has increasingly focused on the unique environmental problems and governance hurdles faced by transboundary regions. Effectively and efficiently addressing the environmental challenges of transboundary regions and achieving the goals of environmental governance has become an urgent and complex task.

In recent years, transboundary environmental governance has emerged as a significant area of global research interest [4]. The intricate superposition of geographical, administrative, natural, institutional, economic, technological, and socio-cultural elements renders the research and practice of transboundary environmental governance a complex undertaking [3,5,6]. The existing research results primarily focus on the roles and functions of governments and non-governmental entities in the environmental governance process, as well as their respective governance paths. However, research on transboundary environmental governance between regions (cities) with different political systems within the same country, especially long-term continuous tracking studies, is clearly not sufficient. Additionally, there is a paucity of research on in-depth analysis and mechanism exploration of transboundary regional environmental governance from a cross-scale perspective. There is still a lack of comprehensive and profound understanding of the interrelationships, coordination, and interactions between various participants at different scales, as well as the underlying reasons for how they achieve environmental governance goals through governance cooperation.

This paper contributes to the literature by integrating the dynamic process, mechanism, and formation reasons of the transboundary water security governance of the Shenzhen River. The Shenzhen River is selected, which traverses Shenzhen in mainland China and Hong Kong, as the subject of investigation. It is situated within the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area, a region that has gained international recognition for its distinctive transboundary characteristics. Before their return to China, Hong Kong and Macao had international relations with mainland China, and the Shenzhen River served as a transnational boundary. Following their return, they were established as special administrative regions, and the Shenzhen River became a domestic sub-region within the country. Yet, it is the variance in political, economic, and social conditions under the “one country, two systems” framework that renders the collaboration between Guangdong, Hong Kong, and Macao more intricate in comparison to other regions, whether they are transnational or within the boundaries of a single nation [7,8,9].

This study aims to understand the mechanism of multi-scalar transboundary water security governance in the Shenzhen River by answering the following questions: (1) Who are the key stakeholders that have been instrumental in the water security governance of the Shenzhen River, and what distinctive role dynamics have they established? (2) What are the pivotal factors that have fostered the evolution of transboundary water security governance efforts between Shenzhen and Hong Kong regarding the Shenzhen River? By examining the dynamic processes and the underlying reasons for the emergence of transboundary environmental governance cooperation in the Shenzhen River, this paper contributes to providing a theoretical exploration based on typical cases for transboundary environmental governance between different institutional regions (cities) within a country. Moreover, this study has important implications for future environmental collaborative governance between Shenzhen and Hong Kong.

The structure of this paper is as follows: Section 2 provides an overview of the literature review and outlines the analytical framework employed. Section 3 details the study area and the methodology that have been adopted for this research. The subsequent two sections delve into an examination of the process and underlying factors contributing to the governance of transboundary water security in the Shenzhen River. Before concluding, we discuss the potential contributions to previous studies and provide some policy implications. Finally, the paper concludes with a summary of the study’s main findings and articulates the future research.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Actors of Transboundary Water Governance

Water resources management is a critical component of global sustainable development. Target 6.5 of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) underscores this significance: “By 2030, implement integrated water-resources management at all levels, including through transboundary cooperation as appropriate [10]”. This target emphasizes the vital role of water governance in the context of international boundaries. Consequently, under this background, the field of transboundary water governance, such as flood governance, water demand management, and water-saving management, has garnered considerable attention from the academic community. The extant literature predominantly concentrates on two key domains: transnational regions and sub-regions within countries. These studies have typically included the Rhine River Basin [11], the Danube River Basin [12], the Baltic Sea [13], the Mekong River Basin [14,15], the Amazon River [16], the Yellow River [17], the Pearl River in China [18], and others. The research examines two types of environmental governance models: those led by supranational entities and those led by local actors. The first category of research primarily examines the pivotal role played by supranational institutions established through the transfer of national power in addressing transnational regional environmental changes. For instance, the economic and other cooperative affairs led by the European Union have established the foundation for transboundary environmental governance cooperation among member countries. Furthermore, the institutionalization of environmental protection has promoted the coordination of environmental standards and awareness among countries, enhancing the binding force of environmental governance in transnational regions such as the Rhine, Danube, and Baltic Sea within the EU [19,20,21]. Research on the Southeast Asian region has revealed that the intergovernmental Mekong River Commission, established by Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam, plays a dominant role in the governance of hydropower in the Mekong River Basin [15]. Conversely, the lack of intergovernmental river basin organizations has constrained the hydropower development and ecological protection of the Salween River Basin by China, Myanmar, and Thailand [22]. The second category of research primarily concerns the role of local actors in addressing regional environmental issues through transboundary cooperation. With regard to transnational water governance and climate change response in the Canada–US transnational region, the downward transfer of national power has been shown to effectively improve the communication efficiency of environmental cooperation at the provincial/state level [23,24]. Inter-provincial/city government cooperation is a crucial component of environmental governance, essential for addressing the growing imbalance between water supply and demand within the Yellow River Basin [17]. Case studies from the Pearl River basins have demonstrated that effective collaboration among various administrative and economic sectors has successfully resolved challenges related to water management [18]. The efficient division of labor and collaborative efforts among governments at various levels in Jiangxi and Guangdong provinces have significantly contributed to the development, allocation, and conservation of water resources within the Dongjiang River Basin. This synergy has been further bolstered by the engagement of local public and environmental organizations, particularly in the wake of the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China [25].

This research focused on two types of cases: transnational and subnational regions. As a result, the findings are not straightforward and have overlooked the key roles of national governments and the initiatives of local actors, including local governments and non-governmental entities, which are often guided and influenced by national government policies, in transboundary water governance.

2.2. Formation Reasons of Transboundary Environmental Governance

The development of transboundary environmental governance cooperation is a multifaceted and nuanced process, influenced by a confluence of political, economic, environmental, and other determinants. Scholars have delved into this complex issue, uncovering a range of factors that influence the formation of such cooperation in various regions. Research indicates that state intervention and strong leadership are essential conditions for the formation of joint environmental governance among nine Chinese city clusters [26,27]. Studies of Northeast and Southeast Asia have identified environmental vulnerability and the complexity of environmental issues as significant reasons for environmental cooperation in these two regions [28]. Concurrently, scientific consensus, economic incentives, and non-intervention by the federal government are crucial factors influencing local governments’ participation in the greenhouse gas reduction program in the Northwest Pacific region [29]. The fundamental rationale for environmental governance cooperation in three urban areas of the UK is the concern for economic development, with the objective of reducing the impact of environmental issues on economic growth [30]. The objective of economic growth and a robust political control mechanism has facilitated collaboration in the management of water quality in the Pearl River [20,31].

Nevertheless, certain factors may impede the seamless advancement of transboundary environmental collaboration. A multitude of political and economic hurdles have frustrated the achievement of regional water governance goals [32]. For instance, the long-standing institutional factors between Guangdong and Hong Kong have impeded transboundary environmental cooperation [4]. Furthermore, financial constraints have hampered ecological protection and development efforts in the Yellow River basin [17]. Moreover, issues surrounding the management of river water resources and the involvement in national strategic military affairs have stymied collaborative efforts in water security governance among countries [33]. Similarly, the lack of effective monitoring of the water environment and the acquisition of water quality data and information has hindered the multi-centered environmental governance of the Pearl River and the Rhine River [20]. The case studies of the Blue Nile and the Yarmouk Rivers have exposed that a lack of basin-wide approaches to managing and utilizing shared water resources has resulted in disputes among riparian states [34]. Additionally, the lack of a unified vision for the management of transboundary waters has precipitated unilateral actions in the cases of the Yarmouk and Blue Nile rivers [35].

There is no doubt that the formation of transboundary environmental governance cooperation is influenced by a combination of various factors. The specific circumstances of different regions and specific factors will have different impacts on the effectiveness of cooperation. The extant literature has produced conflicting findings, which further complicates our understanding of environmental governance, and has yet to delineate the primary factors influencing cross-border environmental governance cooperation.

2.3. Analysis Framework of Multi-Scalar Transboundary Environmental Governance

Transboundary regions are characterized by a myriad of intricate and evolving human–geographical relationships. Within the domain of geographical research, there remains a notable deficiency in the exploration of the multi-scalar dimensions of transboundary issue governance, extending from the urban to the global scale [4,36,37]. Drawing upon extant scholarly work, this manuscript constructs a multi-scalar analytical framework for transboundary environmental governance (Figure 1), with the objective of conducting an in-depth investigation into the specific processes and underlying mechanisms of transboundary environmental governance in the Shenzhen River.

The governance of transboundary environments is a complex and multifaceted endeavor, spanning four distinct scales: global, national, regional, and local (urban). The primary stakeholders in this process include both governmental and non-governmental entities. Transboundary environmental governance is structured around four pivotal processes: initiation, confrontation, coordination, and collaboration. The initiation of governance is driven by these key actors, but it often encounters conflicts due to the involvement of multiple administrative jurisdictions. Overcoming these inter-jurisdictional disputes typically requires the intervention of higher-level authorities, which paves the way for effective transboundary environmental collaboration. The intricate interplay and mutual influence among stakeholders across the various scales are integral to the establishment of robust governance mechanisms. These mechanisms are designed to effectively address environmental challenges that transcend political boundaries and to foster the sustainable development of transboundary regions.

3. Study Area and Research Method

3.1. Study Area

The case study presented in this article is the Shenzhen River (Figure 2). The Shenzhen River, with a length of 37 km, originates from the southern slope of Niuweiling and flows from northeast to southwest into Shenzhen Bay. The river serves as the boundary between Shenzhen City and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. On the Shenzhen side, the river traverses densely populated and rapidly developing areas, including Luohu District, Futian District, and Nanshan District. On the Hong Kong side, the river flows through the New Territories North District and Yuen Long District, which are significant fishing and agricultural areas. The Mai Po Nature Reserve and the Futian Mangrove Nature Reserve, situated in the lower reaches of the Shenzhen River, are designated as internationally important wetlands and national-level nature reserves under the Ramsar Convention. These reserves have attracted the attention of international organizations and national governments. This paper examines flood governance along the Shenzhen River, a critical component of transboundary water security that significantly influences the development of Shenzhen and Hong Kong.

3.2. Research Method

This study primarily employs qualitative research methods, such as field research, in-depth interviews, and textual analysis, to collect and analyze research data. The data gathered through field surveys encompass a variety of sources, including government work reports, five-year plans for national economic and social development, environmental regulations and policy documents, planning documents, archival materials, documentaries, and news reports (see

Table 1. Main data sources and acquired information.

Type		Information
Field research		Current situation of Shenzhen River, the development of Shenzhen and Hong Kong
In-depth interviews	Government department staff (13)	Process, mechanisms, and formation reasons related to Shenzhen River governance
	Corporate personnel (3)
	Residents (5)
	Expert (1)
Documents	Government work reports	Globalization and urbanization of Shenzhen and Hong Kong
	Five-year plans for national economic and social development
	Environmental regulations and policy documents
	Archival materials, documentaries about Shenzhen River governance	History, major events, and related information related to Shenzhen River governance
	News reports

). The in-depth interviews were conducted in two phases: the first phase took place from November 2020 to January 2021, and the second phase was scheduled for May 2021. This paper selects interviewees who are included as key stakeholders in the Shenzhen River governance for in-depth interviews, comprising 13 government department staff, 3 corporate personnel, 5 residents, and 1 expert. Each interview lasted between 30 min to 2 h, aiming to gain a comprehensive understanding of the process, mechanisms, and reasons underpinning the transboundary governance of the Shenzhen River. In the course of the interview process, the primary emphasis was directed towards delving into the roots, management procedures, pivotal stakeholders, and the prevailing circumstances surrounding flooding issues in the Shenzhen River. The line of questioning was progressively elaborated upon in response to the insights provided by the interviewees. Additionally, supplementary secondary research was undertaken to fill any gaps in the information gathered. The interview proceedings were recorded and documented in writing for subsequent verification and analysis.

4. Process and Mechanism of Shenzhen River Transboundary Water Security Governance

The Shenzhen River, situated in the subtropical monsoon maritime climate zone, experiences its flood season from April through October annually. Historically, the river has remained in a pristine state, characterized by a meandering course and a constricted riverbed. This natural configuration is only equipped to handle a flood event with a five-year recurrence interval, which has regrettably led to the Shenzhen River being prone to frequent flooding throughout its history. The origins of the Shenzhen River’s flooding issues date back to the 1960s. As documented in the “Chronicle of Shenzhen and Hong Kong Joint River Management,” in October 1964, the region was pummeled by Typhoon No. 13, leading to torrential rains that flooded over 13,000 acres of agricultural land. The downstream areas, particularly the low-lying farmlands, faced submersion for an extended period of up to seven days. The Shenzhen River, coursing through the core of the Shenzhen Special Economic Zone, has experienced flooding that has had a substantial impact on the local economy and the daily lives of residents. This impact has been further exacerbated by the rapid economic growth and social development of Shenzhen. Consequently, the Shenzhen municipal government is actively and sincerely pursuing the implementation of effective management strategies in collaboration with Hong Kong.

The governance of transboundary water security in the Shenzhen River dates back to the 1980s and has been strategically segmented into three key phases: negotiation, consultation, and collaboration. Various levels of government, as well as non-governmental actors, have been involved in the governance process for transboundary water security in the Shenzhen River (as depicted in Figure 3).

4.1. Negotiation Stage (From 1981 to 1992)

In December 1981, Shenzhen Mayor Liang Xiang extended an invitation to Sir Murray MacLehose, the Governor of Hong Kong, to visit Shenzhen, marking a significant step towards cooperation. During this visit, both governments engaged in profound discussions concerning the collaborative stewardship of the Shenzhen River, culminating in a mutual understanding. This laid the groundwork for the official launch of negotiations regarding the joint management project on 2 April 1982.

Under the aegis of the central government’s authorization and through extensive consultations, the Shenzhen–Hong Kong Joint Working Group was formed. The group was co-chaired by the deputy secretary-general of the Shenzhen municipal government and the deputy secretary for development of the British Hong Kong government (the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government after the reunification to China). It included representatives from key functional departments on both sides, tasked with the responsibility of negotiating, deliberating, and making decisions on pivotal issues throughout the project’s execution [38]. Subsequently, an array of specialized sub-committees was instituted to address technical, environmental, and bridge engineering design and construction issues. These include dedicated teams for technology, the environment, and bridge engineering design and construction, each responsible for coordination and negotiation within their areas of expertise. The joint working group convenes once a year, while the meetings of the technical and environmental sub-committees are more frequent, with consultations scheduled based on the demands of the ongoing projects. The establishment of the joint working group meeting as a unique platform has enabled government-level negotiations, consultations, or directives, successfully addressing various policy and planning/design concerns associated with the cross-border governance of the Shenzhen River. This collaborative effort has given rise to a novel working model that is singular in its approach, distinguishing itself from both the mainland and Hong Kong paradigms.

While the Shenzhen municipal government demonstrated a constructive and enthusiastic approach in the negotiation process, the British colonial administration in Hong Kong exhibited a less eager stance. This reluctance stemmed from a confluence of factors: Firstly, the New Territories, predominantly agricultural and earmarked as restricted development zones, suffered relatively limited damages from flooding events; secondly, the Mai Po Nature Reserve, located downstream along the Shenzhen River, was a focal point of concern for the World Nature (Hong Kong) Foundation (WWF) and the Environmental Advisory Committee, necessitating a stringent environmental impact assessment for any management interventions; and lastly, the river’s proposed realignment and straightening raised sensitive territorial concerns, with both parties standing firm on their respective positions, showing little inclination towards compromise. These compounding factors led to an impasse in the negotiations.

4.2. Consultation Stage (From 1992 to 1995)

In a bid to reconcile the discord over land ownership and management rights, the Shenzhen municipal government strategically elevated the discourse on Shenzhen River management to the national stage. This move paved the way for the central government to assume a pivotal role, spearheading negotiations with the British colonial administration in Hong Kong to dissolve their differences. Liang Ming, Director of the Shenzhen Municipal Water Bureau, introduced a groundbreaking proposal: to decouple land ownership from jurisdictional authority. The territory of Lok Ma Chau Loop would nominally remain under Shenzhen’s possession, yet the managerial prerogative would be delegated to Hong Kong. This innovative suggestion was then conveyed by the Shenzhen municipal government to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office for their consideration. The year 1992 marked a significant milestone when the state council’s Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office endorsed the proposal, confirming the central axis of the new river as the demarcation line for boundary management between Shenzhen and the Hong Kong region. This decision effectively illuminated the path forward by resolving the contentious issues of ownership and jurisdiction over the Lok Ma Chau Loop area.

With these boundary management concerns adeptly addressed, the negotiations were reinvigorated. During the deliberation phase, the Shenzhen municipal government actively incorporated third-party entities—an advisory firm and a monitoring team—to meticulously craft the Shenzhen River management initiative. They were tasked with conducting comprehensive environmental impact assessments, as well as overseeing and safeguarding the project throughout its lifecycle. This strategic move was designed to satisfy the rigorous scrutiny of the WWF and the Environmental Advisory Committee, which were observing the British colonial government in Hong Kong. Shenzhen River has attracted considerable interest from the WWF owing to its distinctive geographical positioning and ecological significance. Located within the river basin’s Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the Mai Po Nature Reserve constitutes a vital ecological haven. Instituted in 1984 with the primary objective of conserving and rehabilitating wetland ecosystems, the reserve offers a sanctuary for wildlife and flora. Following diligent conservation endeavors, Mai Po was recognized as a Ramsar Site of International Importance in 1995, ascending to the status of a globally pivotal ecological conservation landmark. It holds immense importance in the realms of ecology, as well as serving as an invaluable resource for educational and research purposes.

During interviews with government staff, it was revealed that “Environmental volunteers in Hong Kong, as well as WWF, have been actively engaged and have made substantial contributions. They promptly offer their insights and constructive criticism to the Hong Kong government whenever environmental challenges or concerns come to their attention (government staff, December 2020)”. The British colonial administration responded to these measures with a positive outlook, which significantly propelled the consultative process for Shenzhen River management. Regarding the development of the management plan, both parties embraced a spirit of consensus-building, navigating disagreements on project administration and technical standards with a willingness to find common ground swiftly. In an effort to minimize the environmental footprint of the management initiative, both sides committed to employing standards and methodologies that surpassed those typically found in mainland China, opting instead for the more stringent benchmarks upheld by the Hong Kong authorities.

4.3. Collaborative Stage (From 1995 to 2018)

Upon transitioning to the implementation phase, the Shenzhen and Hong Kong governments, adhering to the project plan set in 1985 for the transboundary management of the Shenzhen River, initiated a systematic and phased rectification of the river’s main channel from 1995. The financial burden was equitably divided between the two jurisdictions. The proposed scheme exhibits a marked departure from conventional river management methodologies. Its innovative aspect is initiated at the river’s midsection, prioritizing the rectification of two critically obstructive river bends. This strategic alteration has succeeded in lowering the flood level of the Shenzhen River by 60 cm, thereby facilitating a prompt and efficient mitigation of flood risks along the riverbanks. On the 11 May 1995, an auspicious milestone was reached with the signing of the “Agreement on the First Phase of the Shenzhen River Management Project” between the governments of Shenzhen and Hong Kong. Recognizing the project’s transboundary nature, it was decided that the Shenzhen municipal government would assume the mantle of the primary executing body. In furtherance of this role, Shenzhen established a dedicated office known as the Shenzhen-based Shenzhen River office (hereinafter referred to as the “River Management Office”), whose sole mandate was to meticulously oversee the execution of the agreement and manage the project’s affairs with precision and care.

Spanning two decades from 1995 to 2017, the collaborative efforts resulted in the successful completion of four distinct phases of river management projects. Tailored strategies were employed for various sections of the river, encompassing a spectrum of interventions, such as widening and deepening channels, straightening meanders, reconstructing bridges and embankments, ecological restoration, and the implementation of flood peak mitigation measures through the creation of detention basins. These comprehensive measures were aimed at bolstering the river’s flood defense capabilities and neutralizing potential flood threats. Post-completion, Shenzhen River’s flood defense infrastructure was upgraded to a standard capable of withstanding a once-in-50-years flood event, with the levees fortified to resist the impact of a once-in-200-years flood. It is noteworthy that the ethos of environmental stewardship was woven into the fabric of the Shenzhen River management project from inception to completion. This holistic approach ensured the effective management of environmental pollution during the construction phase and significantly mitigated the project’s ecological footprint.

5. Formation Reasons for the Transboundary Water Security Governance Cooperation of Shenzhen River

The governance of transboundary water security for the Shenzhen River was initiated by the Shenzhen municipal government. In the face of emerging disputes, the Shenzhen municipal government sought the intervention of the national government to mediate, which ultimately led to a collaborative agreement between the Shenzhen municipal government and the British colonial administration in Hong Kong. This established a governance mechanism for transboundary water safety, with the Shenzhen municipal government taking the lead, the Hong Kong government providing support, and the central government of China participating in coordination. The formation of the Shenzhen River’s transboundary environmental governance cooperation was primarily influenced by three factors:

(1)

Urgent practical issue

The Shenzhen River was frequently ravaged by flood disasters, which profoundly affected the economic progress and the daily lives of the residents residing along its banks. This was especially true for the densely populated and swiftly developing districts in Shenzhen, such as Luohu, Futian, and the Nanshan District, which experienced the impacts most acutely. The “Chronicle of Shenzhen-Hong Kong Joint River Management” documented severe flood events, including a 1980 typhoon that caused half a day of inundation in Shenzhen and a direct economic loss of CNY 1.6 million, and a 1993 flood resulting in over CNY 700 million in direct economic losses. Lin Wanquan, then-director of the River Management Office, stated in an interview, “The flooding in the Shenzhen River severely hindered the reform, opening up, and economic development of the Shenzhen Special Economic Zone”. During negotiations with the British colonial government, foreign officials often raised objections, emphasizing the need to protect the rights of animals and aquatic life. Director Lin Wanquan countered assertively, “We must balance the rights of animals and aquatic life with your rights to survival and development”. To alleviate the adverse effects of floods on production and daily life, the Shenzhen municipal government proactively engaged in transboundary governance negotiations, partnering with Hong Kong to jointly tackle the flood issues of the Shenzhen River.

(2)

Economic factor

Shenzhen’s booming economy provided solid financial support and technological backing for transboundary governance. The establishment of the special economic zone in Shenzhen in July 1979 accelerated the reform and opening up process. A significant influx of foreign direct investment, along with China’s abundant labor force, established a unique industrial model of “input—processing—value addition—export”. Industries such as electronics, machinery, textiles, and light industry experienced rapid growth, leading to a remarkable leap in Shenzhen’s economy and a sharp increase in population size. According to the “Shenzhen Statistical Yearbook 2023”, Shenzhen’s GDP soared from CNY 196 million in 1978 to CNY 84.279 billion in 1990, and further to CNY 221.92 billion in 2000, with a growth rate far exceeding that of 1978, reaching an astonishing increase of over a thousand times. Despite its rapid economic growth, Shenzhen also steadily increased its investment in environmental governance. Although the city’s investment in environmental governance accounted for only 1.84% of GDP in 1997, it gradually increased as the economy grew. By 2003, the investment in environmental governance had reached CNY 6.187 billion, about three times that of 1997, and its proportion of the GDP also rose to 2.16%. Clearly, the significant enhancement of economic strength provided an essential material foundation for the Shenzhen municipal government to promote the transboundary water governance of the Shenzhen River. As stated by a staff member of River Management Office: “Shenzhen’s economy has developed, giving it the capability to manage water issues. When it comes to funding, the Shenzhen government provides the necessary financial support, primarily using its own funds (government staff, Dec 2020)”. With the financial burden shared equitably between Shenzhen and Hong Kong, the Shenzhen municipal government bore the majority of the costs for the Shenzhen portion of the project. Additionally, the central government and the Guangdong provincial government contributed a smaller sum of money to support the efforts.

(3)

Political factor

The active coordination and support of the national government played a crucial role in the transboundary governance cooperation between Shenzhen and Hong Kong. However, disagreements over land ownership and management rights once became the main obstacle to cooperation between the Shenzhen municipal government and the British colonial government of Hong Kong in carrying out the transboundary water governance of the Shenzhen River. In June 1988, the British colonial government raised issues of boundary management after the completion of the project, involving land rights of 87 hectares in the Lok Ma Chau Loop area and other regions of straightening meanders, leading to a deadlock in the negotiations. It was not until 1992 that the state council’s Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs jointly issued a statement clarifying the centerline of the new river as the boundary management line between Shenzhen and Hong Kong, confirming that the Lok Ma Chau Loop area belonged to Shenzhen, with jurisdiction rights belonging to the Hong Kong region. “It is mainly the central government that makes the decision, and we (the Shenzhen Municipal Government) dare not make this decision for fear of being called ‘modern Li Hongzhang’ (government staff, Nov 2020)”. This resolution removed the obstacles for the transboundary governance negotiations of the Shenzhen River, allowing subsequent work to proceed smoothly. The central government consistently played a key role, driving continuous deepening and development of the cooperation between the two sides. After the return of the Hong Kong region in 1997, the transboundary governance of the Shenzhen River shifted from a diplomatic level to a domestic affair within the country. The cooperation between Shenzhen and Hong Kong transformed from transnational cooperation to transboundary cooperation under the “one country, two systems” framework. Throughout this transition, the central government was instrumental in facilitating the cooperation’s ongoing advancement and development.

6. Discussions

This article examines the intricate dynamics of transboundary environmental governance, contextualized within the backdrop of rapid globalization and regional economic development. It offers a novel perspective on the existing research in transboundary environmental governance. Unlike previous studies that have concentrated on transnational and domestic sub-regional areas [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18], this research conducts a long-term, continuous follow-up study on transboundary environmental governance within different political system regions (cities) within the same country. The study reveals that local governments play a pivotal role in initiating transboundary environmental governance, with the central government of China acting as a crucial facilitator for cooperation in this domain. This dynamic diverges from the two predominant governance models previously identified in the literature, which are characterized by either supranational entities or local actors taking the lead. Under the “one country, two systems” framework, the central government actively promotes cooperation between mainland China and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, fostering complementary advantages and mutual development, and assisting Hong Kong in overcoming external challenges. The governance mechanism for transboundary water security in the Shenzhen River transcends a unidirectional scaling approach, embodying a sophisticated interplay of bottom-up and top-down strategies within a framework of flexible, multidirectional scale reconfiguration. Guided by national-level coordination and direction, a consensus on environmental governance is forged through deliberative processes. This dynamic rescaling facilitates the realization of environmental governance objectives in the transboundary region while ensuring the coupling of governance scales with geographical scales.

Within the context of the Shenzhen River case, the contributions of local and national governmental entities to transboundary environmental governance are notably significant, and global participants, such as the World Nature (Hong Kong) Foundation, have assumed a supervisory role in Hong Kong, whereas the engagement of non-governmental actors remains comparatively deficient, particularly within the mainland of China. As governmental support intensifies through policy and financial initiatives, and as public environmental consciousness and the desire for participation escalate, non-governmental agents are anticipated to assume a more proactive role in environmental governance. Their involvement is poised to be pivotal, necessitating the formation of a cohesive and effective transboundary environmental governance structure in concert with governmental institutions.

Thus, this paper has several policy implications to enhance the roles of non-governmental actors. Firstly, at the policy decision-making level, the participation of professionals such as experts and scholars should be increased to provide intellectual support and scientific assurance for projects. This will ensure the feasibility and scientific basis of environmental governance and prevent blind decision-making. Secondly, at the implementation level, the involvement of the public and environmental organizations should be enhanced to provide effective social supervision for environmental protection. This would enable the timely identification and resolution of issues and the establishment of a sustainable regulatory mechanism. Thirdly, we should capitalize on the positive influence of globalization on cross-border regional environmental governance by actively encouraging international environmental organizations and multinational corporations to engage in cross-border environmental management efforts. Strengthening the dynamic interaction between global and local entities is essential for boosting public awareness of environmental issues and ensuring effective oversight of government and corporate environmental practices.

7. Conclusions

This study employs a carefully constructed multi-scalar analytical framework for transboundary environmental governance to investigate the Shenzhen River, which flows through Shenzhen and Hong Kong, as a case study. It has explored the dynamic progression, operational mechanisms, and underlying reasons for transboundary water security governance by utilizing qualitative research methods including field research, comprehensive interviews, and textual analysis. The principal findings are as follows:

(1)

Confronted with the challenges of flood disasters amidst the swift socio-economic evolution of Shenzhen and Hong Kong, the Shenzhen River’s capacity to support life and industry within its basin has been compromised. This situation has also posed formidable challenges to the previously independent environmental governance frameworks of both cities. To effectively tackle these transboundary environmental issues, Shenzhen and Hong Kong have embarked on a cooperative journey in governance since 1981. The transboundary water safety governance of the Shenzhen River has advanced through three pivotal phases: negotiation (1981–1992), consultation (1992–1995), and collaborative efforts (1995–2018).

(2)

Propelled by the developmental aspirations of both regions, the governance paradigm of Shenzhen and Hong Kong has evolved from separate jurisdictions to a unified approach in managing transboundary affairs. A transboundary collaborative mechanism, jointly established by the governments of Guangdong (including Shenzhen) and Hong Kong, has been instrumental in this transition. This has led to the establishment of a robust governance structure, with the Shenzhen municipal government taking the lead, the Hong Kong government providing support, and the central government of China coordinating efforts.

(3)

The convergence of severe flood events, a foundation of economic growth, and the pivotal coordination and backing of the central government of China have been the key drivers in forging a consensus on transboundary environmental governance between Shenzhen and Hong Kong. The central government has consistently played an indispensable role, fostering the ongoing intensification and evolution of this cooperative endeavor. The synergy between local initiatives from the ground up and strategic directives from the top down has enriched and refined the multi-tiered governance system through the dynamic interplay of diverse stakeholders.

Future research ought to focus more intently on transboundary regional scenarios, conducting a thorough investigation into the global–national–regional–local multilevel governance system and the impact of global–local interaction on transboundary environmental governance. Such an approach promises to enhance our comprehension of the intrinsic qualities and distinct features of transboundary environmental challenges, thereby boosting the efficacy and outcomes of governance efforts. Ultimately, this work can offer valuable lessons and guidance for the advancement of global environmental stewardship.