Date: May 12, 2012
PLES has hosted the second seminar of “Responding Strategies of Law and Policy - Sustainable Environmental Regulations under Climate Change” at Multimedia Room of Tsai Lecture Hall on May 12, 2012.
Professor Jiunn-rong Yeh represented PLES, reviewing the Taiwanese government’s climate change responding strategies in three major categories - “organization, policy and legislation.” Professor Yeh concluded that the Taiwanese government’s climate change responding strategies were “increasingly disordered” and revealing the “phenomenon of emptiness.”
On the organization part, the current climate change responding strategies were mostly not systematically distributed by its tasks but randomly scattered in different departments. It lacks a thorough plan; for example, the emission reduction and adjustment were under different organizations, causing separation of the policies. The climate change issues needs a thorough deliberation and it needs to have access to diverse resources. It should be vigorously emphasized on the importance of administration. Thus, we should enhance the power of each department (e.g. the department of environmental resources); we should establish a mechanism of a multi-disciplinary department for climate change policy coordination and adjustment bureau under Executive Yuan through legislation; with the Minister of State of specific duty as coordinator, helping the Premier of Executive Yuan to gather chief executors of various departments in organizing climate change policy.
On the policy aspect, although the government had come up with various plans and policies, these policies tended to become mere slogans, or were touching only the margins of the issues. Furthermore, the policies lacked for a vigorous and overall planning of policies and projects. Currently, the target of GHG emission reduction is still unclear, and the procession of adjustment guidelines was merely the accumulations from scholars, ascribing the approaching method of international participation to institutional agents. We believed the government should design a comprehensive blueprint and progression for climate change policy instead of stopping at the spot where the government repetitively runs the slogan of “Energy Saving and Carbon Reduction.” The direction of the policy should be based on the consensus of citizens and societies, establishing a specific emission target and examining thoroughly the overall adjustment mechanism of climate change. The government officials should dedicate more on the subject, and cannot just depend on individual research projects. As opposed to international connection, we must be clear as to the purpose and strategies of international involvement, and collectively considered with domestic policy.
On the legislation part, the current movement of legislation was not only scattered but in delay, and it tended to incline towards the imbalance of energy and industries, ignoring the core issues thus separating with the current system. The government should work with the policy blueprint we mentioned, and they should come up with a comprehensive legislative framework in response to climate change, working determinedly towards the continued legislation in a planned way. The specific and individual legislation should deal with core issues of emission reduction and adjustment, making progress with the current environmental effect assessment, and current legal system such as Air Pollution Control Act, Disaster Prevention and Protection Act, and Environmental Liability Act, et cetera, providing a comprehensive legal foundation in legislation in response to climate change.
Overall checking up on Taiwan’s responding strategies on organization, policy and legislation, the current projects seemed diverse, however, they were mostly scattered and loose, without a comprehensive and deep deliberation. These policies did not work as an effective and sound foundation of the system, thus we do not see the ambition and strong efforts of the government. We hope that the discussion brought up today could give us a new direction, and that the government can achieve a more grounding, comprehensive and mature undertaking regarding climate change issues.