China’s coal sector is the largest contributor to the country’s greenhouse gas emissions and a major cause of air pollution, which claims over 1 million lives annually. Long-term climate commitments include a target to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060, which entails between a 60–90 percent reduction in coal use by mid-century. Of the many challenges associated with this transition, addressing the dislocation of coal and fossil fuel workers is perhaps the most challenging. While there are recognized efforts to achieve a “just transition” that works for fossil communities and workers, practices to date in China do not fully prioritize these groups. The closest analogue to what will need to be achieved is the supplyside restructuring of mostly state-owned coal and other heavy industries concentrated in 2016–2018 and continuing to this day. The coal sector has shed over 2 million jobs since its recent peak of 2013—and, in contrast to earlier state-owned enterprise (SOE) reforms, did not result in widespread social unrest. Lessons were learned from earlier periods, and the increased institutionalization of labor contract law is a possible argument for the relatively smoother workforce reduction mandated by overcapacity reduction. In this brief commentary, we explore the workforce reduction strategies during this period and the legal basis for various practices adopted by SOEs.
As China continues to enhance its ecological civilization, emerging ecosystem laws have arisen. This paper aims to explore the characteristics of China’s emerging ecosystem laws as well as their practical application and challenges. The research focuses on two main backgrounds of these laws - the ecological civilization ideology that led to their emergence, and their legislative phases. This study primarily revolves around the legal characteristics and implementation challenges of the emerging ecosystem laws, recognizing the considerable innovation in legislating for large-scale ecosystems in China. The main challenge lies in the need for novel administrative and judicial coordination mechanisms across administrative regions and the detailed implementation of specific rules and regulations. By comparing these ecosystem laws to the legislation and governance of five representative large river basins in the United States, the research concludes that China’s emerging ecosystem laws are not fundamentally different from the watershed management laws and governance in the US. However, there is innovation in laws regarding other ecosystem types, such as the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. The key focus should be on coordinating current cross-administrative regional governance and judicial collaboration and innovating large-scale environmental regulatory measures to enhance the effectiveness of such laws in China.
Despite significant efforts towards decarbonization, China’s progress in climate legislation has been relatively slow. This paper explores China’s current climate laws and the institutional approach behind the legislating efforts, identifying a central challenge: the lack of coordination among laws enacted at different times with varied focuses. It argues that a dedicated climate law could enhance accountability for climate goals and address the gaps in climate litigation. The paper also reviews China’s lawmaking institutions, discussing the roles and interactions of key players in shaping climate governance. Additionally, it compares legislative models from other countries, proposing components that could be adapted for China. The paper concludes with recommendations for a comprehensive climate legislation framework in China.
As many people are currently discussing an important reform of international tax rules1 and the tensions surrounding Taiwan, it is worthwhile to consider the tax aspect of Taiwan’s relationship with the world. Legal rules govern both Taiwan’s outbound investment and inbound investment in Taiwan. Even the People’s Republic of China (P.R.C., zhonghua renmin gonghe guo, or 中華人民共和國) receives Taiwan’s outbound investment, and Taiwan receives inbound investment from the P.R.C. At a time when tit-for-tat politics catches almost all the attention, a less well-known aspect of international law demonstrates both acause for optimism and a problem. Taiwan has its own legal rules, and Taiwan has bilateral treaties or agreements with its friends. However, when there are multilateral efforts to face the challenges of an important issue, Taiwan has often been left out. This article discusses Taiwan’s engagement with the world tax order. Part I sets out Taiwan’s legal rules regarding income tax. Part II discusses Taiwan’s thirty-five bilateral treaties or agreements with its friends. Part III introduces the P.R.C. tax law and the U.S. tax law for cross-border activities that implicate Taiwan. Part IV discusses some major multilateral efforts to reform the international tax system, and the creativity that may be required for Taiwan to be included. Overall, this article discusses Taiwan’s engagement with the world tax order.
Over the last two decades, China has undergone an extraordinary transformation in environmental law and governance that remains insufficiently understood in the outside world. In April 2024, the UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal and the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at UCLA School of Law held a symposium on China & the Environment – Taking Stock of Domestic and Global Developments in Law & Governance. Leading Chinese environmental law scholars, Chinese civil society actors, and international scholars gathered to shed light on cutting edge developments.2 As part of the symposium, UCLA Law also organized a public talk on Chinese Environmental Civil Society to explore the continuing role of environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in Chinese environmental protection.
