BEIJING, Sept. 13 -- Ecological compensation is a new mechanism being tried by the State Environmental Protection Administration to further contain pollution by increasing the cost of discharging pollutants and rewarding conservation.
Such a mechanism was introduced in the 1990s on a trial basis to collect ecological compensation fees in 685 counties and 24 state-level nature reserves.
This time, the environmental watchdog, in cooperation with other state departments, will further push the fledgling mechanism on a trial basis in the hope of establishing a sound system nationwide.
Underscoring this mechanism is the principle that polluters must pay for the damage done to the environment and those who have contributed to conserving the ecology at the expense of economic gains must be reasonably compensated.
The message is that any form of the environment - rivers, forest, underground water or soil - is not free for polluters to pollute. This is because they are making a fortune in the process.
Another message is companies that have spent much money in treating their waste before dumping it have contributed to environmental protection and should be compensated because their cost of production is much higher than their counterparts which have not spent as much in pollutant treatment.
But it is easier said than done. The fact that such a practice has been on trial for so many years and a sound system is still yet to be established speaks volumes for the complications in formulating rules and implementing the scheme.
First of all, we do not have unified standards for collecting ecological compensation fees. For example, we must have quantitative standards to charge polluters for the degree of pollution.
Furthermore, detailed laws or related administrative regulations are yet to be made to regulate as much as possible the entire process from the charging of fees to the use of the fund from collected fees and to the compensation of those that have contributed to environmental protection.
In addition, both transparency and effective supervision measures must guarantee that the money is used for the purpose it is intended for.
