Q: Over the past decade Taiwan has suffered serious losses from typhoons almost every year. What is the core problem in protecting our land?

A: There are three general issues faced in the work of rehabilitating the land of Taiwan. The first is that authority and responsibilities for land conservation and management and for disaster prevention are fragmented, so it often happens that problems end up in a bureaucratic no-man's land and are handled only in a superficial way, and there is no single platform for managing the land and water on a regional scale. The second is that local governments, who are the first line of defense, have limited budgets and manpower, so they often don't do things that they know need to be done. In addition, the government's land protection agencies are not able to get close cooperation from those agencies that handle industry, energy, and land use, so that environmentally sensitive areas are still overdeveloped.

Take the tasks of preservation and management of Taiwan's major rivers. The upstream forest land is managed by the Forestry Bureau, midstream slopeland is under the Soil and Water Conservation Bureau, reservoirs and downstream parts of the rivers are controlled by the Water Resources Agency, maintenance of roads and nearby soil and water comes under the Ministry of Transportation and Communications, and local governments are charged with routine oversight, reporting, and law enforcement. Because unlawful activities frequently come under the jurisdiction of various agencies, if no one steps forward to take charge, problems get put off rather than resolved. Last year, after Typhoon Kalmaegi, government agencies reached consensus on "regional comprehensive management," placing all parts of a river region under a single authority. In the future, based on this kind of thinking, we plan to have management programs for five major river regions-the Danshui, the Dajia, the Zhuoshui, the Zengwen, and the Gaoping.

Q: What can you tell us about the direction of land conservation policy? Many people are pinning their hopes on a "National Land Planning Act" [NLPA], but the legislative process takes time. How will land preservation be advanced in the meantime?

A: In the future, the NLPA will set the guiding principles for development and management of all the territory of Taiwan. It will be able to resolve the current problem of having two systems-the zoning system under the Regional Planning Act and the zoning restrictions set by various government agencies (under the Wildlife Conservation Act, the Water Resources Protection Act, the Cultural Heritage Conservation Act, and so on)-existing concurrently, and sometimes in conflict with each other, over the same subject matter.

The NLPA will divide the nation's territory into four categories: protected areas, agricultural development areas, urban development areas, and marine resources areas. Within each area, further zones will be defined and graded as needed. Once an area is designated as protected, the major guiding principles for that area will be conservation and safety, and development and use will be restricted. If the local environment has already been badly damaged, then restoration will be undertaken step by step.

At the same time, when the law goes into effect the government will also decide which areas can apply for "development permits," and which can change designated land use and which cannot. This should help avoid things like the Erlin Science Park controversy.

The NLPA was first sent to the Legislative Yuan for deliberation back in the 1990s. But it was only in 2004, after the fourth time the bill was sent in for deliberation, that the first reading was completed. [In Taiwan a bill must complete three "readings" to become law.] After that, however, because of opposition from construction firms, the bill was shelved. After Morakot we submitted the proposed law for the fifth time. Recently we have been talking with civic organizations asking them to first be happy just to get the framework into place, and only afterwards try to make it perfect. Otherwise, if we touch on sensitive issues, the bill will just end up bouncing back and forth to the legislature and we'll never get anywhere.

After the law is passed, there will be a four-year transitional period before it goes into effect. During this period government agencies will finalize plans, hold public hearings, and consider the views of the public and their representatives. During this period, land conservation work will be governed by the Policy Guidelines for National Land Conservation and Preservation. The CEPD has already submitted its draft of this outline to the National Council for Sustainable Development [NCSD] in the Executive Yuan for approval. The NCSD will be the monitoring agency for national land and water conservation, while implementation will be handled by each ministry or agency in its sphere of responsibility.

Q: If use of land that is designated as "protected" under the NLPA is restricted, or if the land will be expropriated by the government, there will be conflicts with local people. How will the government win the agreement of local residents?

A: Under the provisions of the Special Statute for Post-Typhoon Morakot Reconstruction passed in September, in the future if land reserved for indigenous peoples is to be designated as protected land, it will first be necessary to get agreement from the local residents. At the same time, after the NLPA goes into effect, there will be a two-year buffer period for areas that are not urgently in need of protection, and the land and structures already there can continue to be used for their original purposes, if such purposes were lawful to start with. When the two years is up, it will be necessary to either alter the zoning designation or get rid of the structures and uses of the land, for which the government will offer land swaps or pay compensation out of the Fund for Sustainable Development.

For example, preliminary inspections have already been completed of the 64 Aboriginal communities that were affected in the recent disasters. Next we will move to Phase 2, communication and negotiation with the residents, and complete the process mandated by law. Priority will be given to relocating communities out of high-risk areas, under the principles of "moving away from the danger without moving away from the community" or, if necessary, "remaining in the township even if leaving the village." We want to keep any further shocks to the disaster victims to a minimum.

As I understand it, Aboriginal peoples have long known a lot about how to avoid natural disasters where they live. But in recent years, for economic reasons, they have moved to areas of greater risk. In particular, excessive land use and construction have been driven by demand from lowlands companies for mountain agricultural produce. For the most at-risk mountain communities, the policy of choice will be to stop maintaining the roads that lead to them, which should reduce the economic incentives and give the land a chance to rest. When the mountain forests have recovered to a certain degree, then we will reassess whether it will be possible to allow some low-density land use in those areas.

Of course, it is easy to set policy on paper, the trick will be implementing it. Take for example the severe landslides along Provincial Highway 21 between Shuili and Alishan. The soil and geology there are very fragile, so in theory the road should be abandoned, but the policy is still to repair it. Changing attitudes like these will take time, and there will have to be a consensus among citizens.