U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

86–349 PDF 2014

S. HRG. 113–150

REBALANCE TO ASIA III: PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT AND ENSURING FOOD AND WATER

SECURITY IN EAST ASIA AND THE PACIFIC

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EAST ASIAN

AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

JULY 24, 2013

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey, Chairman

BARBARA BOXER, California 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire 

CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut 

TIM KAINE, Virginia 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

JOHN McCAIN, Arizona 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

DANIEL E. O’BRIEN, Staff Director

LESTER E. MUNSON III, Republican Staff Director

——————

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EAST ASIAN AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland, Chairman

CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

JOHN McCAIN, Arizona 

(II)

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

C O N T E N T S 

Page

Beck, Hon. Gregory, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Asia, U.S. Agency 

for International Development, Washington, DC .............................................. 12

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 14

Cardin, Hon. Benjamin L., U.S. Senator from Maryland, opening statement ... 1

Economy, Elizabeth C., Ph.D., C.V. Starr Senior Fellow and Director for 

Asian Studies, Council on Foreign Relations, New York, NY .......................... 35

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 38

Reifsnyder, Hon. Daniel A., Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Oceans 

and International Environmental and Science Affairs, U.S. Department 

of State, Washington, DC .................................................................................... 4

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 6

Roberts, Carter, Chief Executive Officer, World Wildlife Fund, Washington, 

DC .......................................................................................................................... 25

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 27

(III)

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

(1)

REBALANCE TO ASIA III: PROTECTING THE 

ENVIRONMENT AND ENSURING FOOD AND 

WATER SECURITY IN EAST ASIA AND THE 

PACIFIC 

WEDNESDAY, JULY 24, 2013 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON EAST ASIAN AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:02 p.m., in room 

SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin, 

chairman of the subcommittee, presiding. 

Members present: Senators Cardin and Markey. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND 

Senator CARDIN. Let me welcome everyone to this hearing of the 

subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the third 

in our series on the Rebalance to Asia. Let me just observe, I just 

came from lunch at the State Department with the President of 

Vietnam, and I think that underscores the administration’s commitment to the Rebalance to Asia. The relationship between the 

United States and Vietnam has gotten much stronger in the last 

decade. It is a remarkable change in a relatively short time. 

The trade minister was also there, who has been negotiating 

with our trade minister, USTR, on the TPP. So clearly the Asian 

countries are focused on the United States and on developing 

stronger strategic relationships with the United States. 

Our first hearing dealt with good governance and human rights. 

We also dealt with security issues. We had a chance to talk to the 

President of Vietnam about human rights, good governance, and on 

maritime security issues, which are obviously very, very important 

issues. 

This hearing is going to concentrate on the economic priorities 

related to environmental protection and food and water security in 

the East Asia-Pacific region. In June we celebrated Oceans Month 

and were reminded that protecting the environment and preserving 

our natural resources is a challenge we must address locally, 

nationally, and globally. As chair of the Environment and Public 

Works Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife, I have dedicated a significant amount of my time and energy to advancing domestic priorities that protect the Chesapeake Bay. The Chesapeake Bay is a 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

2

precious resource not just to the people of Maryland and to this region, but indeed to our entire Nation, and it has global significance. 

In my role as a member of this committee, I have supported efforts to ensure my grandchildren inherit a clean and healthy 

Earth. As President Obama noted in his recent climate action plan, 

we have a moral obligation to leave our children a healthier planet. 

But environmental protection is not just about our moral obligation to future generations. It is also about advancing our current 

national security and economic interests. The devastating impacts 

of climate change and environmental degradation have touched 

every corner of the Earth, sending shock waves that have reverberated in communities from the Eastern Shore of Maryland to the 

peaceful plains of middle America, to the pastoral communities of 

Africa, to low-lying islands in the Asia-Pacific. 

Regardless of what any of us may think about the scientific evidence of climate change, one thing is clear: The security and economic impacts of climate-induced shocks and environmental degradation are significant. 

For decades, the United States national security and intelligence 

community have documented the strategic and economic importance of promoting smart sustainable development, protecting the 

environment, and addressing the global problems of climate 

change, particularly in the East Asia and Pacific region. 

Some observers have criticized the Rebalance to Asia policy for 

not focusing on the environment and related food and water security issues. However, recent reports and public statements by 

administration officials have underscored the view that helping the 

East Asia-Pacific region address environmental challenges is essential for preventing future conflicts and instability and advancing 

our economic interests in the region. 

Just last month, Adm. Samuel Locklear III, the Commander of 

the U.S. Pacific Command, eloquently conveyed the national security and economic impacts of climate shock, noting that over the 

past 4 years, nearly 278,000 people were killed in the region due 

to natural disasters and over half a million displaced and more 

than $800 billion lost in economic productivity. 

In April during his trip to Japan, Secretary of State Kerry spoke 

of the need for sustainable fisheries, problems related to illegal 

mining and logging, and the need for innovative global enforcement 

mechanisms in the region. In this region, each nation’s environmental and natural resource consumption practices can negatively 

affect its neighbors and climate change impacts are felt across the 

region. Rivers that provide water for drinking, irrigation, industry, 

and ecosystems are stressed by increased demands, pollution, and 

dams. 

China’s damming upstream of the Mekong River for hydropower 

projects has led to agricultural and water supply problems for 

downstream countries. Growing material demands, wealth, and 

poor development strategies have led to illegal wildlife trade, excessive commercial logging, deforestation, threatening native elephants, rhinoceros, and other species. 

The competition for energy and economic resources, including 

overfishing, has sparked rising tensions in disputed waters in the 

South and East China Seas. I already mentioned the fact that 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

3

maritime security issues are one of our greatest threats to regional 

security and stability. We are all concerned that one of these minor 

flareups could end up causing a major problem in the region. 

Rising sea levels in the Pacific Ocean, home to the world’s largest 

garbage patch of over 3.5 million tons of trash and pollutants, 

threaten to degrade the water supply, disrupt agriculture and food 

security, deplete marine life, biodiversity, impact tourism, and displace millions, including, according to the Department of Defense, 

our own U.S. military installations. 

Forest fires in Indonesia create a haze which devastates the air 

quality of neighboring countries. Air quality in China is a challenge 

of epic proportions. During my trip to Beijing in June, I did not 

have an opportunity to see the sun, and there were no clouds. You 

can see the air pollution in China. It has become not only a real 

problem as a health issue, including our own Embassy personnel 

concerned about its impact on their children, their ability to live in 

Beijing safely; it has also become a very political problem because 

the people of China see the problem every day and they are expecting their government to do something about it. 

In fact, China is doing something about it. They recognized that 

this is a growing problem and it looks like they are preparing to 

take steps to do something about it. There was a recent press 

report that we received today indicating that they are prepared to 

take some pretty dramatic steps to deal with the source of pollution 

and to show real leadership. 

We are pleased that the United States and China entered into 

a working agreement on climate change and we look forward to 

seeing how that will produce results, not only for China and the 

United States, but as a model for the region. 

We have at least one model for success in the region. Singapore 

is a trailblazer, a model for good environmental governance, for 

smart sustainable development. Over the past 40 years, during a 

period of tremendous industrial growth, Singapore has invested in 

proactive government reforms to implement best practices in environmental planning. Despite water scarcity, population growth, 

and rising sea-level challenges, those reforms have made Singapore 

cleaner, greener, and more prosperous, and they inform regional 

dialogue on environmental issues within ASEAN. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses not only about the 

challenges, but also the partnership opportunities to advance best 

practices and develop innovative, economically friendly solutions to 

these challenges. 

I expect that the ranking member of the committee, Senator 

Rubio, who has been a real partner in developing the agenda of our 

Rebalance to Asia in this subcommittee, will be joining us shortly. 

He indicated to me he may be a little bit late getting here. He 

encouraged me to start the hearing so that we would not inconvenience the witnesses and those that are here. So we will do exactly 

that, and I will yield to Senator Rubio when he arrives. 

So let me introduce our first panel. On our first panel, we are 

pleased to have with us: Dan Reifsnyder as Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental 

and Scientific Affairs. Can you get that all on one card? [Laughter.] 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

4

I am amazed at the titles that we give everyone today. But anyway, we appreciate the work that you do. You have held that position since August 2006, and are responsible for overseeing many 

issues related to environmental protection and conservation, from 

the forests to the wetlands to the coral reefs. 

In his prior role as the Director of the Office of Global Change, 

he developed and implemented U.S. policy and global climate 

change. You are a real expert in this area and it is a pleasure to 

have you with us. 

Our second witness is the Honorable Gregory Beck. As Deputy 

Assistant Administrator of USAID for Asia, he has oversight 

responsibility for all of USAID programming in East Asia, Southeast Asia, and the Pacific. He has over 15 years of senior-level leadership experience in development and in conflict and post-conflict 

environments, including in Asia. 

So, gentlemen, it is a pleasure to have both of you before the 

committee. Your entire statements will be made part of our record 

and you may proceed as you wish. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL A. REIFSNYDER, DEPUTY 

ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF OCEANS AND INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCIENCE AFFAIRS, U.S. 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. REIFSNYDER. Thank you and good afternoon, Chairman 

Cardin and other members of the Subcommittee on East Asia and 

Pacific Affairs. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you 

today to testify on the important foreign policy and security issue 

of protecting the environment in the context of the administration’s 

Rebalance to Asia. 

The United States has a long and rich history of strategic 

engagement with countries in the Asia-Pacific on a multilateral, 

regional, and bilateral basis, and the administration’s rebalance 

moves us strategically toward even deeper relations with these 

countries. Their geopolitical and economic landscape makes it 

imperative that we address mutual challenges. Issues such as climate change, water, and conservation are beyond the reach and 

power of any one nation to address. 

In the Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and 

Scientific Affairs, we are working to advance cooperation with 

countries in the Asia-Pacific region to help solve these difficult 

problems. I would like to provide you with a few concrete examples. 

During the first high-level meeting this month of the U.S.-China 

Strategic and Economic Dialogue, the Climate Change Working 

Group agreed to focus on five new ambitious initiatives. Their goals 

include: reducing emissions from heavy-duty and other vehicles; 

increasing carbon capture, utilization, and storage; increasing energy efficiency in buildings, industry, and transport; improving 

greenhouse gas data collection and management; and promoting 

smart grids. 

Second, in my written testimony I highlighted the announcement 

by President Obama and President Xi in June to phase down the 

consumption and production of hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs. Such 

a global phasedown could potentially reduce some 90 gigatons of 

carbon dioxide equivalent by 2050. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

5

With China’s support, we hope soon to amend the Montreal Protocol to begin phasing down HFCs and to stimulate the use of 

better alternatives. We very much appreciate the letter that you, 

Senator Cardin, sent to President Obama on June 5 advocating just 

such an agreement between the United States and China. 

Third, in addition to the work with China, we are also assisting 

a number of developing countries in Asia to create and implement 

‘‘low-emission development strategies.’’ Already, developing countries account for the majority of greenhouse gas emissions and 

these emissions only increase without concerted action to decouple 

them from economic growth. These strategies enable developing 

countries to chart pathways to economic growth that reduce emissions over the long term while also achieving domestic growth 

objectives. 

Three other examples I would like to highlight quickly focus on 

water, forests, and wildlife trafficking. The lack of access to safe 

drinking water and basic sanitation in the Asia-Pacific region continues to be a major cause of illness. We are taking steps to increase access to safe drinking water and sanitation, improve water 

resources management, increase the productivity of water resources, and mitigate tensions associated with shared waters. 

We are also collaborating with partners throughout the AsiaPacific to conserve and sustainably manage their forests, supporting our climate change, biodiversity and development goals by 

working regionally and with key countries such as Indonesia to 

strengthen forest mapping and science, combat illegal logging, protect natural forests, and restore degraded lands. 

Turning to the last example, wildlife trafficking continues to 

drive protected and endangered species to the brink of extinction. 

The illegal trade, estimated to be between $7 and $10 billion annually excluding timber and fish, undermines conservation efforts, 

robs local communities that depend on natural resources for their 

economic resource base, contributes to the emergence and spread of 

disease, and threatens the rule of law. 

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations Wildlife Enforcement 

Network, ASEAN–WEN, of which the United States is a strong 

supporter, helps countries share information and facilitate the 

exchange of regional best practices in combating wildlife crimes. On 

July 1 President Obama signed an Executive order to combat wildlife trafficking, putting in motion a process to marshall new efforts 

and better coordinate our existing efforts against wildlife crime. 

In addition, a special session on wildlife trafficking was held 

recently during the 2013 U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue. Experts from multiple agencies met to review our efforts to 

combat the global illegal trade in wildlife and identify areas for 

increased cooperative efforts. The United States is committed to 

working with China to address this global challenge. 

It is becoming more and more vital for the United States to demonstrate our firm commitment to the Asia-Pacific through engagement on a full range of issues important to countries in the region. 

Achieving a sustainable environment in the Asia-Pacific region 

requires the cooperation and commitment of all countries. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

6

I thank the chairman, the ranking member, and the subcommittee’s distinguished members for the opportunity to testify and I will 

welcome your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Reifsnyder follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL A. REIFSNYDER

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Rubio, and members of the subcommittee, thank 

you very much for inviting me here today to testify on this important issue of protecting the environment in the context of the Rebalance to Asia. I would also like 

to thank the committee for its efforts to build bipartisan consensus to engage the 

Asia-Pacific region and advance U.S. interests there. We value working with you 

and look forward to continuing to work closely with you and other Members of Congress in the future. 

The Obama administration’s ‘‘rebalance’’ to the Asia-Pacific region is motivated by 

the desire to develop deeper and more wide-ranging partnerships in a part of the 

world that is increasingly important to American interests. The region, which is 

home to two-thirds of the world’s population and the world’s fastest-growing economies, offers increasing opportunities and challenges for U.S. strategic interests. As 

such, the administration’s rebalance to the region covers a range of strategic objectives from deepening alliances and boosting economic growth and trade, to expanding good governance, democracy, and human rights. However, no rebalance policy 

would be complete without also examining implications for efforts to protect the 

environment in the Asia-Pacific region and to promote food, water, and climate 

security. 

The East Asia and Pacific region is known for its vast natural resources and biodiversity. Its economic growth has outpaced environmental protection, which has led 

to negative impacts on the region’s fisheries and coral reefs, forests and grasslands, 

rivers, lakes, and air. Though the region has made great strides to reduce poverty, 

1.2 billion people still live on less than US$2 a day, according to the World Bank. 

At the same time, in the past decade some countries in the region have lost 70 to 

90 percent of their natural wildlife habitat to agricultural and infrastructure development, deforestation, land degradation, and climate change effects, while demand 

for water has almost doubled. Populations of big mammals such as elephants, tigers, 

bears, antelopes, and wild cattle, as well as marine turtles, freshwater fish and 

amphibians have continued to decline over the past decade. Many primate populations are in serious decline. 

Much is at stake: communities across the region are experiencing great changes 

from fast-paced economic growth averaging 5 to 7 percent annually. Recent growth 

has reduced poverty and supported progress toward achieving the Millennium 

Development Goals. Yet rapid growth, urban migration, extensive new infrastructure, exploitation of raw materials, and energy needs also jeopardize the region’s 

natural resource base, food security, and traditional livelihoods. 

The United States has a long history of engagement with countries in the AsiaPacific on a bilateral and regional basis. The Bureau of Oceans and International 

Environmental and Scientific Affairs (OES) at the U.S. Department of State seeks 

to advance U.S. foreign policy goals in the region in such critical areas as climate 

change, conservation, and environmental quality, to name a few. In my testimony, 

I will focus on several efforts the United States is undertaking in such areas as climate change, water, and conservation, among others in East Asia and the Pacific, 

and will highlight some examples of bilateral cooperation efforts. 

CLIMATE CHANGE INITIATIVES AND PARTNERSHIPS

Internationally, we have made strides in the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) toward an approach in which all major economies commit 

to reducing emissions, and we are working to negotiate a global agreement by the 

end of 2015—to come into effect post-2020—that is ambitious, flexible, and applicable to all. 

Through the Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI) and other climate-related 

U.S. Government programs, the United States is integrating climate change considerations into relevant foreign assistance programs through the full range of multilateral, bilateral, and private mechanisms to foster low-carbon growth, promote sustainable and resilient societies, and reduce emissions from deforestation and land 

degradation. 

Through the GCCI’s Sustainable Landscapes pillar and related projects, the 

United States works with partners to reduce emissions from the land sector, and 

especially from deforestation. These efforts are undertaken in order to help stabilize 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

7

temperatures while conserving biodiversity, protecting watersheds, and improving 

livelihoods of vulnerable populations. For example, the United States provides support to, and sits on the governing body of, the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility 

(FCPF). The FCPF is a multidonor trust fund housed at the World Bank that supports countries to develop and implement their own strategy to Reduce Emissions 

from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+). The United States also supports, and sits on the governing body of the Forest Investment Program (FIP). This 

multidonor trust fund, also housed at the World Bank, assists eight pilot countries 

in implementing elements of their REDD+ strategies. The Asia-Pacific region is 

prominent in each of these global initiatives. Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao People’s 

Democratic Republic, Papua New Guinea, Thailand, Vanuatu, and Vietnam are all 

participants in, and recipients of funding from, the FCPF. Indonesia and Lao People’s Democratic Republic are FIP pilot countries. Through the GCCI’s adaptation 

pillar and related projects, the United States works to help low-income countries 

reduce their vulnerability to climate change impacts in a variety of multilateral, 

regional, and bilateral contexts. The Asia-Pacific region figures prominently in these 

GCCI activities because of its high levels of vulnerability, as well as its strategic 

importance for U.S. economic and security interests. 

Another example of U.S. engagement in multilateral adaptation initiatives is our 

support for enhanced action on adaptation in vulnerable countries through contributions to two multilateral adaptation funds overseen by the Global Environment 

Facility (GEF). The United States is one of the largest donors to the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) and the Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF), multilateral funds created under the UNFCCC. The Asia-Pacific region has benefited 

greatly from both multilateral funds. As of May 2013, Asia and the Pacific had 

accessed 29 percent of total LDCF resources approved (roughly US$160 million). For 

the SCCF, the largest share, or 30 percent, of financing had been directed toward 

Asia. 

Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC) 

The Climate and Clean Air Coalition is a voluntary, collaborative global partnership uniting governments, intergovernmental organizations, the private sector, and 

civil society to quickly reduce short-lived climate pollutants such as methane, black 

carbon, and many hydrofluorocarbons. Actions can be undertaken now using current 

technologies. Major efforts include reducing methane and black carbon from waste 

and landfills; avoiding methane leakage, venting, and flaring from oil and gas production; phasing down hydrofluorocarbons through new technologies; and addressing black carbon from brick kilns and diesel engines. 

In the Asia-Pacific region the Coalition’s members include Australia, Japan, New 

Zealand, and the Republic of Korea (Bangladesh and the Maldives are also members 

from Asia). In February 2013, the Coalition held a regional intergovernmental consultation in Bangkok for the Asia-Pacific region. Led by the environment ministers 

of Bangladesh, Nepal, and Maldives and the vice-minister of Japan, over 100 participants from 19 Asia-Pacific countries, development organizations, CCAC partners, 

scientists, and NGOs participated. CCAC is actively working with additional countries, including Indonesia, at the subnational level though CCAC initiatives such as 

municipal solid waste management. 

Low Emission Development Strategies (LEDS) 

One of our premier international climate activities involves support for ‘‘low emission development strategies,’’ or LEDS, in over 20 different developing countries. 

LEDS provide a framework for developing countries to address poverty and development concerns, while simultaneously reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In many 

cases, identifying cleaner domestic energy opportunities or finding energy efficiencies accelerates economic growth. In Asia, our assistance is two-pronged. First, 

we provide bilateral assistance to Cambodia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia, 

and Vietnam through the Enhancing Capacity for Low Emission Development Strategies (EC–LEDS) program. Second, we provide multilateral assistance through the 

LEDS Global Partnership, a largely U.S.-supported platform which provides a space 

for countries to share knowledge and best practices on LEDS. 

Pacific Islands Small Developing States (PSIDS) 

From a regional standpoint, the Pacific Small Island Developing States (PSIDS), 

in particular, are especially vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. They are 

small in size, have limited human, economic, and natural resources, including freshwater supplies, and are located in areas frequently prone to natural disasters, with 

much of the population living within 1.5 kilometers of the shore. We are supporting 

efforts to enhance the scientific and technical capacity of governments, regional and 

local institutions, and communities in the PSIDS to: understand, forecast, and use 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

8

climate information to strengthen the adaptive capacity of key sectors, and, to 

access and effectively utilize adaptation financing. We are also supporting the Secretariat of the Pacific Community and the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Program to implement adaptation activities in local communities across the 

region to strengthen their food security and water resilience in the face of climate 

change and variability. 

China 

With regard to our bilateral efforts in the East Asia and Pacific region, on July 

10 and 11, 2013, Secretary Kerry hosted the Fifth Round of the U.S.-China Strategic 

and Economic Dialogue (S&ED). This year there was a strong focus on climate 

change, with the recognition that both countries need to do more given that together 

the United States and China are responsible for the lion’s share of global emissions. 

Secretary Kerry elevated climate change in the U.S.-China relationship in April on 

his first trip to Beijing as Secretary of State, where he issued a Joint Statement 

creating a Climate Change Working Group tasked with developing large-scale cooperative action and presenting its recommendations at the S&ED. Essentially, the 

Working Group developed a set of new initiatives to help address major sources of 

emissions in the United States and China. The Working Group also emphasized the 

need to work together in fora like the U.N. climate negotiations, the Montreal Protocol, and the Major Economies Forum. 

The Working Group Report highlighted the agreement announced by President 

Obama and President Xi in June on the goal of phasing down hydrofluorocarbons. 

Given the enormous climate benefits of acting quickly on hydrofluorocarbons, this 

can only be seen as China stepping forward and helping lead the global effort on 

climate change. Building on existing bilateral cooperation, the Working Group and 

the S&ED have put U.S.-China relations on climate change on even firmer footing. 

Indonesia 

Indonesia is a leader in REDD+, with President Yudhoyono having committed to 

significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, largely from the land sector. To 

achieve this, Indonesia is creating a series of REDD+ institutions to help implement 

a national REDD+ strategy. The second Indonesia Tropical Forest Conservation Act 

program is supporting the reduction of emissions from two heavily forested districts 

in East Kalimantan, developing new strategies for development on lower emissions 

trajectories. The United States supports additional work on REDD+ in Indonesia in 

areas such as forest mapping and monitoring; peatland emissions and fires; low 

emissions rural development options; and measuring, reporting, and verifying emissions. We have provided support to launch the Indonesia Climate Change Center, 

and are working with Indonesia on LEDS. 

Korea 

Korea has stepped up its international efforts to address climate change. It has 

housed the Secretariat of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Climate 

Center since the organization’s establishment in 2005. In 2012, the board of the 

UNFCCC’s Green Climate Fund (GCF) voted to locate the Fund’s headquarters in 

Songdo, Korea. The Republic of Korea (ROK) is now focused on implementing the 

GCF’s mandate, which is to provide assistance to developing countries to help them 

limit their greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to the impacts of climate change. 

The ROK also cooperates with the United States and other governments and organizations in the CCAC working to reduce short-lived climate pollutants such as methane, black carbon, and many hydrofluorocarbons. 

FOREST INITIATIVES AND PARTNERSHIPS

As the United States works to assist the Asia-Pacific region in meeting its growing energy, infrastructure, and agricultural needs in a climate-smart way, we are 

also working to prevent or minimize impacts on ecosystems, and particularly natural habitats such as biodiverse tropical forests. We work regionally to promote conservation and to address forest issues through the Responsible Asian Forestry and 

Trade (RAFT) initiative, the Forest Legality Alliance (FLA), the APEC Experts 

Group on Illegal Logging and Associated Trade, and the International Tropical Timber Organization. 

Illegal logging is one such forest issue that poses a significant challenge in the 

region. It robs countries, impoverishes forest communities, and puts money in the 

pockets of criminals. It undermines sustainable forest management, destroying forests, watersheds and habitat. And it unfairly competes with legal production and 

trade, and has even been used to fuel conflict and purchase arms. The United States 

supports efforts to combat illegal logging and associated trade, and to promote trade 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

9

in legally harvested forest products through a multifaceted approach in partnership 

with other governments, such as China and Indonesia, the private sector, civil society, and international organizations. 

We also work to implement the Lacey Act, a wildlife protection statute first 

enacted in 1900 and amended by Congress in 2008 to expand protections to plants 

and plant products. 

Multilaterally, we work to address illegal logging in cooperation with other governments and stakeholders through the Convention on International Trade in 

Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, the International Tropical Timber 

Organization, the United Nations Forum on Forests, the Food and Agriculture Organization, and the U.N. Office of Drugs and Crime. 

Regionally in Asia, we participate in three key initiatives:

• The APEC Forum Experts Group on Illegal Logging and Associated Trade, 

which we worked with the Government of Indonesia and others to establish in 

2011. The group includes representatives of trade, forestry, and other ministries 

to combat illegal logging and associated trade, promote trade in legally harvested forest products, and support capacity building activities. 

• The FLA, a public-private partnership to reduce demand for illegally harvested 

forest products and increase industry capacity to supply legally harvested forest 

products. 

• The RAFT Program, which has assisted in the development of timber legality 

assurance and chain of custody systems and has helped to bring 1.2 million hectares of tropical forest under Forest Stewardship Council certification. 

China 

The United States works bilaterally with China under a formal Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU) to Combat Illegal Logging and Associated Trade. The United 

States and China have achieved a more open and constructive dialogue and relationship on illegal logging since the signing of the MOU in May 2008. Discussions about 

the importance of private sector and civil society engagement under the MOU have 

also progressed significantly as there is mutual recognition that in the forest sector, 

civil society and industry are key players. China is actively promoting voluntary 

best practices guidelines for its private forestry firms operating overseas and making progress on its wood legality verification initiative. 

The Philippines 

We have recently signed agreements for a second Tropical Forest Conservation 

Act debt for nature deal with the Philippines, which will primarily focus on forest 

conservation and REDD+ activities. These agreements, along with other U.S. efforts, 

will support the Philippine national government’s efforts to reduce emissions from 

forest loss. Together these efforts are providing significant assistance to conserve, 

maintain, and restore tropical forests in the Philippines. 

Burma 

Burma holds the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) chairmanship 

in 2014 and the government has stated it plans to focus on the environment. Sustainable development and good management of Burma’s rich natural resources will 

be critical for its stability and success, and will provide opportunities to encourage 

Burmese civil society and government officials to implement best practices and promote sound environmental stewardship in conjunction with economic growth and increased investment. We are supporting NGO efforts to reform the timber production 

sector and combat illegal logging in Burma. 

WATER INITIATIVES AND PARTNERSHIPS

Collectively, the Asia-Pacific region has already met the 2015 Millennium Development Goal to halve the proportion of people unable to reach or afford access to 

safe water. That said, 65 percent of the population lacks access to piped water supplies and over 1.7 billion people in the Asia-Pacific region lack access to sanitation. 

The lack of access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation continue to be a major 

source of illness within the region. 

As Secretary Kerry said during his chairmanship of the July 1, 2013, Lower 

Mekong Initiative and Friends of the Lower Mekong Ministerial Meetings in Brunei, 

‘‘[the Mekong] is a special river. It sustains the lives of over 70 million people. And 

it is a powerful economic engine that connects the peoples of these countries.’’ The 

countries of the Mekong Basin are increasingly considering hydropower as a solution to their growing energy needs. However, construction of dams on the Mekong 

River poses immediate and long-term threats to food security and livelihoods. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

10

Major infrastructure projects, like dams, are ultimately sovereign decisions that 

the countries themselves need to make. We are, however, conscious of both the 

potential negative impacts these projects can have and the opportunities they hold 

to promote cooperation and regional integration. In the case of the Mekong, we believe greater U.S. diplomatic and technical engagement could help strengthen existing regional institutions (like the Mekong River Commission) and drive the region 

toward better decisionmaking around large-scale infrastructure. With plans drafted, 

and construction already underway, the region has a narrow window of time to get 

this right. Smart, sustainable development is the key; deliberative, transparent, scientifically based decisionmaking benefits all. 

The Lower Mekong Initiative (LMI) 

Launched by former Secretary Clinton in 2009 to foster cooperation and capacitybuilding among the lower Mekong countries—Burma, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, 

and Vietnam—the Lower Mekong Initiative (LMI) has become a meaningful platform for engaging these countries on important transnational challenges such as 

shared water resource management. LMI’s Environment and Water Pillar, chaired 

by Vietnam, works to advance economic growth and sustainable development 

through transnational policy dialogues and programs to improve the management 

of water and natural resources. The Environment and Water pillar works through 

three key themes: Disaster Risk Reduction, Water Security, and Natural Resource 

Conservation and Management. 

CONSERVATION INITIATIVES AND PARTNERSHIPS

Wildlife Trafficking 

Wildlife trafficking continues to drive protected and endangered species to the 

brink of extinction. The illegal trade, estimated to be between US$7–10 billion 

annually (excluding timber and fish), undermines conservation efforts, robs local 

communities that depend on natural resources of their economic resource base, contributes to the emergence and spread of disease, and threatens the rule of law. 

Asian countries are range, transit, and consumer states, linked by multiple transportation routes, methods, and facilitators. In recent years, demand for ivory and 

rhino horn has skyrocketed. The scale of the illegal wildlife trade in Asia indicates 

serious corruption at various levels of government, including wildlife authorities and 

customs officials themselves, throughout the smuggling chain. Officially launched in 

2005, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Wildlife Enforcement Network 

(ASEAN–WEN), comprising law enforcement agencies of the 10 ASEAN countries 

(Brunei, Burma, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, 

Vietnam, and Thailand), helps countries share information and facilitate the exchange of regional best practices in combating wildlife crimes. 

In 2012, the APEC Leaders and Foreign and Environment Ministers condemned 

wildlife trafficking and urged members to cooperate to counter this crime. We are 

seeking continued strong statements in the 2013 outcome documents and have proposed specific workshop activities. This past July 1, President Obama signed an 

Executive order to combat wildlife trafficking, putting in motion a process to marshal new efforts and to better coordinate our existing efforts against wildlife crime. 

A special session on wildlife trafficking was held recently during the 2013 U.S.-

China Strategic and Economic Dialogue. Experts from multiple agencies met to review our efforts to combat the global illegal trade in wildlife and identify areas for 

increased cooperative efforts. The United States is committed to working with China 

to address this global challenge. 

The Coral Triangle Initiative (CTI) 

The Coral Triangle Initiative (CTI) highlights the importance of a regional 

approach to issues that transcend the national borders of Indonesia, Philippines, 

Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Timor-Leste: coral reef and 

marine conservation, food security and adaptation to climate change. Goals include 

establishing sustainable ecosystem-based fisheries management for food security 

and livelihoods, strengthening resilience and adaptation to climate change, designating and effectively managing priority seascapes, establishing networks of marine 

protected areas, and conserving threatened marine species. The United States Government was the first financial supporter and partner to the CTI. The U.S. team 

providing support to the CTI involves the State Department, USAID, NOAA, a 

consortium of NGOs, and a contractor which functions as the Program Integrator. 

Altogether, U.S. Government support totals more than $60 million. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

11

MARINE ENVIRONMENT AND FISHERIES

In the Pacific, as elsewhere, the United States has been at the forefront of efforts 

to protect vulnerable marine ecosystems, assess if certain fishing practices may significantly harm these ecosystems, and develop effective conservation and management measures for these fisheries to prevent such harm or halt fishing in these 

areas. To promote these objectives, and to provide opportunities for U.S. fishing vessels to participate in certain high seas fisheries, we have successfully negotiated two 

new fisheries agreements that are now pending before the Senate, one for the North 

Pacific Ocean and one for the South Pacific Ocean. We urge the Senate to consider 

these two treaties and two other fisheries treaties that are also before the Senate, 

with a view to providing advice and consent to their ratification this session. 

The Multilateral Treaty on Fisheries between the Governments of Certain Pacific 

Island States and the Government of the United States (a.k.a. the South Pacific 

Tuna Treaty) remains a cornerstone of our economic and political relationship with 

the 16 states of the Pacific Island Forum. The Economic Assistance Agreement associated with the treaty remains a primary source of economic development funds for 

the Pacific Island States. Recently, we reached agreement on an interim arrangement to extend the operation of the treaty for 18 months, through December 2014, 

while negotiations for a longer term extension continue. 

TRADE

Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) 

The United States views the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a regional trade 

agreement that it is negotiating with Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, Mexico, Canada, and Japan, as a unique opportunity to tackle trade-related environmental challenges, including harmful illegal 

wildlife and wild plant trade, in the Asia-Pacific region. 

The United States has proposed a TPP environment chapter that includes, among 

other things:

• An obligation to maintain measures against trading across TPP borders in products harvested or exported in violation of national laws that seek to protect 

wildlife, forest, or living marine resources. Such provisions would reflect and 

enhance recent trends in a number of countries to restrict trade in products 

that have been illegally obtained. • Mechanisms for cooperation among TPP regulatory and law enforcement

authorities in implementing antitrafficking obligations, including participation 

in and establishment of regional law enforcement networks. • Commitments to develop and strengthen mechanisms for cooperating and consulting with interested nongovernmental entities in order to enhance implementation of measures to combat trade in illegally taken wild fauna and flora, 

including with respect to voluntary forest certification mechanisms. 

Republic of Korea 

The United States and the ROK signed an Environmental Cooperation Agreement 

(ECA) on January 23, 2012, pursuant to provisions in the environment chapter of 

the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement. The ECA established the U.S.-Korea Environmental Cooperation Commission (ECC), which held its first meeting in February 

this year. The Environmental Cooperation Work Program approved by the ECC 

identifies priorities for cooperative activities is areas such as strengthening environmental protection; promoting public awareness of environmental and resource conservation issues; protecting wildlife and sustainably managing ecosystems and natural resources; sustainably managing ports and maritime vessels; and promoting 

environmentally sustainable cities and the use of cleaner energy sources. 

Singapore 

The United States and Singapore have a Memorandum of Intent on Environmental Cooperation, which was negotiated in 2003 in parallel with the Free Trade 

Agreement. We are actively engaged with Singapore in environmental cooperation 

activities, including exchanging best practices in water management, climate change 

adaptation strategies, enforcement of environmental laws, and energy efficiency, 

among others. On June 27, 2013, Singapore’s national water agency, the Public Utilities Board (PUB) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency signed 

a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on Sustainable Urban Water Management. Through this MOU, both countries will strengthen their cooperation on water 

management issues by working together on safe drinking water research, watershed 

management, research and development for innovative water and wastewater treatment, water reuse, and other areas of mutual interest. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

12

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, it is becoming more and more important for the United States to 

demonstrate our firm commitment to the Asia-Pacific through engagement on a full 

range of issues important to countries in the region, including the environmental 

issues I have mentioned today. Achieving a sustainable environment in the AsiaPacific region requires the cooperation and commitment of all countries. The United 

States continues to forge this cooperation and these commitments through a variety 

of global, regional, and bilateral approaches. 

I thank the chairman, the ranking member, and the subcommittee’s distinguished 

members, for the opportunity to testify, and I welcome your questions.

Senator CARDIN. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Beck. 

STATEMENT OF HON. GREGORY BECK, DEPUTY ASSISTANT 

ADMINISTRATOR FOR ASIA, U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. BECK. Chairman Cardin, thank you for the invitation to testify on the administration’s efforts to protect the environment and 

promote food and water security in the Asia-Pacific region. As part 

of the rebalance, a key economic and national security priority, the 

administration has recognized the need to preserve natural 

resources and promote sustainable development in the region to 

ensure mutual prosperity, progress, and security. Home to more 

than half of the world’s population, Asia is the fastest growing 

region in the world and suffers from a lack of access to clean water 

and air, inadequate food supplies, degradation of natural resources, 

and loss of biodiversity. 

The Asia-Pacific region already accounts for more than one-quarter of global GDP, a number that is expected to rise rapidly in the 

future. Asia’s economic growth comes with an increased demand for 

energy and land, which could in turn increase greenhouse gas 

emissions and further threaten tropical forests and marine ecosystems. The effects of these threats are not limited to the AsiaPacific region. Reports have shown that air pollution emanating 

from Asia will cause the temperature in the United States to rise 

as much, or even more, than all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. By 

some estimates, more than 10 billion pounds of airborne pollutants 

from Asia reach the United States annually, that impacts the 

health and well-being of American citizens. 

These compelling needs require USAID assistance and support to 

advance U.S. strategic interests. The Presidential global climate 

change initiative invests in developing countries to accelerate transitions to climate-resilient, low-emission economic growth. During 

fiscal year 2013 USAID provided $334 million for this Presidential 

initiative, of which $65.4 million was for the Asia-Pacific region. 

USAID’s programs work on development strategies to reduce 

emissions from deforestation and degradation, address the impacts 

of climate change on agriculture and marine fisheries, and protect 

biodiversity and wildlife through both the Lower Mekong Initiative, 

or the LMI, and the Association for Southeastern Asians, or 

ASEAN, and bilateral country programs. I would like to take just 

a few moments to describe some of these programs in further 

detail. 

In 2010 the U.S. Government launched the Enhancing Capacity 

for Low Emissions Development Strategies Program, a framework 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

13

for achieving economic and social development objectives while 

reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In East Asia we are partnering 

with Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, and most 

recently Cambodia to help governments and institutions plan for 

climate-resilient low-emissions development. 

Regionally, we are focusing on reducing deforestation to lower 

emissions through a program called Lowering Emissions in Asia’s 

Forests. Target countries include the countries of the Lower 

Mekong River region, as well as Malaysia and Papua-New Guinea, 

with potential for sharing best practices with other countries across 

Asia. The regional program is working toward improving the management of over 1 million hectares of forests and reducing an estimated 15 million carbon dioxide equivalent tons of emissions. 

Global challenges require global responses and participation from 

all sectors, public, private, and civil society. The Tropical Forest 

Alliance 2020 is an example of a public-private partnership to 

reduce tropical deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions associated with key global commodities, such as soy, beef, palm oil, pulp, 

and paper. It is a whole of U.S. Government effort that works 

directly with governments and producers and buyers of key commodities to end the cutting of tropical forests for their production. 

As environment, water, and food security issues extend beyond 

national boundaries, it is also crucial to foster regional cooperation 

through existing institutions such as ASEAN, the Coral Triangle 

Initiative, the Mekong River Commission, and LMI. For example, 

through LMI the Mekong Adaptation and Resilience to Climate 

Change Project focuses on identifying the environmental, economic, 

and social effects of climate change on the Lower Mekong River 

Basin, which sustains the lives of over 70 million people and supports their ability to adapt their livelihoods to climate change 

impacts on water resources, agriculture systems, biodiversity, and 

ecosystems. 

The CTI is a unique example of countries joining forces to 

develop and implement regional solutions for regional problems. 

This area in the Western Pacific Ocean is the world’s most biodiverse marine ecosystem, providing economic and food security 

benefits to over 360 million people. 

In January of this year, with support from USAID, senior officials from the CTI countries signed a resolution to address the negative impacts of an estimated yearly $1 billion fish trade, a concrete step to support the sustainability of marine resources. 

Trafficking of wildlife, the third-largest area of illegal trade after 

arms and drugs, also harms the environment by exploiting natural 

resources and endangering threatened species and ecosystems. 

Asia’s Regional Response To Endangered Species Trafficking, or 

ARREST, is USAID’s flagship antiwildlife trafficking program, 

working to strengthen law enforcement capacity, reduce consumer 

demand, and promote regional information-sharing and cooperation. 

In conclusion, USAID will continue to emphasize cooperation 

amongst countries and help build strong democratic processes 

across the Asia-Pacific region for open dialogue and problemsolving in relation to the environment and climate change. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

14

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your time and I look forward to 

answering your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Beck follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. GREGORY BECK

Chairman Cardin, Senator Rubio, and distinguished members of the committee, 

thank you for the invitation to testify on the administration’s efforts to protect the 

environment and promote food and water security in the Asia-Pacific region. Today, 

I hope to share with you how USAID is helping conserve water and food sources 

in the region through programs which promote sustainable development. I will also 

share details on our regional and bilateral efforts to reduce the degradation of 

oceans, air, and forests. 

As part of the rebalance to the Asia-Pacific, a key economic and national security 

priority, the administration has recognized the need to preserve the environment 

and protect food and water resources in the region to ensure mutual prosperity, 

human progress, and security. Within USAID, the Asia-Pacific region has been a 

focus for the environment and food security given its rich areas of biodiversity and 

growing populations. The Rebalance has sharpened our focus and increased our investment in support of regional institutions and initiatives such as the Association 

of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Lower Mekong Initiative (LMI), and the 

Coral Triangle Initiative on Coral Reefs, Fisheries, and Food Security. 

Home to more than half the world’s population, Asia is the fastest growing region 

in the world and suffers from a lack of access to clean water and air; inadequate 

food supplies; degradation of natural resources; and loss of biodiversity—all of which 

undermine sustainable development. The Asia-Pacific region already accounts for 

more than one-quarter of global GDP, a number that is expected to rise. Asia’s economic growth comes with an increased demand for energy and land which could, 

in turn, increase greenhouse gas emissions and further threaten tropical forests and 

marine ecosystems. Climate change and its impact on natural resources is affecting 

water and food supplies and intensifying environmental and resource problems that 

communities are already facing. More than a billion Asians are projected to suffer 

from its adverse effects. At the same time, natural disasters are becoming more frequent and more severe in Asia—an area of the world that already experiences over 

60 percent of the world’s major natural disasters. Future environmental threats to 

Asia are projected to be significant, including more extreme weather and rising sea 

levels. 

The effects of these threats are not limited to the Asia-Pacific region. Reports 

have shown that air pollution emanating from Asia will cause temperatures in the 

United States to rise as much, or even more, than all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. By some estimates, more than 10 billion pounds of airborne pollutants from 

Asia, including soot, mercury, and carbon dioxide, reach the U.S. annually, which 

impacts the health and well-being of American citizens. Additionally, degradation of 

fisheries in Asian waters impact supply in American markets. 

These compelling needs require U.S. assistance and support to advance our strategic interests. As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, the U.S. Government, and specifically USAID, recognizes that environmental conditions and people’s 

access to natural resources underlie efforts to achieve economic security, political 

stability, and peace throughout the globe. If successful climate mitigation and adaptation strategies are not adopted in the near term, hundreds of millions of people 

will face increasing pressure on water resources; damage to crops and housing; and 

exposure to extreme weather, diseases, and pests. We know that the world’s poorest 

will be the most affected by these changes and USAID is working with our partners 

to mitigate these effects and protect the environment, especially in the Asia-Pacific 

region. 

With a new emphasis on helping vulnerable communities build resilience to natural disasters, the Presidential Global Climate Change Initiative invests in developing countries to accelerate transitions to climate-resilient, low-emission economic 

growth. During FY 2013, USAID will provide $460.3 million for this Presidential 

Initiative, of which $65.4 million is planned for the Asia-Pacific region. 

As part of these efforts, USAID is implementing several programs throughout the 

region to combat global climate change. For our work to be relevant in the AsiaPacific region, we are using a different business model, one that emphasizes work 

with local partners so that we enact solutions that are durable and sustainable. We 

recognize the need for robust partnerships that can have national impact by focusing on partnerships with the private sector, other donors, and host country governments that leverage significant resources for transformational impact. And we also 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

15

rely on evidence-based development methods that draw from advances in science, 

technology, and innovation. We are implementing partnerships with American and 

Asian scientific and academic institutions that are relevant to these complex challenges and can build off of the latest research and technology. 

Therefore, we are working in partnership with governments, civil society, and the 

private sector, among other stakeholders, to find alternative development pathways 

that lower greenhouse gas emissions and increase the resilience of communities and 

economies to climate change impacts. We are also working to help countries and 

communities prepare for and adapt to climate change and extreme weather events. 

Much of this work involves maintaining healthy forests, rivers, and oceans to increase resilience to climate change. 

USAID’s programs include working with countries and the private sector on low 

emission development strategies; reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation; understanding the impacts of climate change on agriculture and marine 

fisheries; protecting biodiversity, including wildlife, through the LMI and ASEAN 

regional institutions; bilateral programs in countries like Indonesia and the Philippines; and the Tropical Forest Alliance 2020, a public-private partnership working 

to reduce global deforestation associated with key global commodities. 

I would like to take a moment to describe some of these programs in further 

detail. 

ENHANCING CAPACITY FOR LOW EMISSION DEVELOPMENT

First, I’ll talk about our efforts to promote climate-resilient, low-emission development in the Asia-Pacific region. In 2010, the U.S. Government launched the 

Enhancing Capacity for Low Emission Development Strategies (EC–LEDS) program. 

A Low Emission Development Strategy (LEDS), broadly defined, is a country’s planning and implementation framework that achieves economic and social development 

objectives while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We are now partnering with 20 

countries to help governments and institutions plan for climate-resilient, low-emission development. In East Asia, partner countries include Indonesia, Philippines, 

Thailand, Vietnam, and most recently Cambodia, which signed on in June 2013. The 

EC–LEDS program is managed by USAID and the U.S. Department of State, drawing upon experts from the U.S. Government’s Environmental Protection Agency and 

Departments of Agriculture, Energy, and Treasury. Our partnership with the State 

Department helps enhance key diplomatic relationships with partner countries as 

we work to achieve an effective global approach for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to levels that protect the climate for our children and future generations. 

Our regional mission in Bangkok is advancing countries’ ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through the Low Emissions Asian Development (LEAD) program. LEAD supports regional-level training, technical assistance, knowledgesharing, and partnership platforms to advance the U.S. Government’s international 

initiatives on LEDS. Among its initial achievements, the LEAD program has successfully organized and launched the LEDS partnership, a new flagship platform for 

several hundred government and nongovernment practitioners in Asia to engage in 

peer-learning, hands-on training, and knowledge-sharing on a range of topics related 

to LEDS and green growth. 

REDUCED EMISSIONS FROM DEFORESTATION AND DEGRADATION

We are also working to reduce deforestation to avoid carbon dioxide emissions 

while actively conserving remaining stands of natural forests. Our activities target 

countries that are large-scale emitters from deforestation, such as Indonesia; those 

with large existing stands of forests, such as Cambodia; and those with the potential 

to reduce carbon emissions through reforestation, such as the Philippines. 

Indonesia is a major emitter of greenhouse gases because of widespread forest 

clearance and burning of areas on peat soils for plantation establishment. Just 

recently, Malaysia and Singapore were affected by hazardous levels of air pollution 

from the illegal burning of forests and peat lands in Indonesia. USAID is working 

to avoid such emissions. The USAID Indonesia Forestry and Climate Support program is an integrated climate change, sustainable forest management, and low carbon emissions development activity that is implemented collaboratively by the Governments of Indonesia and the United States. It builds on 20 years of joint forest 

management efforts between the two governments, and supports key climate change 

initiatives of the Indonesian Government including its pledge to reduce emissions 

by 41 percent. The project also supports sustainable development of local economies 

by engaging the private sector. Targeted results include a 6 million ton reduction 

in carbon dioxide emissions; improved management of 3 million hectares of forest, 

including 1.7 million hectares in priority orangutan habitat; and plans in 12 disFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

16

tricts that incorporate Strategic Environmental Assessment recommendations for 

forest and peat land conservation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 

Regionally, we are focusing on reduced emissions from deforestation and forest 

degradation through a program called Lowering Emissions in Asia’s Forests. This 

program is a regional technical assistance program helping developing countries in 

the Lower Mekong to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. 

Target countries include the countries of the Lower Mekong River region (Cambodia, 

Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam) as well as Malaysia and Papua New Guinea, with 

potential for sharing best practices with other countries across Asia. The regional 

program is working toward improving the management of over 1 million hectares 

of forests, reducing an estimated 15 million carbon dioxide-equivalent tons of emissions, and supporting 25 institutions to address climate change issues. The Lowering Emissions in Asia’s Forests program is also working to integrate gender considerations throughout the program to empower 20 women leaders and to strengthen 

the role of women in eight organizations across the region. 

TROPICAL FOREST ALLIANCE 2020

Global challenges like reducing emissions from deforestation necessitate global 

responses. Such responses require participation from all sectors: public, private, and 

civil society. The Tropical Forest Alliance 2020, called TFA 2020 for short, is an 

example of a public-private partnership to reduce the tropical deforestation and 

greenhouse gas emissions associated with key global commodities, such as soy, beef, 

palm oil, and pulp and paper. It is a whole of U.S. Government effort, with USAID 

as lead, working closely with the State Department and other departments and 

agencies. The significance of this alliance is its ability to achieve scale in reducing 

deforestation and associated greenhouse gas emissions. It will work directly with 

governments in buying and producing countries, as well as the producers and buyers of these commodities, to end the cutting of tropical forests for commodity production. In June 2013, TFA 2020 held its first workshop in Indonesia on palm oil and 

pulp and paper. This workshop was an unprecedented opportunity as it brought together for the first time private sector and civil society groups, often at odds with 

each other, to discuss constructively the challenge of tropical deforestation and how 

to address it. During this workshop, strong private sector commitments were made 

to stop deforestation, and the Government of Indonesia committed to protecting the 

rights of indigenous people dependent on tropical forests. 

FOOD SECURITY

USAID efforts are also focused on strengthening food security by improving the 

agricultural production of small-scale farmers. For example, the Cambodia HARVEST program supports Cambodia’s Millennium Development Goal targets, including reducing extreme poverty and hunger; ensuring environmental sustainability; 

enhancing agricultural production; improving harvest yields and distribution; 

increasing access to food; and improving resource management and resilience. HARVEST—which stands for Helping Address Rural Vulnerabilities and Ecosystem Stability—integrates two Presidential Initiatives: Feed the Future and Global Climate 

Change. In Cambodia’s Pursat province, the program helped poor women by providing business opportunities, promoting the use of sustainable products and offering environmentally friendly alternatives to traditional income-generating activities 

such as logging and charcoalmaking. This effort helps communities protect their forest resources through a variety of activities, including tree nurseries, wood lots, and 

agroforestry, while providing a source of income for villagers. For example, the 

project helped the Ou Baktra Community Forest by planting 2,000 seedlings in an 

effort to restore partially degraded forest areas. 

REGIONAL COOPERATION ON ENVIRONMENT, WATER AND FOOD SECURITY

As environment, water, and food security issues extend beyond bilateral boundaries, it is also crucial to foster regional cooperation through existing institutions 

such as ASEAN, the Coral Triangle Initiative, the Mekong River Commission, and 

LMI. Through these regional bodies, we can facilitate knowledge-sharing among 

countries and improve the management of national and transboundary natural 

resources such as water, forests, and fisheries. 

USAID has capitalized on the LMI as a framework to foster common interests 

between Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Vietnam, and Burma with the goal of enhancing 

cooperation in areas such as the environment, education, infrastructure development, and agriculture and food security. As part of the LMI, USAID supports 

several climate change and environment programs. For example, the Mekong Adaptation and Resilience to Climate Change project focuses on identifying the environFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

17

mental, economic, and social effects of climate change in the Lower Mekong River 

basin, which sustains the lives of over 70 million people. The project also assists 

highly vulnerable populations in ecologically sensitive areas to increase their ability 

to adapt their livelihoods to climate change impacts on water resources, agricultural 

systems, biodiversity, and ecosystems. 

Through Feed the Future, USAID has been working to strengthen and institutionalize ASEAN public-private sector engagement on food security by engaging in 

public-private dialogues at both the working group and minister-levels. The December 2012 ASEAN Public-Private Dialogue on Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture, 

a collaboration of ASEAN’s public and private sectors, established a taskforce for 

sustainable fisheries and aquaculture and formalized operational guidelines to focus 

on accelerating sustainable and responsible aquaculture practices. As a result, an 

ASEAN good aquaculture practices, standards, and certification scheme is being 

developed to improve the social and economic situation of small-scale farmers and 

boost the supply of sustainable, responsible, and traceable farmed aquaculture products. By increasing the availability of a key protein source, safeguarding rural livelihoods, expanding incomes, and reducing environmental vulnerability in the region 

the long-term impact of such activities will be enhanced food security. 

USAID is also committed to preserving the oceans in the Asia-Pacific region 

through initiatives like the Coral Triangle Initiative, a unique example of countries 

joining forces to develop and implement regional solutions for regional problems. 

The Coral Triangle marine area in the Western Pacific Ocean is the world’s most 

biodiverse marine ecosystem, providing economic and food security benefits to over 

360 million people in the Coral Triangle region and many more around the world. 

In January 2013, with support from USAID, senior officials from the six Coral 

Triangle countries took a concrete step to support the sustainability of marine 

resources by signing a resolution to address the negative impacts of an estimated 

$1 billion per year live reef food fish trade in the Southeast Asia and Coral Triangle 

regions. In Indonesia, USAID programs in support of the Coral Triangle Initiative 

continue to focus on building the technical expertise and management of the 

Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries. Our goal is to optimize the intersection 

of conservation, sustainability, and profit so that Indonesia’s vast marine wealth 

contributes to long-term national development while adapting to climate change. For 

example, USAID has worked with the Indonesian Government and its people to 

improve the management of over 10 million hectares of coastal zones and marine 

protected areas. In addition, the programhas trained over 1,700 individuals in 

natural resources management, biodiversity conservation, and climate change 

resilience. 

BIODIVERSITY AND WILDLIFE TRAFFICKING

We are also fighting the trafficking of wildlife—the third-largest area of illegal 

trade after arms and drugs and often a source of financing for organized crime and 

terrorist organizations. Wildlife trafficking activities also directly harm the environment, by exploiting natural resources and endangering threatened species and ecosystems. Asia’s Regional Response to Endangered Species Trafficking (ARREST) is 

USAID’s flagship 5-year, $8 million biodiversity antiwildlife trafficking program. 

ARREST is implemented by Freeland Foundation, a Bangkok-based NGO, together 

with local partners in the 10 ASEAN countries and U.S. Government agencies such 

as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, State Department, and U.S. Forest Service. 

ARREST’s holistic approach works to strengthen law enforcement capacity, reduce 

consumer demand, and promote regional information sharing and cooperation across 

Asia. ARREST continues to build on the ASEAN-Wildlife Enforcement Network. 

Successes to date include increasing arrests and seizures of illegal wildlife trafficking by elevenfold since 2005; training more than 3,000 government officials in 

law enforcement techniques; strengthening regional cooperation through a functioning and self-sustainable Secretariat; and raising the awareness of more than 100 

million individuals about endangered species that are threatened by consumer demand. We also partner with international law enforcement organizations such as 

INTERPOL’s Project PREDATOR to combat the illegal trade in tigers and snow 

leopards. 

WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION

And finally, the USAID Indonesia Urban Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene project 

is supporting the Government of Indonesia in its efforts to achieve Indonesia’s Millennium Development Goal targets for safe water and sanitation. The $33.7 million, 

5-year effort, which began in 2011 and is part of the U.S.-Indonesia Comprehensive 

Partnership, works in more than 50 municipalities across the archipelago to help 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

18

provide access to safe water for up to 2 million people in urban areas and access 

to improved sanitation for up to 200,000 people. The project has been active in 34 

urban areas and in the coming year will expand to 20 additional cities. To date 

almost 250,000 people have obtained access to a safe water supply, an estimated 

13,730 individuals now have access to improved sanitation and, in areas surveyed, 

the per-unit cost of water paid by the urban poor has decreased by an estimated 

32 percent. 

Our work has also improved water access for nearly 800,000 people in the Philippines and resulted in the financing of projects that will potentially improve water 

access for 1.8 million more people by mobilizing 42 million dollar’s worth of loans 

from private banks to fund 7 utility-scale projects; training local government units 

and water districts on project design resulting in the implementation of 164 municipal projects; and strengthening public-private sector partnerships which have 

implemented 36 village-level water projects. 

CONCLUSION

I would like to close by emphasizing the interconnectedness of the world particularly in the context of climate change. This is clearly the case with greenhouse gas 

emissions, but also where global commodity markets and unsustainable resource 

management drive deforestation and degradation of transboundary water resources. 

The world is moving from an era of simple solutions to one in which we must 

address more complex global challenges like climate change in order to ensure a 

healthier, safer, and more prosperous future for both the people of Asia and the 

United States. 

As such, USAID will continue to emphasize alliances among countries, through 

efforts like the Coral Triangle Initiative and public-private sector alliances like the 

Tropical Forest Alliance 2020, and to help build strong democratic processes across 

the Asia-Pacific region, for open dialogue and problem solving in relation to the 

environment and climate change. 

Thank you for your time, and I look forward to answering your questions.

Senator CARDIN. Well, let me thank both of you for your presentations. 

Mr. Beck, let me just have you talk a little bit more about the 

Lower Mekong Initiative as to what leverage the United States

has working with the Lower Mekong Initiative to deal with some 

of the water security issues and the dam projects that have been 

planned. Can you just bring us up to date as to where you think 

we could be effective in using that initiative to advance water security issues? 

Mr. BECK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that question. I was 

most recently out in Brunei with Secretary Kerry and we cochaired 

the Lower Mekong Initiative ministerial. It was a great opportunity 

for us to be working with the five countries who obviously are very 

interconnected by the Mekong. It was really interesting because 

Secretary Kerry talked about his experience on the Mekong as a 

young man and noticed at an early age how important it is to protect that for the livelihoods and the peace and prosperity of those 

five nations. 

At the LMI ministerial, I was able to announce two new programs that USAID is initiating. One of them is building out a platform, an opportunity for us to bring in the technical expertise of 

the interagency of the U.S. Government, from USAID, from Corps 

of Engineers, and to be connecting them up with the planners of 

these large infrastructure projects. 

As you noted earlier, seven megadams have already been built 

up on the upper Mekong in China and I think 20 more are in process. So we need to give them the best technical information so that 

they understand what the impact will be on the downstream 

nations. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

19

The second program that we rolled out is also an opportunity for 

us to connect up those planners with the people. Obviously, the 70 

million people in the Lower Mekong region will be directly impacted by the way those infrastructure projects are shaped. So by 

bringing in the people, by bringing in the nongovernmental organizations and civil society organizations, to be involved in that conversation to help in the planning and to be mitigating some of the 

most damaging parts of infrastructure projects, we think we will 

help to mitigate and also to provide better planning and better 

projects, to ensure that the livelihoods are protected of those 

people. 

I think 70 percent of the population in the Lower Mekong Basin 

survive on agriculture and fisheries. So we believe those two 

projects will be most helpful. 

Senator CARDIN. Well, in some cases just the presence of the dam 

itself is going to create a major challenge on these issues. In other 

cases, you can mitigate the effects. How receptive are the countries 

to mitigation plans or using best practices to deal with the consequences of the dam being placed on the river? 

Mr. BECK. Obviously, because China is where many of the dams 

are being built, but of course also Cambodia and Laos—the dam in 

Cambodia is actually going to have the most impact on the people 

of Cambodia. So we do see some initial opening to engaging with 

us on that by bringing in our technical experts. So we are seeing 

some initial receptivity to that. But I think there’s still a tremendous amount of work to be done. 

We also find that by working with civil society organizations, by 

strengthening their capacity to advocate on behalf of the citizens 

of the Lower Mekong Basin, that that will also be effective in driving the interests of the people forward to ensure that they are considered and they are protected in those projects. 

Senator CARDIN. Thank you. 

Mr. Reifsnyder, I want to get into the relationship with China. 

Could you bring us up to date as to what has happened since the 

commitment to set up a working group on climate change between 

the United States and China? Then I would also like you to comment on the press account today that—the report says the government said recently it would name and shame China’s dirtiest cities, 

as well as force factories to disclose environmental standards publicly, in an attempt to bring them into line. It also set targets of 

cutting emissions intensity in key industries by 30 percent by 2017. 

At least one banking expert in the region said it is the most 

aggressive policy effort to address air quality issues in Chinese 

history. Is there a real hope here and how is the working group 

functioning? 

Mr. REIFSNYDER. Thank you, Senator, for those questions, which 

are excellent. I think that, first of all, let me address the second 

question first because in many ways I think it is China’s recognition of the problem that is having——

Senator CARDIN. I’m not sure your mike is on. 

Mr. REIFSNYDER. I guess it is red when you speak, OK. 

Thank you for the excellent questions. I think the second question actually leads to the first, so if I could address that one. It is 

recognition by China of the problem it is having domestically in 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

20

many of its major cities with air pollution, just as you mentioned 

in Beijing in your trip in June. I myself have been to China three 

times this year. The air pollution in many areas is just very, very 

difficult for people. 

That is giving rise, as you correctly noted, to a political concern. 

People are agitating for change. I think this is well recognized by 

the Chinese Government. The current 5-year plan is very aggressive in this way. Our sense is that the Chinese are very determined 

to take this on, because they have to. 

It is partly for that reason that we have found some real receptivity as well to the overtures we have made recently, particularly 

with Secretary Kerry’s visit in April, where he was able to propose 

a new working group, a Climate Change Working Group, that he 

asked to develop recommendations barely 3 months later for the 

Strategic and Economic Dialogue that took place here in Washington just 2 weeks ago. 

That working group met very intensively. Todd Stern, our Special Envoy for Climate Change, and Zie Zhenhua, Vice Chairman 

of the National Development and Reform Commission, led that 

effort on each side. They produced new initiatives in the areas that 

I mentioned in my testimony: heavy-duty vehicles, reducing emissions from heavy-duty vehicles, which is one of the fastest growing 

areas of emissions in both countries; increasing carbon capture, utilization, and storage; increasing energy efficiency in buildings, 

industry, and transport; improving greenhouse gas data collection 

and management; and promoting smart grids. 

One of the most interesting developments I think recently in 

China has been the new carbon exchange that has been set up in 

Guangdong province in Shenzhen. We were there right after the 

opening. It is an effort on a regional basis to begin emissions trading in China, which is very fascinating. There is a cooperative 

effort being undertaken now with California in that regard and we 

met with California officials also when we were there. So there are 

some very interesting developments. 

I think China is quite serious about addressing air pollution and 

it is also that seriousness, that concern about air pollution, that 

leads to many openings for us to work together also to address climate change. 

Senator CARDIN. Is there anything we should be doing to 

strengthen the prospects of a constructive outcome with our 

engagement in China? 

Mr. REIFSNYDER. Thank you, Senator. In fact you are doing a 

great deal, and I could cite some examples. Your trip in June that 

you mentioned—the fact that we have senior members of our Congress going to China, talking with Chinese officials, meeting with 

Chinese enterprises and others, conveying our concern and our 

willingness to work with them, I think that’s a very powerful message. 

The letter that you sent to President Obama, that you and others 

sent to President Obama in early June about the HFC issue, which 

I think was very helpful. 

The hearings that you are conducting on the Rebalance in Asia. 

I think all of these things are very constructive efforts on the part 

of Congress and we welcome them. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

21

Senator CARDIN. Let me just make an observation from my visit. 

I found the government officials I talked with—I thought they were 

very sincere in trying to develop workable plans. I think they have 

taken steps. They recognize they have a political problem as well 

as a real problem from the point of view of the health of their people. So I think there really is a genuine opportunity here to make 

some advancement. 

Let me switch gears a little bit to the overfishing issue and the 

management of fish stock in the region. It not only presents a 

resource problem, but it also is a security issue. It is the source of 

much of the maritime security conflicts, fishing rights, et cetera. 

How can the United States be effectively involved here to deal with 

the management of the problems of overfishing? 

Mr. REIFSNYDER. Well, perhaps I could start on that. We are involved already. We have been for many years in a number of 

regional fishery management organizations. These are efforts collectively to try to come to grips with the overfishing problems and 

so forth. We have had some success in these areas with reducing 

illegal, unreported fishing and so forth. So I think it is the engagement through regional efforts of regional, we call them ‘‘RFMOs,’’ 

regional fishery management organizations, that is our best entree 

to try to help influence the overfishing that is taking place. 

Mr. BECK. Mr. Chairman, if I might add, too, just in addition to 

Dan. On the Coral Triangle Initiative, this is also I think a perfect 

opportunity for us to be engaging with the six countries who are 

at the epicenter of fisheries in the world. It is known as the Amazon of the ocean at the Coral Triangle Initiative. So working at 

both the policy level to ensure that we are aligning policies that are 

protecting those fisheries amongst the six countries, but also then 

working down at the community level to ensure that we are protecting those overfished areas, I think that is an opportunity for us 

also to have some impact. 

Senator CARDIN. When I was in Korea we talked about the problems of North Korea beyond just the nuclear risk factors. We 

talked about deforestation. North Korea has lost 30 percent of its 

forests in the last 20 years. It is having a devastating impact on 

its crop and on floods. 

We have limited opportunities within North Korea and most of 

it is aimed at dealing with the nuclear threat issues. Yet the North 

Korean policies are devastating to the environment, devastating to 

the sustainable economy of their own people and the basic rights 

of its citizens. Is there a way that we can work in the region to 

get North Korea engaged on the environmental disasters that they 

are perpetrating on their own country? 

Mr. REIFSNYDER. Well, I think, yes, it is difficult, Senator. But 

I can tell you that just a couple years ago I visited Primorye in the 

far east of Russia. There we have been working with the Russians 

on conservation of leopard and tiger as well. Those areas are very 

close to the Korean border. This is an area where I know the 

Russians have been working a bit with the North Koreans. The 

Chinese have also been working with them through cooperative 

agreements. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

22

So perhaps through some of our partners, Russia and China, we 

have an opportunity to influence some of what is going on. But it 

is very difficult under the current political situation. 

Senator CARDIN. Let me turn to Senator Markey, who was an

expert on this area during his service in the House of Representatives. It is a real pleasure to have him in the U.S. Senate and particularly on this subcommittee. 

Senator MARKEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much, and I 

thank the witnesses. 

The rise of China has transformed the global economy and has 

enabled millions of Chinese people to rise out of poverty. China’s 

rise has also had repercussions on global energy markets and the 

environment. As its influence on the world grows, we must ensure 

that China is a responsible partner in addressing the energy and 

environmental challenges that the world faces, especially climate 

change. 

Working with the United States and other countries to address 

climate change is also in the best interests of China. The impacts 

of climate change are already affecting China’s water and food 

security. For example, the storage capacity of Himalayan glaciers 

is declining. These glaciers feed Asia’s 10 largest rivers, which supply 47 percent of the world’s population with fresh water. 

Chinese efforts to reduce carbon pollution from burning coal and 

diesel will also improve air quality and public health. China also 

has an opportunity to improve global security by combating the 

growing market for illegal wildlife products. Recent reports have 

documented a dramatic increase in poaching and shown that 

groups like the Lord’s Resistance Army and al Qaeda-affiliated 

groups are raising funds by selling elephant ivory and rhinoceros 

horns. China has some of the world’s largest illegal ivory markets 

in the world and a single rhinoceros horn can go for $300,000. By 

reducing demand at home, China has an opportunity to increase 

security abroad and save some of the most endangered and beloved 

species on Earth. 

So I was pleased to hear about the progress that is being made 

through the United States-China dialogue. I am especially concerned about black carbon, which is produced by diesel engines and 

burning wood and coal. It has a large impact on global warming 

and public health. 

So my question is, What is the role that the United States is 

playing in helping China to reduce its black carbon emissions? 

Mr. REIFSNYDER. Thank you, Senator. I think that I can cite in 

direct response to that the new initiative that we launched with 

the Chinese in July, just this month, on heavy-duty vehicles, where 

we are trying to improve standards for heavy-duty vehicles, we are 

trying to improve the efficiency of engines of heavy-duty vehicles. 

This work at least is not confined to heavy-duty vehicles alone. It 

could also apply to other vehicles, but we need to start, I think, in 

the fastest growing sector of transportation, which is heavy-duty 

vehicles in both countries. 

So it is the particulate matter that comes from those vehicles 

that is creating a lot of the problem in both countries. So this is 

a direct area in which we are working with them now. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

23

Black carbon, though, as you mentioned, is a problem and it is 

something that we have tried to address through the Climate and 

Clean Air Coalition. This is an effort that Secretary Clinton began 

about a year ago when she was still at the State Department. It 

is an effort that has now expanded beyond the initial base. We are 

working very productively. China is not yet a member of that 

effort, but we have made overtures to China. We would be very 

interested in having China participate and join with us in the effort to address not only black carbon, but also HFCs and methane. 

Senator MARKEY. So do you feel that China is actually accepting 

the reality of climate change in terms of something that they have 

to do something about? Or are they just still relentlessly pursuing 

an economic development agenda and not willing yet to deal with 

this issue, although there are real impacts that China is going to 

ultimately have to suffer? 

Mr. REIFSNYDER. My sense is that China first and foremost as 

a political matter is dealing with air pollution. That is the single 

overriding priority in the country today for addressing these kinds 

of problems. But along with that, China is now the No. 1 emitter 

in the world of greenhouse gases. There is no denying that this is—

I think it is a spot that we occupied for many years. It is not an 

enviable spot. It is a spot where you have a lot of pressure, a lot 

of reason to take action. 

I think that China is increasingly aware of its role with regard 

to climate change. It is working with us now in this Climate 

Change Working Group that we have set up under the Strategic 

and Economic Dialogue. Our cooperation is intensifying and we 

look forward to expanding those efforts in the future. 

Senator MARKEY. Will China actually respond if the United 

States does not take action that they view as significant on reducing our own greenhouse gases? 

Mr. REIFSNYDER. I think that is an excellent question. I think it 

is very important in terms of demonstrating to others that we are 

willing to act at home in order to be in a position to encourage others also to take action regarding their greenhouse gas emissions. 

Senator MARKEY. I think it is very difficult to preach temperance 

from a bar stool. Your father cannot have a beer in his hand when 

he is saying drinking is bad for you, or a cigarette or a cigar while 

he is saying smoking is bad for you. So I think that if we are going 

to be preaching then we have to act, and that is why I am so glad 

that the President has made it clear that he wants the EPA to take 

action on our own coal-fired plants. I think that is a very strong 

signal, combined with fuel economy standards and efficiency standards, which actually the Senate is going to pass in the next week 

as well. So these are strong signals that are being sent. 

Let me ask this. What is the United States doing to stop the flow 

of money from ivory sales that fund wars and insurgency groups 

like the Lord’s Resistance Army and the Somali Islamic group and 

other groups that are out there, some of them with ties to

al-Qaeda? What is our government doing? 

Mr. REIFSNYDER. Well, the problem is not just the slaughter of 

the animals, because it is not just a problem of the states in which 

the slaughter is taking place. It is also a problem of others, of ourselves, in the sense of the countries that are buying these products 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

24

and giving a market to these products and creating the opportunities for that kind of trade to take place. 

So we are working through a number of—I mentioned the 

ASEAN, the regional, the ASEAN–WEN, the Wildlife Enforcement 

Network. We have set up these networks like the ASEAN Enforcement, Wildlife Enforcement Network, in a number of other places 

in the world. We are trying to increase awareness of the problem, 

trying to bring everyone into a solution, because I know that we 

had some short public service announcements that were once made. 

I think Harrison Ford was one, who said that when the killing 

stops the—when the buying stops, the killing will, too. 

Senator MARKEY. Thank you. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for this hearing. I served 36 years on 

the Energy Committee and 36 years on the Natural Resources 

Committee. So I went to 72 years of hearings. And in one hearing 

you have both of the subjects that are at the top of the list of those 

two committees. So I thank you so much. 

Senator CARDIN. Let me point out, I chair the Water and Wildlife 

Subcommittee of the Environmental and Public Works Committee, 

which deals with wildlife issues. So two committees that I serve on 

are very much involved here. 

Your question on the wildlife trafficking is a very important 

point. I will tell you, it is all about the economics, and the U.S. 

market is an important tool that we have, not only the direct purchasing by the U.S. market, but we are negotiating a TPP now. 

Have we communicated with our negotiators that this should be 

something considered in those negotiations to make sure markets 

are protected from this type of support for wildlife trafficking? 

The United States, if we take a leadership role, we can affect the 

economics of this issue. If we affect the economics, we can deal 

with the species that are endangered as a result of wildlife trafficking. Is that something that we are working on? 

Mr. REIFSNYDER. Absolutely, Senator. This is something that I 

know Secretary Clinton when she was at the State Department 

was passionate about. It is something that our own Under Secretary for Economic, Environment, and Energy Affairs, Robert 

Hormats, has been passionate about. It is something that Secretary 

Kerry is now engaged in. 

I think we are mounting a very concerted effort in this area. I 

personally have been at the State Department since 1984 and I 

have watched this issue grow in importance in just the past few 

years in a way that very few issues have. It has just zoomed to the 

top of the agenda. So I would say yes, very definitely. 

Mr. BECK. Mr. Chairman, if I might add also on the area of wildlife trafficking. USAID’s ARREST program, within that it is called 

the Predator Project, and that is working very closely with Interpol 

to address the trafficking of tigers. So Interpol is working very 

closely with 11 countries in the region to break down the barriers 

within their own governments, whether it is from customs or interior, and then working on enforcement, but also working on the 

demand end. So, bringing those together, we are already seeing a 

rapid rise in acquisition and also in prosecution of traffickers. 

Senator CARDIN. That is a good segue to our second panel, to 

which one of the first questions I will ask, is how effective our leadFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

25

ership has been on this issue. So we thank both of you. We thank 

you very much for your service and thank you for your participation in today’s hearing. 

With that, we will turn to the second panel: Mr. Carter Roberts, 

President and CEO of the World Wildlife Fund in the United 

States. WWF is the world’s largest network of international conservation organizations. Since joining World Wildlife Fund in 2004, 

Mr. Carter has doubled the size of the organization, focusing on its 

efforts to save the world’s ecosystems by working with businesses 

to tighten their impact on the planet through sustainable resource 

management. 

Then we have Elizabeth Economy, who is the C.V. Starr Senior 

Fellow and Director for Asian Studies at the Council on Foreign 

Relations. Dr. Economy is a successful academic and author. She 

has written two highly acclaimed books on China’s energy and the 

environmental challenges, called ‘‘By All Means Necessary: How 

China’s Resource Quest Is Changing the World,’’ and the other 

‘‘The River Runs Black: The Environmental Challenges to China’s 

Future.’’ Those titles entice me to read those books. I must confess, 

I have not read them yet. But maybe on one of those long flights 

to Asia I will have a chance to read those books. 

Mr. Roberts, we will start with you, and if your daughter is still 

here we would like you to introduce your daughter. 

STATEMENT OF CARTER ROBERTS, CHIEF EXECUTIVE 

OFFICER, WORLD WILDLIFE FUND, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. ROBERTS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would love to introduce my daughter Eliza who is here with me to keep me on the 

straight and narrow. She will be my support throughout the hearing. Thank you very much. 

Senator CARDIN. It is all about her generation. 

Mr. ROBERTS. Right. 

Senator CARDIN. So it is a pleasure to have her here. 

Mr. ROBERTS. You are absolutely right. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for having me. As one of your constituents, it is a pleasure to be here. Senator Markey, I congratulate 

you. As a family whose happiness rises and falls on the fortunes 

in Fenway, we are delighted to see you in your post. So thank you 

for having me. 

This is a tremendously important topic. In our work, increasingly 

our eyes turn to Asia and Southeast Asia. It is a time when the 

leaders of that region increasingly value what we call natural 

capital. 

I love maps and I want to talk about a map that hopefully we 

will be able to project onto the screen. I think you each may have 

a copy of this in your materials. There are two pages to this map. 

I want to make sure you have it. 

The map is one produced by Will Turner at CI. It is a wonderful 

map. It is a color-coded map of the world that shows the value of 

ecosystem services country by country and is color coded. Blue is 

a low value, yellow is the highest. 

If you look at that map and you look at the second page in 

Southeast Asia, it is essentially a map of Myanmar and the 

Mekong River. Because those countries have rivers that feed their 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

26

people, they have forests that sequester carbon, they still have 

what most of the rest of the region has lost. And those countries 

are desperate to find a way to grow their economies without losing 

those assets that are so obvious on the map. 

You can see what happens—you already talked about what happens when you get it wrong, the haze in Singapore, the rivers that 

are polluted in parts of China. You can see what might happen in 

the Mekong River if Lao develops its dams with disregard for the 

fisheries and the rice bowl that are downstream. 

This is also a part of the world where climate change has a disproportionate impact. Of the 10 countries that are most impacted 

by climate change around the world, 6 of those are in Asia, 4 of 

those are in Southeast Asia, where the population is so crowded 

along the coast that they are enormously impacted by what happens with sea-level rise. 

I recently had the chance to spend a morning with the President 

of Myanmar and almost his entire Cabinet here in Washington, 

DC. We spent the morning talking about the future of the country. 

Probably more than any other leader that I have had a chance to 

meet in the world, any other head of state, he was eloquent about 

the choices that are in front of him. 

He has studied dam construction throughout Europe to determine which types of dams have less impact on the free flow of rivers. He has studied forests in his own country and his staff has 

mapped forests and which ones have the highest value. He spoke 

eloquently about the importance of nature in Myanmar and making 

the right smart choices about the future of his country, so that 

when they build the infrastructure, build the dams, build the 

roads, build everything else, that they choose smartly, so they keep 

the best of what our Ambassador to Myanmar calls ‘‘the heart and 

soul of the country.’’

Sadly—and I will talk about this at the end of my testimony—

our policy toward Myanmar is sadly devoid of the environment as 

a priority. One of my main messages today is to reinsert that as 

a higher priority in our engagement with that country. 

There are other smart choices that we see in the region and it 

is all a question—I think that part of the region sees a chance, certain countries see a chance to leapfrog over their neighbors in the 

use of new technologies, whether it is energy, dam construction, 

and the rest. I think this is where our country can provide an enormous value, both through technical assistance and also through 

brokering exchanges and even providing surgical support and 

assistance where it matters most. 

I will give you some examples. On deforestation, traditionally our 

community addressed deforestation by creating parks, and parks 

are super important. But the gentleman from USAID spoke eloquently about the role of big companies in reducing deforestation, 

particularly companies that source commodities from around the 

world. At WWF we have identified the 100 biggest companies that 

control those commodities that have the biggest impact on deforestation. We now have MOUs with 56 of those companies. 

Those companies represent a tremendous force to engage not 

only governments, but with our government, in creating policies 

that can drive new food production away from forests and toward 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

27

land that is already degraded. It is a really elegant solution. But 

we need the power of the market and we need the right kind of 

policies to make it so. 

You have spoken about fisheries. A disproportionate amount of 

the population of Southeast Asia depends on fish for food and one 

of the signature overseas programs of USAID has been the Coral 

Triangle. Building the right governance system in that part of the 

world is intrinsically important to keeping those fisheries intact 

and maintaining stability in that part of the world. 

Then last but not least is rivers. I had a chance to be at the 

Friends of the Lower Mekong meeting last year and sat with Secretary Clinton and representatives of key countries in Cambodia. 

It is a classic complicated case of the commons, where if we can 

find a way to put the value of that river on the table for providing 

fish in Cambodia and for providing water and siltation to the rice 

paddies in Vietnam and for providing power in Lao, put all those 

on the table, and look at what happens when you build this kind 

of dam versus that kind of dam, what happens downstream, my belief is we could knit together those countries to incentivize the 

right kind of solutions in dam construction. Then our country could 

play a role in not only providing some technical assistance, but 

helping to broker that kind of agreement between those countries, 

where their futures are bound up together. 

So in conclusion, I would say three things. One is: Help make 

sure the environment is at the forefront of our engagement in 

Myanmar. The second is these regional priorities. Ecosystems do 

not stop at national boundaries and supply-demand dynamics do 

not, either. So the regional initiatives we have for the Coral Triangle and the Mekong are enormously important. Then the last 

thing is just to go back to the private sector. The kind of relationships we are beginning to build with the private sector could be 

enormously influential in that part of the world, and finding creative ways to work with companies like Wal-Mart or Coke or Ikea 

or Mars or Cargill in driving the right kind of food production and 

incentivizing the right kind of growth strategy holds enormous 

promise. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Roberts follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CARTER ROBERTS

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the subcommittee, thank you 

for the opportunity to testify before you today. My name is Carter Roberts, and I 

am President and CEO of World Wildlife Fund U.S. For 50 years, WWF has been 

protecting the future of nature. WWF is the world’s largest private conservation 

organization, working in 100 countries and supported by 1.2 million members in the 

United States and close to 5 million globally. Our unique way of working combines 

global reach with a foundation in science, involves action at every level from local 

to global, and ensures the delivery of innovative solutions that meet the needs of 

both people and nature. 

The issues being considered by the subcommittee today—the environmental sustainability and food and water security of countries in East Asia and the Pacific—

are of critical importance, not only to the countries in those regions and their citizens, but to all of us. The Obama administration’s Rebalance to Asia comes at a 

time of growing recognition in that region of how the long-term prosperity of most 

Asian and Pacific countries is tied to wise management of their ‘‘natural capital,’’ 

including their forest, marine, and aquatic systems and wildlife resources. 

Such recognition is in part a natural consequence of the region’s rapid economic 

growth. It is common to see increased attention paid to environmental quality and 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

28

the protection of natural areas as populations become more prosperous. But it is 

also a response to the increasing degradation of natural resources, which is a byproduct of a growth model that has often paid scant attention to environmental 

sustainability. 

Examples of such degradation abound. We have recently seen another bout of 

severe haze pollution in Southeast Asia from the use of fire for clearing tropical forests in Indonesia. Overfishing in the marine areas surrounding the ‘‘Coral Triangle’’ 

countries has led to declining local food security and threatens the most valuable 

tuna fisheries in the world. In the Mekong Basin, the planned expansion of largescale hydropower schemes threatens to severely impact Cambodia’s freshwater fisheries, undermine water supplies in Lao PDR, and disrupt the rich sediment flows 

upon which Vietnam depends for its Mekong Delta rice production. Throughout the 

region, the intensifying impacts of climate change are exacerbating and adding to 

these challenges. How countries, including the United States, respond to these challenges now and over the next few years will shape Asia’s food, water, and environmental security for decades to come. 

There is much to be concerned about regarding the current state and trajectory 

of Asia’s natural resources and the environmental impact of the region’s rapidly 

growing economies around the globe, and I touch on a number of these concerns 

below. But there are also many reasons for optimism. I would like to recount a 

recent conversation I had with President Thein Sein of Myanmar during a recent 

visit of the President and his Cabinet to Washington. WWF had the opportunity to 

organize a dialogue with the President and senior staff focused on the role of sound 

renewable resources management in Myanmar’s sustainable development. One 

might think that this issue would be a low priority for Myanmar’s President, given 

the range of difficult issues facing the country. With the country’s recent emergence 

as a fledgling democracy and still nascent integration into the global economy, were 

prepared to inform the President and his Cabinet on the need for Myanmar to 

wisely manage its rivers, forests, coasts and wildlife in order to create a sustainable 

economy and ensure the country’s food and water security. But President Thein Sein 

demonstrated a profound understanding of, and appreciation for, these concepts and 

expressed his desire to put Myanmar’s economy on a development path that takes 

advantage of the country’s impressive natural capital while respecting it and protecting it for the future. He characterized Myanmar’s wildlife and other living natural resources as the heart and soul of his nation. 

Like other Asian and Pacific leaders, President Thein Sein is seeking advice on 

how best to achieve truly sustainable development, actively investigating lessons to 

be drawn from experiences in the United States and other countries that have faced 

similar challenges. His willingness to devote more than 2 hours of his own time and 

that of his entire delegation to this subject during their short trip to Washington 

speaks to this desire and openness. 

We have seen similar political will among the leaders of the Coral Triangle countries of Southeast Asia and the South Pacific. Known as the ‘‘Amazon of the Seas,’’ 

the Coral Triangle is the most biologically and economically valuable marine ecosystem on the planet. Encompassing nearly 2.5 million square miles of coastal and 

oceanic waters in Southeast Asia and the Western Pacific, the region covers just 3 

percent of the globe but boasts more than half of the world’s reefs, 76 percent of 

its known coral species and the greatest remaining mangrove forests on the planet. 

The marine and coastal ecosystems of the Coral Triangle directly sustain the livelihoods of more than 130 million people and contribute an estimated $2.3 billion each 

year toward the region’s economies. The health of the Coral Triangle is also important to global commerce and food security, including here in the United States. 

Eighty-six percent of the seafood consumed in the United States is imported, with 

a significant portion originating from the Coral Triangle. The region supports the 

nursery grounds for the planet’s richest tuna fishery, worth over $1 billion annually. 

Pressures due to widespread poverty, rapid development and global demands have 

placed enormous strains on the Coral Triangle’s natural resources: over the past 40 

years, more than 40 percent of the region’s reefs and mangroves have disappeared, 

leaving many habitats and species vulnerable to extinction. Overfishing, destructive 

fishing practices and pollution all threaten the future of this precious seascape and 

its inhabitants. In response to these growing challenges, in 2009 the heads of state 

of Indonesia, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, the Solomon Islands, 

and Timor-Leste signed the Coral Triangle Initiative on Coral Reefs, Fisheries and 

Food Security (CTI), a landmark agreement to protect the region’s marine and 

coastal resources and manage them sustainably. 

These are just a few examples demonstrating Asian and Pacific leaders’ growing 

understanding of and receptiveness to the need to protect nature as the foundation 

of healthy and sustainable economic growth in their countries. Leaders of the region 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

29

are looking to make smart choices as they seek to break free of unsustainable patterns of resource use and development. In many cases, they see opportunities to 

‘‘leap-frog’’ past the technologies and management systems employed by Western 

countries, especially with respect to their energy, transport, and telecommunications 

sectors. 

As they confront these sustainable development challenges they need sound 

advice and are actively seeking to learn from U.S. experience and draw upon U.S. 

expertise and technology. The United States clearly has an important role to play 

in assisting the region’s transition to greener economic development. There are clear 

opportunities for such cooperation, and there are many effective approaches available to be shared. I would now like to highlight a few key areas that WWF believe 

to be priorities to ensure the sustainable development of the region and the health 

and integrity of its environment and biodiversity. 

FORESTS

Deforestation is one of the great environmental challenges facing East Asia, 

where rates of forest loss in some countries remain among the highest in the world. 

Pulp and paper production and conversion to agriculture, including to monocultures 

such as palm oil, are among the greatest threats to the region’s forests and associated wildlife and water resources. Illegal logging associated with these industries 

remains a serious problem in many countries. Earlier this year, WWF released a 

report 1 on the state of the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS), consisting of the countries of Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, and the Chinese provinces 

of Yunnan and Guangxi. WWF’s report demonstrated that the countries of the GMS 

(excluding China) had collectively lost nearly a third of their forest cover between 

1973 and 2009, with the highest rate (43 percent) witnessed in Vietnam and Thailand. Large core areas of intact forest capable of supporting local communities and 

healthy wildlife populations declined across the GMS from roughly 70 percent in 

1973 to only 20 percent in 2009. If deforestation continues at the same rate, the 

region risks losing more than a third of its remaining forests by 2030, with only 

14 percent of the forest areas that are left comprising habitats capable of sustaining 

viable populations of wildlife requiring contiguous forest habitat. On the other hand, 

the report also demonstrates that, were the GMS countries to adopt a ‘‘green economy’’ framework with a 50-percent reduction in the annual deforestation rate and 

no further losses in key biodiversity areas, forest losses could be limited to 17 percent from 2009 to 2030, core forest patches would remain intact, and all of this 

alongside continued improvements in human prosperity. 

The situation is a similar one in the rest of Southeast Asia. Unsustainable and 

illegal logging in Malaysia and Indonesia, particularly on the islands of Borneo and 

Sumatra, threatens the destruction of some of the world’s most diverse rain forests 

and Southeast Asia’s last intact forests, as well as the extinction of some of planet’s 

most unique and beloved species, including Sumatran tigers, Javan and Sumatran 

rhinos, pygmy elephants and orangutans. The clearing, often through burning, of 

vast areas of rainforest representing huge terrestrial storehouses of carbon is also 

a main cause of regional air pollution and a significant driver of global climate 

change. 

Borneo and Sumatra (the world’s third- and sixth-largest islands respectively) 

support diverse ecoregions that house thousands of unique species and massive rivers, which cut across the landscapes and provide freshwater and transportation for 

the islands’ people. Borneo’s forests alone are home to more than 600 bird species 

and 15,000 types of plants, as well as hundreds of indigenous communities that 

depend on the forests for food and shelter. Only half of Borneo’s original forest cover 

remains due to increased production of palm oil—used in many products purchased 

every day by consumers around the world, from snack foods to soaps—and unsustainable logging for timber, paper, and pulp. Borneo’s rainforests are being rapidly 

exported and turned into flooring, furniture, and plywood products found on store 

shelves in the United States and elsewhere. 

Economic development in Borneo is essential for poverty alleviation, but local 

communities fail to benefit when major companies clear their rainforests and ignore 

traditional land rights. Through efforts such as our Heart of Borneo Program, WWF 

is working with communities, companies and governments to support smart decisions that redirect the expansion of oil palm plantations onto degraded lands, 

enforce restrictions on the use of fire for land clearing, and set aside forest reserves 

to maintain local watersheds, support water security and forest livelihoods for surrounding communities, protect Borneo’s unique wildlife species and secure the 

global carbon benefits of that the island’s forests provide. All of this can be done 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

30

while improving land tenure, so that local communities have a clear stake in 

sustainably managing their forests. 

Reducing illegality in the timber trade is essential to ensuring that Asia’s forests 

can survive in the future as both a bastion of biodiversity and the basis of sustainable development. This is an area where the U.S. Government has played a critical 

leading role, both in its leadership with the 2008 amendments to the Lacey Act and 

development investments such as through Responsible Asia Forestry and Trade 

(RAFT), a 6-year program funded by USAID and the Department of State designed 

to improve forest management and bring transparency to the timber trade in Asia 

while also reducing deforestation and forest degradation. The program spans eight 

countries in Asia and the Pacific—Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, 

Papua New Guinea, Thailand, and Vietnam—and works with government, industry, 

intergovernmental organizations, international conservation NGOs (including WWF) 

and academic institutions to influence public policies and corporate practices. RAFT 

partners have helped bring nearly 3.2 million acres of tropical forest in Asia and 

the Pacific under Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification, with 4.9 million 

additional acres on the way. Since 2006, the number of timber concessions has 

grown from 5 to 59. The program has introduced nearly 1,000 wood manufacturers 

in six countries to new legality requirements for products exported to the United 

States and European Union and helped 20 factories achieve FSC chain of custody 

certification. 

FRESHWATER

To get a sense of the critical importance of balancing development and conservation in Southeast Asia, one need only look at the Mekong River, the basin which 

contains one of the most productive and diverse river systems on Earth. Its 

connectivity and natural variability of flows support exceptional productivity, while 

sediments and nutrients sustain the landforms, agriculture, and marine fisheries of 

the Mekong Delta. The Mekong river system supports the world’s largest and most 

productive inland fishery, at least 35 percent of which depends on migratory species. 

Despite long-term intensive human use of freshwater resources in the Mekong 

basin, the system has maintained connectivity throughout most of its area as well 

as much of its original ecological patterns and processes. 

However, the growing need for energy in the Greater Mekong Subregion has led 

to an unprecedented rate of dam building, with impacts on freshwater ecosystems, 

the Mekong River’s connectivity and flow, and the people that rely on these. Eleven 

dams are currently planned on the Mekong main stem, and one key concern is the 

lack of appropriately coordinated planning among decisionmakers for the different 

portions of the basin. Recent controversy has centered on the disputed Xayaburi 

dam in Laos, which is not the largest dam planned on the main stem, but the 

approval of which would set a precedent for countries, undermine the Mekong River 

Commission and herald even more disruptive developments. Models indicate that 

although the loss of connectivity from existing dams has negatively affected fisheries 

production in various Mekong sub-basins, declines in productivity to date have not 

substantially affected overall fisheries output. This will change if planned developments go ahead, with major impacts downstream and on major freshwater 

resources, including: threatening the rich fisheries of Tonle Sap Lake in Cambodia 

upon which millions depend for their protein; undermining the water supplies to 

Lao PDR; and fundamentally altering the nutrient rich sediment flows southward 

to the Mekong Delta, which support Vietnam’s southern rice bowl and recharge the 

delta to prevent land subsistence. 

Decisionmakers in the Mekong river basin face a difficult dilemma: Expansion of 

hydropower in the Mekong River Basin presents enormous economic potential, and 

could also reduce the subregion’s carbon footprint, but how can countries that share 

the freshwater resources of the Mekong River profit from a renewable energy source 

such as hydroelectric power without at the same time degrading the fisheries and 

ecological services that support at least 60 million people? To produce energy 

through hydropower, up to 11 new dams are planned for the main stem of the 

Lower Mekong River alone. Their construction will negatively impact both wild fish 

populations and the many people who rely on wild fish as their major source of protein. For example, once built, a main stem dam would hinder movements of eggs 

and young fish downstream to the Lower Mekong floodplains to grow and those of 

adult fish moving upstream to spawn; harm wild fisheries in Laos, Thailand, and 

Cambodia by flooding upstream spawning grounds and altering nutrient input and 

replenishment of downstream habitats; reduce sediments and nutrients that build 

and feed the Mekong Delta’s productivity; and degrade the functionality of the 

whole, interconnected ecosystem and risk exceeding thresholds that could lead to 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

31

very large and rapid negative impacts. Although dams would bring substantial additional income to the region, they could negatively impact fisheries, increase inequality, contribute to poverty, and have long-term and detrimental environmental 

impacts. 

The question of hydropower on the Mekong is thus a representative microcosm 

of the larger dilemma facing East Asia and the Pacific—how to accommodate rapid 

development and support a rising standard of living without fundamentally undermining the environmental systems that are needed ensure the continued health, 

security, and prosperity of the region’s people. Other major river systems in the 

region face similar challenges, and there are opportunities to benefit from lessons 

learned from experience in the Mekong Basin. 

GLOBAL RESOURCES AND ASIAN DEMAND

While these field-based and policy measures are essential, they will not be sufficient on their own. Attention also must be paid to demand-side-pressures from these 

fast growing economies, which are creating environmental challenges not just in the 

Asia and Pacific region, but globally. Rising wealth and urbanization—particularly 

in China, Vietnam, and Thailand—means that millions are being lifted out of poverty. It also means that these countries have an increasing desire for natural 

resources from abroad, which can lead to major impacts on ecosystems found far 

beyond Asia. China’s expansion into Africa is well known, and its footprint there 

is significant and growing. Therefore, China’s approach to development and whether 

or not it chooses to encourage or require that resource extraction be done in a legal 

and sustainable manner can have a significant bearing on the health of forests and 

rivers in Africa and around the world. 

Rising wealth and a growing middle class in Asia are also putting new and 

unsustainable pressure on a range of wildlife species, including many that are 

increasingly threatened with extinction. There is a growing appetite in East Asia 

for traditional wildlife products, such as carved elephant ivory, rhino horn powder, 

shark fin soup and tiger bone wine, access to which had until recently been limited 

primarily to a smaller elite class. Consumption or possession of these products is 

inherently a sign of status, and as the economic status of millions of Chinese and 

Vietnamese rapidly increases, many are turning to the purchase of ivory statues 

and trinkets and fad drugs made from ground rhino horn as a demonstration of 

their newfound prosperity. 

Unfortunately, the effect on these species has been dramatic and swift. In 2011, 

WWF officially declared Javan rhinos extinct in Vietnam, when the last surviving 

individual was found killed with its horn removed. With rhino populations critically 

endangered throughout Southeast Asia, the illegal trade in rhino horn has found its 

way to South Africa, which is home to 90 percent of the planets remaining rhinos. 

In the past 5 years, the number of rhinos killed illegally in South Africa has risen 

a shocking 5,000 percent—from just 13 animals in 2007 to 668 in 2012. This dramatic spike has been driven primarily by new demand in Vietnam, where the 

ground-up horn is being sold as a powder that is marketed to the rich and the desperate as variously a fad drug that can prevent hangovers or a miracle cancer cure. 

Pound for pound, rhino horn powder is selling for more on the market than heroin 

or gold. There is no medical evidence to support either claim, but that has not 

stopped those who traffic in these endangered wildlife products from creating a 

lucrative illegal market for these snake oil cures: pound for pound, the price of rhino 

horn has now eclipsed the price of gold and heroin on the black market. 

In China, it is the demand for ivory that has risen along with the middle class, 

with a legal internal market for ivory products (based on previous sanctioned sales 

of ivory stockpiles) now providing a smokescreen for the laundering of large quantities of illegally poached African elephant ivory. In 2012, the elephant population 

in Africa was conservatively estimated at 425,000 individuals, a reduction of at least 

50,000 since 2007. In 2011 alone, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) program 

estimated that 17,000 elephants were illegally killed across the sites that they monitor and extrapolated that this number was likely closer to 25,000 on a continentwide basis. 

Broken down on a regional basis, the situation is even more acute, with Central 

Africa experiencing the worst declines. Central Africa’s forest elephant populations, 

including those in protected areas, have experienced reductions of more than 80 percent in the last 25 years, and 62 percent in just the past 10 years. Between 2004 

and 2012, an estimated 11,000 elephants were killed in Gabon’s Minke ́be ́ National 

Park alone, representing a population loss of 44 to 77 percent. In early 2012, we 

saw the worst single massacre on record of African elephants, when at least 350 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

32

elephants were slaughtered by gangs of heavily armed ivory poachers in Cameroon’s 

Bouba N’Djida National Park in just a few weeks, reducing the park’s population 

by more than half. And just this past May, a poaching gang managed to infiltrate 

the Dzanga-Sangha National Park in the Central African Republic, part of the 

Sangha Trinational World Heritage Site, where they killed at least two dozen 

elephants. 

As would be expected, the rise in illegal killings is mirrored by the rise in seizures 

of ivory, most of which is intercepted en route from Africa to Asia. From 1996 to 

2011, nearly 300 tons of ivory were seized, representing only a small proportion of 

the total illegal ivory being trafficked. From 2000 to 2011, there were 54 large-scale 

ivory seizures, and over half of these have occurred in the past 3 years, pointing 

to a surge in demand and a harbinger of the expanding participation in the illegal 

ivory trade by highly organized crime syndicates who see in the illegal trade in 

endangered species products the promise of vast profits and limited risks, given the 

dearth of enforcement and the meager penalties associated with it. 

The impact on African countries of the Asian demand for wildlife products is not 

just the rapid extirpation of Africa’s unique wildlife. Heavily armed poachers working to feed to the demand for ivory, rhino horn and other wildlife products will frequently kill park rangers tasked with protecting their countries’ wildlife, and flourishing wildlife tourism industries, which contribute significantly to the economies of 

many African countries, are being put at increasing risk by the surge in wildlife 

poaching as tourist areas become unsafe and the wildlife they have come to see 

become more and more scarce. 

A similar dynamic is playing out in other parts of the world: in wetlands and forests, emptied of rare reptiles and mammals that have wound up as delicacies on 

Asian dinner plates; and in the world’s oceans, where shark species are in rapid 

decline, largely due to the growing trade in shark fins used to make shark fin soup. 

The latest research suggests that around 100 million sharks may be killed annually, 

often targeted for their fins. 

The United States has taken a leading role in pressuring countries such as China 

and Vietnam to curb demand for endangered species products, both through international fora such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species 

(CITES) and APEC, as well as through bilateral discussions, including the U.S.-

China Strategic and Economic Dialogue and State Department support for technical 

exchanges between Vietnam and South Africa. The heightened attention recently 

culminated in the President’s newly announced Executive order on Combating Wildlife Trafficking, which came as extremely welcome news to us and demonstrates the 

seriousness with which the illegal wildlife trade is now being taken given the multibillion dollar criminal market it supports and its strong connections to transnational 

organized crime, corruption and financing for groups that pose security threats to 

the United States. 

We also need to work with individual countries in East Asia and the Pacific to 

strengthen policies and institutional capacities to address increasing demand pressures on their resources. There are emerging examples, such as China’s experimentation with market-based incentives and other policies to encourage use of renewable energy. And in Thailand, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has shown bold 

leadership on wildlife conservation with her recent pledge to end ivory trafficking 

in her country. We need to do more to encourage these smart choices and ensure 

that Asian and Pacific leaders take a broad and constructive view of how their 

future development impacts global resources and environmental quality, as well as 

that in their own countries. 

CLIMATE CHANGE

Of course, overlaying all of the environmental and resource challenges facing the 

Asia and Pacific region is the growing threat of climate change and its impacts on 

food and water security and essential environmental systems. The Greater Mekong 

Subregion provides a powerful case study of how climate change will increasingly 

affect development in East Asia and the Pacific, with impacts on food, water, and 

regional security. The plight of Small Island States in the Pacific captures global 

sympathy. Several are already actively contemplating future refugee status for their 

citizens, facing the very real prospect that rising seas will inundate or make uninhabitable their islands in the near future, erasing their cultural heritage and 

making them stateless peoples. But mainland Asia also faces significant, imminent 

risks due to climate change. 

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has identified the Mekong Delta 

as one of the three most vulnerable deltas on the planet to climate change impacts, 

including sea-level rise, saline intrusion and increasingly severe storms that promFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

33

ise to erode coastlines and undermine coastal ecosystems. Changes to average temperatures and water availability from precipitation and runoff are also likely to 

have adverse impacts on the Mekong River and its ecosystems. Temperature 

changes can affect rates of growth and reproduction for individual species and can 

also alter species distribution and ecosystem processes, such as nutrient cycling. 

WWF predicts that climate change impacts will accelerate the extinction of some 

species, given the high rate of endemism and habitat fragmentation found in the 

Mekong basin. Changes in the seasonal flow pattern in the Mekong River basin will 

strongly influence future species composition and ecosystem productivity. Changes 

in temperature and precipitation in the basin may also affect the very nature of the 

region’s wetlands—vital freshwater systems that are used for rice cultivation and 

freshwater fisheries, and which help to mitigate floods and erosion. 

Sea-level rise will have significant negative impacts in the Mekong Delta region 

because of the delta’s high population density, which is supported by productive wetlands and estuaries that are in turn maintained by naturally fluctuating water levels and input of fresh water from the river. These upstream inputs of freshwater 

deliver much-needed nutrients and sediments, which are critical for wetland soils 

to accumulate and prevent plants from being inundated.2 Sea level rise and saltwater intrusion threaten to upset this natural balance and undermine the Delta ecosystem. If hydropower development proceeds on the Mekong’s main-stem, dams will 

block sediment that flows southward and rebuilds the delta. As sediment is trapped 

by dams, the reduction in the amount reaching the river mouth will decrease the 

capacity of the delta to replenish itself, making it even more vulnerable to sea-level 

rise, saline intrusion, and erosion. With nearly a quarter of Vietnam’s population 

located in the Mekong Delta, the combined impacts of the proposed main-stem dams 

and climate change will pose significant social and economic challenges. 

The human consequences of unmitigated climate change on the Mekong are hard 

to imagine. Projections across the Mekong basin show an array of climate change 

effects, including a potential sea-level rise of a meter by the end of the century. If 

unaddressed, a meter rise in sea level could submerge more than a third of the 

Mekong delta, home to 17 million people and source of nearly half of Vietnam’s 

rice.3 Already, we are witnessing erratic changes in flood patterns in the Mekong 

and other rivers of the region. Thailand’s 2012 growth was all but wiped out by 

costs associated with its devastating flood. Combined with sea-level rise, we can 

anticipate breakdowns of roads and other infrastructure, leading to the increasing 

likelihood of economic and social instability. Even the more modest predictions of 

how the region and its communities, ecosystems and economies may be altered suggest that, without significant steps to reverse course, the humanitarian impacts of 

accelerating climate change in the Mekong are likely to present new security challenges for both GMS countries and the international community in the 21st century. 

ENVIRONMENT AND SECURITY

Climate change is the most obvious threat to security of a region that is highly 

vulnerable to rising seas and extreme weather—Asia has 6 of the 10 countries most 

vulnerable to natural disasters, with four of them in Southeast Asia, however there 

are numerous other connections between environmental degradation and regional 

security. Competition over declining fisheries contributes to resource conflicts in the 

South China Sea. Much of East Asia’s population lives in coastal areas, and Pacific 

countries fear for their very existence in the face of increasing sea levels, as well 

as rising temperatures and acidity, which can exacerbate typhoons and droughts 

and threaten to undermine the marine food chain that supports the regions fisheries. Countries of the region need help to build their climate change resiliency, lest 

they risk even greater economic losses from disasters and the creation of environmental migrants who could spill across national borders. Improving environmental 

management also links closely with the promotion of democratic principles such as 

transparency, vibrant civil societies, and human rights, including access to water 

supply and indigenous peoples’ use of forests. 

U.S. ROLE AND OPPORTUNITIES

All of this reinforces the importance of enhancing U.S. support to leaders in the 

region seeking to make smart decisions about the management of their environment 

for local and global benefit. Bilateral programs—through USAID, Millennium Challenge Corporation, State Department, or under targeted partnerships, such as the 

Comprehensive Partnership with Indonesia, or the Strategic and Economic Dialogue 

with China—offer good opportunities to cooperatively identify and agree on ways to 

effectively address environmental considerations in national development. As noted, 

there is a great receptiveness to and opportunity for U.S. cooperation with Myanmar 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

34

to ensure that the country finds and follows a green economy path. Bilateral cooperation is complemented by legislative provisions under the Lacey Act and the 

Tropical Forest Conservation Act, which respectively enhance control of the global 

illegal wildlife and timber trade, and encourage innovative approaches to financing 

forest conservation. 

Beyond bilateral cooperation, the Rebalance to Asia should include increased attention to leveraging regional partnerships and organizations as well as making 

good use of multilateral mechanisms. Through the Lower Mekong Initiative—and in 

cooperation with others working to assist countries of mainland Southeast Asia in 

their development—we need to help ensure that smart choices are made on how to 

best use and conserve freshwater resources, including through integrated river 

basin analysis and planning, encouraging ecosystem-based approaches to hydropower development, incorporating schemes to value and monetize the services provided by upstream forests and watershed ecosystems, and factoring in adaptation 

and resilience strategies for freshwater systems in the face of advancing climate 

change. Elsewhere in Southeast Asia and the Pacific, the U.S. Government—alongside WWF, the Global Environment Facility, the Asian Development Bank, and 

other partners—has backed the Coral Triangle Initiative through the Coral Triangle 

Support Partnership (CTSP), a unique consortium of U.S. Government agencies and 

the world’s leading conservation NGOs, including WWF. CTI governments are now 

developing a regional framework for sustainable fisheries management, enforcement 

and improved management of Marine Protected Areas across the region. CTSP is 

winding down, and CTI countries are making smart choices regarding management 

of their marine resources. They continue to need U.S. support. Similarly, the trinational Heart of Borneo Initiative offers opportunities for improved management 

of the region’s largest remaining rainforest. APEC and ASEAN hold tremendous 

potential for improving understanding of and cooperation on the greening of economies. Activities supported by multilateral organizations and mechanisms—such as 

the Global Environment Facility, Climate Investment Funds, and Asian Development Bank—also contribute strongly. 

Finally, there remain unrealized opportunities to incorporate environmental provisions into the framework of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which just concluded today in Malaysia its 18th round of negotiations. As part of the Executive 

order on Wildlife Crime, the President declared that ‘‘the United States shall seek 

to reduce the demand for illegally traded wildlife, both at home and abroad, while 

allowing legal and legitimate commerce involving wildlife.’’ As implied in this statement, there is an important legal trade in wildlife products—including commodity 

products such as timber and fish—and this legal trade, which is of great economic 

value to many countries, including the United States, is undermined by illegality 

throughout the supply chain. This is why it is critical that international trade agreements, such as the emerging TPP, incorporate strong conservation provisions to 

ensure that natural resources are legally harvested and traded and developed 

sustainably in source countries. 

Renewable resources and wildlife are highly traded among the 12 TPP partner 

countries, which represent major producers, exporters and importers of seafood, 

wood and other goods derived from natural resources. The TPP countries represent 

eight of the world’s top 20 fishing nations, contributing over 28 percent of the global 

marine catch, with almost 33 percent of global fish product imports and 24 percent 

of exports. They account for 17 percent of global shark imports and 28 percent of 

global exports by value. They account for 34 percent of global timber and pulp production and 24 percent of total trade value worldwide. They also represent significant importing, exporting, and transit countries for legal and illegal wildlife 

products, and some countries, such as Vietnam, are the major global markets for 

CITES-listed species. 

Where natural resources are poorly managed, the demand generated by TPP markets can drive illegal activities and unsustainable practices. This is why the TPP 

presents the participating countries, including the United States, with a unique and 

important opportunity to promote economic growth in the context of a far-reaching 

and ambitious 21st century trade agreement, while also recognizing the fundamental need to sustainably manage natural resources and protect wildlife from illegal trade. If executed along these lines, it can also serve as a strong model for future 

such agreements. 

CONCLUSION

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the subcommittee, I believe 

that the East Asia and Pacific region—in fact all of Asia—is at a critical juncture 

with respect to incorporation of environmental considerations into future developFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

35

ment. It will be in neither U.S. nor Asian interests for the region to continue with 

the current model, which has led to severe environmental degradation and depleted 

natural capital. There is widespread understanding of this among the region’s leaders, who strive to make smart decisions regarding sustainable use of their natural 

assets for the benefit of their people and the planet. 

While much is known regarding the principles behind this transition to a more 

sustainable development path, each country must define its own way. This will require strong engagement from civil society, academia, the private sector, and public 

sector programs such as those supported by the U.S. Government to ensure that 

smart choices are made and resources wisely used. It is strongly in the U.S. interest 

to see that this scenario is realized. If we act together now, the region can lock in 

a new development model which will lead to continued expansion of its prosperity 

based in large measure on protecting and enhancing the value of natural capital.

————————

End Notes

1 Ecosystems in the Greater Mekong: Past trends, current status, possible futures. WWF. 

2013. 2Mekong River Commission. 2010 ‘‘State of the Basin Report: 2010.’’ Mekong River Commission, Vientiane, Lao PDR. 3 Institute of Strategy and Policy on Natural Resources and Environment (Viet Nam) 2009 

‘‘Vietnam Assessment Report on Climate Change (VARCC).′′

Senator CARDIN. Thank you for your testimony. 

Dr. Economy. 

STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH C. ECONOMY, PH.D., C.V. STARR 

SENIOR FELLOW AND DIRECTOR FOR ASIAN STUDIES, 

COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, NEW YORK, NY 

Dr. ECONOMY. Thank you very much, Chairman Cardin. It is a 

pleasure to be here to have the chance to talk about China, and 

a pleasure, of course, to sit on the same panel with Carter Roberts. 

China’s extraordinary economic growth over the past 30 years 

has produced, I think by anyone’s imagination, a crisis in the country’s water resources. Skyrocketing demand, inefficiencies in the 

way China uses its water, and pollution have left 400 cities out of 

roughly 660 without sufficient water and 110 of them facing serious scarcity. About a quarter of China’s land is seriously degraded 

or technically classified as desert. Desertification is advancing at a 

rate of about 600 square miles per year. 

Just this past May, the Chinese Government announced that 

28,000 rivers out of 50,000 rivers have simply dried up since the 

1990s. Meanwhile, there has been a serious deterioration in water 

quality. According to this year’s report from the Ministry of Environmental Protection, about a quarter of the water that flows 

through China’s seven major rivers and their tributaries is considered unfit even for agriculture or industry. About 90 percent of the 

groundwater is moderately or heavily polluted. 

For Chinese leaders what matters most, of course, is how this 

water scarcity and water pollution affects a range of additional 

challenges that they face in terms of public health, the economy, 

and social stability. In terms of public health, about 600 million 

people in China drink water that is contaminated and 190 million 

of those drink water that is so contaminated it is considered harmful to their health. 

Along China’s rivers scientists have identified about 450, upward 

of 450, of what they call cancer villages, just villages where the 

rates of cancer are much higher than the norm. Water pollution 

causes about 60,000 premature deaths annually in China. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

36

In terms of the Chinese economy, numbers are very sketchy on 

this, but the World Bank in 2007 estimated that water scarcity and 

pollution cost the Chinese economy the equivalent of 2.3 percent of 

GDP. This is from lost agriculture, fisheries, and industrial output, 

as well as from missed days of work and hospital stays. In Beijing, 

for example, in 2009, 49 factories were forced to close because of 

lack of water. 

Most important, however, is how the environment affects social 

stability, and you discussed this a little bit, I think, or hinted at 

it in the first panel. In 2010 China recorded 180,000 protests. In 

2012 the environment surpassed illegal land expropriation, land 

grabs, as the largest source of social unrest in the country. The 

Internet really has transformed people’s access to environmental 

information and their ability to organize, and this is producing 

enormous bottom-up pressure on the Chinese Government. 

China’s strategy for addressing its water challenge is twofold. 

First is going outside its borders to meet its food security, energy, 

and other developmental needs. China has become the third-largest 

investor in agricultural land overseas after the United Kingdom 

and the United States. It is the largest source of illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, and it is damming and diverting, 

as you’ve discussed, transboundary rivers in ways that are engendering concern in its downstream neighbors in Central, Southeast, 

and South Asia. 

Beijing is also adopting a wide range of measures at home, 

including planned construction of desalination plants along the 

eastern seaboard, large-scale river diversion projects within their 

own country, waste water treatment plans, and experiments with 

water pricing and water trading. Yet the political economy of the 

country in many respects undermines the government’s efforts. For 

example, despite numerous laws and regulations on the books, an 

estimated two-thirds of Chinese factories simply dump their waste 

water untreated into nearby lakes and rivers. Beijing has been unwilling to move forward on what I think people in the United 

States and elsewhere would consider to be the pillars of effective 

environmental protection: transparency, official accountability, the 

rule of law, and an enforcement system of economic incentives to 

promote water conservation and recycling and disincentives to 

pollute. 

Because of broader political fears, Beijing also limits the role of 

the media and environmental NGOs, which are the most dynamic 

and progressive elements in Chinese environmental protection 

efforts today. 

Clearly, it is early days in the Xi Jinping and Li Keqiang era and 

rhetorically Premier Li has been a strong supporter of environmental protection. But his predecessor Premier Wen Jiabao was also 

quite supportive and did not accomplish as much as he would have 

liked. So I think we need to wait to see what this new government 

is able to accomplish. 

In terms of what the United States might do within the context 

of the rebalance, I have a couple of thoughts, which I will go 

through very quickly since my time is almost up. I do think we 

have an enormous array of agreements, memoranda of understanding, and other things with China already on the environment. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

37

I believe the United States ought to focus significantly on the fundamentals of good governance, for example a program on the rule 

of law, because I think this type of capacity-building is essential. 

It is at the heart of China’s continued failure to improve its environment. Despite having access to scientific knowledge or to technology, year after year China misses its pollution reduction targets, 

and why is that? It is because of the governance issue. 

I also think we should be targeting areas that affect the United 

States directly—U.S. interests directly. For example development 

of shale gas is an area where the United States has moved forward 

relatively rapidly in recent years to develop environmental regulations. China is moving forward aggressively to develop its own 

shale gas reserves. It wants to become active, it already is active, 

in the United States. And yet they are talking about a 3-to-5-year 

lead time before they are going to have any regulations on the 

books. So I think this is an area that is ripe for cooperation. 

I also have a few other ideas, but I have gone past my time, so 

I will stop there. 

Senator CARDIN. We will give you another minute or two if you 

would like to complete your statement. 

Dr. ECONOMY. OK. I think the second thing is the Trans-Pacific 

Partnership. I think here there are two steps to this, of course. The 

first is that the United States has to ensure that there is a strong 

environmental component with some enforcement mechanism and 

commitments on issues such as fisheries management. The second 

then is to bring China into the agreement, which will be a number 

of years in the making. 

But I think it will be one of the most effective ways to engage 

China, because if we look at something like the World Trade Organization that really is one of the most effective ways that we have 

of holding China to account and reining in some of their most egregious behaviors. I think that TPP has a similar prospect on some 

of these environmental issues of working with China. 

I think the third point is that we ought more often to think about 

working with China through a multilateral framework. Too often 

the United States approaches China just bilaterally, but I think in 

two distinct ways this is important. First, Japan, the European 

Union, and Canada are all very active as well in helping China in 

its environmental protection efforts, but we do virtually no consultation with our closest allies to try to make sure that we are reinforcing rather than replicating similar efforts. I think if we could 

work together there would be enormous synergy. So I think that 

is one thing we ought to do. 

Then the second I think is really to do more of the work that the 

first panel was talking about, as well as Carter Roberts here, about 

working with regional partners and helping develop their capacity, 

because from everything, the Mekong River, but as well looking at 

the development of fisheries in the South China Sea and the East 

China Sea and the potential for greater conflict to emerge, I think 

the United States has a very important role to play there. 

I will stop there. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Economy follows:]

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

38

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH C. ECONOMY

How China manages its water resources over the next 5 to 7 years has profound 

implications not only for the Chinese people but also for the Asia-Pacific region and 

beyond. Within China, water supplies—already scarce in many parts of the country—are diminishing and contributing to a range of serious economic, health, and 

social challenges. Spillover effects, such as damming and diverting transnational 

rivers, a push to acquire arable land abroad, and increasing conflict over regional 

fishery resources are also being felt well outside the country’s borders. China’s leaders have adopted a number of measures to try to address the country’s growing 

water crisis, but these have fallen woefully short of the task at hand. In the context 

of the U.S. Rebalance to Asia, China’s water challenge, if not addressed, is a potentially destabilizing force within the region and suggests the need for targeted 

collaboration with Chinese actors as well as stronger cooperation with regional 

partners. 

THE NATURE OF THE CHALLENGE

China’s per capita water resources are just over one-quarter that of the world 

average, and compounding the challenge, within China are highly unevenly distributed. Northern China possesses approximately 40 percent of the country’s total population, half its agricultural land, and more than 50 percent of its GDP, yet receives 

only 12 percent of total precipitation. Southern China, in contrast, receives roughly 

80 percent of the country’s total precipitation, but severe water pollution dramatically reduces its natural advantage.1

Rapid economic growth has exacerbated China’s water challenge. Water is consumed without consideration for future demand. Industry, which accounts for about 

one-quarter of China’s total water consumption, uses anywhere from four to ten 

times more water per unit of GDP as other competitive economies. Water for energy 

is a particularly critical source of industrial water use—according to the Ministry 

of Water Resources, in 2010, China’s coal mining, processing, and electrical-generating industries alone accounted for almost 20 percent of all water consumed nationally.2 Agriculture demands the largest share of the country’s water resources (about 

60 percent), but household and industrial demand have increased dramatically over 

the past decade as individual wealth and the overall economy continue to expand. 

And as China urbanizes, the problem will only increase: urban residents use two 

and a half times more water than their rural counterparts. 

At least 10 provinces in China are below the World Bank’s poverty level of 1,000 

cubic meters per person per year; and according to Jiao Yong, vice minister of water 

resources, in 2012, China had more than 400 cities that lacked sufficient water, 110 

of which were facing serious scarcity.3 In Beijing, per capita water resources 

decreased to only 120 cubic meters per year in 2011 4; by comparison, the global 

annual average per capita is 1,385 cubic meters.5

China’s widespread pollution poses an additional challenge. Reports concerning 

levels of pollution vary widely, but none is positive. Overall, the Ministry of Environmental Protection reports that approximately one-fourth of the water that flows 

through China’s seven major river systems and their tributaries is considered not 

even fit for agriculture or industry. A February 2013 report by the Geological Survey of China revealed that 90 percent of the country’s groundwater was polluted.6

A year earlier, Vice Minister of Environmental Protection Wu Xiaoqing claimed that 

40 percent of rivers and 55 percent of groundwater was unfit for drinking.7 Even 

water that is treated cannot be safely consumed from the tap. In late 2012, the Chinese newspaper, the Southern Weekend, featured an interview with a married couple, both of whom were water experts in Beijing. They stated that they had not 

drunk from the tap in twenty years, and have watched the water quality deteriorate 

significantly over just the past few years,8 even while state officials claim that more 

than 80 percent of water leaving treatment facilities met government standards in 

2011.9 In rural China, a reported 320 million people do not have access to safe 

drinking water.10

According to one report by Century Weekly, there are a number of reasons for differing assessments of the country’s water quality: (1) the frequency of testing at 

treatment plants is too low, and only 40 percent of the treatment plants in China’s 

35 major cities have the capacity to test for all 106 indicators in any case; (2) there 

are only a few independent water-quality monitoring bureaus, and most water testing is done in-house by the same water-treatment plant being evaluated; (3) there 

is weak transparency from local governments as to the results of the tests; and (4) 

no water testing accounts for the contamination that occurs from the aging and degraded pipes through which the water is transmitted to Chinese households.11

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

39

ECONOMIC, HEALTH, AND SOCIAL IMPACTS

Most important to Chinese officials and to the Chinese people is what their country’s water challenge means for their health, economic well-being, and social stability. 

Impacts on Public Health 

Chinese scholars and activists as well as foreign analysts have started to document the linkages between the country’s growing pollution and its rising public 

health challenges. According to Wang Zhangsheng, a professor at Tsinghua University’s School of Environment, much of China’s water contains organic compounds 

that can impair the immune system, affect fertility, cause cancer, or interfere with 

the nervous system. The impacts can take as long as 10 or 20 years to emerge.12

In 2010, Lee Liu, a geographer at the University of Central Missouri, reported in 

the magazine Environment that he had identified 459 cancer villages—villages in 

which cancer rates were significantly higher than normal. Most were clustered 

around rivers with the lowest grade of pollution on the government’s five-point 

scale. Some of these villages had cancer rates 30 times greater than the national 

average.13 In February 2013, the government-financed newspaper the Global Times 

took the unusual step of acknowledging the existence of these cancer villages and 

their link to pollution. Along with a map of cancer villages, the Weibo account of 

the Global Times stated that ‘‘. . . because of chemical poisoning ‘cancer villages’ 

and other serious [threats to] social health have begun to emerge in many areas.’’ 14

The negative impacts of water pollution are not limited to China’s water supply. 

Chemicals and pollutants that seep into rivers and groundwater also find their way 

into food crops and eventually onto Chinese tables. A consistent diet of cadmiumlaced rice has caused bone softening and weakness in some southern Chinese villagers. And according to the China Economic Weekly, in 2011, as much as 12 million tons of grain—enough to feed 40 million people—were contaminated with heavy 

metals absorbed from the soil.15 Although the Ministry of Environmental Protection 

and Ministry of Land Resources completed a 5-year study of soil contamination in 

2012, other than reporting that 10 percent of the land is contaminated with heavy 

metals, they have refused to release the results, calling the report a ‘‘state secret.’’ 16

Economic Costs 

Measuring the economic costs of water pollution and scarcity is notoriously difficult. In 2007, the World Bank calculated the costs of China’s water crisis to be 2.3 

percent of GDP, of which 1.3 percent was credited to the scarcity of water and the 

other 1 percent to the direct impact of water pollution.17 In Beijing, for example, 

49 factories closed in 2009 due to water shortage.18 And in one of China’s leading 

economic centers, Chongqing, which sits on the banks of the Yangtze River, local 

officials estimate that dealing only with the effects of water pollution on local agriculture and public health at 4.3 percent of GDP.19

These costs are only likely to rise as scarcity increases. In March 2013, Beijing 

announced that more than half of Chinese rivers have ‘‘disappeared’’ since the 1990s 

due to climate change, industrial development, and large hydroelectric projects.20

This changing water landscape will have significant impacts on future agricultural 

and industrial development. 

Social Unrest 

In 2010, the number of reported social protests in China reached 180,000 21; and 

in 2013, the environment surpassed land expropriation as the leading cause of social 

unrest in the country.22 The rule of law in China is only weakly developed, and 

without effective legal redress for environmental wrongdoing, victims of environmental pollution often resort to demonstrations to draw attention to their plight. 

The advent of the Internet has further contributed to the ability of the Chinese 

people to bring bottom-up pressure on officials: Internet petitions, water pollution 

maps demarcating polluting factories, and pictures of polluted sites or protesting 

Chinese are all central to civil society efforts to reform the system of environmental 

protection. Urban residents have also become skilled at using the Internet or cell 

phone texts to organize protests, most commonly against government plans to site 

factories or garbage incinerators near their communities. In July 2012, for example, 

in Qidong, north of Shanghai, thousands of people demonstrated violently in opposition to a waste water pipeline from a paper mill because they believed it would pollute their coastal waters.23 In response to the local government’s unwillingness to 

listen to their concerns, the local citizens stormed local government offices and 

caused $20,000 in damage. Their protest was inspired by another demonstration 

earlier that same month in Shifang, Sichuan province, roughly 1,000 miles away, 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

40

that the Qidong residents had tracked via the Internet. In both cases, the local governments halted the projects in the face of the citizen unrest. 

REGIONAL AND GLOBAL IMPLICATIONS

China’s need for water to fuel its growth and feed its people also has far reaching 

implications for the rest of the world. To meet its food security needs, China is seeking land abroad; to address its declining fish catch, it is pushing further into contested waters; and to meet its need to supply its factories, land, and people with 

energy and water, it is expanding its network of dams and large scale hydropower 

plants. 

Fishing in Distant Waters 

In 2012, China’s State Oceanic Administration completed its 8-year survey of 

marine resources and discovered that 90 percent of coastal cities suffer from intermittent water shortages; mangrove swamps have decreased by 73 percent and coral 

reefs by 80 percent since the 1950s, and coastal wetlands have shrunk by 57 

percent.24

Pollution has taken a severe toll. Three-quarters of discharges into estuaries fail 

to meet regulatory standards. The area of coastal waters that earned the worst official pollution rating increased by more than one-third from 2011 to 2012 from 

44,000 square kilometers to 68,000 square kilometers.25 According to Chinese fishermen, a decade ago, it was possible to catch fish about 90 nautical miles from the 

coast but now they have to go 130 to 160 nautical miles, and the catch has dropped 

by three-quarters during the same time period. In addition, the number of types of 

marine products with commercial value has dropped from 70 to 10 in recent years.26

As fish stocks in Chinese coastal waters have become depleted, Chinese fishermen 

have become more deeply engaged in international waters. In 2011, 470 Chinese 

fishing boats were sent back by South Korean Coast guards for illegally entering 

South Korean waters. More than 90 percent of Chinese companies engaged in distant-water fisheries are private and small,27 yet according to some analysts, they 

are increasingly coordinated with Chinese maritime authorities. As Lucio Blano 

Pitlo suggests, ‘‘In April 2012, Chinese fishermen in the Bajo de Masincloc (Scarborough Shoal) were about to be apprehended for illegal fishing but were able to 

radio Chinese maritime surveillance ships to intercede on their behalf. Fishermen 

have become securitized.’’ 28 While conflict is most regularly reported with China’s 

neighbors, such as Vietnam, the Philippines, and Japan, according to some sources, 

the ‘‘most extreme’’ illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing by Chinese has 

taken place in West African waters. A 2013 report by scientists at the University 

of British Columbia estimates that the total catch of some 3,400 Chinese fishing 

vessels is 4.1 million tons (worth more than $11 billion), but that only 9 percent 

of China’s total catch in Africa, as well as in other international waters, was reported to the United Nations, complicating efforts by African nations to manage 

their stocks.29 (These numbers are disputed by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization as too high.) Some of these catches may be legal, resulting 

from agreements between China and host countries that have not been made public, 

but the sheer magnitude and unreported nature of the catch is enough to raise 

alarm bells throughout Africa and the developing world. 

Securing Food 

China has historically placed enormous importance on food security and food selfsufficiency. Increasingly, however, scarce water supplies and lack of arable land 

have driven China outside its borders to ensure this food security. According to one 

study published in 2013, China is responsible for about 7 percent of all cross-border 

land purchases (i.e., purchases by entities from one country of land in others), third 

in the world, well behind the United Kingdom and just behind the United States.30

However, the rate of its acquisitions is increasing rapidly. 

Chinese land and agricultural investments in different parts of the world take 

varying forms and serve different purposes. In African countries such as Zambia 

and Senegal, Chinese-invested farms are typically smaller-scale—generally under 

5,000 hectares—and often serve local Chinese communities, such as those that 

emerge around particular resource or infrastructure investments. 

In other countries, such as Brazil and Australia, China has sought larger stakes, 

generally to meet needs in China. Chinese companies’ preference is to own land outright to ensure ‘‘product safety, lower production costs, and better profits.’’ 31 Where 

owning land outright is not possible as in Brazil, they are investing in infrastructure and processing facilities that allow them to purchase soybeans directly from 

Brazilian farmers, circumventing multinational grain companies.32 In a number of 

countries, such as the Philippines, Brazil, Argentina, and Australia, there has been 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

41

pushback—particularly from local populations—where communities have either 

passed laws or rejected land purchases by Chinese companies. Concerns vary by 

country, but range from fears over the export of Chinese farmers to control of valuable arable land by Chinese state-owned enterprises. 

Damming and Diverting 

China has more dams than any other country in the world, and between 2007 and 

2020, it plans to triple its hydropower capacity. According to Ma Jun, director of 

the Chinese NGO Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs, many Chinese rivers simply will not be running in 10 years if China meets such hydropower goals.33

China’s hydropower plans and water needs also have significant implications for 

the country’s neighbors. Several of Asia’s longest and most important rivers begin 

in the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau, and China is a central player in many 

of the controversies surrounding shared water resources in Central, South, and 

Southeast Asia. Several of these conflicts, such as those centered on the water resources of the Irtyush, Mekong, and Brahmaputra Rivers are raising regional tensions as China develops plans upstream that may have dramatic impacts on the 

lower reaches. Damming of rivers to generate hydroelectric power alters the way 

that water flows; it can harm fisheries and agricultural activity downstream. When 

river waters are permanently diverted for irrigation, other energy production, or 

similar uses that permanently consume the water (unlike hydroelectric dams), they 

can harm those who share the water resources more. This potential for damage is 

often compounded by poor or nonexistent information sharing between China and 

others with which it shares rivers.34

Across all three conflict areas—the Mekong, the Irtysh, and the Brahmaputra—

China has been generally unwilling to discuss shared water rights—which it does 

not recognize—or even to share information concerning water levels, usage, or pollution. In each case, however, significant negative media attention and public pressure 

have brought China to the table. With regard to the Irtysh, for example, China’s 

plans to divert significant amounts of water from the Irtysh through a series of 

canals contributed to significant negative publicity within Kazakhstan and eventually to the establishment of a 2011 Agreement on Water Quality in Transboundary 

Waters between China and Kazakhstan, obligating each side to monitor water quality.35 The two countries are also conducting scientific research on transborder river 

issues. The research is expected to be completed in 2014 with an eye toward informing later agreement. Still there is no agreement as to shared water rights, although 

Kazakhstan may be able to leverage Chinese interests in investing in and developing Kazakh oil and copper resources to make progress in this area. 

BEIJING’S RESPONSE

The Ministry of Environmental Protection’s annual report released in June 2013 

stated that the future outlook on the quality of China’s water sources is ‘‘far from 

optimistic.’’ 36 China’s leaders face a daunting challenge: how to meet the needs of 

their rapidly growing economy and large population with a gravely threatened water 

supply. Beijing’s answer more often than not has been to launch large work projects 

and campaigns reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution era. They also have plans to 

invest $650 billion on projects between 2011 and 2020, but between 2006 and 2010, 

they spent $112 billion and the situation still has not improved.37

The answer to China’s water dilemma is not complicated in conception, but it is 

challenging in implementation. It rests in developing a system of incentives and disincentives that make it easy for officials and the Chinese people to do the right 

thing. Local environmental protection bureaus often lack the capacity to enforce 

laws and regulations, with too few human or financial resources to oversee the factories in their jurisidiction. Fines for polluting enterprises are often ignored or 

negotiatied such that continuously paying fines is still cheaper than following regulations. And corruption is also a significant problem. Of the 1.3 percent of GDP that 

Beijing currently spends on environmental protection (note: experts believe the percentage should be closer to 2–4 percent of GDP), half finds its way into other local 

priorities such as infrastructure development.38

Pricing reform is one element of an effective policy response. Simply put, water 

in China is too cheap. Experiments are under way in a number of municipalities 

for tiered pricing to try to distribute the burden of price rises, and Beijing has asked 

local governments to ‘‘carry out a tiered pricing system for urban households by the 

end of 2013.’’ 39 However, such efforts are highly sensitive politically. A recent proposal by the China Water Investment Corporation, which is owned by the Ministry 

of Water Resources and the China Power Construction Corporation, to increase 

water tariffs by more than ten times was the object of a scathing editorial in the 

investigative journal Caixin, which argued, ‘‘More than half of the country’s water 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

42

companies are in the red. Low prices are not the major reason companies have suffered large scale losses—it is due to lack of government investment. They need to 

maintain pipes and other facilities. Public access to clean drinking water should be 

provided by the government. Not one Chinese city has said its tap water is suitable 

for drinking.’’ 40

A sound Chinese water strategy also needs to strengthen those elements of China’s political system that support good environmental policymaking. Yet such 

change is even slower to emerge than pricing reform. The most dynamic and creative forces in Chinese environmental protection are Chinese environmental NGOs 

and the media. They collaborate—often with international partners—on a wide 

range of issues such as publishing maps of polluting factories, pushing local officials 

to publish legally mandated pollution statistics, protesting excessive dam construction, developing building energy efficiency standards, and documenting the public 

health consequences of pollution. Yet Chinese officials remain concerned about delivering too much information and too much power to forces outside direct government 

control. Thus, the media are advised not to publicize water pollution disasters, and 

environmental activists may be detained and arrested if they overtly challenge local 

officials. 

The rule of law is also essential to effective environmental protection. Former deputy director of the State Environmental Protection Administration (now the Ministry of Enviornmental Protection) Zhang Kunmin, for example, has stated that the 

environment cannot truly be protected until people’s legal rights are guaranteed.41

However, laws and regulations that promote transparency are often poorly enforced. 

For example, Chinese scholars have noted that although environmental impact 

assessments are perhaps the most important form of government-supported citizen 

engagement in the environment, the system is deeply flawed: only a small percentage of projects are subjected to compulsory public participation; the timing and 

duration of engaging the public is short; the method of selecting those who can participate is often biased; and the amount of information actually disclosed is often 

quite limited in order to try to prevent social unrest.42

Moreover, recent draft revisions to the Environmental Protection Law take a step 

backward in accountability and the rule of law by placing sole authority for bringing 

public interest environmental lawsuits in the hands of the All-China Environmental 

Federation (ACEF) and its provincial-level branches. Previously, some cities, such 

as Hainan, had permitted a wide range of people, including individuals to bring 

cases; and nongovernmental organizations, such as the Center for Legal Assistance 

to Pollution Victims, have handled over 200 environmental lawsuits for pollution 

victims. Since the ACEF is overseen by the Ministry of Environmental Protection, 

many environmental activists believe that it is unlikely to be very aggressive in 

bringing cases, and are protesting the draft regulations.43

CHINA’S ENVIRONMENT AND THE U.S. REBALANCE TO ASIA

The U.S. Rebalance to Asia reflects a renewed and broader commitment by the 

United States to the Asia Pacific region, first and foremost in the realms of security 

and trade and investment. Expanding the parameters of the rebalance to include 

issues such as the environment, which is integrally intertwined with both regional 

security and future regional economic growth, adds an important new dimension to 

this U.S. effort. 

The role of China in the original conception of the rebalance is somewhat complicated, recognizing both the enormous opportunities for growing U.S.-China 

cooperation but also the challenges posed by China’s inreasing economic and military strength. Much as in the security and economic arenas, the U.S. focus in the 

environmental arena should be twofold: supporting targeted bilateral U.S.-China 

cooperation; and strengthening multilateral cooperation to enhance the efficacy of 

collaboration with China when possible and to bring pressure to bear on China 

when necessary. 

Target the Fundamentals 

The United States has a vast array of environmental cooperation efforts underway 

with China. It should develop a clear set of priorities that focus most explicitly on 

those areas where China needs the greatest support. For example, given the structural weakness in China’s environmental protection system, the United States could 

develop a signature program on the rule of law, utilizing public-private partnerships 

with U.S. business, scholars, and NGOs. Building on the work of the American Bar 

Association and others, the program could help train judges and lawyers, as well 

as help develop regulations and standards where appropriate. For example, China 

is making significant investments in shale gas development both within China and, 

increasingly, in the United States. It plans to have the capacity to develop 100 bilFOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

43

lion cubic meters of natural gas annually by 2020. Yet China’s Ministry of Environmental Protection has said that it will need at least 3 to 5 years to develop the necessary regulations.44 Given the strong interest of Chinese oil and gas companies in 

U.S. shale gas development, U.S.-China cooperation on developing environmental 

standards would be beneficial to both sides. 

Strengthen and Better Utilize the U.S. Embassy in Beijing 

The United States Embassy in Beijing achieved singular success in supporting 

environmental protection in China by Tweeting Chinese air pollution statistics and 

spurring the citizen activism that resulted in Chinese cities more accurately reporting local air quality. The Embassy should consider launching a broader environmental educational campaign via the Internet that would strengthen citizen awareness. The campaign could share best U.S. practices, provide a platform for the 

Ministry of Environmental Protection and Chinese environmental activists to share 

their work, and potentially even address sensitive issues such as food safety. 

Encourage China’s Participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership 

The Transpacific Partnership (TPP) represents a unique opportunity to reinforce 

the linkage between trade and environment in a meaningful manner. Evading environmental laws and subverting norms undermines best trade practices. The United 

States should ensure that a strong environmental commitment on issues such as the 

illegal timber trade, trade in endangered species, and illegal fisheries that allows 

for binding commitments and international enforcement is incorporated into the 

TPP. China’s accession into the TPP would then represent an important new vehicle 

for helping ensure China’s adherence to environmental laws and regulations. 

Work with Other Partners in the Region to Support Transparency and Best Practices 

Bilateral U.S.-China cooperation can only accomplish so much. The European 

Union, Japan, and Canada have all been very active in developing Chinese environmental protection efforts. More attention needs to be paid to ensuring that cooperative efforts reinforce but do not replicate each other. To the extent possible, intellectual and financial resources should be combined to deliver the strongest support. At 

the same time, the work that the United States has undertaken throughout the 

Asia-Pacific region, such as the Coral Triangle Initative and the Mekong River Commission, are essential to strengthening the capacity of our partners to address their 

own internal monitoring and enforcement capacities, as well as that of China. The 

United States should look for additional means of enhancing its commitment to such 

regional agreements, as some analysts have proposed for example, by developing a 

system of fish import certification to reduce the proliferation of illegal fishing 

throughout the region.

————————

End Notes

1 Elizabeth Economy, ‘‘China’s Growing Water Crisis,’’ in ‘‘Coming Up Empty: Tackling 

Resource Scarcity,’’ World Politics Review, August 9, 2011. 2Keith Schneider, ‘‘Coal is China’s Largest Industrial Water Consumer,’’ Grist.org, February 

24, 2011, http://grist.org/article/2011-02-23-coal-is-chinas-largest-industrial-water-consumer/. 3 Ecns.com, ‘‘China’s water crisis a growing threat,’’ March 26, 2012, www.ecns.cn/2012/03-26/

11135.shtml. 4 Ibid. 

5Mark Fischetti, ‘‘How Much Water Do Nations Consume?’’ Scientific American, May 21, 

2012, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=graphic-science-how-much-water-nationsconsume. 6 Barry van Wyk, ‘‘The groundwater of 90% of Chinese cities is polluted,’’ Danwei.com, February 18, 2013, http://www.danwei.com/the-groundwater-of-90-of-chinese-cities-is-polluted/. 7Wu Xiaoqing, ‘‘Address at the Press Conference of the State Council Information Office,’’ 

June 5, 2012, http://www.china.com.cn/zhibo/zhuanti/ch-xinwen/2012-06/05/contentl25566769.htm. 8Peng Liguo, ‘‘Beijing family boycotts city’s tap water,’’ ChinaDialogue.net, January 16, 2013, 

http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/5611-Beijing-family-boycotts-city-s-tap-water; 

for the original article in Chinese, please see: http://www.infzm.com/content/84703. 9 ‘‘50 Percent Of Water In China May Be Unsafe To Drink,’’ May 17, 2012, http://

www.ibtimes.com/50-percent-water-china-may-be-unsafe-drink-698930. 10 ‘‘Report on China’s national economic, social development plan (2010),’’ NPC.gov.cn, March 

16, 2010, http://www.npc.gov.cn/englishnpc/Speciall11l4/2010-03/19/contentl1621704.htm. 11Gong Jing and Wang Haotong, ‘‘What’s coming out of China’s taps?’’ ChinaDialogue.net, 

June 7, 2012, http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/4962-What-s-coming-out-ofChina-s-taps-. 12 Jing Gong and Hongqiao Liu, ‘‘Half of China’s urban drinking water fails to meet standards,’’ ChinaDialogue.net, June 6, 2013, http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/

6074-Half-of-China-s-urban-drinking-water-fails-to-meet-standards. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

44

13Lee Liu, ‘‘Made in China: Cancer Villages,’’ Environment, March/April 2010, http://

www.environmentmagazine.org/Archives/Back%20Issues/March-April%202010/made-in-chinafull.html. 14David Wertime, ‘‘China’s State-Run Media Shares Powerful Map of ‘Cancer Villages’ Creeping Inland,’’ ChinaFile.com, February 22, 2013, http://www.chinafile.com/china-s-state-runmedia-shares-powerful-map-cancer-villages-creeping-inland. 15Shi Jiangtao, ‘‘Millions of hectares of farmland and 12m tonnes of grain contaminated,’’ 

South China Morning Post, July 19, 2012, http://www.scmp.com/article/738908/millions-hectaresfarmland-and-12m-tonnes-grain-contaminated. 16 Christina Larson, ‘‘Soil Pollution Is a State Secretin China,’’ Bloomberg BusinessWeek, 

February 25, 2013, www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-02-25/soil-pollution-is-a-state-secret-inchina. 17 Jian Xie, ‘‘Addressing China’s Water Scarcity,’’ The World Bank, 2009. 18 Brooke Barton, ‘‘Why water consciousness is a business imperative in China,’’ 

GreenBiz.com, April 16, 2013, http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2013/04/16/water-business-imperative-china. 19 ‘‘Cost of Pollution in China: Economic Estimates of Physical Damages,’’ The World Bank, 

2007. 20 Emily Ford, ‘‘More than half of Chinese rivers have ‘disappeared’ since 1990s,’’ The Times, 

March 29, 2013, http://dgrnewsservice.org/2013/03/29/more-than-half-of-chinese-rivers-have-disappeared-since-1990s/. 21Tom Orlik, ‘‘Unrest Grows as Economy Booms,’’ Wall Street Journal, September 26, 2011, 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903703604576587070600504108.html. 22 ‘‘Chinese Anger Over Pollution Becomes Main Cause of Social Unrest,’’ BloombergNews, 

March 6, 2013,http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-06/pollution-passes-land-grievances-asmain-spark-of-china-protests.html. 23 ‘‘China waste water pipeline scrapped after protest,’’ BBC News, July 28, 2012, http://

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-19026464. 24 Jane Qiu, ‘‘Chinese survey reveals widespread coastal pollution,’’ Nature, November 6, 2012, 

http://www.nature.com/news/chinese-survey-reveals-widespread-coastal-pollution-1.11743. 25Qian Wang, High Tech Marine Sector Steams Ahead, China Daily, June 8, 2013, http://

english.peopledaily.com.cn/202936/8277851.html 26 An Baijie and Xu Wei, ‘‘Overfishing depleting sea resources,’’ China Daily, February 21, 

2013, http://europe.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2013-02/21/contentl16241804.htm. 27 ‘‘Group formed to aid fisheries,’’ Xinhua, May 30, 2013, www.china.org.cn/environment/2012-

05/30/contentl25515197.htm. 28Lucio Blanco Pitlo III, ‘‘Fishing Wars: Competition for South China Sea’s Fishery Resources,’’ Eurasia Review, July 10, 2013, http://www.eurasiareview.com/10072013-fishing-warscompetition-for-south-china-seas-fishery-resources-analysis/. 29 John Vidal, ‘‘Chinese fishing fleet in African waters reports 9% of catch to UN,’’ the Guardian (April 3, 2013) http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/apr/03/chinese-fishing-fleet-african-catch. 30Maria Cristina Rulli, Antonio Saviori, and Paolo D’Odorico, ‘‘Global land and water grabbing,’’ PNAS 10, no. 3 (January 2013): 895. 31Stephen Chen, ‘‘Party cadre Zhu Zhangjin pins hopes of food security on overseas farms,’’ 

South China Morning Post, March 24, 2013, http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1198218/

party-cadre-zhu-zhangjin-pins-hopes-food-security-overseas-farms. 32 Elizabeth Economy, Interview with Brazilian Agricultural officials (March 2013). 33David Stanway, ‘‘Water, CO2 the priorities for China’s 5-year plan,’’ Reuters, March 3, 2011, 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/03/us-china-environment-idUSTRE72214Y20110303. 34 Elizabeth Economy and Michael Levi,‘‘By All Means Necessary: How China’s Resource 

Quest is Changing the World’’ (forthcoming Oxford Press, 2014). 35 ‘‘Conflict of Interest has Created Water Crisis,’’ European Dialogue, April 13, 2011, http:/

/eurodialogue.org/conflict-of-interests-has-created-water-crisis. 36 ‘‘China moves to address drinking water woes,’’ Xinhua, July 21, 2013, http://

news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-07/21/cl132559802.htm. 37David Stanway, ‘‘After China’s multibillion-dollar cleanup, water still unfit to drink,’’ 

Reuters, February 20, 2013, www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/20/us-china-pollution-wateridUSBRE91J19N201. 38Stephen Chen, ‘‘Money for fighting pollution ‘wasted,’ ’’ South China Morning Post, April 1, 

2012 http://www.scmp.com/article/698060/money-fighting-pollution-wasted. 39Zhao Li, ‘‘Low water prices must be revised,’’ China Daily, May 27, 2011, http://

usa.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2011-05/27/contentl12592357.htm. 40Gong Jing, ‘‘Closer Look: Why Idea to Raise Water Bills Is All Wet,’’ Caixin, April 18, 2013, 

http://english.caixin.com/2013-04-18/100515675.html. 41Meng Si, ‘‘Seeking damages,’’ ChinaDialogue.net, July 21, 2011, http://

www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/4422-Seeking-damages. 42 Yuhuan Zhang, Xiaowen Liu, Yunjun Yu, Guojian Bian, Yu Li, and Yingxian Long, ‘‘Challenge of Public Participation in China’s EIA Practice,’’ South China Institute of Environmental 

Sciences: IAIA12 Conference Proceedings, May 27–June 1, 2012. 43Luna lin and Zhang Chun, ‘‘Amending environmental protection law a backward step, say 

NGOs,’’ ChinaDialogue.net, June 28, 2013, www.chinadialouge.net/blog/6162-amending-environmental-protection-law-a-back. 44Wang Xiaocong, ‘‘Environmental Frets as Frackers Move In,’’ Caixin, November 20, 2012, 

http://english.caixin.com/2012-11-20/100462881.html.

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

45

Senator CARDIN. Well, thank you. I thank both of you. I think 

your testimony has been extremely helpful to our debate. 

Dr. Economy, let me just point out that the first hearing we held 

on rebalance dealt with good governance because we do think it is 

fundamental to the building blocks on all these issues, including 

how we deal with the environmental challenges in the region. 

Your suggestion on TPP is a really good suggestion. It gives us 

an opportunity to include, we hope, an environmental dimension in 

that agreement. We will have a debate about that when we deal 

with trade promotion authority. I also serve on the Senate Finance 

Committee. That will be an issue that the Senate Finance Committee will deal with, and also the trade agreement itself as to how 

it deals with environmental issues. 

As you point out, China’s not a party to the TPP and it is not 

likely that they will be engaged with this type of a multilateral 

agreement including Western countries in the near future. So we 

still need to find a way to engage China. 

One way that could work—and I talked to President Park of 

South Korea about it, it is her initiative—is to establish a regional 

dialogue organization similar to the OSCE. Her idea is for Northeast Asia, but there are possibilities of expanding that mechanism 

beyond just Northeast Asia, to include not just China, North Korea, 

South Korea, and Japan, but also the United States and Russia. 

So there are ways that we think we can engage on a regional 

basis to advance sustainability. 

Mr. Roberts, you raise a very good point about sustainability. I 

was with former President Clinton when we named the EPA building after President Clinton and he made the point that his administration understood and supported the fact that a commitment to 

your environment is compatible with economic growth. In fact, he 

made the point that the only way you are going to get economic 

growth, is if you respect your resources. 

So as we are working with countries that still have valuable 

resources, but have not developed to the level that the industrial 

nations have, it is a point that is going to be difficult for us to 

make because we have already done our thing. But these nations’ 

future economic growth very much depends upon the way they 

manage their resources today. The more that we can make that 

point, it is going to be yes, good for us because we want stable 

countries, but it is also good for that country. 

I know that is a difficult point to make when you are sitting in 

a position where you are a developed nation and you have already 

lost some of the diversity that we are trying to protect in other 

countries. But it is a point that I think we have to emphasize when 

we can. 

Well, I first want to get on the record the wildlife trafficking 

issue and whether there is more that you would expect the United 

States to do in leadership to promote management of wildlife, to 

preserve diversity, and to protect endangered species. Is there more 

that we should be doing? 

Mr. ROBERTS. Yes, absolutely. You know, the numbers are stunning. We lost 30,000 elephants last year alone. On the rhino trade, 

South Africa was losing about 20 a year for a long, long time. 

Three years ago it jumped to 150, then to 350. This year we are 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

46

on track to break 650. The numbers are just growing. They are 

quite, quite huge. You rightly point out the connection between 

that and criminal syndicates and the rule of law and the rest. 

There is a lot of interest in our government, in the White House, 

in the State Department, in Interior, and in Congress to do something about it. We have been working with—in fact, this morning 

we had a meeting with the wider conservation community we 

hosted in our office, in responding to the new Executive order that 

President Obama signed just a few weeks ago. 

I think there is an opportunity for real legislation and we are 

working with the House Foreign Affairs Committee on several legislative options, including a moratorium on ivory trade in our own 

country, and also really making sure we have the resources to mobilize the right kind of action on the ground. It is not just enough 

to catch poachers. 

I was just in Nepal with my daughter in fact and we were tracking rhinos on the back of elephants, and we had the opportunity 

to dart one one-horned rhino and put a collar around the rhino to 

track the rhino. We were with a colonel of the army there. Nepal 

has reached the zero poaching level and I asked him: How did you 

get to zero poaching? 

He said: It was all about infiltrating the networks; it is all about 

intelligence. It is about going upstream. The poachers are just local 

guys who are following the money, and you have got to follow the 

money upstream by deploying the best available intelligence. That 

includes our resources available here, but working with other governments, too. 

So I think—then last but not least is demand. That is a diplomatic issue as much as anything. The Prime Minister of Thailand 

just committed to ending the ivory trade in her own country. She 

is going to need help. I believe there are real opportunities in 

China and Vietnam, which on ivory and rhino horn respectively are 

the two main drivers. 

So I think our government should do a lot more. It needs to start 

at home. There is some legislation that we have talked about. I 

think having a Senate hearing on this topic would be magnificent 

and would open up not only the crisis, but also the options that are 

in front of us, and help drive some things forward quickly that 

need to be done. 

Senator CARDIN. Well, thank you. Thank you for that suggestion. 

On Myanmar, it is a young country from the point of view of 

reform. The President was recently here. I must tell you—and I 

think I express the sentiment of all those who had the opportunity 

to meet with him—that he is very impressive. The jury is obviously 

out on what is happening in that country, but it is a country that 

is struggling with civilian leadership—and whether it will survive—we will see. 

I would welcome your thoughts as to Myanmar, because I think 

we do have inroads to impact some of their decisions. The President asked for transparency—he wants to do things very openly. I 

thought he was very sincere about that. 

So I think it would be helpful if you could perhaps give us help 

as to what should be on our wish list as they manage the resources 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

47

of their country, things that we should try to promote, which might 

be useful. 

Well, we have mentioned China, which is obviously the country 

that gets the most attention. Dr. Economy, I would like you to tell 

us, knowing the current environment, how can the United States 

be more effective in bringing about leadership from China on environmental issues? 

Dr. ECONOMY. Well, I think it is probably prudent to bear in 

mind that in most respects the United States leverage, impact, 

influence, on China is, if not marginal, it is limited. This is an 

enormous country. It is now the second-largest economy in the 

world and it will likely be the largest economy in the world in a 

decade or less. And it marches to its own drummer and it has its 

own sets of priorities. 

But I do think we have seen in the past 5 to 10 years some evidence of what it does take to move China. I think in some respects 

it can be rather surprising. For example, I think it is excellent that 

we have a new climate partnership, but the reality is that getting 

China to move on certain issues came about on the climate change 

issue much more because small island states and other small countries stood up and said: You, China, need to do more. 

There are certain things that matter to China. For example, still 

being considered a leader within the developing world matters a lot 

to China. It does not like to be called out on certain kinds of behavior. When developing countries unite and do ask China to change 

its position, sometimes that does bring about change. 

I think working with actors in China that are obviously supportive of doing the right thing, identifying them and then working 

with them is important as well. I think that requires operating at 

a number of different levels: certainly the central government, but 

also Chinese businesses now. There is a Green Entrepreneur Society that includes some of the powerful Chinese companies, that are 

the largest Chinese companies, that are out there today, that are 

very concerned about doing the right thing on the environment. I 

think working with some of them, having our business community 

work with them, is one possibility, developing partnerships at that 

level. 

And certainly NGOs. As I mentioned, they really are the most 

dynamic and I think creative force in China today. They are the 

ones who are pushing for the types of change that will bring about 

that good governance. 

So I think there are things that we can do to support them. Obviously, they cannot be overt, because the United States Government 

supporting Chinese NGO activity will not go over very well. But for 

example, there are many, many NGOs worldwide—World Wildlife 

Fund is certainly one of them, but NRDC, Environmental Defense 

Fund, and many others—who have been working in China, working 

with the Chinese for long periods of time. To the extent that the 

U.S. Government can support their activities and their partnerships with China, I think that is also really important, because 

supporting the people that are actually effecting the change from 

the bottom up I think is quite worthwhile. 

Senator CARDIN. So we have talked about China, we have talked 

about Myanmar, we have talked about the countries along the 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

48

Mekong. Are there other countries in Asia that we should be particularly concerned about on the environmental front or on preserving diversity, water security, et cetera, that you would want 

the subcommittee to pay attention to? 

Mr. ROBERTS. Obviously, Indonesia is at the top of the list. When 

we map all the priorities of the world in terms of fisheries and forests and rivers and the rest, Indonesia always comes out No. 1. It 

is where everything piles up. It is the world’s richest forest pound 

for pound in terms of diversity of life per square kilometer. I do not 

know if you have seen the map of coral reef diversity in the world. 

It looks like a bull’s eye. The center of the bull’s eye is Indonesia. 

Yet it is a very complicated country because it is such a vast 

archipelago with so many different dynamics there. Yet it is also 

a country where the President has made the Coral Triangle Initiative one of his signature accomplishments. But it is where everything comes together in terms of food production, in terms of timber and pulp production, in places like Borneo and Sumatra, and 

where I think there is an opportunity. We talked about commodities and getting those right and we talked about fisheries management and getting that right, that Indonesia is more than any other 

a place where, if we can nail those kinds of models in a country 

that has real governance issues, that it will have an enormous impact just in that country and also beyond. 

So it has been already one of the priority programs for the U.S. 

Government. But just continuing that kind of work with the countries around Indonesia is enormously important. 

I do not know if you have any other suggestions. 

Dr. ECONOMY. No, I focus on China. It keeps me busy, let me tell 

you. 

Senator CARDIN. You want to get back to China. 

Dr. ECONOMY. No, no. All I was going to say is actually, as I was 

just thinking about it, I am glad to hear that you are thinking 

about working with Japan and South Korea and the sort of Northeast Asia regional sort of forum. I know that had been floated even 

during the Clinton administration, and China was not interested at 

that point in time. So this I think represents a real step forward 

if in fact they are interested. This may be sort of a six-party talks 

comes to the environment. 

Senator CARDIN. That is exactly right. The motivating factor for 

this is South Korea. They are the ones pushing it hard. China was 

interested because they thought it helped North Korea to be in this 

type of a regional discussion. Japan thought it was interesting that 

they could be in a regional organization with Korea and perhaps 

do something about their relationship. It is a complicated group. 

When you are in each country they have different priorities, but I 

think they share a lot in common. 

The good news about the Helsinki framework is that it is not 

that intimidating because it is a consensus group. So you do not 

have to worry about treaty responsibilities. You just sit down and 

talk. It is proven effective. 

The other advantage and what we are looking at is whether it 

could be put under the umbrella of OSCE, so they do not have to 

negotiate the commitments. The commitments are universal. They 

have already been agreed to under Helsinki. 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

49

So there is interest in that and we are pursuing it. We expect 

to see whether that can be done, either formally or informally. 

Some of the countries already have affiliate memberships within 

OSCE. 

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Chairman, one thing I wanted to just touch 

on, and it is building off of your comments, is the whole notion of 

regional influence. On Myanmar, Myanmar is going to chair 

ASEAN in the coming year. I think if we can smartly work with 

Myanmar on a set of agenda items in the context of ASEAN that 

build off the kind of green economy principles that we ought to be 

building with Myanmar and the kind of smart choices that I talked 

about in Myanmar, that we could engage Myanmar also in their 

leadership in ASEAN in advancing those kind of principles 

throughout that region and use their influence. 

I never thought I would be talking about Myanmar’s influence in 

the rest of Southeast Asia, but there you have it, because everybody is watching, they have the platform, and by giving the right 

technical assistance on mapping their biodiversity and giving them 

the right guidelines on technical choices and using ASEAN as a 

platform, is I think, a golden opportunity for us to engage with that 

country and have ripple effects far beyond. 

Senator CARDIN. It is an opportunity. When nations want to take 

on leadership responsibility within regional organizations, they 

need to be a model in using that to advance the goals of those 

regional organizations. You are absolutely correct, we do have higher expectations if they want to step into leadership positions. 

I found this with Vietnam and now perhaps with Myanmar—that 

they really do want to become more of a legitimate international 

player. And if that is the case, then they need to change and they 

need to show leadership. We are seeing that they are taking some 

steps to do that. Again, the jury is out. I am not trying to oversell 

this. But we have seen some signs of progress. Certainly I could get 

into human rights, which is one of my favorite subjects, and there 

are certain deficiencies there that are pretty fundamental that 

have to be dealt with. 

Mr. ROBERTS. When we look around in the world, we have all 

kinds of science that says these parts of the world are important 

and that prioritize different parts of the world, and then there are 

these unexpected openings when the biggest things happen. One of 

the proudest things we have ever done was when Namibia attained 

independence and the U.S. Government through USAID helped 

build one of the most powerful community-based programs for conservation there—another country that almost has zero poaching. 

There are these moments when countries like Myanmar or 

Namibia or Nepal change governments and things happen, where 

shame on us if we do not provide the right technical assistance at 

the right moment and do so over an extended period of time, 

because success blossoms in the most unexpected places. I see that 

part of the world, Southeast Asia, including Myanmar, as one of 

the biggest opportunities we have in our work. 

Senator CARDIN. Agreed. 

Well, let me thank both of you for your contributions to this 

hearing. I think this has been extremely helpful to us. The President’s initiative on the rebalance gives the United States much 

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER

50

greater visibility in the Asia-Pacific region, and that allows us to 

move forward on agenda items. We think very much that sustainability, the environmental front, the management of food and water 

resources is a critical objective for the United States in Asia. So we 

will continue to promote these issues, and you have helped us develop a workable strategy. 

Thank you all very much, and with that the subcommittee will 

stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 2:22 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

Æ

FOREI-43947 with DISTILLER