Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Chinese Version)


national park governance, scientific decision-making, decision-making advisory, organizational forms, boundaries of authority and responsibility

Document Type

Modernizing National Park Governance System


National parks are multi-factor, multi-functional and multi-dimensional complexes, which makes them difficult to follow the traditional administration and management modes, and need to explore the construction of a modernized governance system. An important step in enhancing the effectiveness of governance is to establish a reasonable, and efficient scientific decision-making and consultation mechanism. China has made remarkable progress in scientific decision-making and consultation in national parks. However, there are still some problems with the national parks’ decision-making process and effectiveness due to vague definition of authority and responsibility, dependence on departmentalized management paths, and inadequate upward and downward transmission of information between decision-making and consultation, etc. This study draws on the operational experience of decision-making advisory mechanisms of national parks in the United States and France under different systems of centralized governance and polycentric governance, and analyzes the key components of clarifying the boundaries of authority and responsibility of decisionmaking advisory bodies of national parks in China. According to the degree of potential ecological and environmental impact, the degree of potential social impact and the realistic constraints of decision implementation, this study proposes that 26 decision contents, such as the formulation of national park laws and regulations and administrative regulations, need to give scientific experts the right to support the decision making in depth or even a veto, while 19 decision contents, such as the establishment of the boundary between central and local authority and responsibility, need to initiate a multi-party demonstration mechanism. This study also proposes countermeasures for disciplinary coordination, linkage and coordination, and institutional regulation of decision-making consultation.

First page


Last Page





Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences


1 王名,蔡志鸿,王春婷.社会共治:多元主体共同治理的实践探索与制度创新.中国行政管理, 2014,(12):16-19. Wang M, Cai Z H, Wang C T. Social co-governance:The exploring praxis and institutional innovation of multi-subject governance. Chinese Public Administration, 2014,(12):16-19.(in Chinese)

2 Stoker G. Governance as theory:Five propositions. International Social Science Journal, 1998, 50:17-28.

3 詹国彬,陈健鹏.走向环境治理的多元共治模式:现实挑战与路径选择.政治学研究, 2020,(2):65-75. Zhan G B, Chen J P. Towards multiple co-governance model of environmental governance-Realistic challenge and path choice. CASS Journal of Political Science, 2020,(2):65-75.(in Chinese)

4 Jax K, Furman E, Saarikoski H, et al. Handling a messy world:Lessons learned when trying to make the ecosystem services concept operational. Ecosystem Services, 2018, 29:415-427.

5 Parks Canada Agency. ""Unimpaired for Future Generations?"" Conserving Ecological Integrity With Canada's National Parks. Ottawa:Minister of Public Works and Government Services, 2000:1-21.

6 刘继来,刘彦随,李裕瑞.中国""三生空间""分类评价与时空格局分析.地理学报, 2017, 72(7):1290-1304. Liu J L, Liu Y S, Li Y R. Classification evaluation and spatial-temporal analysis of ""production-living-ecological"" spaces in China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2017, 72(7):1290-1304.(in Chinese)

7 欧阳志云,王效科,苗鸿.中国生态环境敏感性及其区域差异规律研究.生态学报, 2000, 20(1):9-12. Ouyang Z Y, Wang X K, Miao H. China's eco-environmental sensitivity and its spatial heterogeneity. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2000, 20(1):9-12.(in Chinese)

8 Dudley N. Guidelines for applying protected area management categories. Gland:International Union for Conservation of Nature, 2008.

9 魏钰,雷光春.从生物群落到生态系统综合保护:国家公园生态系统完整性保护的理论演变.自然资源学报, 2019, 34(9):1820-1832. Wei Y, Lei G C. From biocenosis to ecosystem:The theory trend of conserving ecosystem integrity in national parks. Journal of Natural Resources, 2019, 34(9):1820-1832.(in Chinese)

10 杨建国,徐艳.决策问责异化的形成机理及其精准治理.公共治理研究, 2022, 34(4):50-57. Yang J G, Xu Y. The formation mechanism of dissimilation of accountability for decision making and the way of precise governance. Public Governance Research, 2022, 34(4):50-57.(in Chinese)

11 Lemos M C, Agrawal A. Environmental governance. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 2006, 31:297-325.

12 Young O R, Berkhout F, Gallopin G C, et al. The globalization of socio-ecological systems:An agenda for scientific research. Global Environmental Change, 2006, 16(3):304-316.

13 胡正昌.公共治理理论及其政府治理模式的转变.前沿, 2008,(5):90-93. Hu Z C. Public governance theory and the transformation of government governance model. Forward Position, 2008,(5):90-93.(in Chinese)

14 石亚军.实现政府科学决策机制的根本转变.中国行政管理, 2006,(10):10-13. Shi Y J. Realize the fundamental transformation of the government's scientific decision-making mechanism. Chinese Public Administration, 2006,(10):10-13.(in Chinese)

15 王毅,黄宝荣.中国国家公园体制改革:回顾与前瞻.生物多样性, 2019, 27(2):117-122. Wang Y, Huang B R. Institutional reform for building China's national park system:Review and prospects. Biodiversity Science, 2019, 27(2):117-122.(in Chinese)

16 魏钰,何思源,雷光春,等.保护地役权对中国国家公园统一管理的启示——基于美国经验.北京林业大学学报(社会科学版), 2019, 18(1):70-79. Wei Y, He S Y, Lei G C, et al. Establishing conservation easement system to promote unified management of China's national parks:US-based experience. Journal of Beijing Forestry University (Social Science), 2019, 18(1):70-79.(in Chinese)

17 Office français de la biodiversité. Les parcs nationaux de France.(2004-06-07)[2020-06-30]. http://www.parcsnationaux.fr/fr/des-decouvertes/les-parcs-nationaux-de-france.

18 Guignier A, Prieur M. Legal Framework for Protected Areas:France Guidelines for Protected Areas Legislation. IUCN Environ-mental Policy and Law Paper, 2010.