html资料文件与下载

1) What legal loophole did the developer take advantage of 开发商钻了哪些法律漏洞的空子?

In late December 2013, Country Garden purchased 2,000 hectares in a marine fishing area between Singapore and the Malaysian state of Johor, at a cost of about USD13,400 per hectare (RMB81,200). This land price was 0.1% the per hectare cost of Country Garden’s previous site acquisition in Johor, and only 10% the unit cost of any other offshore parcel sale in the state’s history (Allen 2017). Although the area had been slated for environmental protection by the regional planning authority, the sultan has the legal authority to sell state property at any time, including the foreshore and seabed areas off the coast. Local reports indicate that sand filling began on the first day of 2014, just one week later, immediately atop the seagrass meadow (Rahman 2017).

2013年12月底，碧桂园以13400美金/英亩（81200人民币/英亩）的价格，买下了新加坡和马来西亚柔佛州之间一片占地面积为2000英亩的渔区。和碧桂园之前在柔佛州买下的另一块地产相比，这个价格只是之前价格的0.1%。而且与柔佛州史上任何一宗大型离岸地产交易相比，这个单价也只占其它单价的10%。尽管这片地区已被计划列为自然保护区，但柔佛州苏丹还是有权随时出售该地区，包括区域内海岸沿线的土地和海岸线以外的海草地。据当地媒体报道，自从2014年1月1日工程开始动工填沙，仅一周之后沙子就掩埋了海草地。

At first, the dumping proceeded without an environmental impact assessment, even though the federal government has strict assessment criteria for coastal reclamation. The developer later claimed this was legally proper because it was only filling a 49-hectare “study area.” Land records signed after the filling began show that two of the parcels were reconfigured to be 49.3 hectares, just under the 50-hectacre threshold that triggers a mandatory EIA (Allen 2017). Similar “legal loopholes” for reclamation projects are frequently used in coastal Chinese provinces to avoid triggering government oversight (Ma et al. 2014). 

起初，尽管马来西亚政府对围海造岛有非常严格的评估要求，但开发商还是没有进行环境影响评估就开始了填沙作业。随后开发商称他们这么做是合法的，因为他们只填了49英亩的“研究用地”。填沙作业开始后的土地记录显示，其中两块地块的面积被改成了49.3英亩，正好低于法律规定需要强制进行环境影响评估的50英亩。中国沿海省份的围海项目经常利用这种“法律漏洞”来回避政府监督。

2) Country Garden claimed that they had widespread support from the community but not the local fishermen. Explain this situation. 碧桂园称他们得到了当地社区的广泛支持，却遭到当地渔民的反对。请解释出现这种情况的原因。

During the EIA, the EIA consultant conducted a survey of local attitudes towards Forest City (Williams 2016). The survey found that almost all respondents though the project would damage the fishing ground and marginalize fishermen. 80% of respondents believe the project would raise their standard of living, and 30% believed they might find employment opportunities. Overall, only 40% of respondents had heard about the project, suggesting the surveyed population may not have been those facing immediate local impacts. At a meeting in 2014, residents demanded to know how the developer had conducted its survey, insisting that there were widespread local objections to the project’s design and secrecy. Some residents speculate that the developer may have hand-picked the respondents to their survey. 

在环境影响评估过程中，评估专家做了一份问卷调查，调查当地人对森林城市项目的看法。结果显示，几乎所有参与调查的人都认为该项目会对渔区造成破坏，并使渔民边缘化。80%的参与者认为项目会提高他们的生活质量，30%的人认为他们可能会因此获得工作机会。总体来说，只有40%的参与者听说过该项目，也就是说接受调查的人也许不是那些遭受最直接影响的人群。在2014年的一次会议上，居民要求开发商透露他们是如何进行问卷调查的，居民们坚称有很多人对项目规划和项目的保密做法不满。一些居民怀疑参与问卷调查的人是开发商特别挑选的。

Local opinions are mixed about the Forest City project, and most are not totally opposed to the project. Many residents, including some fishermen, feel development is inevitable in their local district, and most would prefer to benefit from these trends rather than be excluded from participation. Some are hopeful that Forest City will provide the long-term job its proponents promise, even though almost all construction and management jobs are held by temporary foreign workers. 

当地人对森林城市项目的看法褒贬不一，但大多数人并非完全持反对态度。包括渔民在内的很多居民认为地产开发势在必行，而且大多数人更愿意被囊括其中并从中获益，而不是被排除在外。一些人希望森林城市项目能够像开发商承诺的那样为他们提供长久的工作机会，然而目前几乎所有项目施工和管理方面的工作使用的都是临时外籍劳工。

3) Does all construction stop when doing an EIA? Can EIA and SIA be put forward at the same time 进行环境影响评估时所有施工都要暂停吗？可以同时进行环境影响评估和社会影响评估吗?

Under normal circumstances, an EIA and SIA is conducted prior to project initiation. Traditionally, impact assessment requires that developers compare the project to a “no-build” option and compare costs and benefits to this option. In the case of Forest City, the developer was able to circumvent the EIA through legal creativity and powerful local relationships. But because it could not satisfy all affected parties—fishermen, local residents, and the Government of Singapore—it was forced to conduct one retroactively. This required that construction be halted so that the evaluator and government could asses the value of the project. 

通常情况下环境影响评估和社会影响评估都需要在项目动工前完成。传统意义上的影响评估要求开发商将开发项目和“不进行开发”作比较，讨论开发项目的利弊。而在森林城市案例中，开发商利用法律漏洞和强大的地方关系绕开了环境影响评估。然而因为相关各方——渔民、当地居民和新加坡政府的不满——开发商被迫补做了环境影响评估。这导致开发项目全面停工，以便评估方和政府部门评估项目的价值。

There are good reasons to conduct EIA and SIA at the same time, especially when the evaluations are studying complementary effects. In the Forest City case, environmental and social impacts are highly entwined. Sand fill in Johor’s marine and coastal environments does not just mean environmental damage; it means lost income to fishermen and increased inland flooding risks. Thus, it can be advantageous to link EIA to SIA when impacts are shared.

同时进行环境影响评估和社会影响评估是有道理的，特别是在评价互补作用的时候。在森林城市的案例中，项目对环境和社会产生的影响是紧密相连的。在柔佛州近海填沙造岛造成的不仅是对环境的破坏，也会导致渔民失去收入，并增加内陆遭受洪涝灾害的风险。因此，当环境影响和社会影响相关时，同时进行环境影响评估和社会影响评估是大有益处的。

4) The local Department of Environment seemed to be unaware of this enormous project in advance. How could the Sultan proceed with a project in his own territory without permission from the local government 当地环境部似乎对这个庞大的项目事先并不知情，苏丹为何可以在自己的地界上不经政府允许进行项目开发?

In Johor, the Sultan has unique legal powers and great political clout. Under Malaysian land law, the “state authority” has the power to alienate state property into private hands, including “foreshore and seabed areas.” In Johor, the state authority is the Sultan. The Sultan can thus allow a project to proceed without seeking prior approvals, provided it does not interfere with prior, private rights to land. By alienating an offshore area with support from the Sultan, the developer could ensure that the project would not directly interact with existing land claims or environmentally protected areas. 

在柔佛州，苏丹有特殊的法律权利和巨大的政治影响力。根据马来西亚土地法，“当局”有权将国家财产转让给私人，其中包括“海滨和海底的土地”。在柔佛州，“当局”指的就是苏丹，所以只要一个项目不侵犯先前的土地私有权，苏丹就可以不用知会任何人允许项目进行。将项目建在离岸的海上，又有了苏丹的支持，开发商就可以确保项目不会涉及现有的土地所有方或是环境保护区。

Beyond his legal role, the Sultan is also an influential political actor in the state. He often uses his sovereign authority to initiate and direct particular development projects. He is a driving force behind many business deals and land transfers, including several land reclamation projects, mining operations, and urban development schemes. In some cases, as in Forest City, he will take an equity share in projects he backs. The Sultan has argued that these equity-sharing arrangements are of benefit to the state, although many times these shares appear to be closely held by the Sultan and his associates (Aw 2014)

除了拥有法律权利，苏丹也是当地非常有政治影响力的人，他经常使用自己的管理权来发起或引导某些开发项目的进行。他是很多商业交易和土地交易的幕后推手，这其中包括好几个土地改造、矿产开采、和城市建设项目。在一些项目中，比如森林城市项目， 他会从自己支持的项目中抽取股份，尽管苏丹称这些股份是用来造福国家的，但实际上很多时候这些股份都落入了苏丹和他的合作伙伴手中。

In Malaysia, there are two levels of environmental governance: state (e.g. Johor) and federal (Malaysia-wide). The Johor Department of Environment has a regulatory and monitoring role over land, but does not have the authority to halt land development projects. While the federal Department of Environment does sometimes review and modify local projects, land and water development is a local state power in Malaysia and is seen as the prerogative of each state.

在马来西亚有两级环境管理部门：州环境部（柔佛州）和国家环境部（整个马来西亚）。 柔佛州环境部对土地有监管权，但没有叫停一个土地开发项目的权利。虽然国家环境部有时会对地方项目进行审查和调整，但陆地和海洋开发在马来西亚归州政府管，并且被视为每个州的特权。

5) How did the negotiation process work? Did the project change due to the negotiation in the EIA or before the EIA 协商进行的顺利吗？项目是在环境影响评估进行后还是进行前做出的调整?

One of the reasons the developer was unable to understand the extent of local impacts was that it did not negotiate with local stakeholders beforehand, much less consult with them. The Sultan and developer did arrange a meeting with the fishermen’s association to inform them they would be modestly compensated, but made no attempt to determine whether the compensation was equivalent to livelihood losses. Neither the initial nor revised compensation will offset fishermen’s permanently lost income and permanently increased fishing costs.

开发商不理解项目对当地所造成影响的一个原因就在于他们没有事先与当地利益相关方协商，更别说征求他们的意见了。虽然苏丹和开发商与渔民协会进行了会谈，告知他们渔民会得到一定补偿，但并没有考虑这笔钱能不能补偿渔民失去生计的损失。无论是最初设定的赔偿金额还是调整后的赔偿金额，都不足以补偿渔民永久失去收入来源和捕鱼成本从此提高的损失。

The project was modified according to changes proposed in the DEIA. DEIA records and media reports show significant local concern about seagrass impacts and changes to the Straits’ hydrological regime, which became a major focus of the DEIA revisions. However, it is not clear whose agreement was sought over the final proposed changes. The new site design conforms sufficiently to environmental law, but the project continues to be contested at many levels of government.

调整是根据项目中期环境影响评估结果做出的，环境影响评估记录和媒体报道表明当地人对项目造成的海草破坏和海峡水文变化深表担忧，这也是环境影响评估重点关注的问题。然而没人知道最后做出的这些调整是由谁决定的，新的项目规划虽然符合环境法规定，但仍有很多人在向政府各级部门提出抗议，反对项目的进行。

References

Allen, Nick B. 2017. “Terra Ex Machina: Land Building and the Breach of Property Regimes.” Master’s thesis, Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Instititute of Technology.

Aw, Nigel. 2014. “The Case of Forest City and the Johor Sultan.” Malaysiakini. July 14. https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/268649.

Ma, Zhijun, David S. Melville, Jianguo Liu, Ying Chen, Hongyan Yang, Wenwei Ren, Zhengwang Zhang, Theunis Piersma, and Bo Li. 2014. “Rethinking China’s New Great Wall.” Science 346 (6212): 912–14. doi:10.1126/science.1257258.

Rahman, Serina. 2017. “Johor’s Forest City Faces Critical Challenges.” 3. Trends in Southeast Asia. Singapore: ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute. https://www.iseas.edu.sg/images/pdf/TRS3_17%20(002).pdf.

Williams, Joseph Marcel R. 2016. “Evaluating the Diverse Impacts of Megaprojects: The Case of Forest City in Johor, Malaysia.” Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/105036.