The People’s Republic of China’s Panda Diplomacy

The People’s Republic of China’s Panda Diplomacy

May 25, 2022
The People’s Republic of China’s Panda Diplomacy
The giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca or panda) is a
The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
rare and charismatic species that is native to China, which
changed the status of giant pandas from endangered to
holds a natural monopoly over the species. Pandas
vulnerable in 2016, citing an increase in the population.
generally are popular zoo exhibits, and highly sought after
However, IUCN noted that climate change could adversely
for display by zoos around the world. The People’s
affect pandas’ habitat and cause the species to decline.
Republic of China (PRC or China) has used pandas to
pursue diplomatic objectives, a practice termed panda
The PRC’s Panda Diplomacy
diplomacy. That practice has evolved to reflect shifting
China has a long tradition of offering pandas as gifts to
domestic and international circumstances. In the process,
foreign countries. Scholars assert that panda gift-giving
the panda has become a diplomatic symbol for China, and
may have started in the seventh century, when Empress Wu
serves to soften its authoritarian image, according to some
Zetian sent two bears, believed to be pandas, to Japan.
analysts. Some in Congress are interested in how the
practice contributes to conserving the pandas as well as its
Starting in 1957, the PRC gifted pandas to certain countries
role in diplomatic relations with the PRC.
as a symbol of diplomatic friendship and to signal a
closeness in political ties, according to some scholars. The
Status of the Giant Panda
PRC gradually replaced this approach with a commercial
Pandas are found in the wild in bamboo forests in central
lease model in the 1980s, as it adopted economic reforms
China. They live 14-20 years in the wild and up to 30 years
and China became less isolated internationally. Scholars
in captivity. Their breeding age is 4-20 years old and they
note that some panda loans to foreign countries coincided
can give birth to one cub every two years. In 1984, the U.S.
with trade deals, positing that the PRC intended the practice
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) listed pandas as an
to support the process. Beginning in the late 1990s, China
endangered species under the Endangered Species Act
transitioned to a conservation-oriented lease model. This
(ESA; 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544), and pandas were included
shift was in part driven by China’s accession to CITES in
under Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade
1981. The multilateral treaty restricts trade in wild animals
in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) as
and plants to ensure that such trade does not threaten a
a species endangered due to trade. In contrast to these
species’ survival. CITES forbids the trade of certain species
listing statuses, China declared in 2021 that pandas are no
for mainly commercial purposes, but permits non-
longer endangered and reported around 1,800 breeding
commercial loans between registered scientists or scientific
pairs living in the wild in China (approximately 600 live in
institutions.
zoos around the world).
Figure 1. Giant Panda Programs Around the World

Sources: Graphic by CRS with information from the People’s Republic of China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Government of Mexico City,
and the Taipei Zoo.
Note: PRC entities maintain panda cooperation programs with institutions in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany,
Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Russia, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Thailand, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
https://crsreports.congress.gov

link to page 1 The People’s Republic of China’s Panda Diplomacy
As of February 2021, the PRC maintained joint panda
 public display will not interfere with research activities;
conservation projects with 22 zoos in 18 countries (see
Figure 1). Under the lease agreements, pandas held by
 importing the pandas is not likely to jeopardize their
these institutions are the property of PRC entities. Two
continued existence in the wild;
additional zoos house pandas that are not subject to ongoing
agreements with PRC entities. The first is the Taipei Zoo in
 importing and studying pandas will benefit panda
Taiwan, a self-governing island democracy that the PRC
conservation and contribute to their survival in the wild;
does not control, but over which it claims sovereignty. The
PRC gifted a pair of pandas to the Taipei Zoo in 2008 in
 funds given to China for importing pandas are mainly
exchange for a pair of endangered sika deer. The second is
used for panda conservation and monitoring; and
the Chapultepec Zoo in Mexico City, Mexico, which houses
the descendants of giant pandas originally gifted by the
 the host zoo has adequate expertise and facilities to care
PRC to Mexico in 1975.
for the pandas.
Pandas in the United States
Permit holders also must have a formal loan agreement with
The PRC originally gifted a pair of pandas to the
the PRC to import and keep pandas. FWS’s panda policy
Smithsonian Institution in 1972. They died in 1992 and
stipulates that “all monies used in a loan agreement or
1999. The Smithsonian National Zoological Park’s second
raised as a result of a panda import should fund panda
pair of pandas arrived on loan from the PRC in 2000. As of
conservation efforts, with a significant portion being used
2022, three U.S. institutions maintain giant panda
for priority in-situ conservation projects in China.”
conservation programs: the Smithsonian National
Zoological Park (Washington, DC), the Memphis Zoo
Issues for Congress
(Tennessee), and Zoo Atlanta (Georgia). A fourth
For some U.S. policymakers, a key question regarding
institution, the San Diego Zoo (California), ended its
panda diplomacy is whether native panda populations in
program in 2019. Each zoo partaking in a panda
China benefit from the relationship. Issues for
conservation program has a bilateral agreement with a PRC
congressional oversight might include whether permit
counterpart. The National Zoo is party to an agreement with
conditions are being met and whether fees paid to Chinese
the China Wildlife Conservation Association (CWCA); the
entities leasing the pandas are being used for conservation
Memphis and Atlanta Zoos are parties to agreements with
efforts. Each year, permittees hosting pandas in the United
the Chinese Association of Zoological Gardens (CAZG).
States must provide FWS with a financial accounting of
how the PRC used the fees they paid for the pandas,
Host institutions typically pay an annual fee of $1 million
supported by documentation and by site visits to China by
per panda pair. The agreements require China to direct
the permittee. To the extent panda diplomacy has benefitted
these funds toward conservation efforts. The agreements
pandas, Congress might consider if panda collaboration
include some provisions that address panda research (e.g.,
between the United States and the PRC might hold lessons
biology and reproduction), a statement of Chinese
for addressing other natural resources issues, such as
ownership of pandas, and program fees to China.
wildlife trafficking or conserving other listed species.
Eventually, pandas and their offspring are returned to China
to continue breeding and to support the captive and wild
Some stakeholders argue that pandas should remain in the
population.
United States and not be returned to China, based on the
United States’ contributions to the preservation of the
Legal Framework for Panda Import and Use
species. H.Res. 897, introduced in the 117th Congress,
FWS is responsible for protecting pandas under the ESA
would call for pandas born in the United States to belong to
and CITES. Under the ESA, FWS regulates certain
the United States and state that the United States should
activities, such as importing and exporting pandas,
collaborate with allies and partners to establish a panda
conducting scientific studies on pandas, and breeding
breeding program. Other stakeholders oppose this approach,
pandas in captivity. Under the ESA, FWS must evaluate
arguing that it could diminish mutually beneficial scientific
whether a proposed activity (e.g., captive breeding in a zoo
collaboration with the PRC to conserve pandas and risk
or scientific research) is likely to jeopardize the continued
ending a popular longstanding U.S. program. Opponents
existence of the species and whether it would promote the
also contend that failing to return the pandas as required by
conservation or enhancement of the survival of the species
the agreements may impair the United States’ ability to
in the wild. Under CITES, FWS must determine whether
enter into or maintain agreements to exchange other
the proposed activity involving pandas would be
species. Retaining pandas in the United States after the
detrimental to the survival of the species and must confirm
agreements with PRC entities expire or require their return
that it is not primarily for commercial reasons.
generally would violate the agreements between American
zoos and PRC entities and would be at odds with ESA
FWS established a panda policy clarifying what
permits that allow the American zoos to possess the pandas.
information is needed to apply for import permits under the
ESA and CITES and providing guidance to FWS staff
Ricardo Barrios, Analyst in Asian Affairs
reviewing applications. The policy requires that:
Pervaze A. Sheikh, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy

Erin H. Ward, Legislative Attorney
the pandas are used to conduct scientific research (i.e.,
not solely for display or commercial purposes);
IF12122
https://crsreports.congress.gov

The People’s Republic of China’s Panda Diplomacy

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF12122 · VERSION 1 · NEW