AUTHOR=Xu Shengqing , Lu Wenlei 

TITLE=Institutional challenges and reform approaches in China’s marine environment public interest litigation

JOURNAL=Frontiers in Marine Science

VOLUME=Volume 12 - 2025

YEAR=2025

URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/marine-science/articles/10.3389/fmars.2025.1578824

DOI=10.3389/fmars.2025.1578824

ISSN=2296-7745

ABSTRACT=Marine environment public interest litigation (MEPIL) is a crucial judicial mechanism for protecting marine resources and the environment in China. In a relatively divided governance context between land and sea, the operation of MEPIL has encountered significant challenges due to the immaturity of regulations. The theoretical aspects of MEPIL have been widely discussed. However, as a special arrangement embedded in China’s traditional judicial system, the operation of MEPIL remains to be explored through empirical analysis. Disputes regarding standing, jurisdiction, and compensation mechanisms persist. This research examines MEPIL practices in light of the latest available MEPIL-related judgments following the revision of China’s Marine Environmental Protection Law in 2023. Based on the content and comparative analysis of 218 judgments, the judicial landscape of MEPIL is described from the perspectives of the rules regarding plaintiffs, jurisdiction, and compensation. The challenges primarily include disputes over the qualification and priority of plaintiffs, the complexity of MEPIL jurisdiction, and inadequate arrangements for supervising marine ecological damage compensation. Further analysis reveals that the institutional challenges in MEPIL are caused by its cross-sectional nature and different judicial arrangements for marine and environmental procedures. To improve the judicial system for MEPIL, three crucial reform approaches are needed:(a) confirm the standing of social organizations to sue in MEPIL and stipulate equal rights of action among administrative authorities, procuratorial organs and social organizations; (b) provide centralized jurisdiction by the maritime court with an exception in land-sea crossing litigation; (c) establish compensation fund and deposit mechanisms for ecological damage. These reform approaches are beneficial for the effective implementation of MEPIL and provide more support for public participation in marine environmental governance. Considering that the rules governing marine compensation are still in their infancy, the compensation fund and deposit mechanisms can further enhance the implementation of ecological compensation, providing more effective relief for the damaged marine environment and resources.