ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Mar. Sci.
Sec. Marine Affairs and Policy
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fmars.2025.1578824
Institutional Challenges and Reform Approaches in China's Marine Environment Public Interest Litigation
Provisionally accepted- 1East China University of Political Science and Law, Shanghai, Shanghai Municipality, China
- 2Jiangsu Ocean Universiity, Lianyungang, China
- 3Dalian Ocean University, Dalian, Liaoning, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
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 MEPILrelated 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.
Keywords: marine environment, public interest litigation, Judicial protection, Marine governance, Institutional reform
Received: 18 Feb 2025; Accepted: 25 Aug 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Xu and Lu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Shengqing Xu, East China University of Political Science and Law, Shanghai, 200042, Shanghai Municipality, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.