Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

POLICY AND PRACTICE REVIEWS article

Front. Public Health

Sec. Life-Course Epidemiology and Social Inequalities in Health

This article is part of the Research TopicAffirmative Policies and Actions for Equity in Health Towards Vulnerable GroupsView all 4 articles

A Responsive Governance Path to Health Equity: The Role of State-Led Public Interest Litigation in China

Provisionally accepted
  • Hainan University, Haikou, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Against the backdrop of the "Healthy China 2030" strategy, this paper examines China's unique Public Interest Litigation (PIL) system as an emerging and critical mechanism for safeguarding the health rights of vulnerable populations. The central thesis of this paper is that China's PIL should be understood not as a conventional rights-remedy instrument, but as a state-led innovation in "responsive governance." This system, with the public procuratorate as its core actor, establishes an internal feedback loop designed to identify and rectify administrative regulatory failures, primarily through its pre-litigation procedures. The research finds that this system protects health rights through two distinct pathways: first, by providing universal, indirect protection through the regulation of social determinants of health, such as environmental quality and food safety; and second, by offering targeted, direct protection for specific groups, addressing issues like occupational health for migrant workers and accessibility of services for persons with disabilities. Through a systematic comparative analysis with the models of India (society-driven mobilization), South Africa (constitutional adjudication), and Brazil (individual rights realization), this paper illuminates the distinctiveness of the Chinese model. Its objective is focused on procedural administrative correction and enhancing governance efficacy, rather than on fundamental policy challenges. Although constrained by factors such as state-led agenda-setting, the model's emphasis on collective interests and systemic risks may generate more broadly shared public health benefits. This analysis provides a unique institutional case study on enhancing state governance capacity in the public health domain and contributes a nuanced perspective to global discussions on law, governance, and health equity.

Keywords: Public Interest Litigation - PIL, health equity, responsive governance, China model, comparative law

Received: 08 Sep 2025; Accepted: 24 Oct 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Qi and Yu. 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:
Fei Qi, qifei0186@163.com
Bin Yu, yraven961117@gmail.com

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.