法典化背景下生态环境损害赔偿制度的优化进路
The Optimization Approach of Ecological Environment Damage Compensation System under the Background of Codification
摘要: 生态环境损害赔偿制度从试点先行到全面铺开,已成为我国生态文明体系的重要组成部分。2026年,生态环境损害赔偿制度的基本法律地位在《生态环境法典》第32条得以确立。遗憾的是,法典对生态环境损害赔偿制度虽然进行了顶层设计,却未能深刻触及实践中面临的现实问题,以致该制度仍面临损害赔偿范围边界模糊、损害赔偿资金去向混乱、损害赔偿诉讼与公益诉讼衔接机制不畅的三重困境。因此,欲在《生态环境法典》实施背景下,基于环境权理论、生态正义理论与损害担责原则的理论基础进一步优化生态环境损害赔偿制度,一是应厘清损害赔偿范围;二是要探索构建全国统一的损害赔偿资金管理机制;三是要健全损害赔偿诉讼与公益诉讼的衔接机制,以期真正实现生态环境损害赔偿制度的应有之义,为构建人与自然和谐共生的现代化治理体系筑牢根基。
Abstract: The ecological environment damage compensation system has become an important part of China’s ecological civilization system from the pilot to the full implementation. In 2026, the basic legal status of the ecological environment damage compensation system was established in Article 32 of the “Ecological and Environmental Code of the People’s Republic of China” (hereinafter referred to as the “Ecological Environment Code”). Unfortunately, although the code has carried out the top-level design of the ecological environment damage compensation system, it has not profoundly touched the practical problems faced in practice, so that the system still faces the triple dilemma of vague boundary of damage compensation scope, confusion of damage compensation funds, and poor connection mechanism between damage compensation litigation and public interest litigation. Therefore, in the context of the implementation of the “Ecological Environment Code”, based on the theoretical basis of environmental rights theory, ecological justice theory and the principle of liability for damage, we should further optimize the ecological environment damage compensation system. First, we should clarify the scope of damage compensation; the second is to explore the construction of a unified national damage compensation fund management mechanism; the third is to improve the connection mechanism between damage compensation litigation and public interest litigation, in order to truly realize the proper meaning of the ecological environment damage compensation system, and build a solid foundation for the construction of a modern governance system in which man and nature coexist harmoniously.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
陈学敏. 共同富裕命题下生态环境损害赔偿制度的检视与优化[J]. 兰州学刊, 2025(4): 193-206.
|
|
[2]
|
陈海嵩. 生态环境损害赔偿制度的反思与重构——宪法解释的视角[J]. 东方法学, 2018(6): 20-27.
|
|
[3]
|
林顷楠. 坚持系统观念建设生态环境损害赔偿制度[J]. 伊犁师范大学学报, 2025, 43(3): 12-24.
|
|
[4]
|
冯汝. 《生态环境法典》损害担责原则司法适用的功能与方法[J]. 宁夏社会科学, 2026(2): 115-129.
|
|
[5]
|
孙全胜. 生态正义的两重困境、基本原则与实现路径[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2024, 18(1): 1-10.
|
|
[6]
|
王干, 蔡相辉. 环境法典编纂背景下的生态损害赔偿制度建构理路[J]. 江西社会科学, 2022, 42(12): 171-179.
|
|
[7]
|
华为民, 郑烨显. 完善检察机关推动生态环境损害赔偿金有效使用新模式——以江苏省检察机关生态环境损害赔偿金使用现状为研究样本[J]. 实证法学研究, 2025(1): 130-145+277-278.
|
|
[8]
|
张红霞, 张晶. 生态环境损害赔偿资金管理的实证研究[J]. 中国检察官, 2021(19): 62-65.
|
|
[9]
|
杨漫漫. 生态环境损害赔偿与环境公益诉讼的衔接机制[J]. 黑龙江环境通报, 2025, 38(11): 168-170.
|
|
[10]
|
Schroeder, C.H. (2002) Lost in the Translation: What Environmental Regulation Does That Tort Cannot Duplicate. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.309731
|
|
[11]
|
Tolan, P.E. (2008) Natural Resource Damages under Cercla: Failures, Lessons Learned, and Alternatives. New Mexico Review, 38, 409-452.
|
|
[12]
|
U.S. Government Accountability Office (2003) Superfund Program: Current Status and Future Fiscal Challenges. GAO-03-850. U.S. Government Accountability Office.
|
|
[13]
|
李清悦, 张真. 美欧环境损害赔偿制度的启示[J]. 中国外资, 2026(7): 36-41.
|
|
[14]
|
秦天宝, 王波. 生态环境损害金钱赔偿的类型区分与使用控制[J]. 浙江工商大学学报, 2026(1): 65-74.
|
|
[15]
|
李欣潮, 雷晓媛. 生态环境损害赔偿资金管理模式的反思与优化[J]. 环境保护, 2026, 54(Z2): 64-68.
|