Enforcing Law Through Authoritarian Environmentalism? State and Non-State Actors in China's Environmental Public Interest Litigation

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Standard

Enforcing Law Through Authoritarian Environmentalism? State and Non-State Actors in China's Environmental Public Interest Litigation. / Ma, Yi; Xiang, Wen.

I: Journal of Current Chinese Affairs, Bind 52, Nr. 3, 2023, s. 464-487.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Harvard

Ma, Y & Xiang, W 2023, 'Enforcing Law Through Authoritarian Environmentalism? State and Non-State Actors in China's Environmental Public Interest Litigation', Journal of Current Chinese Affairs, bind 52, nr. 3, s. 464-487. https://doi.org/10.1177/18681026231185791

APA

Ma, Y., & Xiang, W. (2023). Enforcing Law Through Authoritarian Environmentalism? State and Non-State Actors in China's Environmental Public Interest Litigation. Journal of Current Chinese Affairs, 52(3), 464-487. https://doi.org/10.1177/18681026231185791

Vancouver

Ma Y, Xiang W. Enforcing Law Through Authoritarian Environmentalism? State and Non-State Actors in China's Environmental Public Interest Litigation. Journal of Current Chinese Affairs. 2023;52(3):464-487. https://doi.org/10.1177/18681026231185791

Author

Ma, Yi ; Xiang, Wen. / Enforcing Law Through Authoritarian Environmentalism? State and Non-State Actors in China's Environmental Public Interest Litigation. I: Journal of Current Chinese Affairs. 2023 ; Bind 52, Nr. 3. s. 464-487.

Bibtex

@article{51de238e848b4d208881e9276845f914,
title = "Enforcing Law Through Authoritarian Environmentalism? State and Non-State Actors in China's Environmental Public Interest Litigation",
abstract = "Numerous studies have examined China{\textquoteright}s authoritarian environmentalism, with a focus on policy-making and implementation. We argue that law enforcement should also be investigated as a crucial stage. Specifically, we examine environmental public interest litigation (EPIL) and analyse a novel dataset of 7010 EPIL court judgements from 2015 to 2020. We find that state prosecutors dominate EPIL activities, while the role of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) is strictly limited. We also show great variations in EPIL lawsuits filed by state prosecutors across provinces, indicating high local discretion over environmental law enforcement. Lastly, we doubt whether the great number of EPIL outputs from state prosecutors will produce significant environmental outcomes, because they tend to target low-hanging fruit, in contrast to the more challenging and environmentally profound EPIL cases initiated by NGOs. We highlight the value of using the authoritarian environmentalism framework to contextualise debates surrounding the development of EPIL in China.",
author = "Yi Ma and Wen Xiang",
year = "2023",
doi = "10.1177/18681026231185791",
language = "English",
volume = "52",
pages = "464--487",
journal = "Journal of Current Chinese Affairs",
issn = "1868-4874",
publisher = "Journal of Current Chinese Affairs",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Enforcing Law Through Authoritarian Environmentalism? State and Non-State Actors in China's Environmental Public Interest Litigation

AU - Ma, Yi

AU - Xiang, Wen

PY - 2023

Y1 - 2023

N2 - Numerous studies have examined China’s authoritarian environmentalism, with a focus on policy-making and implementation. We argue that law enforcement should also be investigated as a crucial stage. Specifically, we examine environmental public interest litigation (EPIL) and analyse a novel dataset of 7010 EPIL court judgements from 2015 to 2020. We find that state prosecutors dominate EPIL activities, while the role of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) is strictly limited. We also show great variations in EPIL lawsuits filed by state prosecutors across provinces, indicating high local discretion over environmental law enforcement. Lastly, we doubt whether the great number of EPIL outputs from state prosecutors will produce significant environmental outcomes, because they tend to target low-hanging fruit, in contrast to the more challenging and environmentally profound EPIL cases initiated by NGOs. We highlight the value of using the authoritarian environmentalism framework to contextualise debates surrounding the development of EPIL in China.

AB - Numerous studies have examined China’s authoritarian environmentalism, with a focus on policy-making and implementation. We argue that law enforcement should also be investigated as a crucial stage. Specifically, we examine environmental public interest litigation (EPIL) and analyse a novel dataset of 7010 EPIL court judgements from 2015 to 2020. We find that state prosecutors dominate EPIL activities, while the role of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) is strictly limited. We also show great variations in EPIL lawsuits filed by state prosecutors across provinces, indicating high local discretion over environmental law enforcement. Lastly, we doubt whether the great number of EPIL outputs from state prosecutors will produce significant environmental outcomes, because they tend to target low-hanging fruit, in contrast to the more challenging and environmentally profound EPIL cases initiated by NGOs. We highlight the value of using the authoritarian environmentalism framework to contextualise debates surrounding the development of EPIL in China.

U2 - 10.1177/18681026231185791

DO - 10.1177/18681026231185791

M3 - Journal article

VL - 52

SP - 464

EP - 487

JO - Journal of Current Chinese Affairs

JF - Journal of Current Chinese Affairs

SN - 1868-4874

IS - 3

ER -

ID: 358717719