ArticleFrontiers in public health2023
Legislative and judicial responses to public health protection under eco-environmental damage relief in China.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The group-type health damage caused by eco-environmental damage has been stated in the Environmental Protection Law and other laws in China. The first-ever Chinese Civil Code, which took effect in 2021, has explicitly defined eco-environmental damage relief and imposed affirmative duties on those who polluted the environment or destroyed the ecology. This study aims to describe the status quo of public health protection in eco-environmental damage relief and explore its progress and limits in protecting public health. Methods: By reviewing China's legislation on relief of eco-environmental damage and observing the implementation of these laws in judicial practice. All judicial cases of eco-environmental damage published by Chinese courts from January 2021 to May 2023 were selected and examined. From the perspective of the comparison of laws, the measurement of interests and the execution of cases, we discussed the issues of China's legislative and judicial responses to public health. Results: The relief system of eco-environmental damage in China has been formed initially, but there are still some deficiencies: In the application of law for relief of public health, there are many choices of means, resulting in the choice conflict of law application; the public health damage in the eco-environmental damage case has been ignored by courts, and it has not been a dominant consideration element; the objects of the execution of the cases are directed to the pure eco-environmental restoration, and the restoration plan does not cover public health protection measures, which does not have a preventive effect on public health. The root cause of problems is that the relief of eco-environmental damage in China follows the logic of traditional private law. Conclusion: The issues mentioned above merit consideration in China's future law revisions and judicial practice. Based on the dual nature of public and private law in environmental health, it is necessary to adjust the provisions of responsibility for eco-environmental restoration from the framework of public law, including the scope and mechanism, and then further suggestion includes the legal subject, the benefit element and the use of funds.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.