生态环境损害修复责任承担方式实证研究  

Empirical study on the way of assuming responsibility forecological environment damage restoration

作　　者：梁增然[1] 周珂 LIANG Zeng-ran;ZHOU Ke(School of Law,Zhengzhou University,Zhengzhou 450000,China)

机构地区：[1]郑州大学法学院,河南郑州450000

出　　处：《哈尔滨师范大学社会科学学报》2023年第5期65-71,共7页Journal of Social Science of Harbin Normal University

摘　　要：生态环境修复责任作为环境损害救济制度的组成部分,承担方式的正确选择是修复责任得以落实的重要一步。司法实践中,生态环境修复责任的承担方式存在修复目标不明确、承担方式适用错位、修复责任表述不规范和替代性修复适用标准不统一的问题。由学理分析可知,生态修复应着眼于生态服务功能的修复,修复责任具有行为责任属性,修复费用应归于修复责任的范畴以及替代性修复的适用应以非永久性损害为限。文章还针对性地提出制定切实可行的修复目标,确立承担机制并理清适用顺序,规范修复责任表述和明确替代性修复适用前提的完善建议。As an integral part of the environmental damage relief system,the correct choice of the way to assume the responsibility for ecological environment restoration is an important step in the implementation of the responsibility for restoration.In judicial practice,the methods of assuming responsibility for ecological environment restoration have problems such as unclear restoration goals,misplaced application of bearing methods,irregular expression of restoration responsibilities,and inconsistent standards for the application of alternative restoration.From the academic analysis,it can be seen that ecological restoration should focus on the restoration of ecological service functions,restoration responsibility has the attribute of behavioral responsibility,restoration costs should be attributed to the scope of restoration responsibility,and the application of alternative restoration should be limited to non-permanent damage.Finally,it puts forward suggestions for formulating feasible restoration goals,establishing a bearing mechanism and clarifying the order of application,standardizing the expression of restoration responsibilities and clarifying the application premise of alternative restoration.

关 键 词：生态环境损害 修复责任 承担方式 修复费用 实证研究 

分 类 号：D922.68[政治法律—环境与资源保护法学]