环保法庭何以有效?——能动司法视角下的实证分析  

How does the environmental court take effect?an empirical analysis from the perspective of judicial activism

作　　者：马超 罗玉峰 阮蔷 MA Chao;LUO Yufeng;RUAN Qiang(School of Law,University of International Business and Economics,Beijing 100029,China;Digital Economy Laboratory,University of International Business and Economics,Beijing 100029,China;Business School,University of International Business and Economics,Beijing 100029,China)

机构地区：[1]对外经济贸易大学法学院,北京100029 [2]对外经济贸易大学数字经济实验室,北京100029 [3]对外经济贸易大学国际商学院,北京100029

出　　处：《中国人口·资源与环境》2024年第6期90-102,共13页China Population,Resources and Environment

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大课题“优化营商环境的法治建构”(批准号:21ZDA051);中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助“司法大数据赋能智慧法院建设研究”(批准号:22QD01);“大数据与应用经济学融合路径研究”(批准号:22QD26)。

摘　　要：在推进环保法庭建设已经从司法政策被提升为国家政策的背景下,有关环保法庭的实际治理成效各方仍未形成共识,关键原因在于环保法庭提升地区生态环境治理绩效的传导机制不明。为此,该研究以能动司法理念为基本视角,提出法院与政府之间的“府院联动”和由环境司法推动的环境议题“社会关注度”提升可能是环保法庭产生实效的主要方式,并进一步细化为“政府关注力度”“政府规制力度”“公众关注度”和“媒体关注度”四条微观路径。实证部分运用多期双重差分模型实证检验了2011—2020年十年间135个中级人民法院环保法庭的设立对当地工业污染排放综合指数的影响。研究发现,在控制其他影响因素的情况下,设有环保法庭的城市的工业污染排放比未设立的城市低11.9%。中介效应模型估计结果表明,“政府规制力度”和“媒体关注度”在其中发挥了重要的中介传导作用。在发挥环保法庭环境改善功能的路径中,政府的“行”胜于“言”,且媒体舆论场的作用大于民间舆论场。异质性分析表明,2015年前后国家层面一系列加强环境法治的举措提升了环保法庭对于地方工业污染的治理效果,且环保法庭在经济相对欠发达地区的作用更为明显。就影响路径而言,代表府院联动的“政府规制力度”路径影响较为稳定,而代表社会环境关注度的“媒体关注度”则体现出了较为明显的时空异质性。据此,该研究的理论意义在于提示学界基于新时代能动司法理念,加强对环保法庭外部性的研究;政策意义在于,强调在坚持中央环境司法政策的同时,适度推动地区环保法庭的设立,优化环境司法制度保障,完善各方主体相协同的环境治理机制,尤其是加强环境司法中的公众参与。In China,the status of the environmental court has evolved from a judicial policy to a national policy.However,an academic consensus regarding its ecological impact has yet to be reached,primarily due to the ambiguity surrounding the mechanisms through which it exerts its effects.To address the issue,this study attempts to provide insight into the underlying impact mechanisms contribut-ing to the ecological impact of the environmental court.From the perspective of judicial activism,this study theoretically identified two potential impact paths:government-court collaboration and societal attention towards environmental issues.The first path can be more specifically delineated as‘government′s environmental attention’and‘government′s regulatory efforts,’while the second path can be further specified as‘public attention’and‘media attention.’Subsequently,a time-varying difference-in-differences model was utilized to empirically investigate the effects of establishing environmental courts in 135 cities between 2011 and 2020 on emissions of local in-dustrial pollution.Additionally,a causal mediation model was employed to test the hypotheses concerning the impact paths.The empiri-cal results showed that,cities with environmental courts had 11.9%lower industrial pollution emissions compared to cities without such courts,and‘government′s regulatory efforts’and‘media attention’played important mediating roles in this relationship.These results supported the opinion that the effectiveness of the government′s actions surpassed mere rhetoric and that the role of media discourse outweighed that of individual attention.Heterogeneity analysis further revealed that the amendment of the Environmental Protection Law in 2015 had enhanced the governance effectiveness of environmental courts,with their impact being more pronounced in economi-cally underdeveloped regions.Regarding the impact paths,‘government′s regulatory efforts’demonstrated greater stability,while‘me-dia attention’exhibited si

关 键 词：环保法庭 能动司法 府院联动 环境规制 媒体关注度 

分 类 号：DF823[政治法律—法学] F062.2[经济管理—政治经济学]