Reforming Land Public Interest Litigation in China: Addressing Legal and Practical Barriers

Land public interest litigation (LPIL) has emerged as a vital mechanism for addressing China’s land crisis. It serves dual purposes: mitigating the tragedy of the commons and safeguarding the legitimate rights of vulnerable groups reliant on land. Over the past decade, China’s LPIL framework has evo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Land (Basel) 2024-12, Vol.13 (12), p.2019
Main Authors: Zhang, Jing, Tang, Shuchen, Cui, Yongcun, Ji, Aitong
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accountability
Actions and defenses
China
Empirical analysis
Enforcement
Environmental justice
India
Land degradation
land public interest litigation
land regulations
Land use planning
Landowners
Legislation
Litigation
Natural resources
NGOs
Non-governmental organizations
Nongovernmental organizations
prosecutorial framework
Public concern
Public interest
Reforming
Resource management
Sustainable development
sustainable land management
United Kingdom
United States
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Land public interest litigation (LPIL) has emerged as a vital mechanism for addressing China’s land crisis. It serves dual purposes: mitigating the tragedy of the commons and safeguarding the legitimate rights of vulnerable groups reliant on land. Over the past decade, China’s LPIL framework has evolved significantly, with enhanced legislation and consistent judicial practices contributing to the prevention of further land degradation. However, an empirical analysis of 208 LPIL cases reveals a judiciary-led litigation model, with procuratorial bodies initiating 94.71% of cases, while non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and individuals account for only 3.85% and 0%, respectively. This narrow plaintiff base, coupled with significant regional disparities—74.52% of cases concentrated in the top ten provinces—and a mere 25% filing rate for administrative cases, limits the system’s effectiveness. These constraints hinder vulnerable groups’ ability to protect their rights and obscure systemic issues underlying efficient operations. To advance LPIL, China must expand plaintiff eligibility, empower NGOs, and clarify departmental boundaries. These reforms can enhance land governance, ensure equitable resource management, and contribute to sustainable development.
ISSN:2073-445X
2073-445X
DOI:10.3390/land13122019