{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01828761429758936, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0024937655860349127, 'mean_word_length': 5.651933701657459, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Environmental Public Interest Litigation in China: Findings from 570 Court Cases Brought by NGOs, Public Prosecutors and Local Government


 Environmental public interest litigation (EPIL) is an important development in the evolving framework of environmental governance in China. Through quantitative and qualitative analyses of decided cases brought by local government, public prosecutors and environmental non-governmental organisations (NGOs), this study critically examines the features, strengths, difficulties and obstacles in the EPIL practice of China. While there is remarkable success overall for all three groups in terms of outcome, they each display different approaches and focuses. The prosecutors have established themselves as the cornerstone of the system by being the most efficient in winning the greatest number of cases. NGOs moved away from collaboration with the prosecutors in low-value cases, effectively into a competition with the government in a smaller number of high-value cases, though they are willing to venture into areas where others hesitate over. The findings offer valuable insights into current EPIL practice and inform future policy adjustment and legislation.