IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i21p14355-d961405.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Judicial Response to Ecological Environment Risk in China—From the Perspective of Social Systems Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Tian Sang

    (KoGuan Law School, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200030, China)

  • Peng Liu

    (Intellectual Property Law and Policy Institute, East China University of Political Science and Law, Shanghai 200042, China)

  • Liang Zhao

    (School of Tourism, Hubei University, Wuhan 430000, China)

Abstract

In modern society, law is one of the most important means of risk prevention and control. Under the challenge of ecological and environmental risks, China’s legal governance experience provides important historical experience and theoretical samples for other countries. Faced with problems, such as the difficulty of eliminating risks, risk decisions themselves bring risks, and the huge social cost of risk response, the social system theory can provide novel and new ideas for the cognition and response of environmental risks. Combining the experience of judicial practice with social theory, especially Niklas Luhmann’s doctrine of the risk/danger dichotomy, a clearer functional orientation can be given to judicial powers based on risk communication and risk attribution. By reviewing the ecological judicial practices in China, Germany, and other countries, the role of the legal system in stabilizing the normative expectations of the whole of society can be summarized, which will provide a reference for the risk response and legal governance of the global ecological environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Tian Sang & Peng Liu & Liang Zhao, 2022. "Judicial Response to Ecological Environment Risk in China—From the Perspective of Social Systems Theory," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-13, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:14355-:d:961405
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/14355/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/14355/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ying Wang & Keyuan Zou, 2021. "Compensation for Marine Ecological Damage: From ‘Tasman Sea’ to ‘Sanchi’," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Sunstein,Cass R., 2002. "Risk and Reason," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521791991, November.
    3. Emilian CIONGARU, 2014. "Various Historical Considerations Regarding The Public Law–Private Law Dichotomy," Perspectives of Law and Public Administration, Societatea de Stiinte Juridice si Administrative (Society of Juridical and Administrative Sciences), vol. 3(1), pages 111-115, December.
    4. Gary Slater & David A. Spencer, 2000. "The Uncertain Foundations of Transaction Costs Economics," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 61-87, March.
    5. David E. Bell, 1982. "Regret in Decision Making under Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 961-981, October.
    6. Peter Taylor‐Gooby & Jens O. Zinn, 2006. "Current Directions in Risk Research: New Developments in Psychology and Sociology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 397-411, April.
    7. Sierra C. Woodruff, 2016. "Planning for an unknowable future: uncertainty in climate change adaptation planning," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 139(3), pages 445-459, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ran An & Tian Sang, 2022. "The Guarantee Mechanism of China’s Environmental Protection Strategy from the Perspective of Global Environmental Governance—Focusing on the Punishment of Environmental Pollution Crime in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-16, November.
    2. Zhuyi Liu & Yuhan Yin & Yun Zhang & Shangeng Shi, 2023. "Legal System of Soil Pollution Remediation in China and Its Regulation and Guidance to Soil Pollution Remediation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-16, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yoichiro Fujii & Yusuke Osaki, 2018. "Regret-sensitive treatment decisions," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-8, December.
    2. Georgia Perakis & Guillaume Roels, 2008. "Regret in the Newsvendor Model with Partial Information," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 188-203, February.
    3. Amos Schurr & Yaakov Kareev & Judith Avrahami & Ilana Ritov, 2012. "Taking the Broad Perspective: Risky Choices in Repeated Proficiency Tasks," Discussion Paper Series dp621, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    4. Jinyi Hu, 2023. "Linguistic Multiple-Attribute Decision Making Based on Regret Theory and Minimax-DEA," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-14, October.
    5. Martín Egozcue & Xu Guo & Wing-Keung Wong, 2015. "Optimal output for the regret-averse competitive firm under price uncertainty," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 5(2), pages 279-295, December.
    6. Jhunjhunwala, Tanushree, 2021. "Searching to avoid regret: An experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 298-319.
    7. van Dijk, Wilco W. & van der Pligt, Joop, 1997. "The Impact of Probability and Magnitude of Outcome on Disappointment and Elation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 277-284, March.
    8. Enrico G. De Giorgi & Thierry Post, 2011. "Loss Aversion with a State-Dependent Reference Point," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(6), pages 1094-1110, June.
    9. Donald Macrae, 2011. "Standards for risk assessment of standards: how the international community is starting to address the risk of the wrong standards," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(8), pages 933-942, September.
    10. Neelke Doorn, 2015. "The Blind Spot in Risk Ethics: Managing Natural Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(3), pages 354-360, March.
    11. Jones, Tim, 2012. "Getting the British back on bicycles—The effects of urban traffic-free paths on everyday cycling," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 138-149.
    12. van Dijk, W.W. & Zeelenberg, M. & van der Pligt, J., 1999. "Not having what you want versus having what you don't want : The impact of the type of negative outcome on the experience of disappointment and related emotions," Other publications TiSEM 5d1661b1-db82-4773-8ac4-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Leković Milјan, 2020. "Cognitive Biases as an Integral Part of Behavioral Finance," Economic Themes, Sciendo, vol. 58(1), pages 75-96, March.
    14. Olivier Chanel & Graciela Chichilnisky, 2009. "The influence of fear in decisions: Experimental evidence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 271-298, December.
    15. Azam, Nouman & Zhang, Yan & Yao, JingTao, 2017. "Evaluation functions and decision conditions of three-way decisions with game-theoretic rough sets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(2), pages 704-714.
    16. Soora Rasouli & Harry Timmermans, 2017. "Specification of regret-based models of choice behaviour: formal analyses and experimental design based evidence," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1555-1576, November.
    17. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "Salience and Consumer Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(5), pages 803-843.
    18. Raquel M. Gaspar & Paulo M. Silva, 2023. "Investors’ perspective on portfolio insurance," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 22(1), pages 49-79, January.
    19. Johannes G. Jaspersen & Marc A. Ragin & Justin R. Sydnor, 2020. "Linking subjective and incentivized risk attitudes: The importance of losses," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 187-206, April.
    20. Yuval Rottenstreich & Alex Markle & Johannes Müller-Trede, 2023. "Risky Sure Things," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(8), pages 4707-4720, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:14355-:d:961405. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.