替代性修复责任司法适用的反思与调适

Reflectionand Adjustment of Judicial Application of Alternative Remediation

替代性修复责任作为我国特有的概念,其价值在于贯彻全面修复的理念,实现生态环境服务功能的总量平衡。但替代性修复责任在实践中还存在概念界定不清、适用情形不一、修复方式不明等问题,根源在于当前学说和实践仍以传统损害赔偿法原理作为生态环境修复责任的建构基础,导致修复与赔偿的关系出现错位,且各种修复方式的适用顺位缺乏安排。回应生态环境损害的特质,生态环境修复责任应超越民法恢复原状论,秉承所有受损生态环境都是可修复的理念,对于不能通过原位同质进行直接修复的,可以进行替代性修复,以实现区域生态系统的动态平衡和总量恢复。金钱赔偿则类似于“恢复原状费用”而非价值赔偿,赔偿金应视情形分别用于直接修复和替代性修复。

Alternative remediation, a concept uniquely used in China’s mainland, aims at implementing the basic concept of a comprehensive restoration and realizing the gross balance of ecosystem services. In practice, however, there are several problems regarding the responsibility of alternative remediation such as ambiguity in definition, different rules in application, and uncertainty in ways of remediation. The primary cause is that the theory of traditional law of damages is still referred to determine the responsibility of eco-environmental remediation both in theoretical perspective and in practice, which leads to the misplacing between remediation and compensation and the sequences of each variety of remediation in law application. Based on the characteristics of eco-environment and ecosystem, eco-environmental restoration ought to be extended to that beyond the traditional scope of restitution in civil law. In theory, all damaged ecosystems can be restored.Thosedifficult to be directly restored can be alternatively remedied to achieve a dynamic balance and overall restoration of the regional ecosystem. Monetary compensation should be considered as a form of " the cost of restoration" instead of the compensation of value, which should be allocated separately in direct or alternative remediation as appropriate.