Handling different types of environmental monitoring fraud in multiple ways

  • D. LiuEmail author
  • S. Wang
Short Communication


Environmental monitoring fraud has become a serious issue all over the world, in both developed and developing countries. A very different and more pernicious type of fraud was exposed in China. This is the first time that government officials but not enterprise managers and employees have been sentenced for environmental monitoring fraud. This event revealed that the types of environmental monitoring fraud are very different and complex in China, and the challenge to handling such frauds is more difficult and serious. The main drivers behind the frauds were analyzed. To avoid manipulation of monitoring data, it is necessary to develop and combine multiple strategies of administration, judiciary, and technology. More than anything, the management of the monitoring networks should be changed from the current “not only the referee but also the athletes” model. The issue of pollution cannot be fully addressed in a short period of time. However, it is necessary and reasonable to handle the monitoring data fraud immediately. The emphasis here should be on the authenticity of monitoring data, which is prerequisite to winning the war against heavy smog as well as other types of pollution.


Environmental fraud Main drivers Monitoring networks Multiple strategies 



This work was supported by Shandong Huanbao Yanfa (Ecological Heath Assessment SDHBYF-2012-09) project. Thanks are also due to Y. Wang and S. Zhang for assistance with material collection and to our peer reviewers for comments.


  1. He G, Zhang L, Authur PJM, Lu Y, Liu J (2013) Revising China’s environmental law. Science 341:133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Holland SP, Mansur ET, Muller NZ, Yates AJ (2016) Damages and expected deaths due to excess NOx emissions from 2009 to 2015 Volkswagen diesel vehicles. Environ Sci Technol 50:1111–1117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Liu D (2015) New environment law shows its fangs. Nature 525:321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Lu S, Zhou J, Dubee F (2016) New allies fight for China’s environment. Science 352:781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. MEP China (2015) Environmental monitoring data fraud was punished. Accessed 12 June 2015
  6. MEP China (2016a) Bulletin of heavy air pollution. Accessed 19 Dec 2016
  7. MEP China (2016b) Bulletin of heavy air pollution. Accessed 21 Dec 2016
  8. MEP China (2017a) Bulletin of heavy air pollution. Accessed 2 Jan 2017
  9. MEP China (2017b) Bulletin of environmental monitoring fraud in Xi’an. Accessed 10 July 2017
  10. Oldenkamp R, van Zelm R, Huijbregts MAJ (2016) Valuing the human health damage caused by the fraud of Volkswagen. Environ Pollut 212:121–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Schiermeier Q (2015) The science behind the Volkswagen emissions scandal. Nature. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. SPC China, SPP China (2016) Judicial interpretation for the criminal offense of environmental pollution (FaShi Number 29-2016). Accessed 26 Dec 2016
  13. Wang C (2007) Chinese environmental law enforcement: current deficiencies and suggested reforms. Vermont J Environ Law 8:159–193Google Scholar
  14. Wang K (2016) Taking back national air quality monitoring sites under the management of the MEP China has been completed as planned. China Environ NewsGoogle Scholar
  15. Wang T, Jerrett M, Sinsheimer P, Zhu Y (2016) Estimating PM2.5-associated mortality increase in California due to the Volkswagen emission control defeat device. Atmos Environ 144:168–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Xiang X, Shen Y (2018) The Mayor of Linfen in Shanxi Province was warning-interviewed by MEP China for environmental monitoring fraud. Accessed 6 Aug 2016

Copyright information

© Islamic Azad University (IAU) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Shandong Society of EcologyJinanChina
  2. 2.Shandong Institute of Environmental ScienceJinanChina
  3. 3.Taierzhuang Environmental Monitoring CenterTaierzhuangChina

Personalised recommendations