Abstract
As a concluding part of this book, this chapter restated the challenges and problems faced by China in the course of developing its own contaminated land regimes. It then provides a comparative review a comparative review of China’s contaminated land regimes under the Soil Pollution Law 2018. It finally provides recommendations for further develop the contaminated land regime in China.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
- 2.
S 78A (2), Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 , UK.
- 3.
40 CFR part 300.
- 4.
S 78N, Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 , UK.
- 5.
Article 48, Soil Contamination Law 2018 .
- 6.
For example, in the UK, the appeal must be lodged within 21 days of receipt of the remediation notice . See S 78L(1), Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 . Where appeals against remediation notices served by local authorities were to the magistrates’ court whereas appeals against remediation notices served by the Environment Agency; for special sites, were to the Secretary of State.
- 7.
《中华人民共和国农产品质量安全法》 [the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Agricultural Product Quality Safety] (People’s Republic of China) National People’s Congress , Order No 49, 29 April 2006, Article 2.
- 8.
Postle et al. (1999).
- 9.
Swartjes (2011), at 39.
- 10.
Boyd (1999).
- 11.
Davis and Sherman (2010), at 8.
- 12.
MEE (2018), at 108, 110.
- 13.
- 14.
Defra, Defra Circular 01/2006 Environmental Protection Act 1990 : part 2A contaminated land (Defra, September 2006).
- 15.
The Danish law provides that where soil contamination was caused after January 1, 2001, the liability for remediation will be pursued. See CCICED (2015).
- 16.
See MEE (2018), at 194-207.
- 17.
CCICED (2015).
- 18.
《最高人民法院 最高人民检察院关于办理环境污染刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》[The Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Handling of Criminal Cases of Environmental Pollution] (2016) (People’s Republic of China), the Supreme People’s Court, No. 29 [2016], December 23, 2016.
- 19.
The Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Handling of Criminal Cases of Environmental Pollution.
- 20.
Shepherd et al. (2016).
- 21.
Lan et al. (2006).
- 22.
Art. 9 and 10, Soil Pollution Law 2018.
- 23.
Friends of Nature (FON) & China Biodiversity Conservation and Green Development Foundation (CBCGDF) v Jiangsu Changlong Chemical Ltd Co., Changzhou Changyu Chemical Ltd Co., & Jiangsu Huada Group Ltd Co. [2018], (2017) Suming Zong No. 232, Supreme Court of Jiangsu Province, December 26, 2018.
References
Boyd, J. (1999). Environmental Remediation Law and Economies in Transition. RFF 99-21
CCICED (2015). Special Policy Study on Soil Pollution Management (pp. 61). Beijing.
Davis, T. S., & Sherman, S. A. (2010). Brownfields: A Comprehensive Guide to Redeveloping Contaminated Property (3rd ed.). Chicago, IL: American Bar Association.
Kubasek, N. K., Williamson, C., & Vigil, R. (1997). Retroactive Liability Under The Superfund: Time to Settle The Issue. Journal of Land Use & Environmental Law, 13(1), 197-230.
Lan, X., Simonis, U. E., & Dudek, D. J. (2006). Environmental Governance in China. CCICED.
Leveque, M. (1998). Rationales for Applying CERCLA Retroactively After Landgraf v USI Film Products: Overcoming the Presumption Against Retroactivity. Ohio State Law Journal, 59(2), 603–632, doi:http://hdl.handle.net/1811/64955.
MEE (2018). Handbook for interpretation and Implementation of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Prevention and Control of Soil Contamination. Beijing: Law press China.
Postle, M., Fenn, T., Grosso, A., & Steeds, J. (1999). Cost-benefit Analysis for Remediation of Land Contamination. UK Environment Agency.
Shepherd, E., Southworth, J., & Manning, C. (2016). How Will The Withdrawal of Central Funding Affect The Contaminated Land Regime? https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=5ab179b9-49a8-4e56-99a6-04a390dbfe7d. Accessed March 30 2019.
Swartjes, F. A. (Ed.). (2011). Dealing with Contaminated Sites: from Theory towards Practical Application: Springer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zhao, X. (2019). Conclusion and Recommendations: A Comparative Review of China’s Contaminated Land Regime. In: Developing an Appropriate Contaminated Land Regime in China. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-59557-2_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-59557-2_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-59556-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-59557-2
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)