欢迎访问《应用生态学报》官方网站,今天是 分享到:

应用生态学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (10): 2827-2834.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202310.032

• • 上一篇    下一篇

生态环境损害赔偿视域下的近海非法捕捞大数据分析

张琥顺1, 仲霞铭2*, 熊瑛2, 吴晓睿1   

  1. 1上海海洋大学海洋科学学院, 上海 201306;
    2江苏省海洋水产研究所, 江苏南通 226007
  • 收稿日期:2023-05-22 接受日期:2023-08-07 出版日期:2023-10-15 发布日期:2024-04-15
  • 通讯作者: * E-mail: oceanxmzh@163.com
  • 作者简介:张琥顺, 男, 1995年生, 博士研究生。主要从事渔业资源和生态损害补偿研究。E-mail: zhsnekton@126.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(31802297)

Big data analysis of coastal illegal fishing from the perspective of compensation of ecological and environmental damage

ZHANG Hushun1, ZHONG Xiaming2*, XIONG Ying2, WU Xiaorui1   

  1. 1College of Marine Sciences, Shanghai Ocean University, Shanghai 201306, China;
    2Jiangsu Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Nantong 226007, Jiangsu, China
  • Received:2023-05-22 Accepted:2023-08-07 Online:2023-10-15 Published:2024-04-15

摘要: 为探究中国近海非法捕捞状况,了解生态环境损害赔偿制度在该领域的落实情况,本研究基于中国裁判文书网公开发布的大数据,对2018—2022年的近海非法捕捞案件相关信息进行统计分析,提出以下观点: 1)近海非法捕捞因区域差异表现出繁多的具体形态,相关研究重心依然需围绕违法性质和影响程度展开,宜以电捕类和拖网类为切入点;2)应重视耙刺类渔具的非法渔获重量及涉案价值呈增加的趋势,建议优化调整渔业管理方式,从根源上避免此类非法捕捞案件的发生;3)评估模式构成多样导致损害赔偿金的计算充满不确定性,应着力于建立健全的损害评估及价值量化规范;4)补偿放流是应用最多的生态修复措施,但其科学指导不足,应聚焦“修复”进行“补偿”设计,同时探索更多修复措施的操作可能性。

关键词: 生态环境, 损害赔偿, 近海非法捕捞, 渔业管理, 生态修复

Abstract: Illegal fishing is one of the sources of marine ecological damage. The implementation of compensation of ecological and environmental damage in this field is poorly understood. In this study, we examined data pertaining to coastal illegal fishing cases during 2018-2022 using the big data publicly made available by China Judgement Online. The main results included: 1) there are numerous types of illegal fishing, and more efforts should focus on the nature and extent of illegal fishing, with electrofishing and trawl being suitable entry points; 2) Special attention should be paid to the variation characteristics of rakes in the range of high illegal catch weight and value. It was suggested to optimize and adjust its management mode to avoid the frequent occurrence of such illegal fishing cases of rake; 3) The varieties of assessment models increased the uncertainty of damages computation, which might be reduced by establishing strong criteria for value quantification and damage assessment; 4) There is limited scientific support for the compensation for releasing the most popular ecological restoration technique for illegal fishing. As a result, the “compensation” design for “restoration” should be implemented, while the potential for additional restoration methods should be investigated.

Key words: ecological environment, compensation for damage, coastal illegal fishing, fishery management, ecological restoration