Marine Pollution Bulletin 89 (2014) 174–179

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Marine Pollution Bulletin

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate /marpolbul

Research on the fundamental principles of China’s marine invasivespecies prevention legislation

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.10.0050025-326X/� 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

⇑ Address: No. 238 Songling Rd., Qingdao 266100, PR China. Tel.: +8613730960930.

E-mail address: gracefulgl@hotmail.com

Jiayu Bai ⇑Law and Politics School of Ocean University of China, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history:Available online 23 October 2014

Keywords:Invasion of marine alien speciesMarine invasive speciesLegislationFundamental principles

China’s coastal area is severely damaged by marine invasive species. Traditional tort theory resolvesissues relevant to property damage or personal injuries, through which plaintiffs cannot cope with theecological damage caused by marine invasive species. Several defects exist within the current legalregimes, such as imperfect management systems, insufficient unified technical standards, and unsoundlegal responsibility systems. It is necessary to pass legislation to prevent the ecological damage causedby marine invasive species. This investigation probes the fundamental principles needed for the admin-istration and legislation of an improved legal framework to combat the problem of invasive specieswithin China’s coastal waters.

� 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The development of science and technology has improvedhuman beings’ material living conditions and has accelerated adestructive transformation of nature. If such transformationexceeds the environment’s self-adjusting capacity, nature willwarn people of their own destructive activities. The United NationsConference on the Human Environment in Stockholm (1972) washumanity’s first reflection on these effects since the industrialrevolution, when humans began severely remodeling the naturalenvironment. The conference emphasized that man bears a solemnresponsibility to protect and improve the environment on the basisof the fundamental right to freedom, equality and adequateconditions of life granted by nature (UN, 1972). At the time ofthe conference, global environmental problems were notprominent. However, twenty years later, the rapid expansion ofeconomies and technology had caused some of these problems togradually emerge, including the sharp decline in global biodiver-sity. Therefore, parties signed the Convention on Biological Diversity(CBD) at the United Nations Conference on Environment andDevelopment (UNCED) 1992 to protect biological diversity, i.e., toprotect variability among organisms from all sources, includingterrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems, and diversitywithin one species, between species and of ecosystems and ecolog-ical complexes constituted by these sources (Article 2).

The ocean, covering 70% of the earth, is the cradle of life. Eversince marine life appeared, living beings have continued to spread.

Human activities accelerate such diffusion processes and inevita-bly bring the consequences of invasion from marine alien speciesand a sharp drop-off in the number of costal organisms. It is impor-tant to protect the diversity of marine creatures and further globalbiodiversity to control and prevent the invasion of marine alienspecies. The IUCN Guidelines for the Prevention of Biodiversity LossCaused by Alien Invasive Species provides a definition of invasivealien species (IAS) as ‘‘an alien species which becomes establishedin natural or semi-natural ecosystems or habitat, is an agent ofchange, and threatens native biological diversity (IUCN, 2000)’’.Marine invasive alien species are those alien species that becomeestablished in a marine ecosystem or environment and then influ-ence and threaten the native biological diversity. Presently, morethan twenty international conventions involve the preventionand management of IAS, but the international regulations specifi-cally directed at solving the problem of IAS in marine and aquaticenvironments are developing slowly, falling behind those of theterrestrial ecosystem. International regulations on the preventionof marine IAS rely on the implementation of regional or nationallegal frameworks. Therefore, domestic legal frameworks on theprevention of marine IAS in littoral states are the most direct andeffective measures of avoiding the invasion of marine alien speciesand protecting marine biodiversity. As a littoral state with acoastline of 18,000 km, China faces an extremely urgent task ofprotecting marine diversity and preventing the invasion of marinealien species.

The thesis will first introduce the status quo where China’scoastal areas suffer from the invasion of marine alien species andthen demonstrate the necessity of legislation on the prevention

J. Bai / Marine Pollution Bulletin 89 (2014) 174–179 175

of marine IAS. Finally, it will discuss the fundamental principlesthat should be established in the legislation.

1. Status quo of China’s coastal areas suffering the invasion ofmarine alien species

China has unique marine and terrestrial ecosystems; fisheryand aquaculture industries have always been the economic arteryof coastal area. However, with the development of the shippingindustry and frequent international exchanges at sea, the illegalimposition of marine alien species has constituted a huge threatto China’s marine biodiversity and sustainable development ofthe marine economy. Thirty-six categories of marine alien specieshave been found in China, which are incubators for red tide andbiofouling beneath hull bottoms or other marine facilities, leadingto an imbalance in the mudflat ecosystem and affecting the fishbreeding industry and native marine species diversity (Xu et al.,2004).

The carriers of marine invasive species to China mainly includefouling organisms attached to hull bottoms, ballast water carriedby foreign vessels, intertidal mudflat plants and culture speciesof fish, shrimp, cowry, algae, and foreign causative agents broughtby culture species. With the acceleration of globalization, Chinahas become the number one exporting country in the world. Theshipping industry and shipbuilding industry have contributed tothe rapid development of international trade in the region; conse-quently, the tonnage and number of ships coming in and out ofChina’s harbors increase exponentially each year. The foulingorganisms attached to hull bottoms boost the number of speciesspreading in different marine ecosystems. There are twenty-threecategories of marine IAS that arrive at China’s ports throughlong-distance travel by attaching to hull bottoms. Apart from hullbottoms, ballast water is another reason for marine alien species’invasion through ships. When ships are handled in harbors, ballastwater taken on in other sea areas will be discharged from the bal-last tank, the process of which enables living bodies, spores andcytocysts carried by ballast water to pour into the port of loading.Eleven categories of marine IAS are carried through ballast water.In addition to unintentional marine invasive species carried bymarine traffic tools, the intentional introduction of flora and faunais also a core cause of this type of invasion. Plants introduced inintertidal mudflats and aquatic products introduced in the processof sea farming and ranching have potential negative effects on thebalance of ecosystem. Such species will encroach on native biolog-ical species, owing to the pathogenic bacteria carried thereby.

The invasion of marine alien species might bring great harm tothe balance and health of the marine ecosystem of China’s coastalareas. First, marine invasive species cause the loss of speciesvariety. Marine alien species encroach on China’s marine faunaand communities and threaten the native species in coastal areas.For example, ships traveling through the Panama Canal from thetropical sea area in Central America to China’s southern oceanareas carry tons of zebra mussels attached to hull bottoms. Theseshellfish breed and grow faster in areas with slower flowing waterand compete for living space with indigenous organisms such asoysters. Second, native marine biodiversity is threatened. Marinealien species occupy other species’ ecological niches and, afterreducing the diversity of species, wreak havoc on the structureand function of the ecosystem, which results in a large decreasein native marine biodiversity. For example, poisonous algae carriedin ballast water may destroy native marine ecosystems and causered tide (Liu, 2005). Third, genetic diversity is influenced. If marineinvasive species exchange genes with native marine species, thelatter may suffer from gene erosion. Furthermore, convergent evo-lution of genetic diversity is most likely to threaten the evolution

and survival of species (Liu et al., 2007). Finally, marine invasivespecies are indirectly hazardous to human health. Marine invasivespecies may bring certain pathogens, which not only affect species’survival and the ecosystem but also endanger human health.

2. The necessity of legislation on the prevention of marine IAS

In a narrow sense, the problem of ‘‘biosafety’’ involves problemscaused by modern biotechnology research and development bywhich human life and health are threatened. The invasion ofmarine alien species does not belong in the narrow concept of bio-safety but in a generalized idea of ‘‘biosecurity,’’ i.e., the normalstate of the ecosystem, in which the normal survival of livingbeings and human life and health are encroached on by theinvasion of marine alien species. The most significant features ofinvasion by marine alien species are their long incubation period,irreversible damage, and the difficulty of identifying the tortfeasor.In the past, legal means designed for repairing ecological damagecaused by human behavior mainly used environmental tort theoryfrom civil law, i.e., environmental tortfeasors take responsibility,but the theory has ‘‘inborn’’ deficiencies in dealing with ecologicaldamages caused by the invasion of marine alien species. Environ-mental law aimed at prevention is more efficient in controllingthe invasion of marine alien species. However, China’s currentenvironmental legislation cannot meet the demand of preventionand governance of the invasion of marine alien species. Therefore,it is necessary to legislate specifically against the invasion ofmarine alien species.

2.1. Environmental tort theory: solving the insufficiency dilemma inthe invasion of marine alien species

Professor Chen Quansheng considers environmental tort,including environmental disruption and pollution, to be based onthe reality that people’s surroundings and ecosystem suffer fromdamage or pollution and that most residents’ rights and interestsin considerable areas are encroached on because of human activi-ties (Chen, 1996). Professor Cao Mingde claims that environmentaltort refers to a special case in tort where a polluter is civilly liable ifhe damages other people’s property rights, personal rights or envi-ronmental rights (Cao, 2000). Professor Wang Mingyuan believesthat environmental tort is caused by industrial activities or otherartificial activities that result in the pollution or destruction ofthe natural environment and that these tortfeasors cause harm toother people’s personal rights, property rights, environmentalrights and interests or to public property (Wang, 2001). Regardlessof the precise definition of environmental tort, environmental torttheory includes the idea that a tortfeasor pollutes the environmentor causes the natural environment to become contaminated ordamaged, which then harms other people’s lives, health, property,emotion and environmental rights and interests. When a tortfeasorpollutes or damages the environment but does not affect people’sinterests, environmental tort theory seems to be in a state of‘‘dormancy.’’ It is not until pollution is severe enough to prejudicehuman interests that a ‘‘dormant’’ environmental tort theory isawakened. It is thus clear that environmental tort law cannot com-pensate for ecological damage beyond the impairment of humaninterests (Xu and Deng, 2010); the inability to solve this problemis an ‘‘inborn’’ insufficiency of environmental tort theory.

2.2. Current environmental legislation: solving the problem of theinvasion of marine alien species

China’s legislation concerning the invasion of marine alien spe-cies is reflected in the Constitution, laws, administrative regulationsand department rules, such as the Marine Environment Protection

176 J. Bai / Marine Pollution Bulletin 89 (2014) 174–179

Law, Frontier Health and Quarantine Law and relevant enforcementregulations, Rules for the Implementation of Frontier Health andQuarantine Law and Regulation on the Prevention and Control of VesselSource Pollution to the Marine Environment. However, China’s existingenvironmental legislation has many defects that hinder its solvingissues related to the invasion of marine alien species.

First, the legislation to prevent and control the invasion ofmarine alien species does not serve the proper purpose, i.e., theprotection of biodiversity and sustainable utilization of marinebiological resources. For example, the unintentional introductionof biological contamination through ballast water and the particu-larity of invasive species are not fully recognized in the MarineEnvironment Protection Law, and the prevention of such contamina-tion is not emphasized by administrators through sufficient marineecological protection. The Frontier Health and Quarantine Law aimsto protect humans’ bodily health, which indirectly prevents theinvasion of harmful species carried by ballast water, but it appliesto ballast water from only specific epidemic areas.

Second, the management system concerning the prevention ofthe invasion of marine alien species is not yet comprehensive. Itseems that the maritime administrative department in chargeshould be responsible for related ballast water because harmfulalien species carried in ballast water are categorized as vessel-source pollution. If invasive species contaminate fishery areas,the fishery administrative department should take charge. If theissues caused by marine IAS are not resolved in a coherent struc-ture, along with the involvement of various departments, thedepartments’ various functions will overlap or there will be nodepartment in charge of the management at all.

Third, no relevant laws or administrative regulations set a rule ofrelated standards. Potential tortfeasors should be held liable inaccordance with specific legal standards for marine invasive speciescarried by ships or caused by the introduction of marine organ-isms. With a more comprehensive legal framework, invasiveincidents could be avoided. China lacks such nationally unifiedlegal technical standards.

Fourth, the current system of legal responsibility concerning theinvasion of marine alien species needs more improvement. Currentlegislative regulations provide that administrative responsibility isthe main method of bearing the consequence of marine environ-mental pollution and marine ecological disruption, in which theamount of regulated fines is relatively low. In contrast, the damagecaused by the invasion of marine alien species is usually cata-strophic and irreversible, as in, for example, the case of the zebramussel in the Great Lakes. Therefore, it is necessary to effectivelycontrol such invasion by the way of civil, administrative or crimi-nal liabilities, including high fines.

3. Fundamental principles that should be established in thelegislation

From the above analyses, it is clear that traditional environmen-tal tort theory and China’s current environmental legislationcannot effectively solve the problem of the invasion of marine alienspecies; specific laws regarding the prevention of the invasion ofmarine alien species are required to effectively control and mini-mize the damage to China’s marine ecological system caused byinvasive species. In this new legislation, a series of fundamentalprinciples should be established to make clear the legislative intentthe achievement of effectively preventing, controlling and manag-ing marine invasive species from damaging the marine environ-ment and destroying the marine ecosystem. However, it shouldbe made clear that this thesis focuses on the fundamental princi-ples of laws preventing the invasion of marine alien species ratherthan the guiding principles that will need to be followed in the leg-

islative process. Those guiding principles are intended to informlegislation to achieve the goal of protecting the environment inthe process of drafting, formulating or revising environmentallaw. The fundamental principles running through the laws of theprevention of the invasion of marine alien species include theprecautionary principle, the polluter-pays principle, the ecosys-tem-based whole process management principle, and the publicparticipation principle. Among these four principles, the precau-tionary and polluter-pays principles embody the law’s value fromthe perspectives of the prevention of future damage and the gover-nance of existing damage, and the ecosystem-based whole processmanagement and the public participation principles achieve thelaw’s purpose from the levels of management and supervision,respectively.

3.1. Precautionary principle

The original concept behind the precautionary principle, as ini-tially applied in the German Clean Air Act (1970), is that actionneeds to be taken to avoid the risk of damage regardless of whethersufficient scientific data (evidence) regarding cause-and-effectexists. The principle does not deny the function of scientificresearch for confirming existing danger, but emphasizes theprimacy of damage prevention and reducing the burden on theenvironment imposed by technological development (Santillo,1999). Twenty-two years later, this domestic legal principlereceived recognition and subsequent ratification by the interna-tional community. The Convention on Biological Diversity (1992)states clearly in its preamble that ‘‘Where there is a threat of signif-icant reduction or loss of biological diversity, lack of full scientificcertainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measuresto avoid or minimize such a threat.’’ [*] The precautionary principleis mentioned throughout the text of the Cartagena Protocol onBiosafety (2000) for ensuring genetically modified organisms’(GMOs) biosafety, becoming in a narrow sense the basic principlebehind international laws and regulations on biosafety.

Invasion of marine alien species is generally categorized as aproblem of biosecurity. Compared to risk prevention in modernbiotechnology to obtain a modified living body, IAS is characterizedby a lack of scientific foreseeability and artificial control. Take, forexample, the unintentional introduction of marine invasive speciesthrough ballast water, which is used to balance ships; the intake ofwater from one ecosystem and its discharge in another is notintentional species-introducing activity but is legal human activity.However, this activity may cause harmful invasion of marine alienspecies and lacks regulations similar to those governing GMOs.Therefore, the prevention law for the invasion of marine alien spe-cies should consider the precautionary principle as a basic princi-ple. The precautionary principle, compared to the damageprevention principle, is more beneficial to the prevention and con-trol of the invasion of marine alien species. The former focuses onthose serious actions causing risks of irreversible ecological dam-age and the precautionary measures taken before ultimate scien-tific proof. The damage prevention principle restrains or impedesecological damage that has posed risks and damage or is aboutto occur. The precautionary principle is applied when risks exiteven without scientific certainty (Xu, 2005).

Scientific uncertainty provides the main basis for the precau-tionary principle. A dangerous action may cause an irreversibleresult, even if no scientifically certain evidence shows that suchaction is doomed to cause certain damage. If such damage is severeand unavoidable, measures should still be taken to prevent it fromoccurring. As long as harmful alien species carried in ballast watercould constitute an invasion, it could cause damage to the environ-ment that is difficult to repair, and if other living species becomeextinct owing to the invasion of harmful species, such damage

J. Bai / Marine Pollution Bulletin 89 (2014) 174–179 177

has irreversible consequences. The problem is that there can be nocertainty of whether ballast water in ships carries harmful invasivespecies, even with a basic investigation of living bodies where bal-last water discharges. For the purpose of preventing the occurrenceof catastrophic consequences, precautionary measures must betaken. In the fishery industry, the invasion of marine alien speciesthrough the introduction of marine species is classified as an inva-sion of marine alien species caused by intentional activity. Therisks could be avoided through relevant systems and mechanismsfor the purpose of preventing ‘‘introduced species’’ from turninginto ‘‘invasive species,’’ even without certain scientific proof.

3.2. Polluter-pays principle

The polluter-pays principle was put forward at the earliest in1972 by an OECD resolution requiring polluters to pay theexpenses incurred by the government in reducing pollution forthe purpose of insuring the health of the environment in a memberstate (OECD, 1972). The goal of the principle is to encourage theuse of rare environmental resources and avoid conflicts in interna-tional trade and investment (Kiss and Shelton, 2000). In the field ofeconomics and trade, the polluter-pays principle is first raised inthe hope of avoiding the externalization of adverse effects by pro-ducers and consumers in economic activity through the internali-zation of environmental cost; this economic policy allocates thecosts of pollution and ecological damage (Birnie and Boyle,2002). Principle 16 of the Rio Declaration (a soft law that the Rioconference on Environment and Development in 1992 approved)states that the ‘‘National authorities should endeavor to promotethe internalization of environmental costs and the use of economicinstruments, taking into account the approach that the pollutershould, in principle, bear the cost of pollution, with due regard tothe public interest and without distorting international trade andinvestment.’’ In the laws of international marine environmentalprotection, the polluter-pays principle is promoted as a fundamen-tal principle. Paragraph 2(b) of Article 2 of The Convention for theProtection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic(OSPAR Convention), ratified on September 22, 1992, declares that‘‘the polluter pays principle, by virtue of which the costs of pollu-tion prevention, control and reduction measures are to be borne bythe polluter’’. China’s Environmental Protection Act, taking refer-ence to the essence of ‘‘Polluter-Pays Principle’’, requires exploitersresponsible for conservation and polluters for afterwards treat-ments in order to internalizes the external diseconomy of theenvironment.

If invasion of marine alien species caused by intentional orunintentional human activities destroys the ecological mediumto some extent, humans’ property or personal interests will bethreatened. However, such invasion has an incubation period. Untilit harms human property or personal interests, it is difficult to con-firm the actual polluters, and even if polluters are found, pollutionexpenses are hard to determine before the harm to human prop-erty or personal interest occurs. Therefore, in the prevention ofinvasion of marine alien species, applying the polluter-pays princi-ple should be entitled a broader explanation: if the damage to theecological environment is irreversible (i.e., exceeding thresholdvalue) after pollution risks materialize, those potential enterprisesor individuals who may cause pollution risks should pay for insur-ance. The American Superfund (CERCLA) defines ‘‘polluter’’ as a‘‘potentially responsible party (PRP)’’, including the owner, opera-tor, a person who produced a hazardous substance, a person whotransported a hazardous substance and creditors of mortgage-guaranteed interest who participated in the management. Theinvasion of marine alien species prevention legislation should alsoadopt such a definition. Before the occurrence of intentional intro-duction, expenses should be paid to establish a fund for the pre-

vention of the invasion of marine alien species. Moreover, taxeson ships arriving at a port should be collected to establish a fundfor the invasion of alien species carried by ballast water. Potentialresponsible parties that constitute a pollution risk should pay acertain amount of expenses to set up a fund for the prevention ofthe invasion of marine alien species; such a regulation should bean extensive application of the polluter-pays principle. From theperspective of environmental economics, an extensive applicationof the polluter-pays principle belongs to the direct control of wholeprocess management mode. With the evaluation of a healthyecosystem’s threshold value, the potential polluter is responsiblefor potential contamination by the way of paying taxes or otherinsurance (Jin, 2013). The application of the principle also leadsto the following ecosystem-based whole process managementprinciple.

3.3. Ecosystem-based whole process management principle

Ecosystem-based whole process management principle is animprovement on the whole process management principle. Thewhole process management principle is embodied in CartagenaProtocol on Biosafety, which requires that ‘the Parties shall establishand maintain appropriate mechanisms, measures and strategies toregulate, manage and control risks identified in the risk assessmentprovisions of this Protocol associated with the use, handling andtransboundary movement of living modified organisms (Article16(1))’. It is clear that the management of biological safety riskruns through the whole process of use, handling and trans-bound-ary movement. Although the invasion of marine alien speciesbelongs to a broader biosecurity problem, it also requires the appli-cation of the whole process management principle. The principle isa realization of environmental law’s ‘‘whole process control princi-ple’’. It refers to a whole process management of a possible harmfulconduct against the environment starting from plan to action tothe consequences of the conduct (Lv, 2004). Whole process controlis different from end treatment, which is a traditional governancemeasure. Although end treatment is useful for relieving pollutionand even recovering the damaged environment to some extent, itis not that effective in encouraging polluters to decrease or avoidactivities that may create pollution. Whole process control ampli-fies end treatment to a whole process of source, middle and endcontrol, which is especially applicable to law making regardingthe prevention of the invasion of marine alien species. Ecologicaldamage caused by the invasion of marine alien species is oftenimperceptible. Additionally, the polluter is always uncertain. Ifthe environment is treated immediately after the occurrence ofdamage, the remedy will be only barely satisfactory. If managersof the prevention of the invasion of marine alien species involvethe whole process, and if the related management system isregulated through legislation, some of the irreversible ecologicaldamage should be avoided.

Ecosystem-based management was applied to manage landresources as early as 1950s. Since the Earth Summit 1992 in Riode Janeiro, the idea of sustainable development gradually blendedwith policy making; on March 21, 2005, 221 scientists and man-agement experts of the United States jointly signed the ScientificConsensus Statement on Marine Ecosystem-Based Management forthe purpose of ultimately realizing ecosystem-based management.It is a comprehensive management mode that stresses the following:protecting the structure, functions and key process of ecosystems;influencing the scope of a specific ecosystem; aiming to make clearthe target species and untargeted species in the system and themutual relationships in the key process; understanding functionsamong different systems; comprehensively considering the rela-tionships of ecology, society, economy and different institutionsand explicit interdependency (Bai, 2008). China should base the

178 J. Bai / Marine Pollution Bulletin 89 (2014) 174–179

whole process control of the invasion of marine alien species on itsstructure and functions and conduct whole process managementby focusing on specific characteristics of different marine ecosys-tems: the Huanghai and Bohai Sea area, the East China Sea andthe South China Sea. For example, competent departments shouldcarry out whole process management. If the South China Sea suf-fers from invasion of marine alien species, local coastal govern-ments near the South China Sea should become involved by wayof assisting relevant state departments and enforcing related laws,principles and systems by considering the characteristics of theSouth China Sea’s marine ecosystem apart from the joint manage-ment of State Oceanic Administration, Ministry of Agriculture,Ministry of Communications, and other supervising state adminis-trative departments.

3.4. Public participation principle

The ‘‘public participation principle’’, also called the ‘‘environ-ment democratic principle’’, originated in the 1960s when globalenvironmental disaster frequently received notice. People’senvironmental consciousness was awakening. Western countriesexperienced social movements for environment protection. Peoplerealized that environmental resources should not be taken forgranted because they are public property belonging to all ofhumanity. To avoid the occurrence of the ‘‘Tragedy of theCommons’’ (Hardin, 1968), people are justified in managing publicresources through organizations that represent the will of thepeople. In this process, the methods and procedure of scientificdecision making have been introduced. In the 1970s, Joseph Saxof the University of Michigan popularized ‘‘Public Trust Theory’’,which demonstrates that the protection of environmentalresources should make the public the bailor and the governmentthe bailee and manage the environment based on public welfare.The theory provides another theoretical basis for the public partic-ipation principle. The Convention on Access to Information, PublicParticipation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in EnvironmentalMatters, also called The Aarhus Convention, which was put into forcein October 2001, actively encourages the public to participate inenvironmental decision making process, demands contractingparties’ governments to provide opportunities for receiving envi-ronmental information and participate in decision making, andsafeguards the realization of public participation rights throughlegislation, administration and other measures. In China’s legalsystem, Article 5 of the Law on Environment Impact Assessment reg-ulates the content of public participation; Article 4 of the MarineEnvironment Protection Law clearly states that all units and individ-uals are obliged to protect marine environment and are entitled tosupervise and manage any unit or individual that pollutes the mar-ine environment and the delinquency of personnel working onmarine environment supervision and management.

The public participation principle in China’s laws on the preven-tion of the invasion of marine alien species states that the public isentitled to participate in all management activities concerning theintroduction of marine alien species related to public marine envi-ronment rights and interests and the control of unintentionalintroductions through certain procedures or approaches. Further-more, the public is entitled to receive related legal protectionand relief to prevent the mismanagement of environmental activ-ities or from lacking supervision and to make them accord with thepublic welfare (Wang, 2006). The public participation principlecontains the contents as follows: firstly, administrators must keepopen records of decision information. The public has the right toreceive information about intentionally introduced marine alienspecies, and the government should propagandize and teach theapproaches and the harmful forms of marine invasive species byunintentional activities. It is essential for the public to participate

in the prevention. Secondly, the principle encourages the publicand non-governmental organizations to participate in decisionmaking. The public should be provided with channels for express-ing opinions and suggestions on deciding whether a certain marinealien species should be approved for introduction and on how toset up management regulations for related vessels entering port.Reasonable opinions and suggestions should be incorporated intopublic policy. Thirdly, the principle encourages establishing a judi-cial safeguard system. When pubic supervision is impeded, thereshould be inspection of competent departments’ managementbehavior; meanwhile, the public should receive environmentalinformation and have the ability to participate in decision making,and the public should be able to seek the relief from the court.

Among the four basic principles above, the precautionaryprinciple is the most goal-oriented principle for preventing the inva-sion of marine alien species. It achieves the legislative intent ofprotecting biodiversity, sustainable development, and safeguardinghuman health with the help of the polluter-pays principle. The eco-system-based whole process management principle is an importantmanagement measure for implementing the precautionary princi-ple and the polluter-pays principle, and the public participationprinciple is an effective method of supervision and guarantee. Thefour principles overlap and mutually complement each other;together, they ought to constitute the fundamental principles ofChina’s legislation on the prevention of the invasion of marine alienspecies to promote sustainable development of the marineeconomy.

4. Conclusions

Legal principles are rule-based principles and norms that pro-mote integrity and stability (Zhang, 1996). China’s fundamentalprinciples of legislation on the prevention of invasion of marinealien species provide the legal foundation for standardizing, lead-ing and guiding laws and regulations. The precautionary principleis the primary principle of laws on the prevention of the invasion ofmarine alien species; if preventive measures for the pollutionsources are not implemented, the polluter-pays principle with abroader explanation could force ‘‘potential polluters’’ to compen-sate the damage. On the other hand, the ecosystem-based wholeprocess management is an instrumental principle. It assists in theimplementation of the precautionary principle and the polluter-pays principle. Finally, the public participation principle acts as asafeguard principle of the above three principles: it indemnifiespublic resources by creating mechanisms for administrative liabil-ity to protect and preserve the environment in trust. The four prin-ciples are not mutually exclusive alternatives, they should bemeasured in accordance with specific circumstances, the standardof which is to assess whether the legislative intent of protectingbiodiversity, developing sustainably and safeguarding humanhealth could be achieved or not.

Acknowledgements

This research was conducted with support of funding from the2012 Ministry of Education of Humanities and Social ScienceProject for youth in China-‘‘Legal Research on the Prevention andControl of Marine Invasive Species’’ (12YJC820001).

References

Bai, J., 2008. Reflections on the ecosystem-based management model. Ocean Dev.Manage. 5, 30–32.

Birnie, Patricia, Boyle, A.E., 2002. International Law and the Environment, seconded. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 88.

Cao, M., 2000. Environment Tort Law, first ed. Law Press, China, Beijing, pp. 9–35.

J. Bai / Marine Pollution Bulletin 89 (2014) 174–179 179

Chen, Q., 1996. On litigation prescription of environmental torts. Environ. Herald,12–13.

Hardin, G., 1968. Tragedy of the commons. Science 162, 1243–1248.IUCN, 2000. Guidelines for the prevention of biodiversity loss caused by alien

invasive species. In: 51st Meeting of the IUCN Council, Gland Switzerland.Jin, R., 2013. Environmental Law, third ed. Peking University Press, Beijing, pp. 69–

72.Kiss, A., Shelton, D., 2000. International Environmental Law, third ed. Transnational

Publishers Inc, New York, p. 266.Liu, K., 2005. Marine organisms invasion. Sci. Tech. Trends Abroad 5, 26–28.Liu, Fangming, Miao, Jinlai, Zheng, Zhou, Wang, Y., 2007. Present situation, hazards

and prevention and control measures of marine invasive alien species intoChina. Coast. Eng. 26 (4), 49–57.

Lv, Z., 2004. Environment and Resources Law, first ed. Science Press, Beijing, pp. 61–62.

OECD, 1972. Recommendation of the Council on the Implementation of thePolluter-Pays Principle, vol. C(72), p. 128.

Santillo, D., 1999. The Precautionary Principle in Practice: A Mandate for AnticipatoryPreventative Action, Protecting Public Health& the Environment: Implementingthe Precautionary Principle, first ed. Island Press, Washington, DC.

UN, 1972. Principle 1 in Declaration of the United Nations Conference on theHuman Environment, United Nations Conference on the Human Environment,Stockholm.

Wang, M., 2001. Legal System of Environment Tort Remedy, first ed. China LegalPublishing House, Beijing, pp. 13–15.

Wang, J., 2006. Environmental Law, first ed. Peking University Press, Beijing, pp.175–176.

Xu, X., 2005. Environmental Law, first ed. Peking University Press, Beijing, pp. 147–148.

Xu, Xiangmin, Deng, Y., 2010. Environment tort and environment infringement-discussion on the mission of environment law. Legal Forum 21 (2), 9–16.

Xu, Haigen, Wang, Jianmin, Qiang, S., 2004. Study of Key Issues under theConvention on Biological Diversity: Alien Species Invasion, Biosafety, GenericResources, first ed. Science Press, Beijing, pp. 28–37.

Zhang, W., 1996. On Western Law and Philosophy in the Twentieth Century, firsted. Law Press, China, Beijing, p. 390.