In environmental protection, innovation in the ways liability is performed is essential to implementing the principle that the party causing damage bears responsibility. A civil case handled by Long An—the first in Zhongshan in which public-service labor was used to offset part of ecological and environmental damage compensation—has been concluded successfully and selected as a typical annual case of the Zhongshan courts. It provides a practical example for addressing the dilemma of “enterprises pollute, the public suffers, and the government pays.” From a legal-practice perspective, this article systematically explains the legal meaning, conditions, procedures, and broader significance of the innovative “labor substitution” mechanism through that case.

I. Case Overview: From Inability to Pay to “Compensation Through Labor”

(1) Facts of the case

Beginning in June 2020, Guo collected and stored used lead-acid batteries illegally on rented premises without a hazardous-waste operating permit. Lead-containing liquid leaked and damaged the surrounding soil. An assessment found that the highest lead content in the soil exceeded the baseline by 580.4 times. After consultations on compensation with Guo failed, the Zhongshan Municipal Ecology and Environment Bureau, as the department designated by the municipal government, filed a civil action seeking compensation for ecological and environmental damage, including soil-remediation costs, the value of the damaged soil resources, and transactional expenses.

During the trial, a practical difficulty emerged. Guo deeply regretted the unlawful conduct, but his family was in serious financial hardship and he genuinely lacked the ability to pay the substantial compensation in full. If the court mechanically ordered monetary compensation, the case could become impossible to enforce while the damaged environment would receive no substantive relief.

(2) Innovative solution and effect

The parties therefore had to explore a new way to implement the compensation obligation. After research, the lawyers found that Article 20 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Environmental Civil Public-Interest Litigation Cases (2020 Revision) referred to alternative restoration. They considered whether Guo could perform public-service labor to offset part of the compensation. After multi-party study, the Zhongshan Intermediate People’s Court adopted an innovative combination of mediation and judgment. Under the mediation, Guo paid the soil-remediation costs and transactional expenses in cash. A judgment separately determined that he would offset the loss in soil-resource value by performing public-service labor at least three times each month and completing the work within seven months.

This case provides a model for applying “labor substitution” as an alternative-restoration measure in similar cases. It ensured that the core restoration funds could be recovered while resolving the enforcement difficulty through a flexible approach, achieving unity among legal, social, and ecological effects.

II. Definition of Labor Substitution and Its Legal Basis

“Labor substitution” is not a judicial invention without legal support. It is rooted in the current legal, regulatory, and policy framework and provides a responsibility-implementation pathway with identifiable legal foundations.

(1) Definition of labor substitution

Labor substitution means that, in litigation for ecological and environmental damage compensation, environmental civil public-interest litigation, or consultation on ecological-damage compensation, an infringer who genuinely lacks the financial ability to pay in full, where the damaged ecology cannot or need not be restored at the original site, applies for the measure and the rights holder agrees after judicial review. The infringer then provides public-service labor related to ecological protection and governance, and the value of that labor offsets part or all of the ecological and environmental damage compensation. It is an alternative form of restoration liability and a flexible way to implement the principle that the party causing damage bears responsibility.

(2) Core legal basis

1. Substantive-law basis: room for alternative restoration

Article 1234 of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China establishes the basic framework for restoration liability for ecological and environmental damage. It requires the infringer to assume restoration responsibility within a reasonable period and to bear restoration costs if restoration is not performed. The provision does not limit the form of responsibility absolutely to monetary compensation or restoration at the original site. Its open wording—“assume restoration responsibility”—leaves room for interpreting the performance of restoration obligations through alternative means. Article 1235 of the Civil Code expressly includes the costs of removing pollution and restoring the ecological environment within the scope of ecological-damage compensation, providing a direct basis for converting the value of labor into a specific compensation amount.

2. Procedural-law basis: public-interest litigation provides the procedural vehicle

Implementation of labor substitution, particularly in litigation, depends on statutory procedure. Article 58 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China (2023 Revision) grants legally authorized organs and relevant organizations standing to bring public-interest litigation against conduct that harms the public interest, including environmental pollution. This procedural rule makes it possible for a court to confirm the legality of a labor-substitution plan and for an administrative authority or relevant organization to supervise its implementation, ensuring smooth operation and enforceability in litigation.

3. Policies and judicial documents: express encouragement and guidance

National policy documents provide direct momentum. On January 13, 2025, the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, the Ministry of Water Resources, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, the State Administration for Market Regulation, the National Forestry and Grassland Administration, the National Disease Control and Prevention Administration, the Supreme People’s Court, and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate jointly issued the Opinions on Several Specific Issues Concerning Further Advancing Reform of the Ecological and Environmental Damage Compensation System. Article 13 expressly encourages alternative restoration to restore the ecological environment and its service functions in equivalent measure. It also states that, when selecting alternative-restoration projects, priority should be given to projects that give the public a tangible sense of improvement in the ecological environment. This provides an important bridge for labor substitution to move from policy advocacy into judicial practice.

III. Conditions and Boundaries for Applying Labor Substitution

Not every environmental-infringement case is suitable for labor substitution. Based on the first Zhongshan case and pilot experience in other regions, the mechanism has strict positive conditions and negative boundaries.

(1) Positive conditions

1. The infringer is a specific subject with insufficient ability to compensate

The mechanism is primarily suitable for financially distressed natural persons, individual businesses, or micro and small enterprises. Financial hardship must be supported by evidence such as low-income documentation and family obligations, proving that the infringer genuinely cannot perform the monetary obligation in full.

2. The infringer shows sincere remorse

The infringer must deeply recognize the illegality and harmfulness of the conduct, voluntarily acknowledge the violation and accept responsibility, and apply for or positively accept a labor-substitution plan. This is the subjective foundation and value premise for applying the mechanism.

3. The infringer has the capacity and conditions to perform labor

The infringer must be physically healthy, have the stamina and skills to perform the specified public-service work, and live or work in a place where supervision and assessment are practicable, so that the measure can actually be implemented.

4. The damage is relatively limited and the compensation amount is modest

Labor substitution is generally suitable for cases involving relatively minor ecological damage and a relatively small loss amount. In some regional pilot measures, the upper limit is set between RMB 10,000 and RMB 50,000 to ensure that the mechanism remains workable.

5. Restoration at the original site is impossible or unnecessary

Under the approach of Article 20 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Environmental Civil Public-Interest Litigation Cases (2020 Revision), alternative restoration may be used where the ecological environment cannot be fully restored or need not be restored at the original site. Labor substitution is a flexible form of alternative restoration.

(2) Negative boundaries where application should be prohibited

To prevent abuse and preserve the seriousness of the ecological-damage compensation system, labor substitution should generally not apply in the following circumstances:

1. Major or exceptionally serious ecological-damage cases

For cases involving extensive pollution, serious damage, or severe social impact, the rigid principle of “full compensation for all damage” must be maintained.

2. The infringer has significant subjective culpability

Where the infringer intentionally violated the law, committed repeated violations, fabricated evidence, or resisted investigation, the conduct shows a lack of genuine willingness to reform and labor substitution should generally not apply.

3. The infringer has sufficient ability to compensate

For well-funded corporate entities or other infringers capable of paying, monetary compensation should be enforced first. Labor substitution must not be used to evade the principal economic obligation.

IV. Implementation, Supervision, and Acceptance

The successful performance of the first Zhongshan labor-substitution case depended on a rigorous implementation and supervision mechanism. This is not simply “working off a debt,” but a systemic project led by the judiciary, coordinated by administrative authorities, and involving society.

(1) Determining the labor and converting its value

The labor should be closely connected to alternative restoration and preventive protection of the ecological environment. Common forms include afforestation, replanting and revegetation, river cleanup, wetland patrols, maintenance of environmental-protection facilities, and public education on environmental law. The conversion standard generally refers to the minimum-wage standard in the place where the infringement occurred or where enforcement is carried out during the preceding year. After the amount to be offset is determined, dividing it by the local daily minimum wage produces the number of days or sessions of labor required. In the Zhongshan case, for example, the plan required at least three public-service sessions per month to be completed within seven months.

(2) Initiation and confirmation of the procedure

The procedure generally follows the path of “application—assessment—consultation—confirmation.” First, an eligible infringer submits a written application. The compensation rights holder, such as the ecology and environment authority, then assesses the infringer’s financial condition, remorse, and labor capacity. The parties negotiate the details of the plan, which must be reviewed by the court. The final plan should be issued by the people’s court in a judgment so that it has compulsory enforceability.

(3) Supervision and acceptance of performance

This is the key stage for ensuring that labor substitution is neither distorted nor reduced to a formality. A pluralistic supervision network should be established through the cooperation of judicial organs, ecology and environment authorities, social organizations, and grassroots self-governance organizations.

Judicial organs: They undertake final review and supervision. If the infringer fails to perform the labor obligation, they may, upon the compensation rights holder’s application for enforcement, restore enforcement measures for monetary compensation.

Ecology and environment authorities: As the compensation rights holder and competent authority for environmental protection, they guide the determination of labor, supervise its performance, and organize an assessment of its effect.

Social or grassroots organizations: Environmental organizations, volunteer groups, and the village or neighborhood where the infringer lives may undertake daily supervision, attendance records, and technical assistance to ensure that the labor is genuine and effectively completed.

After successful acceptance, the corresponding compensation obligation is deemed performed. If acceptance fails, consistent with the legislative approach of Article 27 of the Administrative Measures for Ecological and Environmental Damage Compensation, the compensation rights holder may require the infringer to continue restoration until the requirements of the effective judgment are satisfied.

V. A Lawyer’s Perspective: Securing and Implementing Labor Substitution

When handling ecological and environmental damage compensation cases, lawyers should actively propose and seek labor substitution where the client meets the conditions, so as to protect the client’s legitimate interests and resolve the dispute substantively.

(1) Make a precise assessment and establish the foundation for application

The first task is to assess comprehensively whether the client satisfies the core conditions. First, investigate the financial hardship in depth and collect evidence of income, assets, and liabilities to establish a complete chain proving the inability to pay in full. Second, determine whether the client’s remorse is sincere and stable and whether the client can complete the labor consistently. Third, demonstrate that the damage is suitable for alternative restoration through labor.

(2) Communicate proactively and design a workable plan

During pre-litigation consultation or litigation, counsel should proactively present the request and legal reasoning for labor substitution to the compensation rights holder and the handling authority. The key point is that compulsory monetary enforcement may result in an unenforceable judgment, whereas labor substitution ensures that ecological restoration is carried out in another form. The lawyer should also design a targeted, workable labor plan that closely matches the ecological-restoration needs. At a minimum, it should specify the content, location, duration, assessment standards, supervising entity, calculation method and reference standard for the offset amount, and liability for non-performance or defective performance. The plan must be detailed and quantifiable to remove obstacles to later performance and supervision.

(3) Follow the matter throughout and protect performance results

After the labor-substitution plan is reached, counsel should urge the client to perform strictly in accordance with the agreement and maintain communication with the supervising entities, such as the ecology and environment authority, local judicial office, and village or neighborhood organization. Counsel should resolve practical problems promptly, guide the client to retain evidence of performance, and ensure that the labor results receive final confirmation, so that the client can complete the compensation obligation and bring the matter to a genuine close.

VI. Conclusion

The labor-substitution mechanism for ecological and environmental damage compensation is a practical innovation in the performance of responsibility. It does not weaken the principle that the party causing damage bears responsibility. Instead, while maintaining legal boundaries, it adds necessary judicial flexibility and a humane dimension to social governance, resolves enforcement difficulties in appropriate cases, promotes substantive restoration of damaged ecosystems, and educates the infringer to move from “destroyer” to “restorer.”

As China advances ecological-civilization development and judicial practice becomes richer, labor substitution will develop in a more standardized and structured direction. As important participants in legal practice, lawyers who understand and skillfully apply the mechanism can make a significant practical contribution to protecting clients’ legitimate interests, promoting substantive environmental restoration, and advancing the rule of law in ecological-civilization development.