英语翻译环境权还是应当停留在公法的角度上去逐步完善和确立,环境权是由环境法来确立和维护的,环境法是以保护环境为己任,是以保护公众的环境利益为重要目的的,因此,其具有社会权的性质.与此同时,试图以所谓的环境权来代替民法中业已存在的财产权及人格权,不仅导致民事权利设置的重复、混乱,也不利于真正地确立环境权.因此,环境权的损害赔偿也仅是以民事侵权来恒定而已.在研究目前国际形势下的环境权发展趋势来看,在欧洲发达国家环境法中,普遍可以找到对个人财产权利的严格禁止条款,有难以计数的关于许可、许可证、配额、时间和空间的限制、环境评价等方面的法律条文.这些限制和禁止性条款的设定,在于通过限制个人财产权利来达到加强环境共享权的目标.由此可见,这些限制性的条款,其主要目标在于通过限制个人私权而将社会公益最大化,并非出于保障私权甚至是将环境权私权化的意图,而部分学者甚至已经提出了“环境乌托邦”即在人类的法律中,赋予除人类以外的其他物种以平等的法律地位并同样切实保障其环境权的做法,在此情况下,还能简单的将环境权私权化吗?

Environmental rights or should remain in the public law perspective up gradually improved and establishment of environmental rights is to establish and maintain environmental law, and environmental law is their responsibility to protect the environment, based on the environmental protection of the public interest as an important objective, therefore, having the nature of social rights. At the same time, attempts to replace the so-called environmental rights to the existing civil law, property rights and personality rights, not only led to the civil rights set repetition, confusion, is not conducive to really establish environmental rights. Therefore, the environment is only right to damages based on tort to a constant only. In the study of the current international situation, development trend of environmental rights, environmental law in the European countries in general can be found on the personal property rights is strictly prohibited terms, there are countless about permits, licenses, quotas, time and space restrictions, environmental assessment and other aspects of legal provisions. These restrictions and prohibitions set terms, that by limiting the rights of personal property rights to achieve the shared goal of enhancing the environment. The effect of these restrictive provisions, its main goal is to restrict individual private rights through but will maximize social welfare, protection of private rights are not even out of the private rights of the environment right intentions, and some scholars have even proposed "Environmental Utopia" that is, in the law of humanity, given in addition to other species other than humans to equal legal status and the same effective protection of the right to practice their environment, in this case, but also the simple right to private rights of the environment do? Therefore, the current environment is not yet mature private law rights in the face of many practical problems Shihai can not solve disputes. Further to the above discussion, the environment is largely private law right to want to establish a preventive mechanism to compensate for the past, "Tort Liability Act" set forth in the environmental tort only after the damage occurred only remedy defects, while I hope by means of environmental rights will be placed side by side with property rights and other private rights or similar position, in order to protect them from the positive legislation. However, if placed in the right environment, like property with private property rights, in order to help market forces to self-regulation interests, to achieve the purpose of maximizing utility, in fact, is not feasible. Though the market is efficient, but also the emergence of regular "market failure", environmental resources as a public good (public goods), does not have the exclusive consumption, and the cost of such consumption is usually low or unpaid . This characteristic of environmental resources will cause demand and supply through the market mechanism can not automatically adapt to each other's problems, and environmental problems per se are "externalities", without administrative intervention in the case it will hinder market efficiency and thus counterproductive. Therefore, the right to private law in the environment could not be molded case, in the right environment under public law, it should be how to make up for their shortcomings, has become a widely discussed academic issues. The existing foundation, public interest litigation and administrative course of two relatively appropriate way, but there are still some of its own shortcomings, such as procedural law, public interest litigation body awkward, because civil prosecution qualification first must be "with a direct interest in the case," and public interest litigation is often the prosecution is in the public interest litigation. Moreover, in many no specific conditions, is difficult to unify criteria of trials, the courts often order by the judgment against the prosecution, such as the Purple Mountain Observatory in Nanjing to build the case of non-compliance. The administration also there are some loopholes, such as digging caterpillar fungus, simply pay a fee, on sustainable mining, the nature of its damage to the environment has not changed. On this basis, I believe that further establish and improve the two systems so that normal operation and play a role, rather than seeking the environmental rights of private law is more appropriate. In this context, the introduction of utilitarian value measurement principles for conflict resolution, has a very important reference value.