作者：秦天宝
作者介绍：武汉大学环境法研究所教授
出版日期：2026年8月9日
内容提要 《生态环境法典》颁布施行后，我国生态环境法律体系完成结构性重塑。立法机关采取分领域差异化整合模式，对污染防治领域实施完全法典化整合，同时对生态保护与绿色低碳发展领域采取适度法典化路径，形成法典通用规则与单行法特别规则并行的“双法源”格局。《生态环境法典》第1239条确立了适用规则，但因“其他法律”范围模糊、“具体或者进一步规定”判断标准缺失、传统法律适用规则失灵，实践中可能出现法典的基础性地位被架空、单行法越位突破法典的生态底线要求、执法司法标准不一等问题。立足我国立法构造，以生态保护与绿色低碳发展为核心场域，摒弃流于形式的法律适用方法，厘清“双法源”冲突的生成机理、适用边界和具体类型，并对《生态环境法典》第1239条展开规范性解释，可以构建“体系融贯—功能适配—层级规制”三阶分析框架，确立法典基本原则与核心制度绝对优位、单行法具体规则有限优先的适用准则，从而形成可操作的裁判与执法方案。
关键词 生态环境法典 双法源 法律适用 冲突调适 体系融贯
Abstract: Following the promulgation and entry into force of the Eco-Environment Code, China’s eco-environmental legal system has undergone a structural reshaping. The legislature has adopted a model of differentiated integration by domain. For the field of pollution prevention and control, it has implemented full codification. For the fields of ecological conservation and green and low-carbon development, it has taken a path of moderate codification, which has given rise to a dual-legal-source structure in which the general rules of the Code operate in parallel with the special rules of single-subject statutes. Article 1239 of the Eco-Environment Code establishes a rule of application. However, because the scope of ‘other laws’ is ambiguous, the criteria for identifying ‘specific or further provisions’ are absent, and the traditional rules of legal application have proven ineffective, practice may witness such issues as the hollowing-out of the Code’s foundational status, single-subject statutes overstepping their bounds to breach the Code’s ecological baseline requirements, and inconsistent enforcement and adjudication standards. Grounded in China’s legislative architecture, taking ecological conservation and green and low-carbon development as the core domain, and discarding the formulaic approaches to the application of law, this article clarifies the generative mechanism, application scope and specific types of dual-legal-source conflicts, and offers a normative interpretation of Article 1239 of the Code. It constructs a three-tier analytical framework of ‘systemic coherence—functional adaptation—hierarchical regulation’, and establishes the application principle that the Code’s basic principles and core institutions enjoy absolute priority while the specific rules of single-subject statutes enjoy limited priority, formulating operable schemes for adjudication and enforcement.