This article examines the historical evolution, contemporary dynamics, and future trajectory of China’s legal and judicial framework for pangolin protection. By reviewing over seventy years of regulatory changes, case law, and policy implementation, it outlines three distinct phases: the early emphasis on pangolins as medicinal and export resources (1949–1989); the phase of conflicted protection and utilization under regulatory expansion (1989–2020); and the post-2020 shift toward judicial activism and ecological civil litigation. We then highlight the long-standing contradiction between legislative protection and continued medicinal use, particularly the centuries-old use of pangolins and their derivatives in traditional Chinese medicine, a practice still acknowledged within certain state policies and regulatory frameworks, showing how these inconsistencies enabled persistent illegal exploitation despite regulatory controls. Through systematic analysis of public court records and case databases, the policy historical records reveal a marked increase in environmental public interest litigation since 2020. These lawsuits, often attached to criminal prosecutions, signal a transition from merely punitive approaches to restorative ones—anchored in ecological valuation of species and their services. Case studies illustrate how courts now impose not only wildlife resource loss fees, but also punitive damages and compensation for ecological service function loss. The article will elaborate in detail on the distinctions and interrelations among these types of compensation. The landmark Case No.17 also demonstrates this paradigm shift, wherein courts recognized pangolins’ role in balancing forest ecosystems. However, significant challenges persist. Valuation methodologies lack uniform standards; while the ecological value of pangolins has been recognized, their inherent value as individuals has not been emphasized within the legal system; judicial discretion varies across jurisdictions; and public interest organizations remain underutilized in litigation. Moreover, while the crackdown on organized crime succeeded in curbing mass trafficking, smaller-scale violations tied to cultural consumption for medicine use persist. The article concludes that judicial innovations, such as ecological judicial restoration bases and integration into China’s draft Ecological Environment Code, offer promising pathways forward. To enhance efficacy, it calls for standardization in ecological valuation, strengthened civil society participation, and nuanced differentiation in penal strategies between minor and serious offenses. This study ultimately positions judicial reform as the cornerstone of China’s evolving pangolin conservation strategy.
Su et al. (Mon,) studied this question.