嚴峻的跨省水汙染形勢和薄弱的司法救濟的現狀，要求我們應當盡快作出新的製度安排，以滿足保護跨省水汙染受害人的需求。前文的分析表明，由海事法院對跨省水汙染糾紛行使管轄權，既是必要的，也是可行的。如果得以實施，將在很大程度上實現對跨省水汙染受害人更公正的司法救濟。
然而，這種改革，遠非一勞永逸。海事法院盡管在對抗地方保護主義中比普通法院更具優勢，但其經費仍然由所在地的市（副省）級或者省級財政保障，其院長、副院長、庭長、副庭長分別由所在地的省、市人大常委會任命，並不能完全與“地方保護主義”脫鉤。因此，通過進一步的製度創新切實保障司法獨立，才是我們努力的最終方向。
On the Maritime Courts' Jurisdiction over Trans-provincial Water Pollution Disputes
Yan Houfu
Abstract：Currently，the trans-provincial water pollution incident was mainly caused by the laxity in law enforcement of local governments.Due to the influence of local protectionism，the common courts，including the environmental tribunal，which were established according to administrative divisions，can hardly provide impartial judicial remedy for the victims of trans-provincial water pollution.Since the maritime courts are not established according to administrative divisions，they are better at resisting the influence of local protectionism.Furthermore，the currently institutional arrangement has provide a good foundation for maritime courts to have jurisdiction over trans-provincial water pollution disputes.Therefore，if the maritime courts are empowered to have jurisdiction over trans-provincial water pollution disputes，they can provide more impartial judicial remedy for the victims.
Key words：Trans-provincial Water Pollution Disputes，Maritime Courts，Common Courts，Jurisdiction Judicial Remedy