公共利益由于自身的抽象性、动态性和不确定性的特点,使得对其法律界定的研究一直是学界的热点和难点问题。我国虽然有很多法律、法规都涉及公共利益,但一直都未给出明晰的界定,即使是刚刚出台的、将公共利益与私人利益的平等保护贯穿始终的《物权法》,在公共利益的界定方面也未能有所突破,给实践中的行政执法和司法工作都增加了难度。考察世界其他国家和地区对公共利益的法律界定,主要采纳两种方式,即概括式和列举式。这两种界定方式孰优孰劣,本文认为他们利弊参半,因而建议我国分别吸收二者的可取之处,走出一条适合我国国情的公共利益法律界定之路。 Due to its own abstract, dynamic and uncertainty characteristics, the public interest has made the research on its legal definition a hot and difficult issue in the academic circle. Although many laws and regulations are involved in the public interest in our country, we have not given a clear definition. Even the just introduced, the equal protection of public and private interests runs through the “Property Law”, and in the definition of public interest Also failed to make any breakthroughs, which has added difficulty to the administrative law enforcement and judicial work in practice. In examining the legal definition of public interest in other countries and regions in the world, two major approaches are adopted, namely generalization and enumeration. The two methods of determining which one is better and worse, the paper believes that they have mixed advantages and disadvantages, and thus suggest that China should absorb the merits of the two, respectively, out of a suitable for our national conditions defined by the law of public interest.