光污染作为物理性污染，其法律概念长期缺位，导致司法实践将其与相邻关系相混淆。以环境科学共识为事实前提，对光污染的定义、物理性污染特征及分类进行系统梳理，可为法学界定奠定基础。既有法学定义的反思与《生态环境法典》第667条定义的评析显示，法典定义虽具开创性，但存在仅关注视觉干扰、未体现物理性污染特殊属性、判断标准主观等局限。基于上述局限，概念界定应遵循三项准则：尊重环境科学认知、突出法学行为规制、保持立法前瞻性与稳定性，并在此基础上对光污染进行定义。从条文措辞、立法本意、侵害路径、适用条件、部门法归属、域外比较六个维度的辨析可知，光污染与相邻关系存在本质区别：光污染是涉及公共利益、需要前端治理的环境问题，应作为独立的环境侵权类型，在环境法框架下构建专门的法律概念与规制体系。

As a form of physical pollution, light pollution has long lacked a clear legal concept, leading to its confusion with neighboring relationships in judicial practice. Taking the consensus of environmental science as the factual premise, a systematic review of the definition, characteristics of physical pollution, and classification of light pollution can lay a foundation for its legal definition. A critical reflection on existing legal definitions and an analysis of the definition in Article 667 of the Ecological Environment Code reveal that, although the Code’s definition is pioneering, it has limitations such as focusing only on visual interference, failing to reflect the special attributes of physical pollution, and relying on subjective criteria. Given these limitations, three principles should be followed in defining the concept: respecting environmental science, highlighting the regulation of conduct in law, and maintaining legislative foresight and stability. On this basis, a definition of light pollution is proposed. A differentiation from six dimensions—textual wording, legislative intent, infringement pathway, application conditions, branch of law attribution, and comparative law—shows that light pollution is fundamentally different from neighboring relationships: light pollution is an environmental issue involving public interests and requiring front‑end governance, and should thus be established as an independent type of environmental tort, with a dedicated legal concept and regulatory system under the framework of environmental law.