For Immediate Release
September 5, 2007

The Asahi Glass Foundation Announces Results of the 16th Annual“Questionnaire on Environmental Problems and the Survival of Humankind”
zzzz

The average time on the Environmental Doomsday Clock advanced to its furthest point since the survey
started in 1992, placing the time past 9:30 for the first time.
Seventy percent of respondents pointed to global warming as the reason for their response on theEnvironmental Doomsday Clock.
When considering a post-2012 regulatory framework, half of the respondents stated, “a new structure will
be in place where in addition to developed countries including the United States and Australia, major
developing countries will participate.”
As a long-term global warming strategy, more than 90 percent of respondents stated the need to reducegreenhouse gas emissions by more than 50 percent from current levels.

The Asahi Glass Foundation (Chairman: Hiromichi Seya) has conducted surveys with environmental experts
around the world each year since 1992. This year, the Foundation received 715 responses from 96 countries; thefollowing are the major findings of the survey. (Please refer to the attached appendix for details on the survey
and this year’s results.)

1. Awareness of the Crisis Facing Human Survival—The Environmental Doomsday Clockz The average time for all respondents was 9:31. This represents a 14-minute advancement from last year
and the highest sense of crisis since the survey started.
z In Japan, the average time was 9:34, an advancement of 19 minutes from last year.
z The needle advanced in all regions except for the Middle East and Asia. The overseas time was 9:28, a9-minute advancement from last year.
0：01～3：00
Barely concerned

9：01～12：00Extremely concerned

1220071212993（＋14min） (N=715)

1293

666

7：49

9：04

9：17

1992 (N=1,054)

1997

2006

(N=595)93

3
6

6：01～9：00
Fairly concerned(N=638)Fig. 1 Environmental Doomsday Clock

3：01～6：00
Slightly concerned

9：31

12912123
63

99

Eastern Europe &f-Soviet Union

69(+13)

6Japan

12

9:34

9:20

WesternEurope12

9:23(+15)

912Middle
East

3
63
6

9:41(-24)

USA &Canada(+19)

9:40

12(+22)9Asia

9:10(-7)363969123612393Africa

6

10:02(+30)

Oceania

OverseasAve.

9:28(+9)

10:27(+69)

Fig. 2 Environmental Doomsday Clock – by Region

11293
6LatinAmerica

9:38(+7)

z

When marking the doomsday clock, “global warming” was the main environmental condition of concern
cited most frequently by respondents overall.
Compared to last year’s survey, “global warming” rose by six points in Japan, and eight points overseas,and seven points overall.
Whereas the percentage of respondents who selected “global warming” reached 80 percent in developed
regions (Japan, Western Europe, United States & Canada, Asian Four), the rate only reached 60 percent indeveloping regions (Latin America, Africa, Rest of Asia).

zz-10-8-6-4-20246810Env ironm ent inGenera l
Globa l Wa r m ing
Air, Wa ter Pollut ion
Wa ter S hor ta ge, FoodDecrea se in
Biodiversit ly
Lifesty le, Wast e
Relat ion to Economy
and Ta dePopula tion, Pov er ty
Ot hers
Unknown

Fig.3 Items considered in deciding the time ‐ Increase from last year(2007－2006）
Table 1 Items considered in deciding the timeJapanUnitedWesternStates &Europe
CanadaAsian
Four

RestofAsia

Latin
America

AfricaOceania

EasternEurope &Former
SovietUnion

MiddleEastOverseas DevelopeTotald Region

DevelopingRegion

Others

Total

Environmental Problem inGeneral

29

1721

925

1720

630

29

20

25

22

23

24

Global Warming

80

70

70

94

57

69

66

78

53

82

68

79

61

68

73

Air, Water, River and Ocean
Pollution

172630

47

46

31

26

44

57

35

38

2239

48

28

Water Shortage, Waste Problem

45

51

3635

31

3154

39

203536

44

36

2940

Deforestation, Desertification,
Loss of Biodiversity

4940

44

7149

47

57

445324494950

4349

Lifestyle Change, Waste
Problems

23

21

31

922

33

1122371223

232226

23

Environmental Problem in
relation to Economy and Trade

13919

913

22

3630

013

13

13

15

13

Population and Poverty Problems

1836

36

21

16

39

31

22

20

59

28

23

24

31

24

Others

519

4

3

400

110

6

562

55

Unknown

12

10

8

3

9

600

4

1

723(％)

2. Global Warming
Post-2012 Regulatory Frameworkz In considering the post-2012 regulatory framework, half of the respondents, both from Japan and overall,stated, “a new structure will be in place where in addition to developed countries including the UnitedStates and Australia, major developing countries will participate.”z While 12 percent of respondents overall selected “There will be a new regulatory framework in which allof the countries of the world will participate,” only 5 percent of Japanese respondents made this selection.

2

Japan [N=322]
5%

Total [N=715]
Developed countries including US andAustralia plus major developing
countries

4% 2%

2%

12%

Only with the Kyoto Protocolcountries

20%
Only developed countries including USand Austiralia

50%

16%

All the countries in the world

57%

Others16%

16%
Unknown

Fig.4

Post-2012 Regulatory Framework

Consideration for Discrepancies between Developed and Developing Countries
z When considering the discrepancies in economic development between developed and developing
countries that should be reflected when creating a new framework, 50% of respondents, from developed,developing regions, and overall, stated “reduction obligations should be determined for each country withconsideration to its level of economic development,” making this the most frequently cited response.
z Whereas 14 percent of respondents from developing regions stated, “developing countries should not bear
reduction obligations,” only two percent of respondents from developed regions made this selection.
Developed Region

Developing Region[N=473][N=177]

Total [N=715]
6%

3%

9%

2% 3%

14%

1%

10%

13 %
49%

50%

51%

37%
31%

21%

Determine ba sed onlev el of economic
dev elopment
Developing countr ies
a ccept em ission gr owt hregula tions
Unifor m reduction
obliga tion by a llcountries
Developing countr ies
should not bea r
reduction obliga tions
UnknownConditions forFig.5
Consideration for Discrepancies between Developed and Developing Countries
ＣConditions for Developing Countries to Accept Regulationz To enable developing countries to accept some level of regulation, “require developed countries to provide
financial and technical support to enable developing countries to meet the regulations” was frequently cited,
at 53%. In particular, 66% of Japanese respondents made this selection.
020Total

4060

5380

1866

J a pa n
DevelopedRegion
DevelopingRegion

1291458

1547

1002584 39211111421484 3

Developed countries to pr ovide
financial a nd t echnical suppor t
Developed countries to accept
developing countr ies' plan
Longer r eduction period fordeveloping countr ies
Lower objectives for developing
countr ies
OthersUnknown

Other s37

28

152118Fig. 6 Conditions for Developing Countries to Accept Regulation

3Considerations for a Framework Beyond the First Commitment Period for the Kyoto Portocolz
To make the post-2012 framework as effective as possible, respondents most frequently selected “createa system for technical and financial assistance to help enable developing countries to meet theirregulatory objectives” at 63%. Responses from developed and developing regions were both consistent（％ ）with this pattern.
010203040506070
Technical and Financial assistance for developingcountries

636442

Incorporate new mechanism s3939

Account energy efficiency accom plishm ents

29
23
23

Regulate penalties for not m eeting objectives
9

Extend the period to longer than 5 years

12
Dev eloped Region
Dev eloping R egion

32Unknow nFig. 7 Considerations for a Framework Beyond the First Commitment Period for the Kyoto Portocol

There May Be a Need to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions by More Than 50%z A combined total of 92% of respondents selected either “such a reduction will unquestionably become
necessary in the near future” or “it is possible that such a reduction will become necessary in the future,”
revealing that an extremely high proportion of respondents feel the need to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions by more than 50% from current levels.
0%

10%

Tot a lJ a pa n
L a t in Amer ica

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Unquest iona bly
necessa ry

Afr ica
Asia n Four

70%

80%

90%

100%

Possibly nessa r yRest of Asia
US A & C a na daW. Eur ope

L a cks
scient ificv a lidit yOcea nia
Middle Ea stE. Eur ope & For mer S ov iet Union

Fig. 8 There May Be a Need to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions by More Than 50%

Achieving a Substantial Reductionz Responses from developed and developing regions revealed a difference of perspectives between the tworegions. While 37 percent of respondents from developed regions selected “create a new economic
structure that assigns a value to carbon,” surpassing the 29 percent who chose “create new reductionobjectives within a framework like the Kyoto Protocol and make a concerted effort towards its attainment,”
the priorities were reversed in developing regions. There, only 20 percent chose the former option, while
44 percent selected the latter.
Assign value to carbon

6%
Framework similar toKyoto Protocol
Intl. org. do not function;
rely on each country

21%

3%

Developed Region

Developing Region
5% 1%[N=473]
37%

20%
25%

Powerful intl. org. withenforcement mechanisms
Others3%

4%

Unknown

29%
Fig. 9 Achieving
4 a Substantial Reduction44%[N=177]

3. Energy Problems
zOverall, the most frequently cited source of energy to compensate for energy needs was “solar power,” at40 percent. In particular, 48 percent of respondents in Japan and more than 50 percent of respondents
from Africa, Asian Four, and Oceania chose this energy source.
(% )
709%

60
50

11%
40%
12%

Solar pow er
Biom ass pow er

40Others

10Hydraulic pow er

060

3059

56

482047

3920Africa

Wind pow er

AsianFour

Oceania

JapanMiddleEastLatin
AmericaUnknow n12%

3416%

1716

Rest of E. Europe USA &Asia& Former CanadaSoviet
Union

W.
EuropeSolar power – by Region

Fig. 10 Realistic Source of Energy to Compensate for Deficiencies
4. Progress Toward Agenda 21
z Similar to last year, the categories in which more than 50% of respondents from Japan and overseas
reported progress included “promotion of environmental education,” “activities by local governments andcitizens’ groups,” “scientific and technological contributions,” “formation of recycling systems,” and“environmental measures by industry.”z As in previous years, the percentage of respondents who reported no progress surpassed those whoreported progress in the five categories of “conservation of forest resources,” “greenhouse gas prevention
measures,” “conservation of biodiversity,” “population and poverty problems,” and “lifestyle alteration.”Once again, “lifestyle alteration” was the only category this year in which responses indicating no progress
exceeded 50%.
Significant progressSome progress
Almost no progress No progress
020

Promotion of environmental education

409

Activities by local governments and citizen's groups

60 (%)

62

6

Scientific and technological contributions

Progress

12

Formation of recycling systems

9Environmental measures by industry

812160

11153

9250

1648

Conservation of forest resouces

4Greenhouse gas prevention measures

325

Conservation of biodiversity

322

Population and poverty problems

3Lifestyle alteration

141827530331831

12No Progress

1032

1618381660

740

200 (%)

Fig. 11 Progress Toward Agenda 21

5. Lifestyle Alterationz When comparing current public awareness towards environmental problems with that of three years ago, amajority of respondents indicated improvement, with a combined 75% selecting either “awareness hasrisen” or “awareness has slightly risen.”

53% 1%1%
21%

*19%

4%

Has risen

3%

3%Stre n gth e n e n viro n me n tal e du c atio n

23%

8%

P u blic ity th ro u gh th e me dia an d o th e r me th o ds

Has slightly risen

In c e n tive s fo r pro du c ts with small
e n viro n m e n tal fo o tprin ts

No change

In tro du c tio n o f pro gre ssive pric in g base d o ne n e rgy u se s

19%

C o mpu lso ry e n viro n m e n tal e du c atio n fo r
c itiz e n s

Has slightly declined21%

Oth e rs

Has declined
Un kn o wn

55%

19%

Unknow nIn fo rm atio n disse min atio n th ro u gh th ewo rkplac e

Fig.12 Public Awareness Towards
Environmental Problems – A
Three-year Comparison

Fig.13 Most Effective Way toPromote
Transformationsin
Individual Awareness - Overall

For more information, please contact:
Shunichi Samejima, The Asahi Glass Foundation
2nd Floor, Science Plaza
5-3, Yonbancho
Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102-0081
Tel.: 03-5275-0621 Fax: 03-5275-0871
Email: post@af-infor.or.jp URL: http://www.af-info.or.jp

For more information, please contact: Shunichi Samejima

THE ASAHI GLASS FOUNDATION
2nd Floor, Science Plaza, 5-3 Yonbancho Chiyoda-ku,
Tokyo 102-0081 Japan
Phone +81-3-5275-0620 Fax +81-3-5275-0871
e-mail: post@af-info.or.jp URL: http://www.af-info.or.jp
6Appendix
z About the “Questionnaire on Environmental Problems and the Survival of Humankind”
Since 1992, the Asahi Glass Foundation has conducted surveys each year with experts around the world who areknowledgeable and are involved in environmental issues, including government officials and those innongovernmental organizations, universities and research institutions, and within industry, about variousendeavors to counter environmental problems. (The survey is supervised by Professor Akio Morishima, Special
Research Advisor of the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies and board member of the Foundation.)
The questionnaires are sent out to approximately 4,000 respondents every April and collected by end May. Afterthe responses are compiled, compared, and analyzed, the survey results are announced in September. The piechart below shows the affiliation of the questionnaire respondents in descending order. The questionnaire has
been sent out to 199 countries (including Japan) since its inception in 1992, with responses returned from 156
countries.
Number of
Number ofNPO
countries
countries
surveyed
responded
Governmen t
16%
Asia
25
2335%
Africa5343
In dustry
Oceania
15919%
Western Europe
2419
Eastern Europe &former Soviet Union
27
2030%
Middle East
16
11
Unive rsity andUSA & Canada22
rese arc h institu teLatin America
3628
Total
198155z Topics Covered in This Year’s Questionnaire
Repeat topics: “Awareness of the Crisis Facing Human Survival—The Environmental Doomsday Clock,”
Progress Toward “Agenda 21”
Main focus of this year’s questionnaire: global warming, energy problems, lifestyle alterationz Facts about This Year’s Questionnaire
Response period: Questionnaires were sent out in April 2007 with a return deadline of May 2007.
Questionnaire respondent pool: Environmental experts selected from members of government organizations,NGOs, academic and research institutions, and corporations (based on the Asahi Glass Foundation database).
Questionnaires mailed: 3,890
Questionnaires returned: 715
Response rate: 18.3%
Breakdown of respondents by region:
Region Number of responses Percent of total
Number of responses
Percent of total
Japan322
45.0
United States & Canada
476.6
Western Europe70
9.8
Asian Four34
4.8
(South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore)
Developed Regions

473

66.2

Rest of Asia
Latin America
Africa

106
36
35

14.8
5.0
4.9

Developing Regions

177

24.7

Oceania187

2.5

Eastern Europe & former Soviet Union
Middle East

30
174.2
2.4

Other65

9.1(Overseas Total)(393)(55.0)

Total

715

100.08