Keidanren Action Plan on the Environment(Section on Global Warming Measures)
Reassessment Report
19 November 2013Keidanren
1. Overview of the Keidanren Action Plan on the Environment(1) Background
Prior to the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (EarthSummit) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992, Keidanren published its Global
Environment Charter, setting direction for companies to fulfil their social
responsibilities by making independent and proactive environmental protection efforts.
In 1996 we issued the Keidanren Appeal on Environment, announcing the preparationof industry-specific independent action plans. Before the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol,
these plans were embodied in the Keidanren Action Plan on the Environment (Sectionon Global Warming Measures) announced in June 1997 (hereinafter, “Keidanren ActionPlan”).
(2) Key Features (Constant Progress)(a) Broad initiative encompassing the Japanese business community
The Keidanren Action Plan was launched as a broad initiative with participation by 37
industries encompassing manufacturing, energy, distribution, transport, construction,trade, and insurance. The number of industries taking part gradually increased, reaching
61 by fiscal 2008. In formulating the plan, Keidanren set a uniform target of“endeavouring to reduce CO2 emissions from the industrial and energy-conversion
sectors to below the level of fiscal 1990 by fiscal 2010.”1 The CO2 emissions of the 28
industries from the industrial and energy-conversion sectors taking part in the Fiscal
1998 Follow-up (performance in fiscal 1997) accounted for about 42% of all CO2
emissions in Japan and around 76% of total emissions from Japan’s industrial andenergy-conversion sectors in fiscal 1990.2 This high coverage rate is evidence of the1In the Fiscal 2007 Follow-up (performance in fiscal 2006), the objective was changed to“achieving the target level as an average over the five years of the Kyoto Protocol first commitment
period (fiscal 2008–2012)” with a view to further contributing to achievement of Japan’s Kyoto
Protocol commitment (a 6% reduction from the 1990 level during the first commitment period).
2
In the base year of fiscal 1990, the CO2 emissions of the 34 industries from the industrial andenergy-conversion sectors taking part in the Fiscal 2013 Follow-up (performance in fiscal 2012)were 505.51 million t-CO2, which accounted for about 44% of Japan’s total emissions of 1,141.2
million t-CO2 in fiscal 1990. Moreover, they represented approximately 83% of the total amountof CO2 emitted by Japan’s industrial and energy-conversion sectors in fiscal 1990 (612.3 million

1effectiveness of the Keidanren Action Plan.
(b) Setting targets as a commitment to society
Each participating industry set its own targets at levels achievable only through theutmost efforts and strived to fulfil them.
In the process, industries that had difficulty meeting initial targets in the face ofchanging economic circumstances and a volatile business environment used domestic
credits and Kyoto Mechanisms credits to supplement their reduction efforts. Conversely,
spurred on by Keidanren’s policy that industries achieving greater reductions thaninitially forecast would set higher target levels, many industries raised their targets asthey approached their original goals.3
Thus, although the Keidanren Action Plan began as a voluntary initiative, industries
maximised their efforts, regarding the plan as a commitment to society.
(c) Transition of role in government climate change policy
Partly due to such industry efforts, the Guidelines of Measures to Prevent GlobalWarming adopted by the Japanese government’s Global Warming Prevention
Headquarters in March 2002 positioned the Keidanren Action Plan as one of its coreelements in aiming to achieve a balance between economic and environmental needs.
Following the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol, the Keidanren Action Plan wasacclaimed as playing a central role in industrial measures in the Kyoto Protocol Target
Achievement Plan decided by the cabinet in April 2005. The plan stated: “Theadvantages of these voluntary methods include the ability of each entity to use its
originality and ingenuity to select outstanding countermeasures, the likelihood ofincentives to attempt to reach more difficult targets, and having no procedural costs for

3t-CO2).
The following industries (listed in alphabetical order) reported raising their targets a total of 41
times: All Japan Freight Forwarders Association (twice); Association of Japanese Private Railways;
Brewers Association of Japan; Flat Glass Manufacturers Association of Japan; fourelectrical/electronics-related groups; Japan Aluminium Association; Japan Association of Rolling
Stock Industries; Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association (three times); Japan Cement
Association; Japan Chemical Industry Association; Japan Copper and Brass Association; JapanDepartment Stores Association (twice); Japan Federation of Construction Contractors; Japan
Federation of Housing Organizations; Japan Foreign Trade Council; Japan Gas Association (threetimes); Japan Mining Industry Association; Japan Paper Association (twice); Japan Rubber
Manufacturers Association (twice); Japan Sanitary Equipment Industry Association; Japan Sugar
Refiners’ Association; Japan Trucking Association; Japanese Electric Wire & Cable Makers’
Association (three times); Japanese Shipowners’ Association; KDDI; Lime ManufactureAssociation (twice); Petroleum Association of Japan; Real Estate Companies Association of Japan;
and Scheduled Airlines Association of Japan (twice).

2both the government and the implementing entity. It is expected that these advantages
will be further exploited in voluntary action plans by businesses.”
It should be noted that a system that began as an independent initiative by the business
community came to be positioned as a key pillar of government climate change policy, amodel not seen in other countries.
(d) Enhancing transparency and reliability
Through annual follow-ups, industries taking part in the Keidanren Action Plan were
held accountable for the quantitative targets they had set, specific efforts to achievethese targets, and actual results.
In 2002, Keidanren established an Evaluation Committee for the Keidanren Action Planon the Environment (hereinafter, “Evaluation Committee”) to objectively check that its
follow-up of the Keidanren Action Plan was being conducted appropriately and pointout any areas for improvement. The reports of the Evaluation Committee greatly
contributed to enhancing the reliability and transparency of the Keidanren Action Plan.
For example, comments from the Evaluation Committee noted variation amongindustries in the boundaries between businesses subject to follow-up and suggested thatindustries should go beyond simply reporting that CO2 emissions had increased ordecreased to providing qualitative explanation of the reasons for the change. In response
to such feedback, industries took specific steps to address these points in subsequent
years’ plans.
Furthermore, since the Keidanren Action Plan was positioned as a pillar of the Japanese
government’s climate change policy, progress towards achievement of targets was also
reviewed by government councils including the Industrial Structure Council and theCentral Environment Council.

2. Specific Results(1) Steady Reduction of CO2 Emissions through the Keidanren Action Plan
CO2 emissions by the 34 industries in the industrial and energy-conversion sectors thatparticipated in the Keidanren Action Plan averaged 444.47 million t-CO2 over the five
years from fiscal 2008 to 2012, a reduction of 12.1% from the fiscal 1990 level of505.51 million t-CO2 (see Figure 1).

3

Figure 1: CO 2 Emissions (34 industries in the industrial and energy-conversion sectors)(1 0,000t-CO2)
55,000Portion of reduction achieved by depreciating credits

Actual reduction

Kyoto Protocol firstcommitment period

Target level

12.1% reduction
from fiscal 1990
level
1,732
715
1,355

50,0001,542

Five-year
average level(44,447)

45,00051,871
50,551

49,165

1,256

49,41850,19648,93849,56448,04150,964
49,61345,45948,64547,19545,08640,00045,36944,30742,01635,0001990 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Notes:
1. Figures from fiscal 2008 onwards show actual reductions and credit depreciation separately.
2. Excluding credit depreciation, the five-year average (fiscal 2008–2012) was a 9.5% reduction from the fiscal 1990 level.

20112012(Fiscal year)

The greatest factor behind the results achieved by the Keidanren Action Plan was thedramatic improvement in the energy efficiency of production activities. Looking at thefactors contributing to reduction in CO2 emissions compared to fiscal 1990, as shown inFigure 2 below, we see that change in CO2 emissions per unit of production activity was
the biggest driver of reductions, both on a year-by-year basis and averaged over the fiveyears.

4Figure 2: Factors Contributing to Reduction in CO2 Emissions (average for 34
industries in the industrial and energy-conversion sectors)

(% )
10.0

Change in CO2 emissions per unit of production activity

Change in CO2 emission factor

Change in production activity

Total※

5.0

5.0
4.1
0.0

2.1

1.7
‐2.1

‐0.9

2.0
1.7

1.1

‐1.5
‐1.4

‐5.0
‐13.6
‐10.0

‐13.0

‐14.1

‐10.1

‐10.3

‐14.0

‐15.8

‐13.2
‐10.5

‐12.1

‐12.3

‐15.0
‐16.8
‐20.02008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Five‐year average

Note: Sum of items may differ from total due to rounding.

(2) World’s Highest Levels of Energy Efficiency
The international comparisons of energy efficiency in the industrial and energy
conversion sectors in Figures 3–7 below show Japan’s superior energy efficiency
compared to other countries. Japanese companies have strived to improve energy
efficiency since the two oil crises of the 1970s, and the Keidanren Action Plan
initiatives further enhanced efficiency.

Figure 3: Comparative Index of Energy Required to Produce
1 kWh of Electricity through Thermal Generation (2010)
180

140

Figure 4: Comparative Index of Energy Required toProduce 1 Ton of Steel (2010)

159

160

120

140

125
111120112

126

113

100

117

123

124

UKIndia132104

100

100
1008080
Japan
Germany
US
ChinaFranceIndia
Source: Ecofys , International Comparison of Fossil Power Efficiency and CO2Intensity (2013).

JapanKorea

Germany

China

Source: Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth.

5USFigure 5: Comparative Index of Energy Required to Produce 1
Ton of Electrolytic Caustic Soda (a chemical raw material; 2009)

120

110

100

100

Japan

Korea

103

105

107

109

109

India

US111

112

118

100

9080
China

Canada Middle
East

Western Eastern Mexico
Europe Europe

Sources: CMAI, Capacity Database (2009); and Japan Soda Industry
Association, Soda Handbook (2009).

Figure 6: Energy-Saving Potential in the Pulp and Paper Industry if
B est Available Technologies Were Introduced (GJ/t)

Figure 7: Energy-Saving Potential in the Cement Industry if Best
Available Technologies Were Introduced (GJ/t)

16

1.6

12.9

1.3

12

1.4

1.2

8.3
8

0.8

6.5

4

0.3

0.1

Japan

Germany

1

0.8

3

2.3

0

0.4

0.5

0.9

0.9

0.6

0.4

0FinlandFranceUS

CanadaRussia Worldwide

Japan

BrazilIndia

Europe

China

Korea

USWorldwide

Source: IEA, Energy Technology Perspectives 2010 .

Source: IEA, Energy Technology Perspectives 2012 .

(3) Stronger Global Warming Measures at the Industry and Company Level
Through the formulation of the Keidanren Action Plan and regular follow-up, industry
associations accumulated various data on their members’ production activities andenergy consumption, enabling them to share best practices and other valuable
information with their members. Some industries also set up meetings to discuss theKeidanren Action Plan initiatives, where those responsible for such efforts networked
and shared information. Such awareness-raising within industries and strengthening of
the PDCA cycle for global warming countermeasures at the industry and company level
were major outcomes of the Keidanren Action Plan.
(4) Promotion of Innovation (Technology Development)
In the course of formulating, implementing, evaluating, and improving their own actionplans, companies constantly worked to develop and commercialise technologies andmake their production activities more efficient, generating innovation as a result.
Leading examples include coke dry quenching (CDQ), cogeneration, heat pumps, andcombined cycle power generation.4(5) Enhanced Understanding and Recognition in the International Community
Through the Keidanren Action Plan efforts, in addition to seriously examining and

4See attachment for specific examples of technology development and deployment.

6implementing global warming countermeasures, the Japanese business community
actively communicated the outcomes of its initiatives to the United Nations and otherinternational forums. For example, at the Major Economies Business Forum on Energy
Security and Climate Change (BizMEF)5 we have expressed views on an international
climate change framework jointly with overseas business organisations and suchdiscussions influenced UN climate change negotiations.
Keidanren also endeavoured to promote understanding and recognition of Japan’sserious approach to global environmental initiatives through dialogue with ourcounterparts in other countries and by outlining the Japanese business community’scontribution to global warming countermeasures at various forums. For example, wehosted side events during COP meetings to publicise results achieved through theKeidanren Action Plan and plans for new initiatives from 2013 onwards underKeidanren’s Commitment to a Low Carbon Society.

3. Future Efforts
Initiatives undertaken to date have greatly reduced CO2 emissions from the industrial
sector. However, CO2 emissions from the residential sector and other domains continue
to rise, and there is a pressing need to achieve reductions in these areas. Overseas CO2
emissions are rising rapidly, especially in emerging countries, and Japan is able tocontribute to addressing this issue. Moreover, the international community will not beable to achieve its target of halving greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 with existing
technologies alone; there is a need to accelerate innovative technology development.
Given these realities, it is essential for the Japanese business community to continue its
efforts to reduce CO2 emissions without pause beyond fiscal 2013 and to contribute toworldwide reduction of CO2 emissions from a long-term perspective.
In December 2009 Keidanren announced its Commitment to a Low Carbon Society,setting out a shared vision, pledging “our resolve as members of the Japanese business
community to harness our technological prowess and assume an instrumental role in thedrive to halve global GHG emissions by the year 2050.” Participating industries commit
to provide society with world-leading low carbon technologies while maintaining andimproving their own levels of energy efficiency, and to formulate action plans on the5BizMEF is a partnership of major multi-sectoral business organisations including the US Chamberof Commerce and BUSINESSEUROPE, and provides a platform for advocating the views of thebusiness community in climate change negotiations. Keidanren has played a leading role in thisforum since its establishment in February 2009.

7

following four points: (a) establishment of CO2 emission reduction targets for domestic
business operations up to the year 2020, (b) strengthened cooperation with stakeholders
including consumers and customers, (c) international contribution including technology
transfer to developing countries, and (d) development of innovative technologies.
Through such efforts, Keidanren will help to achieve a balance between environmental
and economic needs by reducing CO2 emissions and encouraging innovation. We will
also reinforce our efforts to communicate the outcomes of the Japanese business
community’s proactive initiatives both domestically and internationally.

8