Green Watch
A Civil Society Environmental White Paper
2019

Green Alliance Japan(GAJ)

Table of Contents

Preface 2Chapter 1. Recent Trends toward a Decarbonised Society 

4Section 1. Climate Change Issues 

4Section 2. Renewable Energy 

6Section 3. All Talk and Excessively Slow Action in Introduction of Carbon Pricing 

8Chapter 2. Emerging Issues 

10Section 1. The Issue of Plastics 

10

Section 2. The Ongoing Disaster of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident 

12Green Alliance Japan Members Involved in Green Watch 2019
Section Authors





16
18

Preface
Green Alliance Japan
1. Why “Green Alliance Japan”?

sidering the finite nature of the earth. To solve theseissues, fundamental policy changes will be needed

Nearly half a century has passed since the conveningof the United Nations Conference on the Human Envi-based on ethical, political and science-based decision-making, and for that purpose, our wisdom will
be more important to ensure the successful paradigm

ronment (Stockholm Conference, 1972), and almost aquarter of a century since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Rio de Janei-

shift of our civilisation.

ro Earth Summit,1992).

Unfortunately, fundamental policy changes have only
inched forward in Japan, as the Japanese government
continues to neglect sustainability and prioritise policies that emphasise the short-term economic growth.

Over the years, various measures have been taken to

tackle with emerging environmental issues all over theworld. These global movements as well as the enactment of the Japanese Act on Promotion of Specified
Non-profit Activities (to support the formation of a

Deeply concerned these lamentable policy trends,
environmental NPOs/NGOs in Japan have arrived at
a common understanding that, to overcome various
environmental issues and to build a democratic, fairand sustainable society based on the “environment”(the foundation for all life and human activities), it is ofvital importance to act together - going beyond thedifference of their respective missions and objectives- and to advocate together for the benefit of both thepresent and future generations.

sound civil society in Japan) became a driving force
for Japanese people to establish a number of environmental NPOs/NGOs in various parts of the country.
It also served to promote various initiatives including
environmental conservation activities at the community level or advocacy actions at the national and global
level. These NPOs/NGOs have strived to find solutions
through a diverse range of activities making full useof their expertise and their positions as independent
entities.

For these reasons, we established the Green AllianceJapan (GAJ) on 5 June 2015 to network various environmental NPOs/NGOs in Japan and to spark a great
surge in Japanese society toward a sustainable and af-

Meanwhile, however, global warming and resulting
climate change have gradually intensified, causing
serious damage around the globe. Significant biodiversity loss dubbed as the ‘sixth mass extinction’ andfluent society. We chose to work together for the conservation of the critical global environment, collating

the widespread chemical pollution has resulted in thewidespread degradation of our precious environment

knowledge and experiences accumulated to date.

- the very basis of human/social life as well as economic activities. Moreover, the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant disaster in 2011 was a wake-up callfor Japan and the rest of the world to address energy

The Alliance currently has 85 member NGOs/NPOs.

2. Major Activities● Draft possible policies that promote the transition totransition, and raised the fundamental question of
how we perceive “richness” in our current civilisation.
We now have come to a critical stage where the verya sustainable society and propose them to the generalpublicexistence of our society is being threatened.

● Make recommendations to strengthen the organisa-

tional foundation of environmental NGOs/NPOs andencourage actions

These issues stem from past values, lifestyles, technologies, socio-economic systems that we have pursued,
seeking for further economic expansion without con-● Support enhancing the policy advocacy power of environmental NGOs/NPOs2

● Disseminate information through the publication ofpolicies in Japan, we decided to publish Green Watch
and deliver it to as many stakeholders as possible be-

Green Watch: A Civic Society Environmental White Paper and other media, based on independent studies andanalysiscause we strongly believe it is necessary for people
to gain knowledge and perspectives that are different
from those of the government.

● Organise national gatherings of environmental
NGOs/NPOs, and promote international communication

Secondly, through providing information that differsfrom the perspective of the government, we hope to● Exchange information with policymakers, media,
business community, researchers, and other stakeholders

raise awareness on environmental problems and encourage people to participate in NGO/NPO activities
and act themselves for solutions. Environmental problems are issues that involve each and every one of us,● Share information with non-environmental NGOs/
NPOs and their networks that aim to build a sustainable
society, and organise collaborative activities with thembut still very few people take actions to find solutions.
In Japan, we still face many other issues of life suchas unstable employment, economic disparities, childpoverty, and education and welfare issues. Under
these pressures, people may be hesitant to take action
on environmental issues where the effects and actual value of actions are not clearly seen. However, theenvironment is the foundation for the existence of allliving creatures, our day-to-day lives, as well as socialand economic activities. As this very foundation now
faces a perilous situation, we cannot leave it all up topoliticians, bureaucrats and a limited number of experts to find solutions. All stakeholders need to havean accurate understanding of the current state of theenvironment and make appropriate contributions in

3. Publication of Green Watch
As part of its activities, GAJ, from the year of its establishment, started to compile Green Watch for two
reasons.
The first is to analyse the current state of environmental problems in Japan as well as their countermeasuresfrom a non-governmental perspective, and disseminate the analysis to a wider audience.
Each year, the government publishes an environmental white paper, Annual Report on the Environment

in Japan. This document evaluates the state of theenvironment from the government’s perspective
and explains the relevance and legality of their policy measures to the public. As such, their views dotheir respective fields. We hope that Green Watch will
spark this action.

not necessarily coincide with those of environmental
NGOs/NPOs, non-profit expert groups working on

Given the fact that ever-more serious environmental degradation emerging all over the world, and thatyoung people have recently been standing up to stop
global climate change, we wrote up the Green Watch

various environmental issues. If the difference is of no
substantial importance, it would be fine to see it asjust two differing points of view due to the differenceof the status. However, under the current situation,

2019 to convey truthful information to a diverse rangeof audience, including the young generation, so that we
can create a sustainable society where all can lead safe,
secure, and fulfilling lives. It is this truthful informationthat forms the basis for a sustainable society.

the difference cannot be overlooked because several
key contents of the government white paper may nothelp people make appropriate decisions, or mislead
their understanding/evaluation of issues, or are not inalignment with mid- to long-term national benefits.
Therefore, in order to promote sound environmental

Konoe Fujimura

3

Chapter 1
Recent Trends toward a Decarbonised Society
Section 1. Climate Change Issues
The summer of 2018 in Japan was one marked with ex-

2. Delayed Response by the Japanese Government / Trends in Corporate and Financial Institutions

treme weather events, including record-breaking heavy
rains, extreme heat, droughts, and forest fires. To mitigate
risks that have emerged as a result of intensifying climatechange, energy transition away from fossil fuels to renew-

Japan lags far behind other G7 countries to submit long-able sources has been taking place at an unprecedented

term low greenhouse gas emission development strate-

rate all over the world. However, in Japan, although green-gies to the secretariat of the United Nations Framework

house gas emissions such as CO2 have decreased slightly

Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) by 2020 in order

to 1.294 billion tonnes in 2017 (down 1.0% from the pre-to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement. The Japanese

vious fiscal year), no transformative measures have been

government set up a series of expert meetings to puttaken at the national level, resulting in almost no change

together a governmental draft proposal for a “long-term

in emissions. (In fact, compared to the Kyoto Protocol

strategy” in April 2019, but there has been criticism thatbaseline FY 1990 levels, emissions have increased by 1.5%.)

the issue of “decarbonisation” was not taken up and thatthe draft proposal emerged from a process that lacked

1. Global Trends since the Paris Agreement and
COP24transparency.

In October 2018, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

On the flip side, movements by the business community

have been attracting attention, including the launch of

Change (IPCC) published its Special Report entitled “Global

the Japan Climate Initiative (JCI), a network of organiza-

Warming of 1.5°C”. According to this report, global tem-tions that are voicing their intention to voluntarily achieve

peratures have already risen about 1°C from pre-industrial

the goals of the Paris Agreement. Furthermore, the Japanlevels and are expected to reach 1.5°C by about 2040 at

Climate Leaders’ Partnership also issued a proposal on

the current pace. The report also revealed that in order toJapan’s “long-term growth strategy under the Paris Agree-

keep temperature rise within the 1.5°C target, global net

ment,” calling for the government to “articulate the goal

anthropogenic CO2 emissions must be reduced by aboutof zero domestic greenhouse gas emissions by 2050” .

45% by 2030 and reach net zero by around 2050.

Major banks in Japan, such as Mitsubishi UFJ Finan-

At COP24 in December 2018, national governments

cial Group, Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, andwere called on to “step up ambition” in response to theMizuho Financial Group, have also launched sectoral pol-agreement on the implementation guidelines of the Paris

icies for coal power generation. However, environmental

Agreement, as well as the in the IPCC 1.5°C Special Re-

NGOs point out that there are loopholes in these policies,

port and during the Talanoa Dialogue, which evaluatedproviding exceptions that enable financing.

the progress of global warming countermeasures aroundthe world. Many have expressed that moving away from

Insurance companies, such as Dai-ichi Life, Nippon Life,

coal is essential to achieving the “1.5°C target”. Waves ofand Meiji Yasuda Life, have announced that they would

efforts to create a carbon-free society are stronger thancease loans for project finance related to coal power gen-ever, as the world gradually shifts away from coal and oth-eration. Of these, Nippon Life’s policy is the most in-depth

er fossil fuels. Yet, still unable to make a dramatic transi-in that it prohibits project finance, both in Japan and over-tion away from coal, Japan kept a low profile and seemedseas. However, projects in Japan are exceptions under theindifferent at the conference.

4

policy of Dai-ichi Life. Further, Meiji Yasuda Life accepts

essential to move away from the use of fossil fuels as soon

plants (USC) as an exception to their lending policy, andout, which obviously means halting the construction ofas possible. Coal power in particular needs to be phased

applications for new loans for coal-fired ultra-supercriticalnew coal plants and also strategically decommissioning

similar to Japan’s three major banks, also allows loans toexisting plants. Above all, developed countries are expect-coal power plants in the country.

ed to completely phase out coal power plants by 2030. It

is imperative that Japan cancel all current plans and newWithin the international community, it is said that theconstruction, as well as retire all existing coal power plants

reason why financial institutions in Japan cannot make a

by 2030.

bold statement on “decarbonising” policies is that the national government itself promotes the use of coal power.

However, environmental NGOs are recommending that

According to the Japan 2030 Coal Phase-Out Plan com-of the government.

the existing coal-fired power plants are to be abolished by

piled by the Kiko Network in November 2018, if all 117 offinancial institutions issue decarbonisation policies ahead

2030, the Plan is entirely achievable without threatening

3. Issues with the New Construction of Coal
Power Plants, Signalling Changes

Japan’s electrical power supply and without relying on

nuclear power, taking into account the available capacity

Since 2012, plans have emerged to construct 50 coal pow-of liquefied natural gas (LNG) and other power generation

tion plans are starting to be seen amid the increasingly

improvements in energy efficiency.

movements by residents and communities, increased

The number of countries, mainly European countries andplants, the rapidly accelerating global trend towards de-power plants, is on the rise. Japan must also decide tooptions, as well as the spread of renewable energy ander units in Japan. However, signs of change in construcunfavourable winds against coal power, such as protest
movements for injunction proceedings on coal power

Canada, that are declaring their intent to phase out coalcarbonisation, and international divestment.

phase out coal power by 2030, formulate a phase-out

As of 11 March 2019, 13 units out of the 50 units plannedtargets to be consistent with the goals of the Paris Agree-plan, and increase its greenhouse gas emission reduction
ment.

for new construction identified in 2012 and onwards, havebeen cancelled or converted to alternative fuels such as

biomass. In the case of Chiba Prefecture, construction

Figure 1.1.1

plans for the Soga coal power plant in Chiba City weresuspended in December 2018, followed by the cancella-tion of the construction plans for the Chiba Sodegauracoal power plant in Sodegaura city in January 2019. Thismeans that all three new coal power projects in the pre-fecture (in the cities of Chiba, Sodegaura, and Ichihara (in2017)) have been suspended.

On the other hand, 12 units below 112 MW that are notsubject to environmental impact assessment (EIA) process

are still in operation. Therefore, if the remaining 25 units
are subsequently constructed and put into operation, theannual CO2 emissions will hover at around 85.108 million

sub-C (existing)sub-C (new)USC (existing)

USC (new)SC (existing)

Sub-C: coal-fired subcritical plants (the least efficient)
SC: coal-fired supercritical plants
USC: coal-fired ultra-supercritical plants

tonnes. We need to keep a close watch on this trend go-

ing forward.

In order to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement, it isSource: Kiko Network

5Section 2. Renewable Energy
Starting with solar and geothermal, renewable energies

of renewable energy around the world and the large wave

only in developed countries, but across the entire world.

ised by the Paris Agreement. The plan does not appear toto promote the use of 100% renewable energy as galvan-

are being introduced as sustainable forms of energy, notbe able to support various initiatives for energy transition

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

triggered by the 2011 disaster.

(SDGs), agreed upon in September 2015, also emphasise
the use of renewable energy, as evident in Goal 7 (Afford-

able and Clean Energy). The Paris Agreement, adopted

The current administration claims that it is considering all

sation, has galvanised efforts toward 100% renewable

the long-term 2050 target (an 80% reduction in green-

decarbonisation technologies moving forward towards

soon after to address climate change through decarboni-house gas emissions, no base year). However, it seems

energy. While efforts to transition to renewable energy inthat the intentions of industries that were late to begin

Japan have finally started to gain ground after the Great

cutting their carbon emissions are overly considered, andEast Japan Earthquake (on 11 March 2011), many issues

unrealistically high expectations are placed on the future

have since emerged.

technological developments of Japanese companies. In

this way, they may be choosing deliberately to disregard

The share of renewable energy in Japan was about 10%

the currently available policies and technologies that have

until 2010, but, by 2018, the share of renewable energy in1

already proven their efficacy, including the full-scale in-total domestic power generation grew to about 17%. This2

troduction of renewable energies with ambitiously highcame as a consequence of the adoption of the Feed-intargets, extensive energy-saving schemes, and the full-

Tariff (FIT) scheme in July 2012, which led to the introduc-scale introduction of carbon pricing. This approach hastion of renewable energy, mainly solar power. Meanwhile,contributed to further delays in response.

the March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and the nuclear accident at Tokyo Electric Power Company’s Fukushi-

ma Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant kept nuclear power in FY

Based on the premise of a nuclear-free society, it is also

as of 2018. On the other hand, although the percentage

tem infrastructure, which has not moved forward because

necessary to accelerate investment in electric power sys-2014 at 0%, and this value has been consistently low (5%),

of the vested interests of existing electric power com-of electricity generated through fossil fuels was over 90%

panies. There is also an urgent need to stop the rush to

in FY 2012, power generation from fossil fuels has fallen

construct coal power plants, which tramples on climate

since FY 2013 due to a decrease in the overall amount ofchange countermeasures aiming to reach the target of apower generated in the country and as well as an increase

less than 1.5°C rise in global temperatures. Not limiting its

in renewable energy. Consequently, CO2 emissions havegenerally declined since FY 2014. Since FY 2013, the grossefforts to the current long-term 2050 target, the nationaldomestic product (GDP) has risen steadily, suggesting thatand local governments, as well as companies are ultimate-

Japan may also be experiencing decoupling, the phenom-

ly expected to set a zero emissions target for greenhouseenon in which the economy continues to grow in spite ofgas emissions and an energy mix of 100% renewables.

decreasing CO2 emissions and generated power.

With the full-scale dissemination of renewable energy,

Japan’s current 2030 interim target (aiming towards a

it will be necessary to address environmental impacts

26% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from FY 2013in terms of land use and issues with consensus build-levels) is based on the energy mix target set in 2015 bying head-on. Problems regarding the development of

METI, prior to the Paris Agreement. To achieve this target,

large-scale solar power generation (“mega-solar”) haveJapan aims to promptly reduce its dependency on nuclear

emerged throughout the country. The conversion of farm-

power as much as possible and to move ahead with ef-

land for development is regulated from the perspective

forts towards using renewable energy as a major powerthat the land will be used for a different purpose thansource. However, the plan does not reflect the rapid rise

its original intent. Therefore, development is currently

being carried out for mega-solar projects on forest land,

1: Including large-scale hydropower.
2: Including private power generation.
6

on which it is relatively easy to do development projects.

regulations were made less stringent, which allowed proj-

conservation, global environmental conservation, pre-(changed from three years to ten years) for temporary

However, forests play a diverse set of roles in biodiversity

ects that meet certain criteria to receive longer permits

vention of sediment disaster and soil conservation, andland use conversion.

conservation of watersheds forests and Satoyama. Current
regulations and policies do not adequately consider the

As for biomass power, by the end of FY 2016, more thanconcerns that land conversion will be driven forward with-woody material,’ including agricultural residue. However,vast ecosystem services that forests provide, which raises

90% accredited were under the fuel category of ‘generalout sufficient regard for the diverse functions of forests.

the majority of this is biomass such as PKS (palm kernel

shells) and palm oil imported from Southeast Asia, cre-

It is also necessary to think about the area’s industrial

ating major sustainability concerns in fuel procurement.

and economic development, as well as how land is used

These materials are accredited as agricultural residue, notlong-term in order to promote smooth social consensus

woody biomass. Under the revised FIT law, all biomassbuilding between local residents and local governments.

power plants need to meet the fuel procurement methods

In particular, it is important for local governments to cre-defined in business plan formulation guidelines. The law

ate a “place” where the local residents and stakeholders

further requires the ensured legality and traceability of

can engage and to formulate ordinances related to thefuel purchased from abroad. For palm oil in particular, adevelopment of power generation projects and consensus

new category, ‘liquid fuel’, was established in FY 2018 andbuilding guidelines. It is crucial for local governments toa bidding system has been adopted for the accreditation

promote projects led by local residents and companiesof all new facilities. (As for ‘general woody material’, facili-(“community power”) and to spend enough time to ex-ties with at least 10,000 kW electricity generation capacity

plain and discuss together with local companies, financial

are subject to bidding.)

institutions (such as credit unions and banks), and residents in these “places.”

Figure 1.2.1

In Japan, under the Cropland Act (1952), farmland is protected as a valuable resource for individuals and com-munities of today and tomorrow, because they form thebasis of agricultural production, as well as the culture,landscape and lifestyles of regions. For this reason, theuse of farmland for any other purpose has been severely
restricted, although, due to the decrease in the number offarmers and the increase in abandoned farmland, meth-ods of conserving farmland are being revisited in recent
years. Meanwhile, the introduction of “Agrivoltaics3” hasbeen promoted as a new method for renewable energy

projects to co-exist alongside the conservation of farm-land and continued practice of farming. Developed in Chi-

Renewable Energy (excluding Large-Scale Hydropower)

nationwide, and, as of the end of March 2017, about 1,200

Nuclear Energyba Prefecture after 2011, this system has been introduced

Large-Scale Hydropower

projects have been approved for implementation. This

Thermal Energy (Fossil Fuels)

system, which implements solar power generation proj-

Renewable Energy (%totall)ects on the same land that will continue to be used for

Nuclear Energy (%totall)

agriculture, is being carried out with various restrictions

Thermal Energy (Fossil Fuels) (%totall)and conditions stipulated by the Ministry of Agriculture,

Source: Created based on data from the Agency for
Natural Resources and Energy

Forestry and Fisheries in Japan. However, in May 2018, the3: Refers to “photovoltaic agriculture,” which is the practice of combining photovoltaic power generation and agriculture on the same land.
7Section 3.
All Talk and Excessively Slow Action in Introduction of Carbon Pricing
billion tonnes). It is clear that substantial reduction of CO2

With extreme weather events continuing unabated aroundthe world, record-setting heat and heavy rains have start-

emissions as required by the Paris Agreement will not

climate change has become reality. It is amid this stateinclude voluntary efforts by companies and enthusiastic

be possible only through conventional activities, which

ed to be observed in various areas of Japan, a sign thatenergy-saving actions by individuals, as well as the cur-of affairs that the world has started taking action under

rent Climate Change Tax. If only these activities continue,

the Paris Agreement in order to make net-zero emissions

it seems that mitigating the intensity of various extremea reality. With the introduction of carbon pricing (CP) in

weather events associated with climate change will be

particular, some progresses has been observed, provingvery difficult.

evidence for CP’s effectiveness. This economic scheme of
revealing the cost of carbon emissions has been discussed

in Japan for almost 30 years, and from 2012, an environ-

In June 2016, the Ministry of the Environment set up a

mitigation and prevention of global warming (Climate

Japan and published a report in March 2018. The report“Panel of Experts” to consider how CP should work inment tax has been introduced as a tax for climate change

concluded that explicit CP would be the most effective

Change Tax). However, this tax rate, a modest JPY289

means required to achieve reduction targets. However, at

per tCO2, is excessively low compared to those in othera “Subcommittee on Utilisation of CP” held after the publi-

countries that have introduced a carbon tax, calling into

cation of this report, industry members came out with thequestion the actual effect of Japan’s environment tax on

outdated view that “discussions with a foregone conclu-

reducing CO2 emissions. For this reason, the Ministry ofsion on the introduction of CP should be avoided” and thethe Environment Japan has started to re-examine the pol-Ministry of the Environment became preoccupied in deal-icy for the full-fledged introduction of CP, but the inces-ing with this view. Further, the Japan’s Long-term Strategy

sant debate continues with no path for effective climate

under the Paris Agreement, which was announced in Junechange mitigation/global warming prevention measures

2019, was limited to including short statements that did

in sight.

not even touch on the past discussions on CP, but leaving

it as a matter “under continued consideration”, due to the

As mentioned, the Japanese government has discussed

fact that the Ministry of the Environment has less clout

CP over many years. Therefore, environmental NPOs/

than the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry which is

NGOs and experts in climate change problems believe

backed by the business community. This might bring inev-

that the issues related to CP have already been discussed

itable criticism from the rest of the world.

at length, contending that the only issue that remains is
implementation. As such, they have lobbied the government to begin implementing this scheme. However, there

However, the industrial community in Japan is not neces-

especially energy-intensive industries such as steel andare viewing decarbonisation as a business opportunity.

sarily monolithic, and an increasing number of companies

has been consistently strong opposition from industries,

The Japan Climate Leaders’ Partnership (JCLP), a corporate

electric power. Even the current administration, which hasgroup that aims to realise a sustainable, decarbonised

focussed on short-term economic policies, places a heavysociety, announced recommendations for Japan’s Long-

weight on the intentions of these wealthy and politicalterm Strategy in November 2018. The recommendations

powerhouse industries. In consequence, this has derailed

include a proposal to introduce CP and develop decar-

the introduction of CP in this country.

bonised infrastructure through public investment.

Under these circumstances, Japan’s greenhouse gas emissions in recent decades have hardly decreased; in FY2017,

As the world speeds towards a decarbonised society, thedown 1% from the previous fiscal year, but slightly high-od, is a mistake that will leave industries in Japan, as wellcontinued opposition to CP, an effective reduction meth-greenhouse gas emissions totalled 1.292 billion tonnes,

as Japanese society as a whole and even future genera-er than the 1990 base year for the Kyoto Protocol (1.272

8

tions, with a large bill that cannot be paid back. The Minis-

ance Japan (GAJ) maintains that taking actions on climate

have a policy in place to support the many companies

able society that allows all people to lead safe, secure, andchange issues is critically important in building a sustain-

try of the Environment and the Government of Japan mustthat are striving to positively take the lead in developing afulfilling lives. GAJ believes that CP is a solution. Further-

decarbonised society, instead of giving excessive conces-more, it is carbon tax in particular that is essential, as itsions to some industries that are opposed to this idea.

promotes behavioural changes in every corner of society,including in citizens. The GAJ recommendations can befound below.

In response to these lamentable situations, Green Alli-

Proposals on Early Introduction of Carbon Tax
to Halt Climate Change and Promote Changes in Social Structures
1. Basic Points● Disaster recovery projects due to extreme weather aswell as maintenance of aging infrastructure, in particular, school and public facilities, social infrastructure andpublic transportation that will effectively bring about
energy use reduction.

● A Carbon Tax to promote change in social structure
including the current economic and tax systems, as wellas to provide a solution to climate change issues by reducing CO2, and thereby contribute to building sustain-● The promotion of school education for the creationof a sustainable society, and related capacity development in the political, philosophical, technical and scientific fields.

able, decarbonised society● Based on the polluter-pays principle, the Tax to belevied in a fair and equitable manner, rewarding environmentally correct behaviours● The support for technological development/researchand capacity development for small- and medium-sizedenterprises (SMEs) that will contribute to the realizationof a low-carbon society.

● The Tax to be fair and equitable for all people, having
less burden for the socially vulnerable and future generations● The tax rate to be set JPY5,000 per tCO2 or higher by(2) The Carbon Tax should be distributed more to local

2030 at the latest, with an eye on its CO2 reduction ef-

communities so as to revitalise civic society organisations.

fects as well as on global trends

It also should be applied to mitigation, adaptation and di-● The objective of the Carbon Tax to be clearly definedas the tax for the well-being of all citizens and sustainability of society. Before the actual implementation of
the Tax, an extensive national debate to be developed
inviting future generations at all stages

saster prevention activities where the local governments,
residents and companies play key roles.

(3) The Tax can also be applied for the development andmaintenance of transmission grids and environmental

conservation in installation areas as a way to promote re-● To avoid wasteful spending, the Tax to ensure transparency of its levying and allocating processes and how
the Tax is used.

newable energy.

【 Miscellaneous Issue of the CO2 Emission Reduction 】

2. Use of Carbon Tax

The emission trading system, another measure for CO2(1) The Carbon Tax itself has a significant impact on reduc-emission reduction, set a target of fifteen percent (15%) of

ing CO2 emissions. Therefore, the Tax, as a climate change

global CO2 emissions (with an expected increase to 20%

countermeasure, should be used in such ways as a large

in 2020). Particularly in Japan, large emitters for which

number of people can feel the merit of the tax and wel-

this scheme applies account for over 62% of the country’s

come its introduction.

greenhouse gas emissions (based on a study conducted

Specifically, the Tax should be applied to the following:by the Kiko Network). To utilise this system effectively, it

will be essential to reduce total emissions by setting emis-● The social welfare sector, such as medical and educational support and tax returns for low-income earners,
personal income tax reductions and alleviating the costof social security.

sion caps. Stakeholders should engage in urgent dialogue
to discuss the introduction of such regulations.

9Chapter 2
Emerging Issues
Section 1. The Issue of Plastics
1. Challenges for Japan’s “Resource Circulation
Strategy for Plastics”

Because of this, while only a century has passed since it

was first invented, plastic has appeared at every corner

In recent years, the global-scale pollution of marine plas-of our modern-day lives. However, these advantages areof intense attention on the international stage. Marine

main concerning issues of plastic.

and G20. The Ocean Plastics Charter was proposed at the① One benefit of plastic is that it is “cheap and light-

Japan and the United States—were missing. In Japan, theeasily be thrown away. Combined with plastic’s durability

is being promoted under the Basic Act for Establishing abring about the current issue of marine plastic litter. Re-

and Packaging Recycling Law. However, with a recycling

further and turn into microplastics, which stay in the en-

58.0%, it is difficult to say that true resource circulation ischemical substances such as polychlorinated biphenyls

sold in 2017, the current reality is that emission control

may eventually be adversely affected via the food chain,actually disadvantages in disguise. The following are thetic litter has reached a critical level and become the focus

plastic litter has also become a policy issue for the G7

G7 Charlevoix Summit in 2018, but two signatures—fromweight,” but this can equally be a drawback in that it canrecycling of plastic waste from containers and packaging(resistance to water, acids, and alkalis), these properties

Sound Material-Cycle Society, as well as the Containers

cently, it has been found that that plastics break down

rate of 27.8% in contrast to a thermal recovery rate ofvironment for a long time and become a carrier for toxic

being practiced. In addition, with 22.7 billion PET bottles(PCBs). Furthermore, it is becoming clear that ecosystems

has not progressed.

as microplastics are absorbed by wildlife. The environ-

In August 2018, after the Charlevoix Summit, the Ministryilar in nature to persistent organic pollutants (POPs), suchthe “Resource Circulation Strategy for Plastics” (hereinafter

has become a serious challenge that should not be over-egy” on 31 May 2019. However, this “Strategy” (1) does

unless we improve on the properties of plastic or discover

should deal with plastic; (2) includes no specific measures

we have no choice but to steer ourselves in the direction

toxic chemical substances; and (4) legitimises the current

reducing plastic, in the same way that we have restrictions

mental impact of plastic as mentioned above is very sim-of the Environment in Japan belatedly started formulatingas PCBs, and despite the many advantages, their impact

referred to as the “Strategy”), finally drawing up the “Strat-

looked when creating a sustainable society. Therefore,

not consider the basic question of how the human racea method to completely prevent release into the oceans,

to control emissions; (3) lacks regulations on eliminatingof completely eliminating or, at the very least, significantly

situation where thermal recovery significantly exceeds re-on POPs. This is a material that has gone beyond the con-cycling.

trol of humans.

2. How the human race should cope with“plastic”?

② Another benefit of plastic—that it has a high degree ofplasticity and is easy to process—is possible because of
the various additives that plastics contain. A considerable

Plastic is the human race’s first man-made material and it

amount of these additives are endocrine-disrupting toxic

has a number of benefits: it is lightweight, water resistant,chemicals. There is a risk that we are exposed to theseand has a high degree of plasticity. Many types of plastic

toxic chemical substances when they dissolve out of plas-

are also highly resistant to acids and alkalis, and cheap.

tic products. In addition, they may be absorbed by wildlife

10when the substances decompose in seawater after be-② The strategy should prompt the enactment of new leg-for humans and ecosystems. Every time plastic products

The immediate enactment and revision of the following

islation and the revision of existing laws and regulations.

coming marine litter. This may have adverse consequences

laws should be implemented:

are recycled, the toxic chemical substances contained inthese products are released into the environment. There-

a. Revision of the Basic Act for Establishing a Sound Material-Cycle Society
It should be clearly stated that the aim is not only thecreation of a sound material-cycle society, but also a
low-carbon and plastic-free society. The act should be
revised to establish the basic principles and measures ofa circular economy, including production and disposal
methods.

fore, regulations to eliminate toxic chemical substances

are essential, not only for plastic raw materials, but also
for additives, including during the recycling stage.

③ Many plastics are made from petroleum, which is a
fossil fuel. At the very least, plastics made from petroleum

are incompatible with efforts to create a decarbonised

b. Revision of the Containers and Packaging Recycling
Lawsociety. Therefore, petroleum-derived plastics should be

abolished in principle, and at the very least, single-use(i) Relax collection requirements for local governments and strengthen collection requirements forbusiness operators based on the extended producer
responsibility (EPR) principle

plastics should be reduced on a significant scale.

3. Recommendations for Strategies to Dealwith Plastics(ii) Ban the sale of PET-bottled drinking water and introduce a deposit system

While Japan may have been slow to respond, it now needs
to make up for lost time. At the same time, from the per-(iii) Require that all plastic shopping bags be available only at an additional charge by 2020 and aim toachieve a refusal rate of 90% by 2025

spective of a circular economy, Japan must aim to develop
new and alternative products, and create new systems byutilizing its technological capabilities. This will also con-(iv) Evaluate the need for other types of plastic packaging and ban the use of plastic packaging when another material with the same functionality is available

tribute to the revitalization of the Japanese economy. In
order to do so, there is a need to adopt a comprehensive
inter-ministerial strategy that incorporates the following(v) Reach 100% collection and recycling of plastic containers and packaging by 2030

and disposal methods, based on the entire product lifecy-(vi) Introduce regulations on toxic chemical substances and a positive list system for additives in plastics
used for containers and packaging① The strategy should aim to abolish or substantiallyc. Enactment of new legislation for other plastic products
It is necessary to promptly enact legislation to mandate
the introduction of regulations that gradually restrict
plastic use, taking into consideration the need and possible alternatives for each application. Moreover, newlegislation must mandate the establishment of recycling
systems for plastics that have been approved for use, as
well as the introduction of restrictions on toxic chemical
substances.

content, with a drastic review of production, consumption,cle.

reduce the use of plastic, clearly outlining the discontinu-

ation period and the amount by which it will be reduced
when being phased out.

11

Section 2. The Ongoing Disaster of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident
1. Problem of releasing contaminated water
into the oceanindustry to resume operations becomes increasingly remote due to damaging misinformation, and thus far, noagreement has been reached.

In the eight years that have elapsed since the Fukushima
nuclear accident, the government has been moving forward with decontamination and efforts to lift evacuation
orders, making the recovery of Fukushima its top priority.
However, the reality is that very few young people areelecting to return even after evacuation orders have been
lifted, making it difficult for these cities to recover. Making matters worse, work to decommission the Fukushima
Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant has also not been progressing according to plan. Out of the major movements that
occurred in 2018, we have examined the issues regarding
policies related to releasing water contaminated by decommissioning work into the ocean, and ongoing efforts
by the Ministry of the Environment of Japan (MOEJ) on
recycling and landfilling of soil generated from decontamination.

● METI steering policies on releasing contaminated water

into the ocean through decisions made by its sub-committee

Backing this approach is METI, which has established a“sub-committee on handling water treated using an advanced liquid processing system (ALPS)”. The sub-committee examined five different disposal options: groundinjection, ocean release, discharge as steam, discharge ashydrogen, and underground burial. They concluded that
releasing water into the ocean was the most reasonableoption in terms of both cost and time. However, continuous storage was not included as an option. Then, at theend of August 2018, public hearings were held in three locations in Fukushima and Tokyo to gather feedback fromthe public.

● What is contaminated water?

● Public hearings crowded with critical viewpoints regard-

Water is injected to keep the melted reactor cores cool.
Groundwater is also seeping into the damaged reactor
building. It is water from these sources that becomes
contaminated by radiation. About 400 tonnes of contaminated water had been generated in the early stages
post-accident, but this amount has been reduced to about
100 tonnes because of the installation of a frozen soil wall(“ice wall”) to block the inflow of groundwater into thereactor buildings. However, the amount of contaminatedwater can fluctuate significantly due to heavy rainfall, suchas during the typhoon season. According to materials
compiled by Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, Inc.
(TEPCO HD) and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), the average amount of contaminated water
generated in FY2017 was 220 tonnes/day.

ing the release of contaminated water into the ocean

Of the 44 speakers at these public hearings, 42 were opposed to r eleasing contaminated water into the ocean.
The two in favour were stakeholders involved with measuring radioactivity. Almost immediately, it became clearthat decontamination functionalities were inadequate andthat the contaminated water contained various radioactive substances other than tritium. The additional contamination was because there was a period in which the filtersof the removal processing equipment were not changed
as frequently. Many of those who opposed the release ofcontaminated water into the ocean petitioned for continued storage. Additionally, a plan to construct a large
100,000-tonne tank was proposed to enable long-term
storage and encasing contaminated water in concrete.
Given these past events, it seems even less likely that anagreement will be reached on the release of contaminatedwater into the ocean.

Most radioactive substances can be removed from contaminated water using removal equipment (such as the
Simplified Active Water Retrieve and Recovery System(SARRY) and the Advanced Liquid Processing System(ALPS)). However, tritium (radioactive hydrogen) cannot
be removed. For this reason, contaminated water has
been stored in tanks since 2011. Currently, the amount ofcontaminated water has reached about 1.1 million tonnes.
Although TEPCO HD plans to secure a storage capacity of
1.37 million tonnes based on estimates of the amount ofwater that will be generated until the end of 2020, no decisions have been made for after 2020. TEPCO HD’s policy
is to release contaminated water into the ocean, but onlywith consent from fishermen. However, the Fukushima
Prefectural Federation of Fisheries Co-operative Association strongly opposes the release of contaminated water
into the ocean, saying that the possibility for the fisheries

In the end, METI took back the feedback from the public
hearings and decided that the sub-committee would discuss each proposal.

2. Reuse and landfilling policies for contaminated soil
● What are the policies on recycling contaminated soil?
Twenty-two million cubic metres of contaminated soil has
been generated through the remediation of the contaminated area outside the plant, according to MOEJ estimates(as of January 2015). Originally, the government planned
12to bring in interim storage facilities, but it was difficult
to secure land for this large amount of soil, it sought toreduce the volume of soil. As such, MOEJ decided on apolicy to reuse contaminated soil in April 2016, following
discussions at a series of “review meetings” held from July
2015 on technology development strategy for volume reduction and recycling of the removed soil.

taminated soil generated during decontamination efforts
in the area as roadbed material to pave agricultural roads.
There was no rationale for spending JPY 350 million to use
contaminated soil to pave a 200-meter farm road, a project that would usually only cost JPY 5.2 million. Strong opposition from the area’s residents called on the mayor totake action and the plan was ultimately suspended. Even
though the plan has been virtually abandoned, MOEJ stilltakes the position that it is under suspension.

Specifically, after contaminated soil with readings below
8,000 Becquerels (Bq) per kg is treated to prevent scattering or is covered with soil, it is reused around the country
in public projects and farmland reclamation. Its application in public projects includes options such as its use asbanking materials for roads, railways, coastal disaster prevention forests and seawalls, interim covering materials,
materials for land and water reclamation, and materials
for elevating farmland. To control exposure, policy measures have been put in place; notably, “additional radiation
doses for nearby residents, facility users and construction
workers must not exceed 1 millisievert (mSv) per year”
during construction, and “measures must be taken at thetime of service including securing the cover of appropriate
thickness to confine additional exposure (excluding thecase of damage and corruption) to keep levels in which nomeasures are required to prevent damage from radiation(set at 0.01 mSv/year)”.

● Demonstration project in the Nagadoro area of Iitate
Village

A plan for a demonstration project on the use of contaminated soil for developing farmland is underway in the
Nagadoro area of Iitate Village. This area has been designated as a “difficult-to-return zone”. Therefore, residential
areas will be decontaminated once farmland has been
designated by the government under the “reconstruction
and revitalisation plan for specified reconstruction andrevitalisation zones”. In other words, decontamination efforts and the use of contaminated soil were combined ina single plan, so district residents who wanted the area tobe decontaminated had no choice but to accept this plan.
The plan includes a proposal to spread contaminated soil
from Iitate Village on farmland at a height of about one
meter, then cover the soil and revitalise the land as farmland. Floriculture and grain for feed will be grown on thisreclaimed farmland. There are many issues going forward,
including the safety of agricultural products and those responsible for farming.

● Problems with recycling
Policies on the reuse of soil generated from decontamination efforts pose a number of problems from the following perspectives. The use of contaminated soil for publicprojects allows radioactive substances to leach into theenvironment. The standard for reusing radioactive substances that result from dismantling nuclear facilities is
100Bq/kg based on the Act on the Regulation of Nuclear
Source Material, Nuclear Fuel Material and Reactors. It
takes about 170 years for a level of 8,000 Bq/kg to fall tothat of regulatory standards. On the other hand, the useful life expectancy of embankments is 70 years and MOEJ
has yet to answer the question of what to do after thistime. In the event of a disaster, it is possible that roads will
collapse and embankment materials will seep out, which
poses a concern about the effects of extensive soil contamination.

● Plan to use contaminated soil to widen roads
A demonstration plan is currently underway using contaminated soil in construction work to widen the Joban
Expressway in Minamisoma City (to four lanes). This plan
has not moved forward due to opposition from area residents.
● Demonstration project on landfilling contaminated soil
in Nasu Town, Tochigi PrefectureThis is a demonstration project being implemented outside of Fukushima prefecture. Municipalities are responsible for treatment and disposal of soil generated throughdecontamination efforts.

● Demonstration project in Nihonmatsu City that wasforced to shut down

The demonstration project targeted Nasu Town, Tochigi
Prefecture where soil from decontamination efforts in
Iono Sanson Park had been packed in flexible containers
and had been buried temporarily at an adjacent tennis
court. MOEJ went ahead with a demonstration project to
dig up the bags, take out the soil, and rebury it. They havealready completed this project without fully briefing the

MOEJ is trying to develop demonstration projects inseveral areas. One of those demonstration projects was
suspended due to opposition from the public. This project, planned for implementation in Nihonmatsu City, wassuspended by residents who knew about the details of theprocess behind the scenes. The plan itself was to use con13

● What happened in Chernobyl?

local residents.
These are “demonstration projects” in name only; contaminated soil is being reused substantially. After implementing several of these projects in different areas, MOEJ
wants to develop rules and regulations and go on to implement projects nationwide.

Both governments were reluctant to provide information
about the accidents. In Chernobyl, children picked flowers
in the fields and people continued to work on the farms.
In Fukushima, the results of predictions on diffusion by
SPEEDI were not released, causing people to evacuate directly in the direction of radiation flow.
However, in Chernobyl, the government conducted frequent investigations on exposure, taking environmental
radiation dose measurements the day immediately after
the accident. In the Ukraine, thyroid exposure tests wereconducted nationwide on 130,000 children (under the ageof 18) in the month following the accident. Those participating in the health survey included 264,857 people
who worked to bring the accident under control, 49,887
evacuees from the 30 km zone, 1,554,269 residents fromcontaminated areas, and 428,045 children born to people
from these groups. This is far more people than thosetested in Fukushima. In the Ukraine, cases of childhood
thyroid cancer started to rise from the third year after theaccident, and in affected areas, the occurrence of various
diseases such as heart disease, infections from immune
deficiencies (such as tuberculosis), blood disease and cancer have also increased.

Instead of spreading radiation-contaminated water andsoil to the wider environment, it is necessary to move forward with centralized management of these contaminatedsubstances.

3. Considering the future of Fukushima fromthe perspective of experiences in Chernobyl● Released radiation and environmental pollution
Green Watch has continued to address issues related to
Fukushima since its 2016 edition. The 2019 edition compares the impacts from both the nuclear disasters at
Chernobyl and the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.
The following table compares the amount of radiation
leaked with a focus on caesium and areas of soil contaminated with that radiation. In Chernobyl, nuclear fission
progressed rapidly in No. 4 reactor, creating a “nuclear
runaway” to an explosion. This was followed by a graphite
fire that burned for 10 days, during which a large amountof radioactivity was released. Because this nuclear power plant was located inland, soil has been contaminatedacross national borders as a result of widespread radioactivity.

● Childhood thyroid cancer in Fukushima
According to a survey conducted by the Prefectural Oversight Committee for Fukushima Health Management
Survey, 278 cases of thyroid cancer (as of March 2019)were detected through testing about 360,000 children
under the age of 18 and born in the year of the accident.
However, the committee denied that there was a causal
relationship between increases in thyroid cancer and radiation exposure, citing lower radiation doses in comparison
with Chernobyl and the fact that thyroid cancer increasedin Chernobyl five years after the accident. In fact, as stated

In Fukushima, on the other hand, a meltdown occurred
when the reactor had lost its coolant, resulting in a hydrogen explosion. A large amount of radiation was released
along with the explosion. It is believed that most radioactivity flowed out to the Pacific Ocean because of the reactor’s location along the coast.

Table 2.2.1 Released radiation and contaminated areas(PBq: Petabecquerel = equivalent to 10�� Becquerels)

Released radiation (PBq)

Areas contaminated by Cs-137 (km�): [1]I-131

Cs-137

Cs-134> 37,000 Bq/m�> 555,000 Bq/m�

Chernobyl No. 4
reactor [2]

1,760

85

54

145,000

10,300Fukushima Daiichi,
No. 1-4 reactors [3]

473

18.4

14.3

8,424

768

14

earlier, the Japanese government’s claim that the increasein childhood thyroid cancer was five years after the Chernobyl disaster was incorrect, as the rise in cases could beobserved three years after the accident. In addition, theincidence rate of thyroid cancer per 100,000 people has
more than doubled from 28 people in 2013 to 68 people
in 2018.

in areas where the radiation dose is 20 mSv/year or less,support has been discontinued for those who do not want
to return to the areas where they had lived prior to theevacuation.
[1] Imanaka, T. (2016, March). “Cherunobuiri to Fukushima:
Jiko purosesu to houshanouosen no hikaku [Chernobyl
and Fukushima: A Comparison of the Process of the Accidents and Radiation Contamination].” Kagaku [Science(Iwanami Magazine)], 86. [In Japanese only]

In Japan, surveys carried out after the accident were lessthan satisfactory; thyroid exposure tests for children werelimited to 1,080 people between 26 and 30 March 2011.
In addition, there was a problem in the survey methodology. Although the maximum thyroid exposure dose isregarded as 35 mSv, background radiation levels were toohigh in the contaminated radioactive environment andaccurate measurements could not be taken. In addition,
the Japanese government did not measure atmospheric
Iodine-131, although there was a method to estimate initial exposure dose from respiration volume by measuringconcentrations of Iodine-131 in the air right after the accident. Therefore, for this, the Japanese government arguably bears significant responsibility.

[2] Ministry of Ukraine of Emergencies and Affairs of population protection from the consequences of Chornobyl
Catastrophe, & All-Ukrainian Research Institute of Population and Territories Civil Defense from Technogenic andNatural Emergencies. (2006). 20 Years After Chornobyl
Catastrophe: Future Outlook (National Report of Ukraine)(Rep.) (V. I. Baloga, Ed.). Kyiv.
[3] Calculated based on Tables 8 and 9 In: Tokyo ElectricPower Company. (2012, May). Fukushima dai-ichi genshiryoku hatsudensho jiko niokeru houshanoubushitsu no
taikichu-e no houshutsuryou nitsuite [Estimation of Atmospheric Radiation from Radioactive Substances Released
from the Fukushima Dai-Ichi Nuclear Reactor Accident].
(Rep.) [In Japanese only]● Support for evacuees: Chernobyl legislation and JapanIn 1991, five years after the accident, two laws were enacted in the Ukraine: the law “on the legal status of territory
subjected to radioactive contamination as a result of theChernobyl catastrophe” and the law “on the status and social protection for the citizens who suffered as a result of
the Chernobyl catastrophe”. These were referred to as the“Chernobyl legislation” and similar laws were enacted in
Belarus and Russia. According to the Chernobyl legislation,areas within a 30-km radius from an accident reactor areforced evacuation areas. Furthermore, contaminated areas
where the annual exposure dose exceeds 5mSv are designated as mandatory evacuation areas, and those above
1mSv are regarded as areas where residents have the rightto evacuate. Citizens affected by the disaster have various
rights, including free health checks and public transportation, the right to recuperate in non-contaminated areas,
and free provision of non-contaminated food.
On the other hand, in Japan, the Nuclear Accident Child
Victims’ Support Law enacted in 2012 states that “victims will be supported properly regardless of whether
victims decide to reside in the area where support will
be provided, move to other areas, or return to the areas
they inhabited before the evacuation, so that each victim
can make their own decision freely.” However, the reality is that there is a push to get victims to return to theirpre-accident areas. As evacuation orders have been lifted

15

Green Alliance Japan Members Involved in Green Watch 2019
Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center

Website: www.cnic.jp/english/ Phone number: +81 3 6821 3211 Email: cnic@nifty.com
Activity description: With a position independent from the government or industry, the Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center (CNIC) works towards building a society that is not dependent on nuclear power. We collect materials relating to thedangers or issues with nuclear energy, conduct investigative research, and provide the resulting insights for use in civil anti-nuclear movements. We also proactively disseminate our comments on policy. CNIC collaborates with groups within andoutside of Japan to conduct research and organise international conferences.

FoE Japan

Website: http://foejapan.org/en/ Phone number: +81 36909 5983 Email: info@foejapan.org
Activity description: FoE is an international environmental NGO focusing on environmental issues at a planetary scale. Pulling from the support of two million members across 75 countries, FoE Japan began its work in 1980. The organization engages in a wide range of advocacy work in such fields as energy (energy transition and anti-nuclear movements), climatechange and deforestation, and environmental and human rights issues arising from large-scale development. Working towards the creation of a peaceful, sustainable society, FoE Japan envisions a world where all life is respected, where humans
and all other organisms can live in harmony.

Japan Association of Environment and Society for the 21st Century (JAES21)

Website: http://www.kanbun.org/katudo_n/about_us.html Phone number: +81 3 5483 8455 Email: info@kanbun.org
Activity description: Acknowledging that ‘environmental problems are civilization’s problems,’ JAES21 was established in
1993. The organisation seeks to use citizens’ power to build a sustainable civilisation that balances the environment, economy, individuals, and society, one that ensures the health and wealth of the next generation. With this mission in mind,
JAES21 is working towards transformations in social systems, lifestyles, and values that allow for progress towards a newand better form of civilisation. JAES21 engages in a wide range of activities, including: i) investigative research such as“Making an Environment and Society Roadmap”, “Approaches toward a Green Economy,” and “Looking for Japan’s Wisdom
on Sustainability,” ii) policy recommendations such as “Include the Environmental Clause in the Japanese Constitution!”and support for passing legislation for environmental education, and iii) support for regional policy recommendations.

Japan Endocrine-Disruptor Preventive Action (JEPA)

Website: http://kokumin-kaigi.org/?page_id=168 Phone number: +81 3 5875 5410 Email: kokumin-kaigi@syd.odn.ne.jp
Activity description: Environmental pollution by hazardous chemicals such as dioxins and other endocrine disruptors hasdire implications not only for humankind, but also for all living creatures on the planet. In addition to providing citizens
with information related to chemical substances, JEPA communicates its stance on policies regarding chemical substances to the national government, local governments, and businesses. JEPA also creates pamphlets and reading materials to
educate the public about various chemical substances and their adverse effects, as well as hold both domestic and international symposia. Since 2009, the organisation has also worked to tackle the problem of neonicotinoid pesticide use inagriculture. Other initiatives include providing information about the dangers of household chemicals. Ultimately, working
to meet the WSSD 2020 Chemical Management target, JEPA engages in various activities to protect future generations
through hazardous chemical reduction.

16

Kiko Network

Website: https://www.kikonet.org/?cat=54 Phone number: +81 75 254 1011 Email: kyoto@kikonet.org
Activity description: Kiko Network is an NGO/NPO that proposes, comments, and acts on behalf of civil society to stop
global warming. Rather than solely focusing on changing the behaviour of each individual, the organisation strives to makeall aspects of society (industry and economy, energy, lifestyle, localities, etc.) more sustainable. Incorporating research on
global warming mitigation, policy commentary, and information dissemination, Kiko Network creates campaigns, strengthens networks, creates local global warming mitigation models, and engages in human resources development and education. Envisioning a world where all can lead secure lives in a low-carbon and sustainable future, the organisation works
to transform our current society and economy toward greater fairness, peace, and prosperity. Furthermore, as a national
network of civil society and environmental NGO/NPOs in the global warming mitigation space, Kiko Network also engages
and cooperates with a wide range of organisations and sectors.

National Network for the Three Rs for Containers and Packaging

Website: http://citizens-i.org/gomi0/index.html (in Japanese only) Phone number: +81 3 3234 3844 Email: reuse@citizens-i.org
Activity description: The network, initially comprised of 215 groups and 182 individuals nationwide, was established in 2003
as the National Network Working to Amend the Japanese Containers and Packaging Recycling Law and renamed as the
National Network for the Three Rs for Containers and Packaging three years later. In 2011, the network collected 400,000
signatures for a petition to the National Diet, which was adopted. This prompted the network to draft a citizens’ proposalthat incorporated topics such as the responsibility of large producers, promotion of the two Rs (reduce and reuse), andstreamlined garbage segregation. The organisation worked with this policy proposal to pave the way for the planned 2016
reform of the Containers and Packaging Recycling Law.

Institute for Sustainable Energy Policies (ISEP)

Website: https://www.isep.or.jp/en/ Phone number: +81 3 3355 2200 Email: https://www.isep.or.jp/en/about/contact
Activity description: Working toward society powered by renewable energy, ISEP produces energy policy research andcommentary, as well as the development of renewable energy. This includes commentary and activities regarding strategies for transformative energy policy as well as specific energy plans. ISEP’s four areas of utmost importance are Energy
Policy, Energy Business, Financing, and Community. Furthermore, the organisation capitalises on its networks with affiliated groups in and outside of Japan to share information and knowledge. ISEP also uses its connections with prominentinternational renewable energy-related groups to engage in international conferences and research activities.

17Section Authors
Preface

Konoe Fujimura (JAES21)

Climate Change

Takako Momoi (Kiko Network)

Renewable Energy

Hironao Matsubara (ISEP)

Carbon Pricing

Konoe Fujimura

Plastics

Yuko Nakashita (JEPA)Special thanks:
Chika Aoki-Suzuki (IGES), Yachiyo Nakai (National Network
for the Three Rs for Containers and Packaging)

Fukushima Nuclear Disaster

Hideyuki Ban (Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center)
Special thanks:
Kanna Mitsuta (FoE Japan), Masaharu Kawata (Association
to Help Chernobyl, Chubu-District, Japan)

Green Alliance Japan would like to thank the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)
for their support in the creation of the abridged English version of Green Watch 2019.

18