Chiba University Global Fair Society Program
Online kickoff workshop“Global Fair Society After COVID-19: Emerging Agendas”
Date and Time： Wednesday 18 May 2022, 15:00-17:30, Japan Standard Time

Abstract: This is a research essay based on the transcript of the seminar “Global Fair Society After
COVID-19: Emerging Agendas”. Section 1 introduces the topic “Thriving in a post-pandemic
world: Food security and the need for policy coordination” (By Dr.Xiang LI, Chiba University);
Section 2 topic “International Cooperation in Climate Change: Toward a Post COVID-19” (By Dr.
Xiaofang Zhang, Chiba University); Section 3 discusses the topic “Entering a Post-Coivd-19
Scenario in Mexico: how can we fight for a fairer (civil) society?” (By Mr. Alfonso Torrero,
Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana). Section 4 is discussants time.

Moderator
・Prof. Hikari Ishido (Chiba University)
Panelists
・Dr. Xiang LI, (Chiba University)
・Dr. Xiaofang Zhang (Chiba University)
・Mr. Alfonso Torrero (Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana)

Organizer: Chiba University Global Fair Society Program

Page 1 of 38

Introduction (by Prof.Jiro Mizushima)
Since 2016, our group has engaged in this Fair Society program for almost six years,
but today's kickoff workshop is a new start because this year has led to the efforts andachievement of our research members. Our project was chosen as one of the major
programs supported by the International Institute of Advanced Studies of Chiba
University. And it is our duty that we should deepen our research more than ever andpublish more to reach the broad public.
Today's academic activity goes beyond the national border. Three presenters, twocome from China, and one from Mexico, the opposite side of the globe. In this sense,
this is truly a global academic workshop. Many unfair phenomena and divisions in theworld manifest themselves with the rise of populist movements against the establishedorder. In the French presidential elections last month, these divisions became more clear
because the populist candidate got more than 40% of the total votes. It is interesting to
see that a newly elected President Macron mentioned fair society in the speech. Just
after the victory, he emphasized the importance of a fairer society sociated, produced.
I suppose that Macron recognizes that fairness is urgently needed to tackle the serious
divisions in society. In this way, fairness and a fair society are key concepts for theworld in the post-pandemic era. And in the age of globalization, we witnessed a growing
need to ensure that people from all cultures and countries, and backgrounds are treatedfairly, but how can we achieve this? This is a kickoff online workshop discussing
emerging agendas in a concrete manner, specially tailored after the outbreak of COVID
19.

Section 1

Page 2 of 38

Xiang Li
In the next 15 minutes or so or follow this schedule to talk about today's topics, the firstpart of the talk will be on the background stories. So, I will provide you some
information about agriculture and discuss why it's important to focus on agriculture
issues. So, then I will provide you some information about the current situation in
global challenges. So, facts such as the structure of global production risk surrounding
agriculture management and possible impacts will be covered in this section. In addition,issues in Japan will also be measured. The third part in the top there'll be the need ofpolicy coordination.
Let me show you some background information at first (Figure 1). why do we need tocare about agriculture sectors? So, do relevant studies have any implication for us in
our society? The answer is yes. So, agriculture sector not only provides us foods andfeed crops but also energy source. One of the examples is bioethanol, which can beproduced from corn. So, what are implications? In general, our survival relies onsustainable supply of foods. So, you can live without cars for a week, but you cannot
survive without foods. So, moreover, at the current technology level, there are noavailable stuff that can substitute for agricultural products, so which means we must eat
every day. As a result, sustainable supply of the foods become a prerequisite or thefoundation of our social development. In addition to these facts, we might need torecognize the foods a special commodity. In some scenario, they can be become
political weapons. So, traditionally, people perceive weapons to be things like guns,
but the fact is that foods can change their identity and become weapons. Since foodresources are not unlimited, so they can become powerful weapons when contrary
negotiate with each other. So, in some scenario, they can change the comparativeadvantage between Country A and Country B.
Figure 1 BackgroundAs I mentioned earlier, foods are unlimited. We would check the spatial distribution of
our global food production. We can easily notice the countries around the world can
only be grouped to be either net exporters or net importers. Figure 2 illustrates the casesof corn.

Page 3 of 38

Figure 2 The cases of cornSo, figure 1 from the left to the right shows the production export, and import of corn.
The darker green, the color shows the higher amount of its production, export, andimport. For corn, the sheer production amount in the US and China, in general, accountfor over 50% of the total amount of global corn production. However, only a few
countries such as the UK Brazil, and Russia have the capability to export corn to othercountries. For all the types of crops such as the case of wheat, similar phenomena canbe observed. Figure 3 shows the cases of wheat.
Figure 3 The cases of wheat

So, if you look at the export for you in the mid part, so we can again find that only a
few numbers of countries such as Russia, and Ukraine have the capacity to export wheat.
So, Figure 5 showed their cases of rice. So, India, in this case, becomes key exporter.
So, well, developed countries, can all of them produce enough food for themselves?

Page 4 of 38

Figure 4 The cases of rice

Figure 5 Structure of global food production and issues 1

Figure 5, will illustrate only a few countries like Canada, Australia, the US, and France
have self-sufficiency rates exceeding 100%. So, other countries like Germany, Italy,
and Japan have self-sufficiency rates lower than 100%. So, what did these numbers
imply? They indicate that only a few numbers of the country have the capability toexport an extra amount of food. So, when a food crisis occurs, the country that relies
on food imports will be significantly impacted. In the global market, the general ruleis that those who pay the higher price will get what she or he wants at first. Althoughmoney is almighty in many situations, it may not work with food become shortage. So,
when a food crisis occurs, so most countries quickly take measures such as limiting theexport to ensure their national food security. India's recent holds in wheat export is agood example.

Page 5 of 38

So, let me show you more facts so that would be clear how important the agriculture
production is to ask into a global society (Figure 6).
Figure 6 Structure of global food production and issues 2

So, along with globalization, countries around the world have become net importers or
net exporters. Only a few countries can export foods. Secondly, unlike the productionof industrial products, so production of agricultural goods usually takes a longer time.
The figure in the middle part showed the crop calendar and winter wheat in Russia. So,
the sowing usually starts in Odin and the harvesting is in summer. And what's more,
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine occurred this year has already caused food insecurity
affecting countries such as Yemen and African country that depends on agriculture
production imports. So, besides Corona issues, Russia’s invasion has worsened
situations making food insecurity and the poor poorer.
Well, most people often watch the news about Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Very rarely
do they notice the impacts of war on the trade and the market price. For crops likewheat, Russia is the leading exporter in the world. And Ukraine is the sixth big exporter,
which accounts for 1/3rd of the total amount of global wheat you export. For maize,
which is an important food crop, Ukraine’s export amount accounts for over 10% of thetotal amount of the world’s maize export. For N, P, and K three major fertilizers, Russia
separately accounts for around 20% of the world fertilizer export. So, these numbers
provide important clues for us to understand there is an impact of war on the markets.

Page 6 of 38

Figure 7 Risks surrounding agricultural management and impacts/ war risk

For most people stabilizing the prices or global food prices are desirable. But like othercommodities, they can be affected by various risks and change over time. So, let meshow you more information about these key risk factors (Figure 8).
Figure 8 Risks surrounding agricultural management and impacts/ Other typesof risks

One example is political risk, the Russian invasion can affect supply and push global
market prices up. So, in addition to that point, environmental risks such as climatechange can also affect production stability. So, moreover, economic risks such as
currency strength relative to the US dollar can also affect export and production. So,
moreover, the impact of the increase in the energy costs can increase production prices
and market prices. So, if you look at the CBOT graph for future prices in Figure 9, we

Page 7 of 38

can find all the corn, wheat and rice jumped significantly after 2022, so these parts, thispart, and this part.
Figure 9 Impacts-Changes in prices

Let me show you more information about the food price index. Figure 10 illustrates,
they all show the prices maybe new highs for different commodities, especially forvegetable oil and maize.
Figure 10 Impacts-Changes in prices continue

So, given the condition of global society, you may want to know more information
about Japan. So, you may want to know what's happening now in Japan in this situation.

Page 8 of 38

Figure 11 Cases in Japan 1

As Figure 11 shows, Japan compared to other developed country have the lowest selfsufficiency rate. So, the fodder self-sufficiency rate is even lower, which can be kept at around
25% this year. For the rice commodity, the self-sufficiency rate has been kept at about 95%
as a national strategy. So, despite the government's political efforts, domestic demand for rice
this year has decreased by 80,000 tons annually. So, such a result is related to thewesternization of diet in Japan so different from the past. So, many people nowadays prefer
to consume meat and fats. So increased demand for meat and oil requires more consumption
and supply of the crops such as maize. Since demand for feed crop cannot be met by domesticsupply, approximately 90% of feed grain are imported from overseas each year. So, toincrease the self-sufficiency rate and reduce the possible rates of food insecurity, the Japanese
government recently launched a new program called the feed rice production subsidy
program. The subsidy for feed rice production is set higher than those for other grains. So,
you might wonder, why feed rice production is promoted. So, there are several reasons

Figure 12 Cases in Japan 2

Page 9 of 38

Figure 12. One reason is the geographic condition in Japan. So, land, in general, is notsuitable for large production of feed crops like maize, but it’s suitable for producing
feed rice. So, secondly, feed rice itself can be utilized as food when there are shortagesof food, thus promoting feed rice production has no conflict with the target of increasing
food self-sufficiency rate. At any time, farmers are the key stakeholders in making thefinal decision on rice production. So, their reactions determine the success or failure of
the policy. So, analyzing their thinking logic, and responses to environmental andsocioeconomic changes, especially in the post-Corona society is extremely meaningful.
So, let me show you some recent research (Figure 13). In the food data analysis, it has
been noticed that more than 50% of farmers in the Kanto region plan to reduce or stop
rice production. So, comparatively speaking, younger farmers are more likely to do so,say, out of 52% of farmers who reduce or stop rice production, 43 of them chose not to
produce the rice. So, this results in 22.6% of total rice relative farmers living in the
agriculture sector. This is a significant important sign that indicates insufficient policy
response. So, something important is not taken into consideration in the current policy.
So, it has been noticed that farmers fear towards several types of risks such as climatechange.
Figure 13 cases in Japan 3

Figure 14 showed that. I am still actually analyzing data now, and hopefully to provide
you with an overall image soon. But in general, what I can say is that making farmers
remain in the agriculture sector requires income security. So, the government needs toprovide additional support to cover the loss from those risks.

Page 10 of 38

Figure 14 Cases in Japan Farmer’s responses

Figure 15 Policy coordination

Page 11 of 38

Section 2
Dr. Xiaofang Zhang
My topic for today is “International Cooperation in Climate Change: Toward a Post
COVID-19”. First I’d like to talk about the background of my topic today. After the
Industrial Revolution, the concentration of greenhouse gases increased sharply due toincreased fossil fuel consumption and the decrease in forest area due to human
production activities. Now Global Warming is one of the most demanding
environmental problems. Due to the COVID-19 economic crisis, the world carbon
dioxide, the CO2 emissions in 2020 have reduced by 7% compared to 2019. It was goodnews for solving Global Warming, but it was just a short-term reduction. If theeconomic activity level recovered before covid-19, CO2 emissions will return too. As
all human beings are perpetrators and victims of Global Warming, international
cooperation is indispensable for solving Global Warming. However, building aneffective and fair international framework is not easy.
Figure 16 shows how I will proceed with the five parts of the discussion.
Figure 16 Discussion proceedPart 1 Global Warming and Climate ChangePart 2 CO2 Emissions and Economy
Part 3 International Cooperation in Climate ChangePart 4 Obstructive factors in behavioral
Part 5 Policy proposal

In part 1, I will talk a bit about the relationship between greenhouse gases and global
warming. As Figure 17 shows the constant GHG on the Earth keeps the temperature
suitable for the survival of living things. If there is no GHG on earth, the averagetemperature is thought to be around -18 ° C. After the Industrial Revolution, a large
amount of GHG has been emission because of economic activities, and the averagetemperature of the earth has been rising.

Page 12 of 38

Figure 17 Global Warming and Climate ChangePart 1 Global Warming and Climate Change• The constant GHG on the Earth keeps thetemperature suitable for the survival ofliving things.
• If there is no GHG on earth, the averagetemperature is thought to be around -18 ° C.
• After the Industrial Revolution, a large
amount of GHG has been emission becauseof economic activities, and the averagetemperature of the earth has been rising,which is generally called "Global Warming".
Source: Hyogo Prefecture Freon Recovery andProcessing Promotion Council:
http://www.hardoc.org/ondanka.html (confirmed on
October 3, 2021) translated by the author.

According to the intergovernmental panel on climate change’s 6th report (IPCC),
Human influence on Global Warming is unequivocal. The figure in Figure 18 shows usthat 65% of the CO2 emissions come from fossil fuels we use, such as coal, oil, gas, andindustrial processes. So we can know that CO2 is emitted directly or indirectly byhuman activities.
Figure 18

Changes in anthropogenic GHG emissions by type(1970-2010)

Changesin anthropogenic
GHGandemissions
Part 1 Global
Warming
Climate Changeby type (1970-2010)• Human influence on Global
Warming is unequivocal.
(IPCC, 2021: p.4. ).
•65% of the CO 2 emissions
come from the fossil fuels
we use, such as coal, oil,gas, and industrial
processes.

• CO 2 is emitted directly or
indirectly by humanactivities.
Source: IPCC, 2014: p.5.

As Figure 19 shows due to the COVID-19 economic crisis, the world CO2 emissions in2020 have reduced by 7% compared to 2019. COVID-19 economic crisis proves that
Carbon emissions are closely related to economic activities. As We cannot stop
developing the economy to reduce co2 emissions. So, if the economic activity levelrecovered before covid-19, CO2 emissions will return too. we need to find a way tobalance the environment and the economy as early as possible.

Page 13 of 38

Figure 19 Changes in global CO2 emissions and the year-on-year rate ofincrease/decrease (2000-2020)

Part 2 CO2 Emissions and Economy
Changes in global CO2 emissions and the year-on-year rate ofincrease/decrease (2000-2020)
50

6%
4%

40

2%
30

0%
-2%

20

-4%
10

-6%
-8%

20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
18
20
19
20
20

0

Emissions (Gt-CO2）• Due to the COVID-19 economiccrisis contraction of economic
activity, the world CO 2 emissions
in 2020 have been reduced by 7%
compared to 2019.
• Carbon emissions are closely
related to economic activities.
• We need to find a way to balance
the environment and the economy
as early as possible.

Year on year increase(%)

Source: IEA, GLOBAL Energy Review: CO2 Emissions in 2020

By the way, have you ever thought about why do we have to solve global warming,
And why international cooperation is essential to solve global warming? The table on
the left side of Figure 20 lift side from IPCC may give us the answer. For easy
understanding, I have summarized the table contents for 4points on the right side. As
all populations are facing the negative effects of climate change. International
cooperation is essential to solving global warming.
Figure 20 Global Warming risk with high confidence, span sectors, and regions
Global Warming risk with high confidence, span
sectors, and regions

i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)

vii)
viii)

Risk of death, injury, ill-health, or disrupted livelihoods in low-lying coastal
zones and small island developing states and other small islands, due to storm
surges, coastal flooding, and sea level rise.
Risk of severe ill-health and disrupted livelihoods for large urban populations
due to inland flooding in some regions.
Systemic risks due to extreme weather events leading to breakdown of
infrastructure networks and critical services such as electricity, water supply,and health and emergency services.
Risk of mortality and morbidity during periods of extreme heat, particularly
for vulnerable urban populations and those working outdoors in urban orrural areas.
Risk of food insecurity and the breakdown of food systems linked to warming,
drought, flooding, and precipitation variability and extremes, particularly forpoorer populations in urban and rural settings.
Risk of loss of rural livelihoods and income due to insufficient access todrinking and irrigation water and reduced agricultural productivity,
particularly for farmers and pastoralists with minimal capital in semi-arid
regions.
Risk of loss of marine and coastal ecosystems, biodiversity, and the ecosystem
goods, functions, and services they provide for coastal livelihoods, especiallyfor fishing communities in the tropics and the Arctic.
Risk of loss of terrestrial and inland water ecosystems, biodiversity, and theecosystem goods, functions, and services they provide for livelihoods.

1. All populations are facing thenegative effects of climate change.
2. Climate Change has negative
impacts on ecosystems including
human societies, so it will affectour lives, health, and livelihoods.
3. Some certain regions or groups are
more susceptible to Climate Change.
4. The low-income groups have been
more affected, which means a
Fairness issue has occurred.

Source: IPCC 2014: p.12.

Next, let's see what the keyword is to solving climate change by linking rights andobligations in international cooperation. As Figure 21 shows EQUITY as a principle
is a key to solving the climate crisis by linking RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS.

Page 14 of 38

However, politics and the economy are still considered superior to equity. I will show
you two examples to explain it. These 2 examples are all from 26 United Nations
Climate Change Conferences.
Figure 21 A key to solving the climate crisis on International Cooperation in
Climate ChangePart 3 International Cooperation in Climate Change• what should be the criteria when considering the division of
responsibilities of different countries such as emissions(past/present/future) and economic conditions (whether afford the costof climate change measures)?
• EQUITY as a principle is key to solving the climate crisis by linking
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS (UNFCC, 2012). However, politics andthe economy are still considered above equity.

I will show you two examples to explain it. These two examples are shown in Figure
22 all from the 26 United Nations Climate Change Conference, which was held in
England last year. The first one is about the Coal pledge: More than 40 countries pledge
to quit coal, but some of the world's biggest coal-dependent countries, did not sign up.
Another one is just 10 countries and regions participated in the international frameworkfor oil and gas production phasing out. Why is it not easy to build effective international
cooperation in climate change, even though climate change has many negative impacts
on human society? Behavior economics theory may be helpful in understanding.
Figure 22 Example of COP26
Example of COP26• Coal pledge: More than 40 countries pledge to quit coal. Major coalusing countries including Poland, Vietnam, and Chile are among
those to commit. But some of the world's biggest coal-dependent
countries, including China and the United States, did not sign up(BBC NEWS, 2021).
• 10 countries and regions, such as Costa Rica, Denmark, France, andIreland, participated in the international framework for oil and gas
production phasing out. In contrast, most oil-producing countries like
Japan, the United States, and China did not sign up.

Page 15 of 38

Humans tend to perform "myopia behavior" that emphasizes the present rather than the
future due to psychological tendencies such as "loss avoidance" and "status quo bias."
The loss for environmental improvement is estimated to be larger than the gain forenvironmental improvement. Such "loss avoidance", which is a characteristic of human
psychology, can be one factor that creates the inertia of postponing global warming
countermeasures. Lack of attention is also one of the factors. For example, Thegovernments of each country are facing many social issues such as domestic wealthdisparity, income, and employment, not always giving priority solving to Global
Warming. These psychological tendencies inherent in humans hinder compliance with
reduction targets. So to solve Global Warming, we should overcome the loss avoidance
and the status quo bias. At last, I want to give 2 Policy proposals to overcome the loss
avoidance and the status quo bias.
Figure 23 Policy proposal
Part 5 Policy proposal

1. Loss avoidance – Emission trading system
Creating economic incentives
2. Lack of attention - Information-providing
Call attention

Next, I want to give two policy suggestions to overcome the loss avoidance and thestatus quo bias. First, to overcome loss avoidance, we can do creating emission
incentives, such as an emission trading system, the ETS. I will explain how the ETS
works. The Figure on the right side of Figure 23 shows the marginal abatement costwhen two companies are assumed to reduce emissions. 100t-CO2 is assumed as a
reduction target for companies A and B. In the case of the regulatory method, bothCompany A and Company B should reduce evenly by 50 t-CO2. due to the differencein technology level, Company A can achieve the reduction target at a lower cost thanCompany B, even though the same emission is reduced. On the other hand, looking at
the case of the (ETS), the emissions of both parties shift to the point where the reduced
costs of both parties are equalized by utilizing the transactions. In the ETS case,Company A reduces emissions to 30t-CO2, and Company B reduces emissions to 70tCO2. In the ETS case company B can sell their 20 t-CO2 (70t-CO2 -50 t-CO2) surplus
emissions to company A. Compared to the regulatory method, the cost will be lower
for the area of M1-M2-M3 (diagonal line). In short in the ETS there are economic
benefits for both Company A and B.
To overcome status quo bias. We can Call attention such as emissions Informationprovision. For example, assume requires the disclosure of national emission

Page 16 of 38

information and progress. All countries are under pressure from the international
community through the information provision method.
In the end, I want to say that international cooperation is indispensable for solving
global warming. For the well-being of our and future generations, we should bebuilding effective and strong international cooperation post-COVID-19. And at thesame time, we must develop the economy and narrow economic inequality. That's all
my presentations. Thank you to pay your attention.
Section 3
Mr. Alfonso Torrero
I titled the presentation, ‘entering a post-COVID-19 scenario in Mexico: how can wefight for a fairer (civil) society?’ I put in parenthesis the civil word because I will focus
on what is happening to civil society in our country. They're having many limitations
to work. And this is also related to fairness in our country. So, before starting to talkabout the post-COVID-19 scenario, I think that is very important to give a little context
of what happened in Mexico during the pandemic because many of the situations arestill taking place now.
I believe that four main factors in a complex combination hindered the COVID-19
pandemic's appropriate control. I think that the first one is the healthcare sector.
Mexico is one of the countries that less invest in healthcare. So, World HealthOrganization recommends that countries should invest 7% of their GDP in health andMexico invests 4.53, so very low. And the result of this is a lack of adequate facilities,
tools, health materials, and medicines. As you can see in the middle of the image in
Figure 24, there is a small strike of workers of Mexican nurses that are asking for better
materials to work, because they don't have the needed protection against the COVID19. And well, the last result of this low health investment is that there was a highdemand. At the pandemic peak, more than 100 hospitals were crowded or were full,and many people could not get the necessary attention or could not be hospitalized when
they need a tank of oxygen, etcetera.
Figure 24 Background 1

Page 17 of 38

Another factor that is not just from the pandemic context, but in general in Mexico isthe economic poverty. More than 60% of the population of families lives on $5 a day.
So, the prices of things in Mexico are not – this $5 are not permitted to live well and tomaintain a family, of course. And many people are also working in the informal sector.
They have informal laborers. This means also that they do not have social security,
home security, etcetera. So, during pandemics, they also had to work. And there wereno new social welfare programs, or any intervention done by the government to help
these people. And another statistics and important statistic is that even when we were
living in poverty, the effects of the pandemic, 2.1 million jobs were lost from the
beginning of the pandemic 2020 to the end of 2021. As you can see in Figure 25, these
are common images of Mexican people, merchants, and sellers of any product you canimagine.
Figure 25 Background 2

Another factor that hinders the appropriate control of the pandemic was the presidential
decisions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, our president in one of his programs,
which is like the morning news. Since the beginning of the pandemic, he said that itwas not very severe and that it was not an invention, but that his doctor told him that it
was better not to use a mask. So, an important and influential figure also taking thesedecisions, make it worse in the pandemic situation. Have you seen these images (Figure26)? He went on a visit to the countryside of the Mexico kissing little boys and girls.
An important figure of the government that is held as a sub-secretary also said that thepresident was immune to the virus and other very bizarre situations that sound real likethe President in the last photo to the right. He has two stamps in his hands. And hesays that these saints were going to protect him against COVID.

Page 18 of 38

Figure 26 Background 3

But of course, government and lack of infrastructure and economic resources were notthe only problems during the pandemic. Many people did not follow the safetymeasures. And there were also anti-vax groups that made some small strikes, not likein the US. But, they still misinformed many people (Figure 27).
Figure 27 Background 4

Having these four aspects during the pandemic, the government made some decisions
in this context as Figure 28 shows. They made some intermittent lockdowns like
services were closed, like non-essential services, entertainment like the cinema or bar
or some other, not essential places. And there was also the mandatory use of masking
in enclosed places. The common health measures like sanitizing the places you werevisiting and a very popular marketing strategy that they use. So, that was a way to try
to make people aware of taking a good distance away from others, so as not to becontagious or catch the virus.

Page 19 of 38

Figure 28 Background 5

So, in general, during 2020, Coronavirus cases in Mexico went increasingly up and theepidemic peak occurred in January 2021. And in these two graphics that I present here
in the above one, there is a percentage of people vaccinated. And in the lower one, theone below is the number of diseases (Figure 29).
Figure 29 Background 6

So, basically, I found that there is a relation. It is suspected that when more people are
vaccinated, there will be less that's related to the COVID-19. There are small examples
in September or in January 2022, for example, when the new Omicron variant was in
Mexico. There was like a small increase in cases in September, supposedly, what thehealth secretary of Mexico said is that deaths were related to people not vaccinated.
Coming back to the point of fairness in society. Decisions made by the government arelimiting fairness in society. Particularly in civil society, for example, in NGOs, thePage 20 of 38

President proposed and passed a law to cut funds, and privileges previously given by
the government. So, all the taxes obtained and then distributed by the government were
not given to NGOs. In 2021 a new law was passed to limit the number of funds thatsociety could get from citizens and corporations. And the idea behind or thejustification behind these political decisions is that NGOs have led to corrupt activities
like what is called money launderings like big enterprises giving money to civil societyor NGOs, but this money was corrupted and so on. But he just has like two or three
examples. And he took this decision just by generalizing the cases. Anyway, during
the pandemic, there were some cases in which civil society worked together and help
during the pandemic. So, something that the government didn't do and civil society
was doing was gathering the basic food basket to give to people that lost their jobs, andpeople in communities in poverty. And another one, for example, the one from
Fundacion Nemi, donated many masks and other healthy materials to people thatneeded them.
Figure 30 Background 6

So, the post-covid scenario in Mexico was like a gradual change but maybe officially
we can say that on April the 22nd of this year, mask usage was officially not mandatory
in close places. And maybe for many people, this was the post-COVID scenario. The
Mexican health sector also expressed that COVID was now endemic in the country likeit was not such a big problem, bit virus that will kill you. It was like a common flow.
But as we see in the previous context, the government still limits the possible actions
and decisions of NGOs. And decisions are taken or seem to be centrally taken. Thatmeans that the President or the institutions that the governmental institution that the
President is now favoring are the ones that make decisions related to social welfare orother kinds of welfare.

Page 21 of 38

Figure 31 Post-COVID-19 Scenario

This may be underneath because clearly, the President says like NGOs and the private
sector, they are corrupt, useless, and privileged. It seems that government, as I say, andits institutions are the only ones that should create, invest, and manage welfare
programs, and policies, and take political decisions. we are seeing low changes in theeconomic growth in Mexico. So, all the services given before the pandemic are allowed
to be offered now. But many organizations and small businesses, for example, closed
during the pandemic and are not able to or do not have the resources to open again.
And there are non-governmental incentives for that. So, the government cannot solve
everything it says in its discourses. I believe that an important interesting factor thatnot just in Mexico happens is that hybrid jobs that society and organizations learn fromthe advantages of the hybrid job. So some ideas, as we can see that the government isminimizing the civil society activists, and it cannot fulfill the population's basic needs.
I believe that a good way to have better power and have a better consolidation andrepresentativity is to work and collaborate with other social actors. So, civil society
can get together with different organizations and social actors. And this has been seen
to strengthen their representativity and decision making.
Figure 32 Post-COVID-19: ideas for a fairer (civil) society

Page 22 of 38

Well, how do we study these relations of collaborations? I believe that there are manycases of failures in this collaboration test. And we tend to see that successes are themost common that are presented nowadays. But I believe that we should have amultidisciplinary view of this organizational network (Figure 33).
Figure 33 Multidisciplinary studies approach in org networks 1

So, first of all, studying this characteristic of the structure, the formality, the sharedmaterial, and the common objectives of organizations. For example, when I speak
about structure, let's see my inner part of the organigram that is not all the structures,
but that represents how organizations are working and imagine that two of them likeone is a very bureaucratic organization and the other is a very organic organization inwhich everybody is seen as equal. There are no defined roles. Well, we need tounderstand what happened with these two organizations or three or more organizations
working together, how and what structure is the one that is imposed, or how do they get
into a negotiation, for example, in their structure. And also there are network studies
approaches that seem the older ones that talk about the dependency of resources
between two organizations that makes them get together or social network theories that
try to study the interaction between actors in a big network and the position of the actor
what does it implies for in this case, the organization that is influencing a lot of otherorganizations from neo-institutionalism, sociological institutionalism likeunderstanding what happens with the values and the values taken for granted from one
organization is not compatible with the values of other organization.
So, these theories can be, I believe, combined with topics of governance, for example,
in practice, but in theory, maybe a collaboration between organizations in a network is
participative because everyone is helping to establish a program, but we need like to bevery meticulous and to know, what actors are in the planning or designing steps, whatvalues are well interesting, are more privileged or are considered in this organizational
network.

Page 23 of 38

Figure 34 Multidisciplinary studies approach in org networks 2

Figure 35 Multidisciplinary studies approach in org networks 3

So, I believe that studying a multidisciplinary approach in networks will help to haveto understand how it will be better for civil society, it can help civil society to gain someplace again and to be able to have more representativity. And I think that the topics
theoretically are not incompatible like in organization network theory and ingovernance, in both studies, power or influence in the network is studied. Actors’
particular agendas, interests and hidden agendas sometimes are also part of what weneed to study if we want to know how to make maybe a more efficient network that ismuch more representative of minorities, of actors that have not been considered now
by the government.

Page 24 of 38

Section 4 Q&A time
Discussant: Professor Masaya Kobayashi
I’d like to first introduce my own theoretical effort briefly in the project, I wrote
something about the concept of fairness. And I will briefly introduce the basic conceptof myself. Today my speech is very brief. And so, I will shorten my essence. And thepoint is, what is a fair society? These are the most important questions in your project.
I study political philosophy. So, I approach this issue from political philosophy,
especially at first by John Rawls, a liberal. So, Rawls is well known in liberal politicalphilosophy, and he wrote something about fairness. And he thinks of justice as fairness(Figure 36).
Figure 36 Ideological Development of a fair society : Liberalism

And so, I first researched his own theory on justice and fairness. And then I
developed my own theory of communitarian theory of fairness (Figure 37).
Figure 37 Communitarian theory of Fairness

I found Craig Carr's book on fairness, and this is very suggestive, I think. this bookcriticizes, for example, Rawls’ theory and Kantian theory of fairness. And he presented

Page 25 of 38

a new theory and different concepts of justice. This theory is similar to communitarianconcept. I think his communitarian theory of fairness, which emphasizes theimportance of ethical factors related to fairness. So, I think these efforts including
Rawls theory and Kant's theory are also important, so I push for the four-dimensional
theory of justice (Figure 38).
Figure 38 Multidimensional integrative fair society theory

That is, first dimension is law abiding factor. Second dimension is related to equality.
Third dimension is ethical fairness related to squareness and uprightness. Fourth theory
is reciprocity, leading to fairness and welfare. So, I presented this theory as Figure 39
and Figure 40 show.
Figure 39 Theory diagram 1

Page 26 of 38

Figure 40 Theory diagram 2

I cut or shortened my presentation or explanation of these diagrams and figures. But
these indicate there are four dimensions of fairness. We have to these four factors
when we think of fairness. This can lead to a comprehensive theory of fairness, I
think.So, I think this one is my theoretical effort now. And so, I also am trying toverify or demonstrate the theory of fairness experimentally. Because mostphilosophers don't deal with empirical analysis, I would like to develop empiricalanalysis based on political philosophy. So, I think this can lead to a comprehensive
and fair society. And this can be very suggestive, for example, when we face thedifficulty or problems of COVID-19.
Figure 41 Norms and demonstrations of a Fair society: The relationship withjusticeThis is very brief outline of my own theoretical and empirical efforts of projects. Then,
I would like to make some questions to three very good speakers today. Actually, thefirst speaker Dr. Li is one of my very close colleagues. And so, she and I wrote an

Page 27 of 38

article in this book (“Vision of a Fair Society”). So, my first question to Dr. Li is, herresearch is very suggestive of today's difficult problem of climate change.
Figure 42 Environmental fairness

So, she suggested talking about the governmental new policy, but I’d like to ask her
about what is the most effective policy from her own point of view on the basis of her
research? This is my first question. The second question is her presentation today has
not so much related to fairness but actually, I know that she has an interest in a fairsociety. So, may I ask you to make more explanation, the relation between your own
research and our fair society? These are the questions for the first presentation.
And the second speaker Dr. Zhang, I'm very sympathetic to her orientation toward
international cooperation. So, my question to her is, how we can achieve this goal?
And should we have a policy approach or ethical approach or some kind of approachon the basis of civil efforts? This is the question for the second presentation. And thankyou for the third presentation by Alfonso Torrero. I'm very sympathetic and I am very
interested in Mexican case. And actually, I'm very sympathetic to your orientation
toward multi-dimensional studies, especially approaches in organizational networks,
because I study public philosophy. The project on public philosophy, especially inJapan emphasizes the importance of civil society including NPO, and NGOs, and this,
we think, is related to the concept of public common, rather than the government. And
we think this is a very important factor in conceiving present society. But my question
to you is that how does your orientation relate to the serious problem of COVID-19 in
Mexico? I understand that in the Mexican case, Mexican President does not value civilsociety rights. This orientation is the result of COVID-19 or this is the result of the
President's own ideological view, this is my question for the third presentation? Thankyou.
Discussant: Dr. Takayuki Kawase
I have always said, a pandemic situation has never changed our sense of fairness but
just revealed or uncovered our hidden or suppressed sense of unfairness. I think
COVID-19 is a good trigger to find the problems of our society. Thanks to the

Page 28 of 38

pandemic situation, we could find a lot of serious problems, which were previously
concealed. At the early stage of pandemics, many Japanese people criticized politiciansor the government itself. And the politicians who visited, for example, an expensive
restaurant during a soft or informal lockdown. So, technically saying it was not locked
down, but actually, we had the same kind of things. And now in Japan, someone
criticized people who enjoy leisure activities or travel. In both cases, I think the reasonof such kind of criticism is that such leisure activities are dangerous in these COVID
situations. But I think the true reasons are hidden in different places. I guess, they
criticized such activities because they think it is unfair. Frankly saying they're jealousor envious.
This issue does not have to do with COVID at all. This is the issue of fairness itself.
Before Corona, lots of such kinds of unfairness in society are hidden, or at least people
didn't care so much about that. But because of Corona, people became more and more
irritated or sensitive to the unfairness. However, such unfairness has always existed
since far before the pandemic situation started in Japan. So, COVID is just a trigger for
people to become unfairly sensitive. And so, the issue is not to do with COVID but
people use the rhetoric of quarantine hence they criticized social activities, saying it isvery selfish to enjoy leisure activities during an emergency situation. Probably they
consider quarantine is the strongest or the perfect public reason. But I think it is slightly
hypocritical because their true reason is completely different. If they said, it is unfair
because they don't have the same chance to enjoy such kinds of leisure activities, I
would totally understand. And I would not agree, but at least I would understand themeaning of that criticism, but actually, they use the rhetoric of quarantine. So, I think
it is kind of hypocritical.
In the literature of contemporary theories of justice that Professor Kobayashi explained.
John Rawls and many other leaders think about individuals who are indifferent or
independent from each other, so they don't care what the other people are doing. And
on the other hand, Ronald Dworkin and other egalitarians think about individuals whoare caring about other people and are sometimes jealous of other people. So,
egalitarians take external preferences as important and the leaders take them as notimportant. So, in general, anyway, the society is filled up with such kind of envy or
jealousy or a sense of unfairness, how can we justify our legitimate rights and interests?
How can we persuade jealous people that this is not an unfair privilege but legitimate
interests? One strategy may be to give up persuading others and hide such kinds ofrights or interests, even if they are completely legitimate ones. By keeping them thesecret, we can avoid making people angry.
By stopping, and showing off the gorgeous life we enjoy, we can prevent other people
from attacking us. So, in such societies, the establishment of the social class would bea kind of secret society. In my opinion, this is a dangerous crisis of the integration ofsociety or stability of society and such a cynical strategy might make the society
unstable and fragile. On the other hand, the second strategy is to appeal to publicreasons, as John Rawls explains, and keep going to persuade others. In a society offragmentation or the archipelago of gated communities, it is very difficult to share
public reasons. I think the reason is not something transcendental. It is not something
independent of anyone's opinion. So, in my opinion, the reason is not something
metaphysical but specific to the particular context. So, in my opinion, the reason issomething local, relative to our cultures, opinions, or sense of fairness. I accept there isPage 29 of 38

always some fragmentation of reasons or the division of the ideas in our world.
However, I hope there is at least a minimum level of a shared sense of reasons in oursociety in order to achieve the public policies on behalf of our social stability and justice.
So, this is all my own opinion.
And I'm going to the next part, the questions or comments to today's presenters. I think
all of today's presenters showed their own perspectives on after Corona society, forexample, food policies and environmental programs are very important issues.
Therefore, they should not be the matter only during pandemics time. And I think theessence of the basic philosophy of our policies about these issues should not be changed
because of the pandemics. So, the COVID-19 should not be the reason to change ourphilosophy.
So, my question to Dr. Xiang Li is that food is something to do with human basic needs.
If we don't eat, we must die. So, it's very important that basic needs of ourselves. So,
it's the most typical topic of global justice in my opinion. And my question for you is,what do you think about the possibility of the protectionist food policy being successful
in our global society? I think a lot of Japanese people, food nationalists, in my opinion,
are choosing Japanese products in supermarkets. Probably, it depends on our
personality of us. I think the situation is very different in the different countries. But I
think, at least in Japan, the protectionist idea about food is very strong. So, if you havesomething about this tendency, please tell me about that.
And the question to Dr. Zhang, is quite opposite of the question to Dr. Li. What do you
think about the possibility of global cooperation on environmental issues successful? I
asked a question to Dr. Li about the protectionist idea. I asked the question to Dr. Zhang
about the global risk idea of the environmental program. Because I am a little bit
pessimistic about sharing the same idea on environmental issues all over the world, atleast now. Because different countries have different ideas about economics and thevalue of environmental issues. So, what do you think is the most important thing for
us to achieve global collaboration about environmental issues? So, this is the question
for Dr. Zhang.
And next, the question to Mr. Alfonso Torrero. My question is a very basic and very
general one besides pandemic issues. I am very interested in the difference and thecommon things between Japan and Latin American countries such as Mexico because
Japan and Mexico must share something or a lot of things. Both of us are very close to
Anglo-American civilization, which is a superpower and the mainstream of thecontemporary world in practice and in theory. But at the same time, Japan, Mexico arestill keeping something very different from America. I found we can share something
very important. I think we should research what is this something important. And myquestion is a very basic one. What is the most fundamental or basic philosophical ideaof Mexico? Probably, in America, it is personal freedom. And in Japan, it is harmony
in society. So, what is it in Mexico?
Xiang LiThank you so much for giving me wonderful comments. So, first, I’d like to respondto Professor Kobayashi’s comments. It might be better for me to answer the second
question the first. It’s easier for me to answer. So, how does my research related to afair society? Okay, which is the theme of this project? So, well, this research basicallyfocused on food security and the measure to increase the overall supply of foods inJapan and at the global level. So, for example, people at any time no matter is poor or
the rich can access the food, so it means it's a fair opportunity for all to access the foods.

Page 30 of 38

So, my research focused more on the solution or the strategy the government or thepolicy can use to utilize to change farmers’ minds from reducing rice production tocontinuing to produce rice. So, if the government policy works well and can change
farmers’ minds efficiently so that means the national self-sufficiency rate in Japan can
increase in the long-term scale. So, in that term, fairness can be achieved, because themore the food can be produced, the cheaper the price itself. So, that means even thepoor can access the food easily. So, maybe, in that perspective, my research can answer
the questions, of how to achieve a fair society. And to the first question, I'm not sure if
I get your point.
I think you tried to ask me the theme the government can do to self issues. So well, I
just introduced some solutions or some measures the government can do. But in reality,
in so food data analysis of my current research, I actually found the positive side ofCorona issues to the farmers. So, in many cases, there are positive sides and negativesides. The rice production decreases in some scenarios, in some cases like in-country
regions but rice production increases as well. So that means, in some scenarios, thegovernment actually works. But in some scenarios, it doesn't work. So, my job rightnow is to find the best solution or to maximize the benefits for farmers and the peopleof society.
So, to find the best way to maximize the wealth or the fairness. So, the policy itself can
be a good tool if the government can use this well. But in some scenarios, if it does notaccount for the necessary parameter that farmers actually cared about, so it might notwork. So, I'm trying to find out the shortage of those issues and also trying to find thegood points in the current policy. So, did I answer your questions? I'm not sure if I
related it well or not. For Dr. Kawase’s comments, so let me answer your questions
now. You talk about the protection issues. So, probably, you want me to explain, what
can the success of the policy itself? If people do not eat, they will die. You talk aboutthat point. So, actually, I do agree with your point that the pandemic has increased theunfairness among people. So, can you repeat the question one more time? I am sosorry. I will try to catch your points.
Takayuki Kawase
Actually, I try to ask the question about the possibility of the protectionist idea of thefood policy's success. So, I think, at least in Japan, a lot of people want to eat the local
foods, the foods produced around us. But I think probably a lot of people in foreigncountries or outside Japan probably have a different idea about that, so the free trade
policy. Yeah, actually, which is the more plausible idea in our current world?
Xiang LiIf Japan wants more people to consume Japanese food, the best idea is to increase theself-sufficiency rate. So, to increase the supply, domestic supply, and decrease themarket price, because people care about the price. The cheaper the price, the better,more people will consume. If I go to the market, sometimes I compare the prices. So,
if product A is cheaper, so probably even that is produced in other countries like theUS, I want to buy that. So, that's the basic idea for most people, I think. So, for
production size, which is also related to my current research. I'm trying to think about
the solution and measure the government can do to increase the overall national supply,
especially the rice, because rice is the main food in Japan and which is criticallyimportant to people, national one to ensure food security. So, to reduce the impacts ofPage 31 of 38

food insecurity so that's the only way I can think because countries like the UnitedStates and Australia, those countries usually have self-sufficiency rates exceeding
100%. But comparatively, Japan only has a rate of around 37%. So, that means wemust change, otherwise, so we will be impacted.
Takayuki Kawase
Thank you so much. I think it's very interesting that Japan is such a very strongly foodnationalist country that achieved such a role in sale-supply percentage. So it's, I think,a very interesting paradox.
Xiaofang Zhang
First, my answer to Professor Kobayashi is how to achieve our goals, I think to achieve
we reduce the target of global warming, we can do many things as I introduced 65%
CO2 emissions from the fossil fuel we use. So, in my opinion, promote thetransformation of energy. Consumption structure is very important. For example, we
can introduce more renewable energy and use EV cars. The next is my answer for Dr.
Kawase. I'm very grateful for your opinions, different country has their own different
way to reduce or solve global warming. The very important thing is to respect eachother's opinions and promise to reduce the meat emission is very important. I hope I
give the right answer to your questions.
Takayuki Kawase
Thank you very much. Actually, respecting each other's ideas is something that I reallyagree with. So, I totally agree with that. But I think so I said the different country has
a different idea about environmental issues. So, for example, actually, it was but
President Putin says global warming is a very good thing because Russia will be warm.
And if I were Prime Minister of Japan, I would not have any confidence to persuade
such kind of opinion. Of course, respecting other opinions is a very good thing and I
totally agree with that, but on the other hand, there must be a limitation to that tolerance.
Yes, so if you have some opinion about that, so please tell me. Let me explain themeaning of my questions. My question is, do you think it is possible to achieve a global
agreement about environmental issues such as global warming? Is it possible to agree
all over the world?
Xiaofang Zhang
It’s a very big question.
Takayuki Kawase
I am a little bit pessimistic. I hope we can do that. But I think it is very difficult.
Xiaofang Zhang
Yes, I agree with you. I think it's difficult to achieve it. Even we know it's difficult.
But it's very important to know why we couldn't achieve the goal So, if you know thereason why we couldn't achieve it, you can think and let it go on.
Takayuki Kawase
That is exactly what I said in the last part of my comments. So, what do you think is
the most important thing for us to achieve global collaboration. So, we should search

Page 32 of 38

for the reasons that we cannot achieve agreement. There must be some reason that wecannot agree with each other. I think this is the most important thing for us.
Masaya Kobayashi
Yes. Actually, this issue is quite closely related to my question. My question is how
it's possible. But actually, I think, I believe it's very difficult to try to do best effort. I
have no answers that.
Alfonso Torrero
Yes, of course. Thank you for the questions. First, to Dr. Kobayashi, I think that it wasvery clear that since this presidential term started, the president's idea is to minimize
the NGOs and civil society, in general, was little by little more clear since 2019. He
began with discourses speaking about corruption in civil society. And then there werepassing some laws that limit the resources given to civil society. So, I think, yeah, it ispresidential or maybe not presidential – of this government in the general idea that civilsociety is not as important or should not be as important. I think that behind all of this,well, there is a long history in Mexico like the country is the first time that has a leftwing president. But he is very autocratic and very – he has a politic to argue with me
or against me. So, it's difficult for example, also journalists, are very criticized when
they show something that is not convenient for the government. And Mexico is a very
dangerous place for journalists, the country with more…
Hikari Ishido
Connection, is there….? Hello Mr. Torrero. Is the connection okay? Here in Japan,
we don't hear your voice. Okay, so it looks there is some connection problem.
While waiting, if there is any other comments or issues, please type them into thechatline because we got some time for making another round if the speakers are not too
tired. So, if there are any comments, I mean, just by writing or maybe orally if you
could raise your hand or, I mean, show up, switch on your camera, and then you can
ask your question to any one of the three speakers.
Alfonso Torrero
My house connection just broke. But, I mean, I'm not trying to be like paranoid or justthink that the actual government is the worst because the other day the othergovernments were also very corrupt and had many, many bad practices. So, I believe
that, yes, in this presidential term with this government, they have a very particular
agenda to work. And they consider that Mexico should, for example, take more central
and conservative decisions and, for example, privatize the resources, the Mexican
resources like the lithium or the energy. And I don’t know, I believe that it's a very
autocratic position of our government, not to let the critics take part in what has
happened in the context problems. That's what I believe. And yes, this is just to reason
my point. Yes, this is a situation of this new government. They are taking resources
and limiting the way in which civil society works.
Masaya Kobayashi
Yeah, I understand your explanation of presidential orientation. So, my question is,what is the relation between the presidential orientation and the effect of the

Page 33 of 38

government's policy on COVID-19. For example, some countries like Brazil andAmerica in the Trump administration adopted a neoliberal or libertarian policy. I think
this policy did not succeed because there are plenty of COVID-19 problems under thesegovernments. So, I now learned that your country adopted a Presidential orientation,
which does not value civil society. So, such orientation had some effective effects on
the results of the policy of COVID-19. Because you said that vaccination is positiveeffects. And so, what's the relation between your country's policy and the effects of thepolicy on COVID-19?
Alfonso Torrero
Okay, I think it was not really, like, clear at the beginning. I believe that, at firstwatching the news, the government in the news, given by the President, they say that
COVID was not really a problem, because they justify that just one in, I don't know, in
100 people having the virus will die. And they say some data that was not reallyconfirmed. Like they also didn't consider, for example, the problems that were
occurring or the pandemic occurrence in Europe like the Italian tragedy and the quantityof the deaths there. And I believe that they try to justify later on their first approach.
They went into many phases, but in the end, I think that the President also promotes thevaccination in a certain way, but at the beginning, that was the most important time
when they were no vaccines. He took that – how to say – this attitude, this like not very
responsible attitude, saying that the virus was nothing to worry about. So, that's why I
believe that during, well, not just his participation but was one of the elements that led
to so many deaths in Mexico.
Alfonso Torrero
Dr. Kawase, I didn't understand the question.
fundamental idea of Mexico?

I'm so sorry.

Like, what is the

Takayuki Kawase
In the philosophical sense, it is not a very difficult meaning. But what is the basic ideaof the country itself? For example, I said, America, American government, American
Constitution, American people respect the freedom of persons, freedom of individuals
so much. And in Japan, I think the people respect the value of the harmony of thesociety. And what are most important things for Mexican people? So, very generalquestion, so very easy question, not very academic. What is the most important thing
for Mexican people?
Alfonso Torrero
Okay, I believe that many Latin American countries is like Mexico is very focused on
being warm to others and to have like proximity with other members of society. I
believe a lot of that is in Mexico. Not really harmony in society, because, I mean, I
believe that sometimes it's very chaotic, everything that happens here, and people do
not follow rules in other countries. But I think that's something that characterizes therelations in the country or what people deserve to be seen as is an as warm andwelcoming person. I think that is a typical Mexican idea.
Takayuki Kawase
Thank you very much. Actually, I had the theory of Samuel Huntington, the conflictof civilization in my mind, so probably Latin American countries and Japan, probably

Page 34 of 38

have something in common, but probably have something very different, in my opinion.
So, in that theory, Japan is a very unique civilization, and actually, I don't know. I'm
not sure it is true or not, but actually, I think at least, Japan and Latin American country
is the marginalized area of the Anglo-American civilization, in my opinion, so thanks
anyway.
Alfonso Torrero
Okay, okay. Like the influence of Anglo-American culture in both countries or what
do you mean by…?
Takayuki Kawase
For example, actually, my major is Rawls. Japanese constitutions I think came from
America. So, actually, I think it is a good thing because I'm basically supporting thephilosophy of the American Constitution. But anyway, the Constitution, the basic ideaof the Japanese government came from America, but I think we still have a lot of things,
which is very different from America, for example. And it is a very difficult thing. But
recently, we imported the judicial system from America, so we copied that, but it didn't
work very well. So, actually, the Japanese constitutional idea, I think, is very good andworked very well in Japanese society. But the judicial system and the criminal
procedures didn't work very well in Japan. Actually, we have a lot of common things
with America. But at the same time, we have very different things from America. So,
this is my opinion about the relationship between Japan and America. And I guess
Mexico must have a similar situation in the relation to America. So, this is my guess.
Alfonso Torrero
Okay. I'm not sure either. I think that Mexico has an aspirational approach to the US
like all the marketing, all the things that the US does, and has a better – not lifestyle but
life quality. It's like something aspirational for many people. And I'm not sure how
much, for example, American laws affected Mexican laws, but honestly, I am not sure.
I will leave that. What I know is that there is a lot of aspirational interest in theAmerican Dream, the so-called American Dream by Mexicans. And yeah, that's a
relation and for other people like in the rest of in many countries of the world, North
America is not seen as a very good country in some aspects, like, they have likeconquering tactics. And they just will do anything for your resources and things likethat. So, it depends on people, but in general, I believe is an aspirational idea of the US.
Takayuki Kawase
Thank you. I think the biggest difference between Japan and Mexico is that Mexico isconnected to America directly on the ground. So, actually, there are serious issues
about immigration that we don't have. So, I think Japanese people don't have such kindof strong aspiration for America at least not so strong as a Mexican people, I think. So,
this is I think a very big difference.
Alfonso Torrero
Yes, yes, of course. Yes. And Mexican nationalists appreciate the other countries like,I don't know, European ones that have a very nationalistic position and so on. They arelike more open – Mexican is more open and just try to – I believe they just try to befriendly with the world or something like everybody comes to Mexico without any
difficulty, even external politics did not block, for example, during the pandemic andPage 35 of 38

their flights to Mexico and things like that. It's like Mexico is very open to othercountries even when you speak about politics.
Hikari Ishido
Thank you so much. I wish to make my own very brief comment as an economist. So,
these days, I hear that you know, food prices are going up and then there is no returning
back, never to the original point in terms of food and also in terms of, you know, energy.
So, that comes into environmental policy-making issue. And then reaching anagreement among different stakeholders, I mean, networking is quite sometimes
difficult, right, regionally even. So, globally, it's even more difficult to reach an
agreement. We sometimes hear the words let us agree to disagree first, then there will
not be any final battle. But what we see across the globe is that’s not a feasible option
to agree to disagree in a peaceful manner. So, that's why countries are fighting against
countries and then we never know what the fairness-oriented viewpoint on could be andhow to solve this kind of antagonistic, hostile situation. But definitely, we need to think
about the maximin principle, right, according to the Philosopher John Rawls,
maximizing the minimum standard in terms of food security and environmental policy,
complementation between the government sector and civil society. The minimal, theworst-case scenario should be avoided. That's what I also agree with.
I mean it could be reached, I mean, to some kind of consensus, because the minimal,
the worst-case scenario should definitely be solved, and then who can recognize this.
Of course, in your mindset, okay, as a politician or a country leader, okay, who cares
about this worst case, group of people, yes. But at least if we are to agree to reachsome kind of a consensus, then, of course, this maximin principle would apply to allthe, I mean, each of these cases discussed in today's workshop. But, of course, otherphilosophers might say, okay, trying to agree itself is some kind of, you know,
terrorized situation, right. So, we are not coerced to make some kind of a global final
agreement. I wish to take some pointers from that kind of remark and so after all, it'sdifficult. But I should say this is a kickoff workshop. We cannot solve all theseconundrums and difficult questions. So, at least we should to the best of our knowledge,
and to the best of our intention, keep getting together online and also offline, and thenkeep thinking, keep releasing what we think about this fairness, although, it's notreachable near at hand sort of thing. Yes, we know it.
We acknowledge it, but we still have plenty for the sake of this project, and we still
have some time. So, let us keep thinking. All right, so that's my kind of like, I mean,
the kickoff type of remark. Thank you so much. So, okay, we still have some time, but
I don't see any typing into the chat line. And so, if there is anything from the audience
today, yes, we are pleased to welcome anything. If not, then we wish to move on to thefinal item which is a closing remark from both Professor Jiro Mizushima and Professor
Masaya Kobayashi. Would that be all right? Just a wrap-up remark from each of them.
Okay. So, if there are no more specific comments or questions, let us move on to thefinal wrap-up session. So, can we invite Professor Jiro Mizushima, please?
Jiro MizushimaThank you very much for the presentations and comments. Today, we had a very
extensive and enthusiastic discussion. I enjoyed it very much. And it is worth to seethat this is our kickoff symposium. So, as Professor Ishido pointed out, this is the startof our discussions. But anyway, after I heard the three presentations, I noticed that

Page 36 of 38

there is a common theme behind the three presentations. And I think that is the conflictor contrast between national framework and global perspective, national or patriotic
framework versus global international viewpoints. That is very important and contrasts
or underlying conflict. Professor Li pointed out the food supply. Yes, the selfsufficiency rate of rice and rice is okay in Japan, but in general, the self-sufficiency rateof food is very low.
In this case, some kinds of protectionism based on nationalism probably is not evil, but
it is in one sense necessary to be safe against the change in the world market such as
the outbreak of war. But in contrast to that, good protectionism, Dr. Zhang pointed outthat if each state pursues its own goal, it is quite difficult to reach an agreement andclimate change would not be realized. Probably, climate disaster might come. In thissense, we have to abandon our nationalistic viewpoints. And we have to cooperateinternationally. But as today's discussion shows, it is difficult to reach an agreement,
and Professor Ishido point out agree to disagree. Yes. I am a political scientist, and I
am studying European politics. In Europe, there is a new term for fuel transition to acarbon-neutral. In this term, we see the word fair. What is fair? It means that theabolishment or if you abolish all fossil fuels, that's good for the climate, but it might
damage other sections of the society. It is not fair. We have to consider many aspectsof the things like climate or employment or other distribution, economy, and finance.
So, if we consider these various kinds of aspects, we can consider a fair transition.
In this sense, this agreement is the start of fairness, because fairness is not equality.
Equal distribution is not always fair distribution. In some countries or in other countries,
there is a difference between what is right and what is equal. So, we have to think about
what fairness is, and we have to discuss and exchange our views. And this is the startof fairness, I think.
And about the presentation of Alfonso Torrero, thank you for the representation from
Mexico. And he also pointed out the president of a populist movement. And populists
are in general nationalistic and patriotic. And they don't like the influence from outside.
Probably, the president of Mexico does not like the influence of global civil society in
Mexico. He does not like the interference from outside. In this sense, nationalism
works negatively on civil society. It did much damage, to the effect of COVID-19
during these years. So, these three presentations showed us the positive side andnegative sides of the nationalist framework and global framework. We cannot say
which is right, nationalism is evil, and globalism is right. We can't say about it.
However, what we can say at this moment is I think we have to think globally. But at
the same time, we have to take the national context into consideration. Today, we got
many lessons from the presentations and the discussions. Thank you, and until nexttime.
Masaya Kobayashi
Thank you very much, very interesting discussions. These discussions inspired me verymuch. I'd like to say something about the inspiration there (Figure 43). First, for thepresentation of Dr. Li, actually, I have some slides on our chapter. This is a chapter
with Dr. Li.
In that chapter, we push for the idea of environmental fairness, that is environmental
compliance, environmental equity or equal equity, environmental ethical fairness, andenvironmental reciprocity. And as for the measures to cope with the issue, first,
international regulations; second, how to cope with socially vulnerable groups; third,
ethics of intergenerational fairness; fourth, interstate and individual considerations ofPage 37 of 38

various factors. And we think that today's discussion, something has much common
with these arguments, and especially the discussion as for the civilization push for, Dr.
Kawase, remind me of a very important issue because I'm very interested in the issueof conflicts of civilization in my lectures on comparative politics. So, obviously, I wasvery annoyed by the clash of civilization between Western countries and Islamicinterpretations. Now, I feel that there emerged a very serious civilizational conflict
between Russia and Europe and other civilizational people.
Figure 43 Environmental fairness (chapter 9)

So, this issue is very important and very, very serious in the contemporary world. I
think that this issue should be included in theoretical frontiers or a research topic forfairness. As well as the environmental issue, there is the problem of intergenerational
and also global fairness. Obviously, as political philosophers, we are very familiar withthe concept of global justice. But I think global fairness has not so popular in thecontemporary academic world. So, we have to explore the concept as well as global
justice and also domestic justice, and fairness. And my own research on the domestic
concept, and context is related to the impact of fairness on the well-being of people. In
my experiment, mentor studies, I demonstrated that people's wellness, people's wellbeing have been influenced by the government to policy related to fairness and justice.
In that essence, justice and fairness are very important in tackling the issue of COVID19. And also, I think, these kinds of intergenerational and also global fairness havevery important factors in dealing with people around the world, especially in the context
of the clash of civilizations. Actually, this is the first time I encountered this issue. So,
I'm very grateful for the present content and today's discussion. Thank you very much.
END

Page 38 of 38