Silviase/jgov_v1.4_full_ann huggingface dataset:
Figure 2-33 Changes to total waste generation and daily waste per person

Note: Total volume of waste generated = Designed collection volume + Volume of waste directly brought in + Volume of group collection of recyclable waste

Source: Ministry of the Environment

Figure 2-34 Changes to the garbage processing methods

Source: Ministry of the Environment

Figure 2-36 Changes to numbers using the different methods of night soil treatment

Note: Figures in the graph refer to population composition (million). Source: Ministry of the Environment

Figure 2-35 Changes to waste treatment costs

### C. Changes of the operating expenses for garbage processing

The total amount of operating expenses for garbage processing in fiscal 2008 was 1,823.5 billion yen, this averages out to about 14,200 yen per person. It has been flat since the previous year (Figure 2-35).

## (2) Municipal waste (night soil)

### A. Changes to the disposal of night soil

Concerning changes in the night soil disposal population, while the number of Johkasou (a compact high-performance on-site waste water treatment tank facility with biofunction) users remains at the same level, due mainly to the increase of public sewage system users (86.03 million in fiscal 2008), the total population of flush toilet system users
Figure 2-38 Changes to the number of intermediate processing facilities of industrial wastes

Note: Facilities to crush waste wood and debris were added to those facilities requiring approval in February 2001. Source: Ministry of the Environment

Note: The number of new facilities was surveyed by the Ministry of the Environment, but this could change in the future. Source: Ministry of the Environment

the years before revision of the Wastes Management Law in Year 1997. (Figure 2-39 and 2-40).

## (2) Wide-area movement of wastes in the greater metropolises

In such megalopolis as the Tokyo metropolitan district, it is becoming difficult to secure intermediate processing facilities such as incineration furnaces and final disposal sites, this is caused by the upgrading of land-use and environmental problems. Therefore, as it is not easy to process wastes in the local area, most of the municipal wastes and industrial wastes are transported across prefectural and city governmental borders to other areas for disposal.

In fiscal 2008, out of all municipal wastes generated from one Metropolis and six prefectures in the Tokyo metropolitan district, 1,360,000 tons were sent for final disposal, of these 210,000 tons were transported to an area other than where they originated, 160,000 tons - about little under 80% - were sent for final disposal to other areas outside the Tokyo metropolitan district. The final disposal amount of

Note: The number of new facilities was surveyed by the Ministry of the Environment, but this could change in the future. Source: Ministry of the Environment

municipal wastes transported from the nationwide municipalities to prefectures outside their boundaries was 310,000 tons, the Tokyo metropolitan district accounts for a little over 70% of these.

In fiscal 2008, the amount of industrial wastes transported for the purpose of intermediate processing or final disposal from the Tokyo Metropolitan district to an area other than where they originated was 16.49 million tons, 8.78 million tons of these – which accounts for a little over 50% - were transported from the Tokyo metropolis, and of these 1.32 million tons flowed-out from the Tokyo metropolitan district to other areas. (Figure 2-41).

It is worthy of note that as the amounts transported from the Tokyo metropolis to Saitama, Chiba and Kanagawa prefectures for intermediate processing are noticeably large, and the amounts transported for final disposal from Saitama and Kanagawa prefectures to other prefectures are also distinctly large, it is presumed that industrial wastes transported from Tokyo metropolis to outside are, after being sent for intermediate processing in the neighboring prefectures,
Figure 2-41 Status of wide-area movement of industrial waste generated in the Tokyo Metropolitan district (fiscal year 2007)

transported again to other prefectures for final disposal.

There is a deep concern about such movement of waste across wide areas; if waste is illegally dumped in the area accepting waste and causes environmental pollution, this may trigger many regional conflicts resulting in increased restrictions on the acceptance of waste. This is coupled with feelings of unease and unfairness about accepting waste transported from other generation areas.

In the areas around Tokyo, as is shown in the state of residual years of the sites, securing of final disposal sites, especially final disposal sites for industrial wastes is becoming more difficult, and this shortage is supposed to be the main cause of the wide-area movement of wastes to neighboring prefectures.

## 4 Wastes-related Information

(1) State of Final Disposal Sites

A. Municipal wastes

(a) State of Final Disposal

Final disposal volume in 2008 (total of direct final disposal volume and final disposal volume after intermediate treatment) is 5.53 million tons, and final disposal volume per person daily is 119 grams. This indicates that the final disposal volume continues to decrease (Figure 2-42).

(b) Residual Number of Years and Residual Volume of Final Disposal Sites

As of the end of 2008, the number of final disposal sites is 1,823, and residual volume is 121.84 million m $ ^{3} $ . The national average residual number of years is 18.0. Because the final disposal volume in 2008 is smaller than that of the previous year, the residual number of years is increasing although the residual volume is decreasing (Figure 2-43).

(c) Municipalities Where There Is No Final Disposal Site

As of the end of 2008, among Japan’s 1,800 municipalities, 352 of them need to dispose of wastes but have no final disposal sites and entrust private final disposal sites with landfill (however, when they landfill wastes in the public disposal sites of municipalities targeted for the Osaka Bay Phoenix Plan, use other municipalities, public corporations, etc. although they have no final disposal sites, they are included in the number as having final disposal sites), and Figure 2-44 shows the distribution of the municipalities.

(d) Future actions and initiatives

Because waste treatment facilities, such as final dis-
Figure 2-42 Changes to final disposal and daily final disposal per person

Source: Ministry of the Environment

Figure 2-43 Changes to residual volume and remaining years of final disposal sites (municipal waste)

Source: Ministry of the Environment

Figure 2-44 Municipalities with no final disposal site (as of the end of fiscal year 2008)

Number of municipalities with no final disposal site: 352 (19.6% of 1800 municipalities)

Note: “Municipalities with no final disposal site” refers to municipalities that are relevant municipalities do not have any final disposal site and outsource landfill disposal to private final disposal sites. However, even if they do not have any final disposal site, if they are located in the area covered by the Osaka Bay Phoenix Plan, or if they dispose of waste in public landfills in other municipalities or public corporations, such municipalities are included in municipalities with final disposal sites.

Source: Ministry of the Environment

A postal sites, are public-nuisance facilities, it is difficult to find new locations to build them, and the municipalities all have difficulty in finding locations for final disposal sites in particular. Against this background, each municipality has been making efforts to find locations for final disposal sites across a broader area. However, they should not act based on the idea that they aim to secure locations in other areas because it is simply difficult to do so in their own areas, they need to develop final disposal sites in broader areas as a final measure after having decreased the number of facilities to be managed, and taken certain and high-level environment-conserving measures as well as reducing the amount of wastes and thoroughly promoting appropriate recycling and reuse of wastes.

Municipalities need to develop waste treatment facilities needed for the establishment of such a sound material-cycle society after having established specific goals related to the 3Rs of wastes and having formulated a definite plan of comprehensive measures for achieving the goals.

### B. Industrial Waste

The residual volume of final disposal sites for industrial
Figure 2-49 Types of illegally dumped industrial waste (fiscal year 2008)

Total of waste excluding construction 84 cases 27.3%

Total of construction waste 224 cases 72.7%

Total of waste excluding construction 25,346t 12.5%

Total of construction waste 177,384t 87.5%

Figure 2-50 Types of improperly treated industrial waste (fiscal year 2008)

Total of waste excluding construction 78 cases, 25.3%

Total of construction waste

230 cases, 74.7%

Source: Ministry of the Environment

Total of waste excluding construction

787,166t, 64.1%

Total of construction waste 441,233t, 35.9%

### B. Unsolved Cases of Illegally Dumped Industrial Wastes as of the End of Fiscal 2008

As of March 31, 2009, the number of unsolved cases of illegally dumped but inappropriately treated industrial waste found by the 47 prefectures, etc. all over the country was 2,675, and the residual amount of the waste was 17.26 million tons (Figure 2-53).

Of this, measures concerning removal of problems are to be carried out for 16 cases in the future. Among 159 cases reported that problems may happen, preventive measures are to be taken for 33 cases, monitoring of surrounding areas is to be implemented for 11 cases and on-the-spot inspections are to be conducted for 115 cases in the future. Of 33 cases in which preventive measures against problems are to be carried out, the preventive measures have been implemented for six cases by the administrative authorities. As for 199 cases reported as under survey on problems, the survey to clarify the situations of problems, etc. is carried out or will be carried out in the next fiscal year. In addition, periodic on-the-spot inspections, monitoring, etc.
Figure 2-51 Perpetrators of illegally dumped industrial waste (fiscal year 2008)

Source: Ministry of the Environment

Figure 2-52 Perpetrators of improperly treated industrial waste (fiscal year 2008)

Table 2-6 Problems caused by illegal dumping cases and status of prefectures' measures against the problems (fiscal year 2008)

Number of dumping	Percentage	Volume of dumping (t)	Percentage
Problems have happened.	5	1.6%	1,725	0.9%
Measures concerning removal of problems (including taken and partially taken ones)	5	1.6%	1,725	0.9%
Measures completed $ ^{*2} $	4	1.3%	1,425	0.7%
Problems may happen.	15	4.9%	7,620	3.8%
Preventive measures against problems (including taken and partially taken ones)	12	3.9%	2,091	1.0%
Measures completed $ ^{*2} $	8	2.6%	1,623	0.8%
Periodic on-the-spot inspections	3	1.0%	5,530	2.7%
No problem at present	282	91.6%	191,795	94.6%
Others (guidance of removal, follow-up survey, etc.)	106	34.4%	127,996	63.1%
No particular measures	176	57.1%	63,799	31.5%
Under survey on problems	6	1.9%	1,590	0.8%
Survey in order to clarify the problems	6	1.9%	1,590	0.8%
Total $ ^{*1} $	308	100.0%	202,730	100.0%

$ ^{*} $ 1: Number of reported cases which were identified as illegal dumping ones within the fiscal year

$ ^{*} $ 2: Cases completed within the fiscal year from among above ones, which are not included in the remained cases as of the end of the fiscal year Source: Ministry of the Environment
Table 2-7 Problems caused by improper treatment cases and status of prefectures' measures against the problems (fiscal year 2008)

Number of improper treatment	Percentage	Volume of improper treatment (t)	Percentage
Problems have happened.	0	0.0%	0	0.0%
Problems may happen.	16	5.2%	899,405	73.2%
Preventive measures against problems (including taken and partially taken ones)	12	3.9%	869,408	70.8%
Measures completed $ ^{*2} $	7	2.3%	320	0.0%
Periodic on-the-spot inspections	4	1.3%	29,997	2.4%
No problem at present	286	92.9%	318,454	25.9%
Others (guidance of proper treatment, periodic on-the-spot inspections, etc.)	96	31.2%	226,899	18.5%
No particular measures	190	61.7%	91,555	7.5%
Under survey on problems	6	1.9%	10,540	0.9%
Survey in order to clarify the problems	6	1.9%	10,540	0.9%
Total $ ^{*1} $	308	100.0%	1,228,399	100.0%

$ ^{*} $ 1: Number of reported cases which were identified as illegal dumping ones within the fiscal year

$ ^{*} $ 2: Cases completed within the fiscal year from among above ones, which are not included in the remained cases as of the end of the fiscal year Source: Ministry of the Environment

Figure 2-53 Remaining volume of illegally dumped industrial waste by prefecture (by prefecture and ordinance designated city, as of the end of fiscal year 2008)

Note: The above data concern cases of illegal dumping, etc. of industrial wastes identified by all prefectures and 12 ordinance-designated cities as of the end of fiscal 2008; from among these cases, the above data were created by counting those cases for which it was possible to ascertain the remaining volume of wastes.
# Section 3. State of Implementation of Legal Systems for Establishment of a Sound Material-Cycle Society

## (1) Fundamental Law for Establishing a Sound Material-Cycle Society

The “Fundamental Law for Establishing a Sound Material-Cycle Society” was promulgated in July 2000 and enforced in January 2001, with the aim of securing a material cycle in society by revising the present state of our mass-production, mass-consumption, and mass-disposal society and the lifestyles of people, to thereby establish “a sound material-cycle society” where consumption of natural resources is curbed and the environmental load is decreased.

This law provides the following: (1) objects subject to this law should be understood as “wastes, etc.” in an integrated manner regardless of whether they are valuable or of no value and products should be prevented from becoming wastes, etc., (2) the usefulness of generated wastes, etc. should be paid attention to and wastes, etc. should be rerecognized as “recyclable resources” for them to thereby be subject to cyclical use (reuse, recycling, and heat recovery), (3) wastes that are not capable of cyclical use should be appropriately disposed. With these processes, this law aims to realize “a sound material-cycle society”, that is “a society where the consumption of natural resources can be reduced and as much of the environmental load as possible can be decreased.” (Figure 3-1)

The Sound Material-Cycle Society Fundamental Law promotes two concepts as the base of its policies: the responsibility of waste generator and extended producer responsibility.

### A. Responsibility of Waste Generator

A waste generator must bear the primary responsibility for the reduction of environmental load caused by its disposal of wastes. “Responsibility of waste generator” is an idea that a business operator that generates wastes should bear the responsibility for proper treatment of the wastes, and it is one of the basic principles of measures for recycling wastes. More specifically, proper treatment of wastes means that a business operator must sort its generated wastes and treat them by itself.

Because the perpetrator of environmental load caused by the disposal of wastes is the generator of the wastes, it is rational to think that the generator is responsible for the reduction of environmental load caused by its disposal of wastes. The root of this idea lies in the so-called Polluter-Pays Principle.

This idea of “responsibility of waste generator” must be continuously and thoroughly promoted. In addition, ordinary citizens cannot be free from their responsibility as a generator of wastes and need to play their roles positively.

### B. Extended Producer Responsibility

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is an idea that a producer bears a certain responsibility (physical or financial responsibility) for the reuse, recycling, and disposal of the products it produced even after the products were used and then disposed of. This idea gives producers incentives to develop and produce products that are difficult to

Figure 3-1 Flowchart for a sound material-cycle society
The guidelines basically provide the following: (1) the generation of wastes should be controlled as much as possible, (2) then actual wastes should be used as cyclically as possible in the order of reuse, recycling, and heat recovery in consideration of prevention of improper waste treatment and reduction of the environmental load, and (3) wastes unable to be subject to proper and cyclical use, even after such generation control and proper and cyclical use have been thoroughly carried out should be treated properly. With these processes, it is required for the final disposal volume of municipal waste and that of industrial waste to be reduced by about 50% by fiscal 2010, compared with fiscal 1997, and, also in fiscal 2009, efforts to achieve the target were steadily made.

In addition, when the Waste Management Law was revised in June 2003, provisions concerning the formulation of the Wastes Disposal Facility Development Plan were added to the law, resulting in the repeal of the Law for Special Measures for the Improvement and Construction of Waste Treatment Facilities. The Waste Disposal Facility Development Plan, whose target was changed from “amount of projects” to “results to achieve” based on the discussions about the revision of the ideal state of social capital development by the national government, was decided on by the Cabinet in October 2003. Because this plan was supposed to reach its final year in fiscal 2008, the new Wastes Disposal Facility
Table 3-2 Sorted collection plan and recycling plan

(1) Number of municipalities with sorted collection

FY 2008	FY 2009	FY 2010	FY 2011	FY 2012
Glass containers: colorless	1,779	1,780	1,781	1,784	1,788
97.4%	97.4%	97.5%	97.6%	97.9%
Glass containers: brown	1,782	1,783	1,783	1,786	1,790
97.5%	97.6%	97.6%	97.8%	98.0%
Glass containers: other colors	1,782	1,784	1,786	1,790	1,794
97.5%	97.6%	97.8%	98.0%	98.2%
Paper containers and packages	896	915	942	965	974
49.0%	50.1%	51.6%	52.8%	53.3%
PET bottles	1,791	1,792	1,802	1,804	1,806
98.0%	98.1%	98.6%	98.7%	98.9%
Plastic containers and packages	1,429	1,465	1,489	1,504	1,517
78.2%	80.2%	81.5%	82.3%	83.0%
Steel cans	1,819	1,819	1,819	1,819	1,821
99.6%	99.6%	99.6%	99.6%	99.7%
Aluminum cans	1,820	1,820	1,820	1,820	1,822
99.6%	99.6%	99.6%	99.6%	99.7%
Cardboard boxes	1,744	1,749	1,753	1,756	1,759
95.5%	95.7%	95.9%	96.1%	96.3%
Drink cartons	1,568	1,575	1,585	1,587	1,591
85.8%	86.2%	86.8%	86.9%	87.1%

[Upper row: number of municipalities, lower row: percentage of all municipalities]

Total number of municipalities: 1,827 (as of April 1, 2007)

(2) Estimated sorted collection

(Unit: thousand tons)

FY 2008	FY 2009	FY 2010	FY 2011	FY 2012
Glass containers: colorless	359	359	358	357	356
Glass containers: brown	309	309	308	308	307
Glass containers: other colors	183	184	184	184	184
Paper containers and packages	146	153	161	168	171
PET bottles	303	312	324	332	340
Plastic containers and packages	804	858	945	978	1,004
Steel cans	314	312	311	309	307
Aluminum cans	149	150	151	152	152
Cardboard boxes	752	763	770	776	781
Drink cartons	25	26	27	28	28

(3) Estimated recycling

(Unit: thousand tons)

FY 2008	FY 2009	FY 2010	FY 2011	FY 2012
Glass containers: colorless	180	180	180	180	180
Glass containers: brown	160	170	170	170	170
Glass containers: other colors	130	130	130	130	130
Paper containers and packages	356	356	356	356	356
PET bottles	370	384	384	385	386
Plastic containers and packages	1271	1291	1291	1293	1,293

Source: Ministry of the Environment

Table 3-3 Collection by designated corporations of waste conforming to sorted collection criteria

FY 2008	Plastic containers and packages	Paper containers and packages	PET bottles	Glass bottles
Colorless	Brown	Other colors
Number of municipalities conducting sorted collection	1,308	644	1,765	1,723	1,724	1,716
Number of municipalities transferring waste to designated corporations	1,017	148	1,137	921	983	1,184

Source: Created by the Ministry of the Environment, based on materials published by the Japan Container and Package Recycling Association

time to revise the Home Appliance Recycling System according to a provision of the law. In June of the same year, the system was examined and evaluated in the joint conference of the Central Environment Council and the Industrial Structure Council. As a result in February 2008, “Report on the Evaluation and Examination of the Implementation Sta-
Figure 3-6 Development status of major home appliance recycling plants

administrative agencies of the 47 prefectures, etc, aimed to ensure fair application of the law and took measures against improper treatment of vehicles, targeting the last users of vehicles, relevant business operators, and exporters.

In addition, in order to enforce the law efficiently, the government using various types of media conducted public relation activities and held briefings for relevant business operators, vehicle owners, etc.

Costs needed for recycling of fluorocarbons, air bags, and shredder dusts (fluorocarbons are destroyed) are set and announced officially by automobile manufacturers, etc. As an organization that handles costs needed for managing recycling charges (charge management cost) and costs needed for managing the information on end-of-life vehicles (information management costs), the Japan Automobile Recycling Promotion Center is approved by the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry and the Minister of the Environment, and the costs are announced officially.

The number of reports by vehicle collectors on used vehicles (electronic manifest report) was about 3.58 million in fiscal 2008. In addition, the total number of vehicles charged a fee for recycling in the period from January 2005 to March 2009 was 92.77 million, and the total amount of charged fees was 912.1 billion yen.
Source: Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry

The National Institute for Environmental Studies worked on the steady implementation of the “Priority Program for Sustainable Material Cycles”, which is one of the priority programs mentioned in the Second Medium-Term Plan (program period: FY 2006 to 2010).

## (6) Facilities

Support was provided for advanced projects to improve recycling-related facilities, within the “Eco-Town Plan” (Figure 4-1) implemented under the coalition of the Ministry of the Environment and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, with the aim of establishing a socio-economic system with environmentally sound resource cycles in the local area.

As for livestock manure generated by the livestock industry, implementation of appropriate treatment and effective utilization were promoted, based on the Act on the Appropriate Treatment and Promotion of Utilization of Livestock