### Chart. 160 Efforts for Strategic Infrastructure Maintenance, Management, and Renewal

Source: MLIT

The rate of progress for life-extension measures and measures against aging in each facility covered by the Infrastructure Development Priority Policy Program (Cabinet decision made on March 31, 2009)

Initial value	Actual value(as of FY end)	Target value
FY2007	FY2008	FY2009	FY2010	FY2012
The formulation rate of the life-extending repair program for nationwide highway bridges (Note 1)	28%	41%	54%	63%	100%
The formulation rate of the life-extension program at sewerage systems (Note 2)	0%	Approx.4%	Approx.8%	Approx.24%	100%
The life extension rate in floodgates, etc., at river management facilities (Note 3)	0%	Approx.15%	Approx.31%	Approx.47%	100%
The formulation rate of life-extension measures at port and harbor facilities (Note 4)	Approx.2%	Approx.13%	Approx.58%	Approx.70%	Approx.97%
The rate of coastal preservation area facilities at which measures against aging have been implemented (Note 5)	Approx.51%	Approx.51%	Approx.52%	-	Approx.60%
The initial value (2007) and target value (2012) were as established in the Infrastructure development Priority Policy Program.
* With regard to the rate of formulation of the life-extending repair program at nationwide highway bridges, the data used for Iwate, Miyagi, and Fukushima prefectures were as of April 2010.
* With respect to the urban park facilities, 12 government bodies completed it, and 150 bodies were working on formulation of their measures as of fiscal 2010.
Notes: 1 “Number of highway bridge with life-extending repair programs / Number of Highway Bridges” for nationwide highway bridges of 15m or longer
2 “Number of municipality with life extension programs / Number of municipality managing the end-of-life sewage pipes”
3 “Number of facilities that have implemented the life extension measures / Number of national river management facilities (floodgate, etc.) that are expected to reach the end of their life during fiscal 2008 - 2012.”
4 “Number of facilities that have formulated a long-life extension program / number of major mooring facilities on the level of “major port” or above”
5 “The extension of coastal preservation area facilities for which required functions have been secured/ extension of coastal preservation area,” with respect to the facilities established before 1967”
Source: MLIT

3) Management on the strategic operation basis: “Selection and intensification,” complex of facilities, disposition, utilization/exploitation, privatization, etc.

For the purpose of infrastructure development amid the severe fiscal constraint in this society of declining population and aging, it is required to invest policy resources in a prioritized manner, which means the process of their “selection and intensification” is indispensable.

More specifically, the criteria for “selection and intensification” were stipulated as follows in the “Interim review of the Infrastructure development Priority Policy Program” dated November 2011, and we continue working to move forward with the program formation.

1) Those likely to be unable to reduce large-scale or wide-area disaster risks unless development is implemented now;

2) Those likely to become extremely difficult to enhance the industrial and economical infrastructures as well as international competitiveness of the nation unless development is implemented now;

3) Those likely to significantly preclude the realization of “development of sustainable and vibrant national land and regions” unless development is implemented now; and

4) Those likely to be put in extreme danger in the future unless proper maintenance, management, and renewal measures are implemented now.