Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on EU-Japan Relations: The role of Civil Society
Date: 2007-02-16
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, Japan, cooperation policy, international relations, non-governmental organisation, non-profit organisation, voluntary organisation

C 97/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.4.2007

The same holds for the question whether or not Part B of the
Convention (the Guidelines) should be made binding.

If the social partners fail to reach an agreement, the EESC will
revisit these points.

account, the EESC might wish to observe that, whatever solution
the Commission envisages for ensuring Community coordina-
tion in a tripartite decision-making process,
it should never
weaken tripartite ILO provisions at the national level.

As regards the setting up of

the tripartite structure
2.7
provided for by the Convention, the EESC might note that such
mechanisms are not foreseen by the Treaty. Taking this into

The EESC might wish to recommend Commission
2.8
support for ILO expert meetings for the development of opera-
tional guidelines for Flag and Port State control.

Brussels, 15 February 2007.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on EU-Japan Relations: The role of Civil
Society

(2007/C 97/12)

At its Plenary Session of 17 January 2007, the European Economic and Social Committee decided, under
rule 29(2) of its Rules of Procedure, to draw up an opinion on EU-Japan Relations: The role of Civil Society.

By letter dated 6 April 2006, Ms Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Commissioner for External Relations and European
Neighbourhood Policy of the European Commission, encouraged such an initiative.

The Section for External Relations, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the
subject, adopted its opinion on 24 January 2007. The rapporteur was Ms Päärendson.

At its 433rd plenary session, held on 15-16 February 2007 (meeting of 16 February), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 112 votes to 3 with 28 abstentions.

1. Executive Summary and Recommendations

increasing recognition of shared challenges shows that the time
is ripe for more contact.

1.1
The Committee has been encouraged by the European
Commission to examine developments in civil society in Japan
and to consider ways in which the European Union (EU) could
cooperate with it to further strengthen EU-Japan relations.

1.2
The EU and Japan share many common values and inter-
ests. There are many areas where cooperation on an official
level are established and working well.

Japanese interest in regional cooperation on the model of

1.3
‘functional integration’ is growing in importance.

1.4
The role of civil society in Japan is of steadily increasing
importance although most often it still focuses on local and
regional issues.

It will

take significant

1.6
time to establish more and
stronger contacts and identifying the best partners will be
crucial.

An important initial step could be to hold a meeting to
1.7
identify common problems and to consider how to start to
tackle these.

1.8
Appropriate civil society organisations from both part-
ners should routinely be considered for inclusion in relevant
seminars and similar events.

There are currently relatively few areas of strong contact
1.5
between the EU and Japanese civil societies although the

Over time a more structured dialogue on the model of a

1.9
round table could be envisaged.

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 97/35

1.10
Japan already offer a basis for networking and partnership.

The two European Institutes (hereinafter EU Centres) in

3. Background

1.11
increasing use of
voice over internet protocol.

Funding requirements should be reduced by making
techniques such as video conferences and

economically, where

Japan is a major player in East Asia, a region of growing
3.1
importance
cooperation is
improving fast but also where security concerns are growing. As
the East Asian region, including China, becomes more impor-
tant to the EU, a closer relationship with Japan will provide
balance and will
include increased cooperation on regional
issues (7).

regional

2. Introduction

2.1
Following growing earlier cooperation, in 2001 the EU
and Japan decided to launch a decade of EU-Japan cooperation
under the title ‘Shaping our Common Future’ (1). This action
plan contained four sections (‘objectives’). The final objective
(Objective IV) was titled ‘Bringing together peoples and cultures’
and included ‘developing civil society links and encouraging
inter-regional exchanges’. Objective III (Coping with Global and
Societal Challenges) is also of relevance.

2.2
Recent events involving civil society links have been the
very successful
in 2005,
‘Year of people-to-people exchanges’
two EU Centres
the establishment of
in the
Tokyo (3) area and in Kansai (4) and a joint symposium in Brus-
sels in April 2006 to discuss progress made in the ‘Shaping our
common future’ action plan so far and to discuss possible
changes needed to it to allow for the changing situations in
Japan, the EU and elsewhere.

in Japan (2)

The aim of this opinion is to consider developments in
2.3
civil society in Japan and to explore ways in which EU civil
society, and notably the EESC, could cooperate with it to further
strengthen EU relations with Japan (5).

Japan is also one of the EU's strategic partners. Although
3.2
Europe and Japan are on opposite sides of
the globe, and
although both have complex and very distinctive cultures, we
share much. Both are major economic entities who wish to play
a wider international role. We share much the same funda-
mental values and share many common interests and concerns.
Both are democratic societies. It is in our mutual
interest to
consolidate and deepen our relationship and our mutual under-
standing.

3.3
In economic terms, Japan is the EU's fifth largest export
market at 6.6 % and the EU is Japan's second largest export
market. Its current GDP growth rate is about 2.7 % per annum
and its unemployment rate is about 4.5 %. Japan provides some
14 % of the world's GNP (China has 3.4 %) and has an average
per capita income of $32 230 (China has $780).

those

In the earlier stages of cooperation the main subjects of
3.4
common concern were
involving trade and other
economic factors, which included significant foreign investment
in both directions. Economic reforms are important for both
parties to improve competitiveness in a globalised world while
sustaining their own social models and having regard to sustain-
able growth.

‘Civil Society’

2.4
is defined by EESC as ‘all organisational
structures whose members have objectives and responsibilities
that are of general
interest and who also act as mediators
between the public authorities and citizens’ (6).

(1) ‘Shaping our common future’, An Action Plan for EU-Japan Coopera-

tion; European Union-Japan Summit, Brussels, 2001.

(2) EU Centres are funded by the EU and have the role of bridging the
awareness gap between Japan and the EU to allow students in all facul-
ties to learn about the European Union.

(3) Participating institutions: Hitotsubashi University, International Chris-
tian University, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies and Tsuda
College
http://www.euij-tc.or.

(4) Participating institutions: Kobe University, Kwansei Gakuin University

and Osaka University
http://euij-kansai.jp/index_en.html.

(5) See letter

from Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner D/06/468 dated

6 April 2006.

(6) See COM(2005) 290 for a fuller definition.

3.5
There are now many sectors where EU-Japan cooperation
is well established. For example, there are standing forums for
discussions on industrial policy, science and technology, infor-
mation technology, employment, social questions, electronic
research, development
commerce,
aid and environmental
protection.
In 2006 the Japanese social partners showed a
growing interest in the practice of corporate social responsi-
bility. Further, the EU-Japan Regulatory Reform Dialogue (estab-
lished some 12 years ago) is addressing all regulatory issues in a
coherent way. Details of some programmes are at Appendix I.
Many Directorates General in the European Commission, as well
as EU Member States are involved in this dialogue.

(7) There are already a considerable number of regional bodies, some of
which include European participation. Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM)
and the Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF) are important examples. Invol-
vement in such bodies could further increase the value of EU-Japan civil
society cooperation.

C 97/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.4.2007

There is a gradual

increase in Japan of what can be
3.6
described as ‘a sense of closeness’ with Europe. The more
recently joined Member States are, however, still
little known
there.

assets available to Japanese society. This will lead to an increase
in the importance and influence of civil society organisations.
The democratic participatory process is starting to be better
understood and all draft
legislation is now available for
comment on the internet; however, according to civil society
organisations the views of civil society (apart from the social
partners) do not often enough influence final decisions.

4. Civil society development

Japan has, as said above, a very different culture from the
4.1
EU (8) and also different social conditions. It is thus no surprise
that Japanese civil society organisations are different. The most
obvious difference is that until quite recently the state played a
rather dominant role in shaping civil society; apart from social
partners, organisations had to be approved by the authorities
and were then subject to supervision by them.

This was accepted by the public because the combination
4.2
of an elite central bureaucracy coupled with major industrial
interests (supported by parliamentarians) allowed for quick and
effective policy decisions and their implementation; all
this
assisted economic growth (9). Under these circumstances the
role of civil society in governance was very restricted. Indeed
concepts of civil society, governance and accountability were
not even in popular vocabularies at the time.

4.3
In the late 1980s the so called ‘economic bubble’ burst;
this led to a period of deflation and economic stagnation, only
recently overcome. Then, in the 1990s, there were several scan-
dals involving senior bureaucrats which started to undermine
the public's confidence in this dominance of the state and major
industrial interests. This, and the mishandling of the rescue and
recovery work following the ‘Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake’
in Kobe in 1995 showed the public the effectiveness (and poten-
tial) of some civil society organisations. This led in 1998 to the
adoption of a new law on ‘Not for Profit Organisations’ (NPOs)
which acknowledged that civil society organisations could play
an important role in good governance (10). This law removed
many of the barriers to NPO development and removed most of
the very burdensome bureaucratic supervision. It was one of the
changes that brought
less regulation and centralisation into
Japanese society and politics.

4.4
Since these events civil society has started to change;
organisations are proliferating quite fast with the greatest
growth concerning those groups that emphasise their indepen-
dence from the authorities. The question now being discussed in
Japan is how it is possible to use more fully the totality of the

(8) Japanese culture has a very long history and has been much affected by
the fact that the country was cut off from the rest of the world for
centuries.

(9) This success led to ‘output legitimacy’, where legitimacy was based on
performance in realising its goals, to the detriment of ‘input legitimacy’,
based on the democratic participatory process.

(10) From the Japanese point of view the EU also had crises, such as the
events leading to the resignation of the Santer Commission, at about
the same time which led to rethinking EU governance, leading to a
greater involvement of EU civil society in the policy process.

4.5
Discussion on Japanese civil society normally considers
them under two main headings. First, there are the Non-Govern-
mental Organisations (NGOs) which primarily provide services
overseas for development and humanitarian work. These are
largely funded by the Government (Ministry of Foreign Affairs
— MOFA); they work in close partnership with the authorities
for its Official Development Assistance (ODA) programmes and
have regular meetings with the Government to promote close
dialogue and collaboration. However, their financial and human
resources remain limited.

4.6
Then there are NPOs, covering a very wide range of
activities; the social partners, trade and professional associations
and those active in the environmental, consumer, agriculture,
cultural and other sectors are included. These stakeholders will
play an increasing role in the dialogue that is beginning to take
place within Japanese and foreign-owned companies about their
social responsibility, while respecting the voluntary nature of
this. Furthermore, organisations in the health sector play a very
important role. Funding from the authorities is sometimes avail-
able for
these are
them. A very significant proportion of
concerned primarily with finding local and regional solutions
for local and regional issues; work is for the benefit of local
communities. As a result there are fewer national NPOs.

Youth is also well represented by student and other orga-

4.7
nisations.

5. Current contacts between Japanese and EU civil organi-

sations

5.1 While there are numerous and regular contacts between
the EU and Japanese authorities (see 3.5 above and Appendices)
whose importance is regularly stressed by political leaders from
both parties, the links between most civil society organisations
are far more limited. However, in some areas there are already
strong and active links.

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 97/37

5.2 Social Partners

Employers — Nippon Keidanren (Japan Business Federation) is
a comprehensive economic organisation born in May 2002 by
amalgamation of Keidanren (Japan Federation of Economic
Organisations) and Nikkeiren (Japan Federation of Employers'
Associations). Its membership of 1,662 is comprised of 1,351
and 47 regional
companies, 130 industrial
economic organisations (as of 20 June, 2006).

associations,

Trade Unions are relatively weak, both in numbers and in
resources. About 20 % of workers are members of trade unions.
The main Trade Union organisation (RENGO (11)) accounts for
about two thirds of this total. RENGO has an office in Brussels.
It has access to much information from ETUC and often sends
representatives to meetings of labour organisations in Member
States (MS).

5.3
The EU-Japan Business Dialogue Roundtable (employers)
has been meeting annually for the last ten years to discuss ways
to improve economic and trade relations and, increasingly, to
consider global issues, such as energy. Their recommendations
are presented at the annual EU-Japan bilateral summit to poli-
tical
leaders, who are prepared to take them into account.
Further, EU and Japanese business organisations have long been
in dialogue over a wide range of matters.

In the face of worldwide challenges such as food safety
5.4
and labelling, EU and Japanese consumer organisations have
been meeting for six years now. Other examples of cooperation
are the annual dialogues between journalists, citizens' move-
ments, NGOs and environmentalists. And there is also the
academic cooperation that already exists between universities,
colleges and research institutes and that will be strengthened
after the recent establishment of two EU Institutes in Japan. The
academic institutions in Japan have particularly close links with
each other within Japan and with other such institutions in the
EU.

Recognising the need for personal contacts if better
5.5
understanding is to be developed, EU and Japan agreed that
2005 should be the ‘Year of People to People Exchange’. This
was a successful programme with some 1900 events being orga-
nised and a follow-up programme is now under discussion. The
challenge is to maintain and build on what was achieved.

These current contacts are very useful and show that it is
5.6
possible to establish lasting contacts where there is a clear back-
ground of shared challenges to be faced in the context of a
changing world with globalised practices and standards and an

(11) 6 500 000 employees are member of RENGO (as of June 2006).

increased need to be competitive. These include sustainable
development (notably energy security ‘green purchasing’ (12) and
natural resources), development aid (where the EU and Japan are
the major donors worldwide), ageing populations (with the
consequent effects on pensions, health services and social help),
immigration, working in multi-ethnic societies, work/family
balance and employment challenges. Corporate Social Responsi-
bility is an area where common interests are becoming clearer,
as is gender balance. Exchanging views on the above subjects
would be helpful.

EESC has some informal

links with the EU Centre in
5.7
Kansai. These are its only links currently although many EESC
members have some experience of working with Japanese orga-
nisations.

6. Possible action to build and sustain relations between

EU and Japan civil societies

6.1
In dealing with common challenges it is clear that civil
society has a significant role to play both within the EU and
Japan, in common undertakings and in the relationship between
us. Through bilateral discussions and by making their positions
clear civil society organisations will contribute to the ongoing
political process between EU and Japan. It is clear that there is
plenty of scope to do far more towards developing the relevant
sections the EU-Japan Action Plan (13)
involving civil society;
and that such work can be an important element in adding
value to EU-Japan relations.

this will

6.2
The first aim of building contacts between organised civil
society in Japan and in the EU must be to know and to under-
stand each other;
lead to the development of
networking. Only then can we start to cooperate properly to
add our contributions to the strong existing links between our
respective authorities. This will not be a quick process but it
would be helpful to seek support from the Commission and
from the Japanese authorities for an initial meeting to identify
common problems and to discuss the way ahead,
including
which organisations
represent both
parties (14); focussed work, including joint action, should follow
this initial meeting. The participants for this meeting should be
representatives of EU and Japanese civil society who could
provide a basis for further networking. For the EU, the EESC
and the EU level social partners should provide the majority of
the delegates.

could most usefully

(12) ‘Green purchasing’

is the system where public procurement must

include a significant percentage of ecologically friendly products.

(13) See paragraph 2.1 above.
(14) While some Japanese partners such as the Japanese Center for Interna-
tional Exchange (JCIE) and the EUIJs could help, there will initially also
be a need to seek advice from the Japanese authorities.

C 97/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.4.2007

The Commission should consider the inclusion of both
6.3
EU and Japanese civil society organisations (CSOs) at all relevant
seminars and similar events; they should also encourage the
Japanese authorities to do likewise. Over time this would build
up understanding between the partners as well as building a
network that can then be used for all sorts of contacts. The
identification of such events should be a regular agenda item on
meetings between the Commission and their Japanese collocu-
tors.

The selection of suitable topics for discussions involving
6.4
CSOs will be crucial. Where meetings at the official level iden-
tify subjects that would benefit
from the inclusion of CSO
input,
the Commission and the Japanese authorities should
consider tasking the EESC to provide this in conjunction with
Japanese counterparts. In such joint meetings the trade unions
could, for example, discuss ILO core standards.
Initially this
work could be put to groups formed on an ad hoc basis; where
appropriate setting up small ad hoc advisory groups should be
considered (15).

6.5
Recognising the growing importance to Japan of regional
cooperation, EU CSOs could also offer their experience in
helping States at different stages of development to become
more integrated, in accordance with the doctrine of ‘functional
the newer member
integration’. The experience of some of
states in establishing viable civil society organisations and
encouraging the authorities to include them in consultation and
decision making could offer some examples of interest. The
success of the EU in containing and reducing the potential for
rivalries and conflict could also offer a useful model that might
help in regional security concerns.

6.6
The establishment of the two EU Centres in Japan (EU
Centre in Tokyo and EU Centre in Kansai) offer possibilities for
networking and for building understanding. For example:

— the EESC could act as a point of contact for assistance and

information;

— this could include facilitating the bringing together of those
who seek contacts (for a particular purpose) in each other's
home area;

Brussels, 16 February 2007.

— it could also include offering places to each other for appro-
priate seminars (or other work) both as speakers and as
participants;

— the EESC could also offer to speak on EU related subjects in
which they are involved; decision-making processes in the
EU, the roles of civil society organisations at both EU and
national levels, the role of the social partners, the way in
which businesses handle the discussion and the implementa-
tion phases of EU legislation;

— the EESC could offer regular internships for the EU Centres

to bid for.

The EU Centre in Kansai is already considering the possibility of
co-organising a series of seminars/workshops focussing on
food labelling, environmental
specific issues.
protection and the ageing society are likely to be early key
issues.

In this context

6.7
It is also important to note that universities (and similar
bodies) are of great importance in Japanese society and offer
another route to help in understanding between CSOs. They can
also help to involve youth, which will be a key factor in building
long-term contacts.

The EESC should also consider setting up a small contact
6.8
group to help keep up to date and to offer a point of contact
for Japanese partners. As the civil societies come to understand
each other better on the longer term, some sort of standing
body, on the model of a Round Table, should be considered.

6.9
Contact should be maintained with the EU-Japan Joint
Parliamentary Committee to ensure that the civil society role
and potential is understood and, where appropriate, used to the
common benefit.

6.10
Funding will, as always, be crucial. However, the costs
of such arrangements should not be great and newer techniques,
such as video-conferences and Voice over Internet Protocol
(VoIP — conference calls), could help keep costs down in many
cases, most obviously for contacts between any small ad hoc
groups that may be established.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

(15) Language will, as elsewhere, cause some problems.