Land of the rising toxins:
Japan struggles with environment
Wednesday, March 10, 1999
By Maggie Suzuki and Rick Davis
Species such as the Japanese macaque are routinely killed as "pests," despite
their regionally endangered status in Japan.
Japan has long been criticized for lagging behind other nations in its
commitment to environmental issues. These days, the environment is getting more
attention than ever in the Land of the Rising Sun.
But a weighty question remains: How much is actually being accomplished?
The Law to Control Packaging Waste is a case in point. It's garnered a lot of
attention, and on the surface, it appears Japan is taking great strides. Yet
critics say that enormous problems remain. Record low prices for waste paper
made 1997 yet another crisis year for the recycling industry, which operates on
the brink of collapse despite high recycling rates. Stacks of old newspapers and
magazines still adorn curbside pickup points on "burnable trash" days, and paper
accounts for about 20 percent of Japan's municipal waste. At least half of all
aluminum and steel cans are recycled, but the introduction of smaller PET
plastic bottles by beverage companies has hindered efforts.
Shocking revelations about Japan's environmental problems seem to make the
headlines every week. Endocrine disruptors, or "environmental hormones" as
they're known in Japan, have churned public debate, as more and more illegal
toxic waste dumps and dioxin-spewing incinerators become public knowledge.
Extremely high dioxin levels, for example, were discovered in soil near an
incinerator in Osaka.
Meanwhile, the Ministry of Education found that 83 percent of schools use small
incinerators which release dioxin. Only this year was dioxin declared a
hazardous material in Japan.
"After World War II, the obvious priority for the country was to develop
economically," says Richard Forrest, an expert in Japanese environmental issues
with the Environmental Diplomacy Institute in Seattle. "Japan was very
successful by concentrating on developing infrastructure and creating an
environment that would help business.
But now this high-growth machine is an anachronism. It also causes other
problems, environmental problems in particular. And there's no real political
will to change."
Consider wetlands protection. The United States established its "no net loss of
wetlands" policy a decade ago, but Japan has no official position -- and there's
none in sight. Government public works projects, in fact, are the main cause of
wetland destruction in Japan. Last year, for instance, a Ministry of Agriculture
project strangled Japan's largest tidal flat wetland at Isahaya Bay in Nagasaki
Prefecture.
Hirofumi Yamashita was awarded the prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize in
San Francisco for his wetland conservation work last April, but the government
continues with projects throughout the country that, over the next few years,
will destroy most of Japan's tidal flat wetlands. Recently, a group of scholars,
journalists and other environmental leaders selected 100 of the worst public
works projects in Japan. More than half, and all of the "Worst Ten," affect
wetlands.
"Each country has its strengths and weaknesses," says Forrest.
"Certainly the weakness in Japan is a lack of appreciation and effort to
preserve intact ecosystems and habitat. A lot of the development that people see
as destructive is a reflection of that.
There are dams that are harming the biodiversity of rivers, and virtually all of
the coastal wetlands are either developed or planned for development."
Japan also remains behind much of the world in matters of wildlife conservation.
The Mammalogical Society of Japan announced last year that about half of the 174
mammal species in and around Japan are in danger of extinction. Ruling Liberal
Democratic Party members, in the meantime, want to revise legislation to make it
easier to kill wild animals and birds, supposedly in the interest of controlling
nuisance wildlife.
Species such as the crescent-moon bear and the Japanese macaque are routinely
killed as "pests," despite their regionally endangered status. Under the
proposed revision, responsibility for managing wildlife would be decentralized
to the local level, where many feel regulating powers would fall into the hands
of the would-be destroyers. "There's an interest in preserving wildlife in
Japan," says Forrest. "But the system doesn't work."
Which is not to say all is gloom for the environment in Japan. Truth be told,
Japan is ahead of even the United States in certain areas.
Energy efficiency, for one, says Forrest. "They're also much more responsible in
how they're accepting the reality of climate change and the need to deal with
it," he explains. "If it's a question of technology or use of resources, Japan
can be very efficient and innovative." The country, in fact, is among the world
leaders in shipments of photovoltaic cells for solar homes, largely because of
government support in the form of subsidies and tax incentives.
"Last year, the growth of the solar-cell industry jumped 40 percent and it was
largely due to demand from Japan," says Molly O'Meara, of the Worldwatch
Institute.
And Japanese auto companies, especially Toyota, are leading environmental
innovators. Toyota, which has committed itself (along with other companies) to
reducing the threat of global warming, has also introduced the world's first
fuel-efficient "hybrid" car (combining electric and internal-combustion motors)
and will soon introduce a low-polluting fuel cell automobile. Additionally,
Honda has pledged to share its environmental technology with other companies.
In June, the Japanese government approved an update to the "Long-Term Energy
Supply and Demand Outlook," Japan's blueprint for future energy use. The Outlook
calls for more co-generation energy and less dependence on coal. But its
relentless drive toward increasing nuclear power is unchanged, calling for an
increase of 35 to 45 percent of nuclear-generating capacity by 2010.
As with much of Japan's environmental policy, however, the government marches on
with its plans. "A decision was made that this was the path they were going to
take," says Forrest, "and they're very reluctant to change."
For more information, contact the Worldwatch Institute, (202)797-6800.
(Maggie Suzuki and Rick Davis are contributors to E, the Environmental
Magazine.)
