Analysis of Local Environmental Indicators/indices in Japan
Takahiro NAKAGUCHI* Yuichi MORIGUCHI**
(*Part-time Lecturer of Saitama University, **National Institute for Environmental Studies)
@
Abstract
The characteristics of sets of local environmental indicators/indices in Japan were analyzed by comparing with international, national, and local environmental and sustainability indicators/indices in the world. We investigated indicators/indices developed by 47 international organizations, national and local governments and NGOs. There were clear differences in the selection of indicators/indices between Japanese sets and those in other countries.
As a result from Hayashi's quantification method 3 using 44 organizations and 60 environmental themes, selection of themes by organizations was explained by 2 axes: the first axis was Local/Global and second was Social/Physical. These sets were categorized into 4 groups by projecting them on these axes. Group A , that is more Global and neutral on the second axis, includes UNCSD, UNEP, etc. Group B, more Physical and neutral on the first axis, includes SCOPE, Netherlands, etc. Group C, more Social and neutral on the second axis, includes Seattle, Hamilton-Wentworth, etc.
Most of indicators/indices in Japan, represented by Urban Environmental Quality Indices developed in mid-1980s by Kita-Kyusyu City and Tokyo Metropolitan Government, belong to Group D, which is distinguished from other three groups by more "Local" position on the first axis. Those developed recently for basic environment plan in several prefectures also belong to group D, but they are shifting to more "Global" direction. It seems they tend to select global environment themes as well as local ones. There are a few exceptions which belong to Group A (Adachi Ward) and B (Miyagi Pref.). There is no example in Group C, because this group is not covered by environmental indicators but by social indicators in Japan.
On the other hand, we analyzed selection of indicators/indices according to "Driving force" and "Pressure"(D/P), "State" and "Effect"(S/E), "Response"(R) framework. We found 4 types: Type T
of high D/P ratio, including Netherlands, WRI, etc. Type U of high S/E ratio, including SCPOE, EEA, etc. Type V of high R ratio, including indicators/indices developed in Japan. Type W is characterized by balanced selection from D/P, S/E, and R, including OECD, EPA, etc. Before 1992 most of Japanese indicators/indices belong to type Ta. After 1992, those which developed indices for presenting total environmental pressures belong to type T, the others which selected indicators for setting targets of policy measures and monitoring their compliances belong to type V.Keywords: Environmental Indicator, Sustainability Indicator, Local Environment Plan
@