Transcript スライド 1 - AECEN

Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
Towards sustainable development - policy oriented, practical and strategic research on global environmental issues
Lessons learned from Japan on Soil
Contamination Policy and Implementation
AECEN Regional Forum
Masanori Kobayashi
Coordinator
Nusa Dua, Indonesia
24 – 26 November 2008
Ashio Copper Mine Pollution
Copper mining intensified in 19th
Century
Iron Oxide – Sulfuric Acid
contaminated areas
Sickness exemplified by
ophthalmic disorder illness and
killed over 1,000
Developed law and institutional mechanisms
for tackling soil contamination – brown field
In 2002, Japan enacted the Soil Contamination
Countermeasures Act that has been developed based
on the lessons drawn from Europe and North America
taking into account Japan’s socio-economic conditions,
 5 year review have been conducted, and further
reforms were recommended,
 Prefecture government has adopted more stringent
ordinance thereby obliging a seller of over 1,000 ha. to
conduct soil contamination survey.

Mechanism of soil contamination
Effluent from
factories
Illegal
dumping
Soil
contamination
Underground
water
contamination
Toxic substance flows through air, water, agricultural crops and
fish → health damage/ecosystem damage
Japan’s Soil Contamination Countermeasures Act
Key Provisions
Objective
To implement countermeasures to soil contamination for protecting
health through assessing contamination and preventing the damage of
human health
Survey
- At the time of abandoning the facility using toxic substance (Art.3)
- When the prefectural government detects the risk of damaging human
health by soil contamination (Art.4)
Designation
When contamination exceeds the standard, the site is designated under
the Act, and it is publicly announced (Art.5)
Restriction on land and its use change
Obliged to report to the prefectural government and to be regulated
(Art.9)
Removal of contamination
Polluters or owners obliged to remove contamination and cleanse soil
(Art.7)
Japan’s Soil Contamination
Countermeasures Act
Performance (Feb. 2003 – Feb 2008)
Surveyed land sites 898 cases
Designated sites 259
Sites declared to require contamination removal 63 (33
removed, 30 in the process of removal or under
consideration, 0 – no action)
Sites declared not to require contamination removal
W196 (111 treated, 62 in the process of treatment or
under consideration, 23 – no action)
Lifting the designation of sites under the Act 128
Surveyed site cases
Number of surveyed
site cases
1991 Soil
contamination
standard was set
Cases that remain
within the standards
Cases that
exceed the
standards
Feb 2003 Act
enacted
Number of surveys in 2006
Surveyed
Obliged by
the Act 3%
14,032
cases
Voluntary
86%
Obliged by
ordinances
11%
No. of
cases
Undertaken measured
Measuring
underground
water quality
Entrance
prohibition
Covering
Containment
Cleansing at
the site
Removal of
contaminated
soil
Whereabouts of removed
contaminated soil
Storing facility
Removed
contaminated
soil
Non-certified
treatment
plant
Certified
treatment
plant
Cement
factory
Final
disposal
Various supporting measures
estate – soil contamination
risk/cost is integrated in the land price
 Finance – when making loans,
financial institutions take into account
the soil contamination risk/cost
 Accounting – soil contamination
risk/cost is accounted in the financial
statement
 Real
Financial assistance to soil
contamination countermeasures
Governmental
contricutions
Fund
Prefectural
Government
Land owner
Non-governmental
contributions
Recent lawsuit case –
Seiko Epson vs Ohji Paper
SE bought land from Ohji P and it turned out that the soil was
contaminated with dioxin and PCB
SE estimates that 9,200 tons of contaminate soil would require
removal/cleansing
Have taken measures to remove/cleanse contaminated soil
Sought 640 million JPY(6.4 million USD) for damages
Declared on 8 July 2008 that Ohji must pay 589,75850 (5.9
million USD)
Future challenges
○Promoting rational countermeasures based on the type of risks
・Categorizing designated sites, and disseminating info on the status
・Assessment based on land use types
・Checking countermeasures plans
○Economic instruments
・City planners, real estate agents, accountants
○Scope of Act
・ For preserving safe and comfortable land
○Information sharing mechanisms
・Management sheet on removed soil
・Enforcement measures on illegal cases
○Ensuring sound treatment of removed soil
○Enhancing accuracy/credibility of surveys and countermeasures
○Prevention of soil contamination
http://www.env.go.jp/water/dojo/sesaku_kondan/rep080331/gaiyo.pdf