Institute for Global Environmental StrategiesTowards sustainable development - policy oriented, practical and strategic research on global environmental issues
Lessons learned from Japan on Soil Contamination Policy and Implementation
Masanori KobayashiCoordinator
Nusa Dua, Indonesia24 – 26 November 2008
AECEN Regional Forum
Ashio Copper Mine PollutionCopper 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
Underground water
contamination
Soil contaminationIllegal
dumping
Effluent from factories
Toxic substance flows through air, water, agricultural crops and fish → health damage/ecosystem damage
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)
DesignationWhen contamination exceeds the standard, the site is designated under the Act, and it is publicly announced (Art.5)
Restriction on land and its use changeObliged to report to the prefectural government and to be regulated (Art.9)
Removal of contaminationPolluters or owners obliged to remove contamination and cleanse soil (Art.7)
Japan’s Soil Contamination Countermeasures Act
Key Provisions
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 removalW196 (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
Feb 2003 Act enacted
1991 Soil contamination
standard was set
Cases that exceed the standards
Cases that remain within the standards
Number of surveyed site cases
Number of surveys in 2006
Surveyed
14,032 cases
Voluntary 86%
Obliged by ordinances
11%
Obliged by the Act 3%
Undertaken measured
Entrance prohibition
Measuring underground water quality
Covering
Containment
Cleansing at the site
Removal of contaminated
soil
No. of cases
Whereabouts of removed contaminated soil
Removed contaminated
soil
Storing facility
Non-certified treatment
plant
Final disposal
Certified treatment
plant
Cement factory
Various supporting measures
Real 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
Financial assistance to soil contamination
countermeasures
Governmental contricutions Fund
Prefectural Government
Non-governmental contributions
Land owner
Recent lawsuit case – Seiko Epson vs Ohji PaperSE bought land from Ohji P and it turned out that the soil was c
ontaminated 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 contaminationhttp://www.env.go.jp/water/dojo/sesaku_kondan/rep080331/gaiyo.pdf