10 Japanese Law and Policy on Marine Environment Protection …
189
specific measures, Japan had designated MPAs for 8.3% of its waters.
61 However,
this calculation has been criticised by some academics and civil society,
62 especially
by the Nature Conservation Society of Japan (NACS-J), which is the first ICUN
Member and the secretariat for the IUCN in Japan.
63 This is because 6.9% out of
8.3% MPAs consist of Designated Waters,
64 which are established for the sustainable
use of fishery resources, and not for biodiversity.
65 Moreover, the establishment of
Designated Waters has been criticised as being based on the experience of fishers
and not on scientific evidence.
66
Although most parts of the Japanese MPA have been criticised in this way, the
Shiretoko World Natural Heritage Area, which is an MPA that was established even
before the Aichi Targets were adopted to protect marine biodiversity, is highly
evaluated.
67 Although the area was vital for local fishers, to register the area in
the UNESCO World Natural Heritage framework, several measures were adopted,
including measures to conserve the ecosystem.
68 Therefore, in this area, the MPA
is operated for both the sustainable use of fishery resources and the conservation of
marine biodiversity, simultaneously.
69 Therefore, the Japanese government should
establish MPAs in accordance with the experience of Shiretoko, instead of simply
incorporating Designated Areas into MPAs.
Against this background, the MOE launched the project to establish a new and
very large MPA surrounding the Ogasawara Islands. On the 28th May 2018, the 35th
meeting of the Nature Conservation Committee of the Central Environment Council
was held to discuss ‘measures to conserve nature, including marine environment.’ In
this meeting, the establishment of an MPA in the Okiai Area (Japanese internal waters
and territorial sea that are deeper than 200 m, and Japanese Exclusive Economic Zone
61 MOE, ‘How the Marine Protected Area should be Established in Japan’, available at https://www.
kantei.go.jp/jp/singi/kaiyou/dai8/siryou3.pdf (last visited 21 May 2019) (in Japanese).
62 Taro Saishu, ‘Toward Setting Japanese Marine Protected Area -For the sake of CBD/Aichi Targets
Accomplishment-’. Journal of National Fisheries University, Vol. 67 (2018), p. 29 (in Japanese).
63 NACS-J, ‘About Us’, available at https://www.nacsj.or.jp/english/ (last visited 21 May 2019).
64 MOE, supra note 61.
65 NACS-J, How the MPA should be in Japan: For the Sake of Conserving Biodiversity, p. 13,
available at https://www.nacsj.or.jp/archive/files/katsudo/wetland/pdf/20120517mpateigensyo.pdf
(last visited 21 May 2019) (in Japanese).
66 Hiroshi Mukai, ‘Marine Protected Area: The Effects and the Present’, Journal of Environmental
Information Science, Vol. 38(2) (2009), p. 5 (in Japanese).
67 As for this MPA, see Yasuhiko Kagami, ‘Japanese MPAs at a Turning Point: Nomination of
Shiretoko for World Heritage Status’ in Michael I. Jeffery, Jeremy Firestone, and Karen BubnaLitic (eds.), Biodiversity Conservation, Law and Livelihoods: Bridging the North-South Divide
(IUCN Academy of Environmental Law Research Studies) (2009), pp. 251–264.
68 Makino and others, supra note 55, pp. 207–214.
69 MOE, Forestry Agency, Agency for Cultural Affairs, and Hokkaido Government, Management
Plan for the Shiretoko World Natural Heritage Site, (2009), pp. 9–16.
189
specific measures, Japan had designated MPAs for 8.3% of its waters.
61 However,
this calculation has been criticised by some academics and civil society,
62 especially
by the Nature Conservation Society of Japan (NACS-J), which is the first ICUN
Member and the secretariat for the IUCN in Japan.
63 This is because 6.9% out of
8.3% MPAs consist of Designated Waters,
64 which are established for the sustainable
use of fishery resources, and not for biodiversity.
65 Moreover, the establishment of
Designated Waters has been criticised as being based on the experience of fishers
and not on scientific evidence.
66
Although most parts of the Japanese MPA have been criticised in this way, the
Shiretoko World Natural Heritage Area, which is an MPA that was established even
before the Aichi Targets were adopted to protect marine biodiversity, is highly
evaluated.
67 Although the area was vital for local fishers, to register the area in
the UNESCO World Natural Heritage framework, several measures were adopted,
including measures to conserve the ecosystem.
68 Therefore, in this area, the MPA
is operated for both the sustainable use of fishery resources and the conservation of
marine biodiversity, simultaneously.
69 Therefore, the Japanese government should
establish MPAs in accordance with the experience of Shiretoko, instead of simply
incorporating Designated Areas into MPAs.
Against this background, the MOE launched the project to establish a new and
very large MPA surrounding the Ogasawara Islands. On the 28th May 2018, the 35th
meeting of the Nature Conservation Committee of the Central Environment Council
was held to discuss ‘measures to conserve nature, including marine environment.’ In
this meeting, the establishment of an MPA in the Okiai Area (Japanese internal waters
and territorial sea that are deeper than 200 m, and Japanese Exclusive Economic Zone
61 MOE, ‘How the Marine Protected Area should be Established in Japan’, available at https://www.
kantei.go.jp/jp/singi/kaiyou/dai8/siryou3.pdf (last visited 21 May 2019) (in Japanese).
62 Taro Saishu, ‘Toward Setting Japanese Marine Protected Area -For the sake of CBD/Aichi Targets
Accomplishment-’. Journal of National Fisheries University, Vol. 67 (2018), p. 29 (in Japanese).
63 NACS-J, ‘About Us’, available at https://www.nacsj.or.jp/english/ (last visited 21 May 2019).
64 MOE, supra note 61.
65 NACS-J, How the MPA should be in Japan: For the Sake of Conserving Biodiversity, p. 13,
available at https://www.nacsj.or.jp/archive/files/katsudo/wetland/pdf/20120517mpateigensyo.pdf
(last visited 21 May 2019) (in Japanese).
66 Hiroshi Mukai, ‘Marine Protected Area: The Effects and the Present’, Journal of Environmental
Information Science, Vol. 38(2) (2009), p. 5 (in Japanese).
67 As for this MPA, see Yasuhiko Kagami, ‘Japanese MPAs at a Turning Point: Nomination of
Shiretoko for World Heritage Status’ in Michael I. Jeffery, Jeremy Firestone, and Karen BubnaLitic (eds.), Biodiversity Conservation, Law and Livelihoods: Bridging the North-South Divide
(IUCN Academy of Environmental Law Research Studies) (2009), pp. 251–264.
68 Makino and others, supra note 55, pp. 207–214.
69 MOE, Forestry Agency, Agency for Cultural Affairs, and Hokkaido Government, Management
Plan for the Shiretoko World Natural Heritage Site, (2009), pp. 9–16.