CHAPTER 18 • Management of Tokyo Bay
349
governments with respect to different uses of the bay. Most measures taken deal only
with one specific use. Multiple agencies at different levels of government have varying,
and sometimes overlapping, responsibilities for aspects of the bay's development and
management, such as land reclamation, fisheries, navigation, recreation, and pollutant
discharges. Table 18.11 lists decision-makers in relation to various uses of the bay and
national laws relevant to management of Tokyo Bay. There is no overall, effective, coordinating mechanism: at the national level, i.e., among ministries; at the prefectural
level, i.e., among prefectures and designated cities (i.e., cities endowed with virtually
the same level of administrative authority as prefectures); and among the national,
prefectural, and municipal levels.
The ministries and agencies of the central government and of the prefectural and
municiRal governments have formulated and implemented single-purpose projects for
development of the resources of Tokyo Bay with little or no regard for the essential
unity of Tokyo Bay, i.e., the Tokyo Bay ecosystem. It is no exaggeration to say that unilateral and fragmented actions, whether public or private, national prefectural or municipal, dominate the decision-making process in planning and implementation of
coastal management activities, especially land reclamation.
The fact is that decision-makers have never regarded the whole of Tokyo Bay and
the various uses made of it as a system. The bay has been divided by harbor limit lines
within which governors and mayors, as port mangers, have enjoyed almost complete
discretionary powers with respect to certain activities. The central governments has
failed to deal with Tokyo Bay as a single body of water, and prefectural and municipal
governments and private developers have been interested only in short-term gains.
These entities and interests: have pursued short-term economic interests at the cost of
long-term interests of protecting the natural heritage and maintaining the ecological
balance of the bay; have neglected the simple fact that the bay is a single physical-biological mechanism in which actions affecting one part very often affect other parts;
and have ignored the tradeoffs among the various possible outputs which could be taken
into consideration under integrated management.
In the Tokyo Bay area, no area-wide management mechanism exists for evaluating
individual projects with respect to their effects on the entire bay. The absence of such
a mechanism has left the ministries and agencies, and the prefectural and municipal
governments, free to act in their own self-interests, without the constraints of any
broader responsibility for environmental protection, public access to and along the
shoreline, and navigational safely.
The past and present uncoordinated and haphazard developmental activities have
threatened the existence of the bay itself and have been inimical to the welfare of both
present and future residents of the region. Poorly planned development policies have
caused many serious environmental problems. Water quality has deteriorated as a result of waste discharges from multiple sources. Red tides are occurring with increasing frequency. The aesthetic values of the coast of Tokyo Bay have been increasingly
undermined by careless reclamation, marine pollution, and eutrophication. Marine
transport is increasingly being done with larger vessels, which are inherently less maneuverable than medium-size vessels. Any accident in the bay involving an oil tanker,
an LNG tanker, or a vessel transporting any dangerous/hazardous substances could
cause major, and possibly irreversible, damages to the marine ecosystem of the bay.
Another serious concern is the concentration of processing and storage facilities for
349
governments with respect to different uses of the bay. Most measures taken deal only
with one specific use. Multiple agencies at different levels of government have varying,
and sometimes overlapping, responsibilities for aspects of the bay's development and
management, such as land reclamation, fisheries, navigation, recreation, and pollutant
discharges. Table 18.11 lists decision-makers in relation to various uses of the bay and
national laws relevant to management of Tokyo Bay. There is no overall, effective, coordinating mechanism: at the national level, i.e., among ministries; at the prefectural
level, i.e., among prefectures and designated cities (i.e., cities endowed with virtually
the same level of administrative authority as prefectures); and among the national,
prefectural, and municipal levels.
The ministries and agencies of the central government and of the prefectural and
municiRal governments have formulated and implemented single-purpose projects for
development of the resources of Tokyo Bay with little or no regard for the essential
unity of Tokyo Bay, i.e., the Tokyo Bay ecosystem. It is no exaggeration to say that unilateral and fragmented actions, whether public or private, national prefectural or municipal, dominate the decision-making process in planning and implementation of
coastal management activities, especially land reclamation.
The fact is that decision-makers have never regarded the whole of Tokyo Bay and
the various uses made of it as a system. The bay has been divided by harbor limit lines
within which governors and mayors, as port mangers, have enjoyed almost complete
discretionary powers with respect to certain activities. The central governments has
failed to deal with Tokyo Bay as a single body of water, and prefectural and municipal
governments and private developers have been interested only in short-term gains.
These entities and interests: have pursued short-term economic interests at the cost of
long-term interests of protecting the natural heritage and maintaining the ecological
balance of the bay; have neglected the simple fact that the bay is a single physical-biological mechanism in which actions affecting one part very often affect other parts;
and have ignored the tradeoffs among the various possible outputs which could be taken
into consideration under integrated management.
In the Tokyo Bay area, no area-wide management mechanism exists for evaluating
individual projects with respect to their effects on the entire bay. The absence of such
a mechanism has left the ministries and agencies, and the prefectural and municipal
governments, free to act in their own self-interests, without the constraints of any
broader responsibility for environmental protection, public access to and along the
shoreline, and navigational safely.
The past and present uncoordinated and haphazard developmental activities have
threatened the existence of the bay itself and have been inimical to the welfare of both
present and future residents of the region. Poorly planned development policies have
caused many serious environmental problems. Water quality has deteriorated as a result of waste discharges from multiple sources. Red tides are occurring with increasing frequency. The aesthetic values of the coast of Tokyo Bay have been increasingly
undermined by careless reclamation, marine pollution, and eutrophication. Marine
transport is increasingly being done with larger vessels, which are inherently less maneuverable than medium-size vessels. Any accident in the bay involving an oil tanker,
an LNG tanker, or a vessel transporting any dangerous/hazardous substances could
cause major, and possibly irreversible, damages to the marine ecosystem of the bay.
Another serious concern is the concentration of processing and storage facilities for