Dear Peter and All --

This is a "nadzukashii" discussion for me, having researched Japanese environmental policy process during the 1990s.

It is also a discussion with practical implications, since the NPO I direct is working on climate change, and exploring how we can help "encourage" the Japanese government and citizenry to take action to mitigate/counter climate change--particularly with regard to investing more in renewable energy, and substituting renewable energy for coal as much as possible.

And so we are at the nexus of academia and practical action, i.e., utilizing ideas and research to "make a difference on the ground," on the most urgent of sustainability issues.

Here are a few English-language links FEI (For Everyone's Information):

https://world.350.org/ja/press-release/g20-global-action/

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2019/06/13/commentary/world-commentary/realist-case-combating-climate-change/#.XZJNCW_QiM8

http://www.nocoaljapan.org/about-us/

Just Google "Japan", "climate", and your keyword of choice -- and you will probably find something new, and instructive in some manner.

During my Japan-related research in the 1990s, the concept of "gaiatsu" came up in environment-related discussions. I remember, in particular, that the IUCN seemed effective at influencing Japanese government bodies. IUCN seemed to have an unusual amount of credibility with Japanese governments during the early-mid 1990s--perhaps because it was an international organization comprised largely of scientists, and it utilized, as I recall, mostly scientific arguments.

I assume "gaiatsu" is still seen as significant? How has it changed over the past 30 years? (As both a research topic and practical matter, this question may be of special interest to the non-Japanese members of this group.)

All this leads one to wonder whether there is an analogue to the IUCN that might be similarly effective when weighing in on today's climate-related issues in Japan. The U.S.'s Union of Concerned Scientists comes to mind as an NPO of somewhat similar ilk-- though it is not an international group. The US's World Resources Institute does not seem overtly 'scientific' or 'international', but it, too, seems like a group that might be effective. The IPCC seems to be a horse of a different color.

Caveat: IUCN was not dealing with issues so central to the Japanese economy, i.e., "How will we generate the electricity that powers our economy?"

As I recall, there was research in the 1990s that seemed to conclude that "all wavelengths on the NPO/NGO/activist spectrum have an important place." The more strident groups play an important role, though, in the 1990s, Greenpeace, for one, was pigeonholed and looked at askance by many -- especially those who were offended by its stance, actions, and "cultural insensitivity" on whaling. However, others argued that Greenpeace had a significant impact nonetheless. Which makes one wonder how Greenpeace, 350.org and similar groups are faring in Japan on climate these days. Are they avoiding old pitfalls? Are they exerting significant impact? My hunch is that NGOs/NPOs are pressing as hard for climate accountability as anyone -- and that they are indeed having an impact.

The current Japanese government, of course, does not seem terribly receptive, but that does not mean that such groups are not having an impact.

And now a practical matter: our NPO takes climate change seriously. We are a group that relies heavily on scientific data. We accept that the situation is urgent now and likely growing more so by the day (think "feedback loops"). We would like to help those who are deeply concerned about climate issues in Japan figure out how to effectively encourage the Japanese government and citizenry to consider actions that would counter climate change in highly meaningful ways. (Think "coal-burning".) Herein lie important academic and practical issues. If this post resonates, and you have ideas to share, please let us know, publicly or privately. We are always interested to read what folks on this list have to say.

And, finally, here is a thought specially for the media researchers in the group: would a visit by Greta Thunberg to Japan (via a "zero-emission" vehicle of some sort) result in a big media splash, positive media attention, and/or catalyst-type effects? If such a visit is impractical, how about a videotaped message from Greta to kindred spirits in Japan -- to the Japanese Prime Minister -- or ... ?

Yours in "Engaged Social Science",

Steve Hoffman
--
Steve Hoffman, Ph.D., Executive Director
NW Center for Sustainability and Innovation
Bow, WA, USA
http://www.nwcenterforsustainability.org
http://www.facebook.com/NWCSI
@NWCtr4Sustain (on Twitter)