In preparation for the Copenhagen meeting (COP15) of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change at the end of 2009, Japan is currently engaged in debate about the country's medium-term greenhouse gas emission reduction targets (for the period 2013 to 2020). After considering public opinion and various other views, Prime Minister Taro Aso will decide on the medium-term targets this June. While environmental NGOs are calling for major emission reductions, industry is making a strong appeal for targets that will not lead to big reductions. A large gap in their positions persists.

Japan that will set its own national medium-term targets, but we at Japan for Sustainability (JFS) would like to ask people around the world for their comments, and then share our findings with Prime Minister Aso and the media here. If you have any questions about this survey, please write to info[at]japanfs.org (Please replace [at] with @). We will post our findings on the JFS website at the end of May. We very much appreciate your help!

* The survey form is closed. Thank you very much!

Background:
Japan’s Medium-Term GHG Emission Reduction Targets (2013-2020)

(1) Global CO₂ emissions

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's 2007 Fourth Assessment Report Working Group III report says that Annex I countries (industrialized countries) in the UNFCCC need to reduce emissions by 25% to 40% by 2020 in order to stabilize at the 450 ppm CO₂e in the atmosphere, or a level considered to keep temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius.

Industrialized countries account for 75% of historical CO₂ emissions, and developing countries for 25%. The ranking of current annual emissions switched in 2005: industrialized countries now emit just less than half, and developing countries just more than half. In 2050, developing countries are predicted to emit just over 60%, and industrialized countries just under 40%, of total emissions.

The United States accounts for 20% of global emissions, and other industrialized countries for the remaining 30%. The United States is not a party to the Kyoto Protocol, so the emissions from Annex I countries account for about 30% of global emissions.

(2) Japan’s CO₂ emissions

Japan currently accounts for 4% of global emissions. Japan’s target under the Kyoto Protocol is for a 6% reduction from the 1990 level, but in 2005 Japan had actually increased by 7.7%.

(3) Medium-term target

International negotiations have been continuing for some time, seeking consensus on an international framework to be established at the Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen (COP15) in late 2009 and start functioning in 2013. The European Union and United States have already announced their medium-term targets for 2020, with the former aiming for a 20% reduction from the 1990 level (or 14% from 2005), and the latter a 14% reduction from the 2005 level (no change from 1990).

(4) Six options for Japan’s medium-term targets

Japan is considering two types of approaches to determine its emissions target for 2020. One looks at what reductions could be achieved if certain actions were taken. The other focuses on fairness among industrialized countries.

- Option 1: +4% from 1990 (-4% reduction from 2005)

This is a scenario to “continue current efforts” to improve efficiency by making continued progress with existing technologies and continue with current policies (targets for efficiency improvements that promote voluntary efforts, the “Top Runner” program, subsidies, and so on).

- Option 2: +1% to -5% from 1990 (-6% to -12% from 2005)

This approach seeks reduction efforts that are fair for all industrialized countries, by equally sharing the marginal abatement costs of GHG emission reductions, aiming at a 25% reduction from 1990 for these countries. Marginal abatement costs are the additional costs required for additional reductions; this approach considers previous efforts. Japan, for example, has already made considerable investments into energy efficiency improvements, so its marginal abatement cost is higher than in countries that have not done so. (By this approach, the US target will be -19% to -24% compared to 1990, and the EU will be - 23% to -27%.)

- Option 3: -7% from 1990 (-14% from 2005)

Strengthen governmental policies to the greatest extent possible, by enhancing current policies to promote the installation of the most efficient equipment available, introducing new programs promoting the purchase of photovoltaic power as well as subsidies to promote the purchase of eco-cars, and strengthening regulations on energy efficiency housing (annual subsidies of 1.2 trillion yen).

- Option 4: -8% to -17% from 1990 (-13 to -23% from 2005)

Industrialized countries as a whole will seek a target of -25%, but in the interest of fairness among industrialized countries, the cost of emission reduction measures per unit of GDP will be considered. (In this case, the US target will be -7% to -18%, and the EU target -30% to -31%.)

- Option 5: -15% from 1990 (-21% from 2005)

New equipment will all have to be highly efficient, and a certain percentage of existing equipment will also have to be replaced or improved.

- Option 6: -25% from 1990 (-30% from 2005)

To achieve a 25% reduction from 1990, all developed countries will have the same -25% target. For Japan to achieve this, almost all new and existing equipment will have to be highly efficient, and Japan will have to reduce its economic activity (production) by setting a price for carbon (carbon tax, emissions trading).

Reference 1: Announced reduction targets

	Compared to 1990	Compared to 2005
European Union	-20%	(-14%)
United States	+/-0%	(-14%)
IPCC 450 ppm CO2e target*	-25% to -40% (Annex I region)	--

*IPCC's 2007 Fourth Assessment Report Working Group III report in Box 13.7

Reference 2: Summary of options

	Compared to 1990	Compared to 2005	Basis for calculation
Option 1	+4%	(-4%)	Continuation of efforts under current policies
Option 2	+1 to -5%	(-6% to -12%)	Equal marginal abatement costs
Option 3	-7%	(-14%)	Maximize efficiency of new equipment
Option 4	-8% to -17%	(-13% to -23%)	Equal cost of measures per unit of GDP
Option 5	-15%	(-21%)	Option #3 plus incentives to replace equipment stock
Option 6	-25%	(-30%)	Same reduction target across the board

TAG