Japan's Climate Change Discourse: Toward Climate Securitisation?

This article situates Japan in the international climate security debate by analysing competing climate change discourses. In 2020, for the first time, the Japanese Ministry of the Environment included the term “climate crisis” (kikō kiki) in its annual white paper, and the Japanese parliament adopted a “climate emergency declaration” (kikō hijō jitai sengen). Does this mean that Japan’s climate discourse is turning toward the securitisation of climate change? Drawing on securitisation theory, this article investigates whether we are seeing the emergence of a climate change securitisation discourse that treats climate change as a security issue rather than a conventional political issue. The analysis focuses on different stakeholders in Japan’s climate policy: the Japanese Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the parliament, the Cabinet, and sub- and non-state actors. Through a discourse analysis of ministry white papers and publications by other stakeholders, the article identifies a burgeoning securitisation discourse that challenges, albeit moderately, the status quo of incrementalism and inaction in Japan’s climate policy. This article further highlights Japan’s position in the rapidly evolving global debate on the urgency of climate action and provides explanations for apparent changes and continuities in Japan’s climate change discourse

The evolution of “phase-out” as a bridging concept for sustainability: From pollution to climate change

Many sustainability challenges, such as contamination of air, water, and soil or climate change, can be traced back to specific polluting substances (e.g., mercury), technologies (e.g., combustion engines), or practices (e.g., waste dumping). To confront these grave challenges, “phase-out” is garnering increasing attention as a policy approach. Although the literature on phase-out is burgeoning, it remains unclear how the concept has evolved across scientific disciplines and policy. In this review, we use a coding-based mapping approach to systematically unpack the scientific discourse on phase-out since 1970, focusing on the contribution of different scientific disciplines, targets and drivers of phase-outs, instruments, affected industries, and geographical context. We find that the focus of phase-out has shifted from toxic pollution to climate change, and that the scope of phase-out targets has broadened. Results further suggest that phase-out is emerging as a bridging concept to foster transdisciplinary dialogues and transformative actions toward greater sustainability