Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Co-design of national-scale future scenarios in Japan to predict and assess natural capital and ecosystem services

  • Special Feature: Original Article
  • Future Scenarios for Socio-Ecological Production Landscape and Seascape
  • Published:
Sustainability Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services has revealed that the development of scenarios is crucial for helping decision makers identify the potential impact of different policy options, there is a lack of reported scenario approach studies in Asia. A new 5-year research project (PANCES) has been developed for predicting and assessing the natural capital and ecosystem services in Japan using an integrated social–ecological system approach via the participation of 15 research institutions and more than 100 researchers. PANCES conducts the development of national-scale future scenarios for exploring potential changes in natural capital and ecosystem services, as well as human well-being, up to 2050 using key direct and indirect drivers including climate change, depopulation, and super-aging, as well as globalization and technological innovation. The Delphi method is employed to generate key drivers that determine different future pathways. Based on the two drivers for scenario axes identified by the Delphi survey and extensive discussion with project members and policy makers, four future scenarios are created, “Natural capital-based compact society”, “Natural capital-based dispersed society”, “Produced capital-based compact society”, and “Produced capital-based dispersed society”, respectively, in addition to the business-as-usual scenario. This study describes a novel approach for collectively designing national-scale future scenarios with qualitative storylines and a visual illustration of the developed scenarios in Japan.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Japan has experienced pronounced population aging, and has the highest proportion of elderly adults in the world (Chen et al. 2016). According to projections, Japan’s population will shrink to 87 million by 2060, with nearly 40% over the age of 65 years (Chen et al. 2016).

References

  • Alcamo J (2008) Environmental futures, volume 2: the practice of environmental scenario analysis (Developments in Integrated Environmental Assessment). Elsevier Science, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Asara V, Otero I, Demaria F, Corbera E (2015) Socially sustainable degrowth as a social–ecological transformation: repoliticizing sustainability. Sustain Sci 10:375–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs R, Raudsepp-Hearne C, Atkinson-Palombo C, Bohensky E, Boyd E, Cundill G, Fox H, Ingram S, Kok K, Spehar S, Tengö M, Timmer D, Zurek M (2007) Linking futures across scales: a dialog on multiscale scenarios. Ecol Soc 12:17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen BK, Jalal H, Hashimoto H, Suen S, Eggleston K, Hurley M, Schoemaker L, Bhattacharya J (2016) Forecasting trends in disability in a super-aging society: adapting the future elderly model to Japan. J Econ Ageing 8:42–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, de Groot R, Sutton P, van der Ploeg S, Anderson SJ, Kubiszewski I, Farber S, Turner RK (2014) Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Glob Environ Change 26:152–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Alisa G, Demaria F, Kallis G (eds) (2014) Degrowth. A vocabulary for a new era. Taylor and Francis, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dale G (2012) The growth paradigm: a critique. Int Soc 134:55–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalkey N, Helmer O (1963) An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Manag Sci 9(3):458–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly H (1995) On Wilfred Beckerman’s critique of sustainable development. Environ Values 4:49–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond IR, Grant RC, Feldman BM, Pencharz PB, Ling SC, Moore AM, Wales PW (2014) Defining consensus: a systematic review recommends methodologic criteria for reporting of Delphi studies. J Clin Epidemiol 67(4):401–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Díaz S, Demissew S, Carabias J et al (2015) The IPBES conceptual framework—connecting nature and people. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 14:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallopin GC, Hammond A, Raskin P, Swart R (1997) Branch points: global scenarios and human choice. A resource paper of the Global Scenario Group; Pole Star series report number 7; Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm

  • Grumbine RE (1994) What is ecosystem management. Conserv Biol 8(1):27–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haga C, Inoue T, Hotta W, Shibata R, Hashimoto S, Kurokawa H, Machimura T, Matsui T, Morimoto J, Shibata H (2018) Future simulation systems for natural capital and ecosystem services using LANDIS-II—linking social scenarios and forest landscape model in Japan—. Sustain Sci (under review)

  • Hathimoto S, DasGupta R, Kabaya K, Matsui T, Haga C, Saito O, Takeuchi K (2018) Scenario analysis of land-use and ecosystem services in the Noto Peninsula, Japan: implications of alternative development pathways under declining population. Sustain Sci (under review)

  • Hunt DVL, Lombardi DR, Atkinson S, Barber ARG, Barnes M, Boyko CT, Brown J, Bryson J, Butler D, Caputo S, Caserio M, Coles R, Cooper RFD, Farmani R, Gaterell M, Hale J, Hales C, Hewitt CN, Jankovic L, Jefferson I, Leach J, MacKenzie AR, Memon FA, Sadler JP, Weingaertner C, Whyatt JD, Rogers CDF (2012) Scenario archetypes: converging rather than diverging themes. Sustainability 4:740–772. https://doi.org/10.3390/su4040740

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ikeda S, Tamaki T, Nakamura H, Managi S (2017) Inclusive wealth of regions: the case of Japan. Sustain Sci 12(6):991–1006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IPBES (2015) Scoping report for a global assessment on biodiversity and ecosystem services (deliverable 2 (c)), IPBES/4/8 (23 Nov 2015). https://www.ipbes.net/sites/default/files/downloads/IPBES-4-8_EN.pdf. Accessed 13 Sept 2017

  • IPBES (2016) The methodological assessment report on scenarios and models of biodiversity and ecosystem services. https://www.ipbes.net/sites/default/files/downloads/pdf/2016.methodological_assessment_report_scenarios_models.pdf (Online)

  • Jamieson D (1998) Sustainability and beyond. Ecol Econ 24(2–3):183–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Japan Biodiversity Outlook Science Committee (2010) Report of comprehensive assessment of biodiversity in Japan (Japan Biodiversity Outlook). Global Biodiversity Strategy Office, Biodiversity Policy Division, Nature Conservation Bureau, Ministry of the Environment, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  • Japan Biodiversity Outlook Science Committee (2015) Report of comprehensive assessment of biodiversity and ecosystem services in Japan (Japan Biodiversity Outlook 2). Global Biodiversity Strategy Office, Biodiversity Policy Division, Nature Conservation Bureau, Ministry of the Environment, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  • Japan Satoyama Satoumi Assessment (2010) Satoyama-satoumi ecosystems and human wellbeing: socio-ecological production landscapes of Japan (summary for decision makers). United Nations University, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamiyama C, Akiba H, Shoyama K, Hashimoto S, Takanori M, Saito O (2016) A design framework for future scenarios to support biodiversity and ecosystem service research in Japan. In: Proceedings of 44th annual meeting of environmental systems research. Tokyo, Japan, pp 151–158

  • Kaufmann PR (2016) Integrating factor analysis and the Delphi method in scenario development: a case study of Dalmatia, Croatia. Appl Geogr 71:56–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kok MTJ, Kok K, Peterson GD, Hill R, Agard J, Carpenter SR (2016) Biodiversity and ecosystem services require IPBES to take novel approach to scenarios. Sustain Sci 12:177–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linstone HA, Turoff M (1975) The Delphi method: techniques and applications. Addison-Wesley, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsui et al (2018) (under review)

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) (2005a) Ecosystem and human well-being—summary for decision makers. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) (2005b) Ecosystems and human well-being: volume 2 scenarios: findings of the scenarios working group (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Series). Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakicenovic N, Swart R (eds) (2000) Special report on emissions scenarios: a special report of working group III of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill BC, Kriegler E, Riahi K, Ebi KL, Hallegatte S, Carter TR, Mathur R, van Vuuren DP (2014) A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared socioeconomic pathways. Clim Change 122:387–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okoli C, Pawlowski SD (2004) The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Inf Manag 42:15–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oteros-Rozas E, Martín-López B, Daw TM, Bohensky EL, Butler JRA, Hill R, Martin-Ortega J, Quinlan A, Ravera F, Ruiz-Mallén I, Thyresson M, Mistry J, Palomo I, Peterson GD, Plieninger T, Waylen KA, Beach DM, Bohnet IC, Hamann M, Hanspach J, Hubacek K, Lavorel S, Vilardy SP (2015) Participatory scenario planning in place-based social–ecological research: insights and experiences from 23 case studies. Ecol Soc 20(4):32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PANCES (2016) Predicting and assessing natural capital and ecosystem services (PANCES). http://pances.net/top_eng/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/PANCES_Leaflet_2016_EN.pdf. Accessed 20 Mar 2018 (online)

  • Plieninger T, Kohsaka R, Bieling C, Hashimoto S, Kamiyama C, Kizos T, Penker M, Kieninger P, Shaw BJ, Sioen GB, Yoshida Y, Saito O (2018) Fostering biocultural diversity in landscapes through place-based food networks: a “solution scan” of European and Japanese models. Sustain Sci 13:219–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0455-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purdey SD (2010) Economic growth, the environment and international relations: the growth paradigm. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson J (2003) Future subjunctive: backcasting as social learning. Futures 35(8):839–856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saito O (2017) Future science-policy agendas and partnerships for building a sustainable society in harmony with nature. Sustain Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0475-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saito O, Ichikawa K (2014) Socio-ecological systems in paddy-dominated landscapes in Asian monsoon. In: Nishikawa U, Miyashita T (eds) Social–ecological restoration in paddy-dominated landscapes. Springer, Berlin, pp 17–37

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Saito O, Shibata H (2012) Satoyama–satoumi and ecosystem services: a conceptual framework, chapter 2, pp 17–59. In: Duraiappah AK, Nakamura K, Takeuchi K, Watanabe M, Nishi M (eds) Satoyama-Satoumi ecosystems and human well-being: socio-ecological production landscapes of Japan. United Nations Press, Tokyo, Japan, p 480

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider F, Kallis G, Martinez-Alier J (2010) Crisis or opportunity? Economic degrowth for social equity and ecological sustainability. J Clean Prod 18:511–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shoyama K, Matsui T, Hashimoto S, Kabaya K, Oono A, Saito O (2018) Development of land use scenarios using vegetation inventories in Japan. Sustain Sci (under review)

  • Slocombe DS (1993) Environmental planning, ecosystem science, and ecosystem approaches for integrating environment and development. Environ Manag 17(3):289–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland WJ, Gardner T, Bogich TL, Bradbury RB, Clothier B, Jonsson M, Kapos V, Lane SN, Moller I, Schroeder M, Spalding M, Spencer T, White PCL, Dicks LV (2014) Solution scanning as a key policy tool: identifying management interventions to help maintain and enhance regulating ecosystem services. Ecol Soc 19:3. https://doi.org/10.5751/Es-06082-190203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takeuchi K (2010) Rebuilding the relationship between people and nature: the Satoyama Initiative. Ecol Res 25:891–897

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNU-IHDP, UNEP (2012) Inclusive wealth report 2012. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • UNU-IHDP, UNEP (2014a) Inclusive wealth report 2014. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • UNU-IHDP, UNEP (2014b) Inclusive wealth report 2014. Measuring progress toward sustainability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • van’t Klooster S, van Assel M (2006) Practising the scenario axes technique. Futures 38:15–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zurek MB, Henrichs T (2007) Linking scenarios across geographical scales in international environmental assessments. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 74(8):1282–1295

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This research was funded by the Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (S-15 ‘‘Predicting and Assessing Natural Capital and Ecosystem Services’’ (PANCES), Ministry of the Environment, Japan). I specially appreciate the project members and respondents who contributed to this survey design and implementation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. United Nations University Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability, Tokyo, Japan

    Osamu Saito, Chiho Kamiyama, Takanori Matsui, Kikuko Shoyama & Kazuhiko Takeuchi

  2. The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

    Shizuka Hashimoto, Kei Kabaya, Tomoko Uetake & Kazuhiko Takeuchi

  3. Osaka University, Suita, Japan

    Takanori Matsui

  4. Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute, Forest Research and Management Organization, Tsukuba, Japan

    Hisatomo Taki

  5. Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC), Yokosuka, Japan

    Yoichi Ishikawa

  6. Shiga University, Hikone, Japan

    Kyohei Matsushita

  7. Hiroshima City University, Hiroshima, Japan

    Fumihiro Yamane

  8. Educational Unit for Studies on Connectivity of Hills, Humans and Oceans, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan

    Juri Hori

  9. National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Tsukuba, Japan

    Toshinori Ariga

  10. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Tsukuba, Japan

    Kazuhiko Takeuchi

Authors
  1. Osamu Saito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chiho Kamiyama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shizuka Hashimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Takanori Matsui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kikuko Shoyama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kei Kabaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Tomoko Uetake
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Hisatomo Taki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Yoichi Ishikawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Kyohei Matsushita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Fumihiro Yamane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Juri Hori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Toshinori Ariga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Kazuhiko Takeuchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Osamu Saito.

Additional information

Handled by Shunsuke Managi, Kyushu University, Fukuoka.

Appendix

Appendix

See Figs. 4, 5, 6 and 7.

Fig. 4
figure 4

Natural capital-based compact society

Full size image
Fig. 5
figure 5

Natural capital-based dispersed society

Full size image
Fig. 6
figure 6

Produced capital-based compact society

Full size image
Fig. 7
figure 7

Produced capital-based dispersed society

Full size image

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saito, O., Kamiyama, C., Hashimoto, S. et al. Co-design of national-scale future scenarios in Japan to predict and assess natural capital and ecosystem services. Sustain Sci 14, 5–21 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0587-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0587-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation