Abstract
The concept of the hydrologic cycle has significance not only for the natural sciences but also for the social sciences. As a result of this cycle, an upstream water diversion may place external diseconomies on downstream water uses. A conflict of interest can result. A well-designed institution overseeing water resource management would have a function to prevent or resolve such externality problems. This paper focuses on the influence of the artificially created boundary on this function. The investigation is based on a case study of a groundwater problem in Saijo City, Ehime, Japan. While surface water is defined as “public water” and is subject to governmental regulations, groundwater is regarded as “private water” and goes with the land ownership under the Japanese legal system. This boundary between surface water and groundwater, which does not exist in the natural hydrological cycle, can hinder internalization of external diseconomies between surface water and groundwater users. It is often vaguely asserted that integrated management of surface water and groundwater is necessary for integrated water resources management. This paper shows that efficient use of water resources provides a basis for that assertion.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In this paper, externality is defined as technical externality; meaning that an actor’s activity impacts another actor and does not pass through to the market. That is, it is an effect that the former has on the latter without permission or compensation. Thus it is distinguished from a pecuniary externality. For this definition, see Scitovsky (1954).
- 2.
There are multiple criteria used for defining “public water.” (1) Whether it is running water, (2) Whether it is navigable, or (3) Whether it has something to do with public interest or not, and so on (Ichimura 1909). The River Law defines “River” as “public running water and water surface” and regards it as public water (Tanaka 1968). Not all rivers in Japan are subject to the River Law. The law applies only to rivers classified as First or Second class. The rest are managed by the corresponding application of the River Law (the River Law §3, §100, Study Group on the River Law, 2006).
- 3.
As mentioned detailed below, the groundwater problem in Saijo illustrates a conflict of interest between Saijo and its adjacent city, Matsuyama regarding the water in the Kamo River. The latter wants to divert water from Kamo River but the former is very anxious because the diversion will most probably decrease the river flow and have a negative impact on groundwater recharge for groundwater users in Saijo City. The proposal is still under negotiation. Moreover, the possible on groundwater in Saijo has yet to be quantitatively estimated. Thus the problem we discuss is just a potential one that caused by the different legal statuses of surface water and groundwater. But those legal distinctions are applied throughout Japan. Even if the problem is not yet actual in Saijo, similar problems can take place elsewhere. In this sense, the case of Saijo could be an example of future issues. This is a reason why Saijo was chosen as the case study model for this investigation.
- 4.
By way of contrast, the average precipitation per year for Japan, over a 30 year measurement period (1976–2005), is about 1,700 mm. (Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism 2008).
- 5.
Originally, these waterworks were built and run by Ehime Prefecture to promote industrial development in the coastal areas of Saijo, and an adjacent city, Niihama. But, as a result of industrial changes caused by economic depression in early 1970’s, the number of factories built were so limited that the demand for industrial water was far less than expected. The SIW suffered a chronic fiscal deficit (Official Website of Bureau of Public Utilities, Ehime Prefecture).
- 6.
By contrast, a river that is of particular importance for land conservation and the national economy is classified as a First Class River. These are under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism.
- 7.
But a River Administrator reserves authority to grant permission to a new applicant without approval of existing Concerned River Users when it is judged that the enterprise of the new applicant will contribute to public welfare more than that of existing Concerned River Users (The River Law § 40).
- 8.
This does not mean there are none in Saijo City who have water rights for the Kamo River. For example, the Kanbe–Tachibana Land Improvement District has a water right of 1.703 m3/s (147,139 m3/day), Ohmachi Land Improvement District 0.992 m3/s (85,709 m3/day), Kurare (a company) 1.113 m3/s (96,163 m3/day) (Saijo City 2006). Whether Matsuyama City will actually make a formal application for permission for a water right is not yet determined. If Matsuyama City does, it is reasonably to think that it will be necessary for Matsuyama City to obtain approvals from those bodies as a requisite of its permission. But, as mentioned before, this is not an absolute requirement. If the River Administrator concludes the applicant’s water use will contribute to public welfare more than that of existing water right holders, it will be able to give permission without approvals of existing water right holders.
- 9.
Strictly speaking, not all groundwater is regarded as private water. Some kinds of groundwater can be treated as public water as surface water. A typical example is the subflow that runs together with surface water within river banks. Because subflow runs just beneath surface water, diverting subflow may negatively influence the volume of surface water. That is why government permission is necessary for taking such subflow (Study Group on the River Law, Ministry of Construction 1967, Study Group on the River Law 2006; Endo et al. 1975). Some private companies in Saijo City obtained permission from the prefectural government to take water from underground and have been regarded as water right holders for the Kamo River.
There are controversies about how to deal with subflow running out of river banks. This is because the flowing mechanism is uncertain compared to the subflow within river banks. Moreover, it is difficult in practice to cover even this subflow under public regulations (Study Group on the River Law, Ministry of Construction 1967). It is assumed that residents in Saijo City use groundwater that lies in a much deeper area and also runs out of the banks of the Kamo River. Moreover, even though there is no doubt that groundwater is recharged by the Kamo River, the flowing mechanism remains uncertain and residents pump groundwater without government permission. Therefore, we can reasonably postulate that groundwater that is used by residents in Saijo City can be regarded as private water.
- 10.
Externality between a surface water user and a groundwater user may be mitigated by the in-stream flow requirements mentioned above. The in-stream flow requirement (Kasen-iji-yousui) is defined as “the minimum flow that is necessary for proper utilization of a river and maintenance of the normal function of it”. And the flow necessary for maintenance of groundwater level is regarded as one of the examples (Okamoto 1995). It should be noted that Saijo City government requires that the amount of the minimum in-stream flow requirement should be reconsidered in negotiation with Matsuyama City government (Saijo City 2007).
- 11.
If groundwater users in Saijo were regarded as existing water right holders, the Matsuyama City Government would need to compensate them. Because of these increased costs, Matsuyama would possibly have to divert less water. Internalization would take place in both situations but the distribution of wealth would differ (Coase 1960).
References
Babel MS (2005) Integrated water resources management (IWRM). In: Lehr L (ed) Water encyclopedia. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 574–576
Berber FJ (1959) Rivers in international law (trans: Batstone RK). Stevens & Sons, London
Coase RH (1960) The problem of social cost. J Law Econ 3:1–44
Dawes R (1975) Formal models of dilemmas in social decision making. In: Kaplan MF, Schwartz S (eds) Human judgement and decision processes. Academic, New York, pp 87–107
Dellapenna JW (2003) The physical and social bases of quantitative groundwater law. In: Beck RE (ed) Waters and water rights, 1991 Edition, 2003 replacement volume, vol 3. Matthew Bender, San Francisco, pp 1–72
Elhance AP (1999) Hydropolitics in the 3rd world—conflict and cooperation in international river basins. United States Institute of Peace, Washington
Endo H, Okawa I, Kanazawa Y, Shiono H, Takahashi Y (1975) On groundwater law. Jurist 582:16–42 (in Japanese)
Global Water Partnership (2000) Integrated water resources management. TAC background papers no.4
Grigg NS (1999) Integrated water resources management: who should lead, who should pay. J Am Water Resour Assoc 25:527–534
Ichimura M (1909) Public water and private water. Kyoto Hougakkai Zashi 4:54–79 (in Japanese)
Kanazawa Y, Sanbongi K (1979) Water law. Kyoritsu Shuppan, Tokyo (in Japanese)
Mankiew NG (1998) Principles of economics. Dryden, Fort Worth
McCaffrey SC (2001) The law of international watercourses, non-navigational uses. Oxford University Press, New York
Miki A (1993) A history of Uchinuki. History of Saijo 30:11–33
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (2008) Water resources division. Water resources in Japan
Mitchell B (1990) Integrated water management. Belhaven, New York
Mitchell B (2005) Integrated water resource management, institutional arrangements, and land-use planning. Environ Plann 37:1335–1352
Miyazaki A (2006) Landownership and groundwater law with special focus on the legal characteristics of groundwater. In: Urban and land use (Essays in Honor of Professor Inamoto Yonosuke). Nihon Hyoronsha, Tokyo, pp 47–73 (in Japanese)
Murase K (2004) A review of water rights in Japan. Technical Note of National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management 156:91–96
Okamoto M (1995) Drought conciliation and water right. Jurist 1060:55–59 (in Japanese)
Olson M (1965) The logic of collective action, public goods and the theory of groups, sixteenth printings. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Piper AM, Thomas HE (1958) Hydrology and water law: what is their future common ground? In: Water resources and the law. University of Michigan Law School, Ann Arbor, pp 7–24
Saijo City (2000) The result of investigation on Saijo groundwater resource 1996–1999 (in Japanese)
Saijo City (2001) Natural treasure, together with Uchinuki (in Japanese)
Saijo City (2003) Sixty years history of Saijo (in Japanese)
Saijo City (2006) Bulletin Saijo (in Japanese)
Saijo City (2007) A document on the 3rd meeting for opinion exchange on Matsuyama diversion plan (in Japanese)
Saijo City (2010) Annual report on groundwater (in Japanese)
Scitovsky T (1954) Two concepts of external economy. J Polit Econ 62:143–151
Study Group on the River Law (2006) Commentary on the river law, revised edition. Taisei Shuppan, Tokyo (in Japanese)
Study Group on the River Law, Ministry of Construction (1967) Commentary on the river law. Minato Shuppansha, Tokyo (in Japanese)
Suzuki K, Watanabe M, Kadota A (1998) Area of confined groundwater with piezometric head higher than ground level in Saijo city. Mem Facul Eng Ehime Univ 17:209–217 (in Japanese)
Tanaka M (1968) Water right (2). Kensetsu Geppo 21(10):50–53 (in Japanese)
Thomas HE, Leopold LB (1964) Groundwater in North America. Science 143:1001–1006
Wiel SC (1929) Need for unified law for surface and underground water. South Calif Law Rev 2:358–369
Acknowledgements
This work was financially supported by the Project “Humans and Water” (2005–2009) organized by the National Institutes for the Humanities and KAKENHI (Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research, Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B)) of Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (Project No. 22710050). Special thanks are extended to Saijo City government for providing materials on groundwater. The views presented here are those of the author and should in no way be attributed to Saijo City government. Responsibility for the text (with any surviving errors) rests entirely with the author.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Endo, T. (2012). A Boundary Between Surface Water and Groundwater in Japanese Legal System: Its Consequences and Implications. In: Taniguchi, M., Shiraiwa, T. (eds) The Dilemma of Boundaries. Global Environmental Studies. Springer, Tokyo. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54035-9_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54035-9_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Tokyo
Print ISBN: 978-4-431-54034-2
Online ISBN: 978-4-431-54035-9
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)