Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：Teylor & Francis   Participation form：Joint(The main charge)  

Legislation to control invasive alien species for nature conservation is a relatively new area. We examined: (1) whether prohibition of sale and release into the wild can stop dispersal of invasive alien aquatic plants; (2) who is responsible for managing an invaded site; (3) whether government procedure is needed to carry out management; and (4) whether herbicide use is legalized in managing invasive alien aquatic plants. We carried out case studies on the management of water primrose（Ludwigia grandiflora）in France, England and Japan, which are all developed countries in the Palaearctic realm, and where it is regarded as one of the most invasive alien aquatic plants. All three countries have introduced prohibition of sale and release, but only England has clearly introduced landowner responsibility and has applied it. All three countries have effectively halted its commercial trade, but have not yet stopped its dispersion, while England has succeeded local eradication in a considerable part of detected sites and stabilized the number of actual sites. While in France and Japan many unmanaged sites remain, all detected sites are managed in England. France prohibited herbicide use near and in water systems and in Japan, officials are reluctant to use herbicide. On the contrary, England has legalized herbicide use around water systems, under strict conditions. The landowner responsibility is an important element of legislation to manage IAS, and legalization of herbicide use around water systems, in avoiding damages for other living organisms, could contribute to its local eradication.

DOI： 10.1080/13880292.2020.1788778

Other Link： https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13880292.2020.1788778

Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：Springer  

A comparative typological study of change in global environmental regimes is presented in this paper. Ernst B. Haas’s “three models of change” is chosen as a framework to explain change in the regimes. The models are (1) incremental growth, (2) turbulent nongrowth, and (3) managed interdependence. They reflect the shift of power balance among member states and their knowledge of policies. The models are applied to five case studies covering the Ramsar, CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna), Basel, Ozone, and Climate regimes, which have been in effect for over 15 years. The three models help explain diverse changes in those regimes. Five factors, (1) shift of power balance and political leadership, (2) the scope of the regime (narrow or wide), (3) institutional legacy, (4) consensual knowledge and conflict of political value, and (5) learning between rival groups, have made major contribution to the change in those regimes.

DOI： 10.1007/s10784-013-9229-y

Other Link： http://www.springer.com/law/environmental/journal/10784

Authorship：Corresponding author   Language：Japanese  

DOI： 10.69186/hars.2024.68_41

Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：Center for Environmental Information Science, Tokyo   Participation form：Joint(The vice charge)  

There were 102 shelters in quasi-national parks in Japan. 42 are built and managed by municipalities, 20 of them are built and managed by prefectures, 24 are built by prefectures, and 16 of them are others. On management, we received responses concerning 33 shelters built and managed by municipalities and mountaineering associations, 13 of them had contract with prefectures, and 10 of them received subsidiary from prefectures. Only 3 shelters have local councils. 10 shelters of the 33 respondents received the subsidy from prefectures concerning shelter management. This study shows with number that municipality and local mountaineering associations play major roles in building and managing shelters in addition to municipalities which are stipulated as major providers of facilities in quasi-national parks.

Language：Japanese   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：Center for Environmental Information Science, Tokyo   Participation form：Joint(The main charge)  

The yellow-legged Asian hornet was firstly spotted in 2004 in France, then firstly reported in 2016 in England. Before that, the UK Government had prepared to respond this species, based on learning from the situation in France, and had published the risk assessment in 2011 and the response plan in 2012. Based on the plan, the Government had set up information system for the public to submit information and dispatch the staff to France to have training for removal operation in 2014. As of the end of April 2022, there have been 22 sightings including 12 nests; all of them have been destroyed and any overwintering nest has not been found. Those Government's responses have been supported by beekeepers' organized vigilance and information from the public, which is one kind of citizen science. This is the noteworthy case of a nation-wide successful rapid response case based on advance preparation.

Other Link： https://doi.org/10.11492/ceispapers.ceis36.0_221

Total pages：859   Responsible for pages：738-741   Language：Japanese   Book type：Scholarly book

地球温暖化防止条約は、国家間の協調と対立の中で大きく変化してきた。ここでは、①条約の主要文書の交渉経緯と採択された内容および②条約変化の背景について述べる。

Total pages：285   Language：Japanese   Book type：Textbook, survey, introduction

Total pages：362   Language：Japanese   Book type：Scholarly book

Language：Japanese   Book type：Textbook, survey, introduction

Language：Japanese   Publishing type：Article, review, commentary, editorial, etc. (trade magazine, newspaper, online media)   Publisher：Natural Parks Foundation  

This report describes 1) the outline of the regional natural park system in France, 2) the Brière regional natural park as an example, 3) the Federation of regional natural parks of France and 4) considers its imprecation to the quasi-national park system in Japan.

Language：Japanese   Publishing type：Article, review, commentary, editorial, etc. (trade magazine, newspaper, online media)   Publisher：産業用水調査会   Participation form：Joint(The main charge)  

生物多様性保全のための外来生物管理法制度は，比較的新しい分野である。本稿では，日本と同じ旧北区に属する先進国であるフランス・イングランドにおける侵略的外来水生植物管理法制度の発展について，オオバナミズキンバイの管理を事例として紹介するとともに、日本と比較して考察する。比較項目は，①取引と野外放出の禁止が拡散を防止できているのか，②定着箇所の管理についての責任を誰が負っているのか，③同管理において農薬使用は合法化されているかである。日本を含む3ヶ国とも取引・野外放出の禁止を導入している。そして同種の取引を停止することができたが，同種の拡散は停止できていない。イングランドだけは「土地所有者責任」を明示している。イングランドのみ，相当数の定着現場で地域的絶滅を達成するとともに，全ての確認定着現場を管理下においている。また，定着現場管理のための除草剤使用を，イングランドは明示的に合法化している。

Language：Japanese   Publishing type：Article, review, commentary, editorial, etc. (other)   Publisher：環境コミュニケーションズ  

Language：Japanese   Publishing type：Article, review, commentary, editorial, etc. (other)   Publisher：日本地域冷暖房協会  

Language：English   Presentation type：Oral presentation (general)  

Venue：オンライン  

日本における制度的課題
①国のリーダーシップ（個別種に特化した国の行動計画）
　特定外来生物に指定された植物について、オオバナミズキンバイのような強害性のものについても個別種に特化した国の行動計画なし←対策が自治体を越えて広がらない一因
②「土地管理者責任」制度
2022年法改正による定着済み特定外来生物対策に関する国、地方公共団体等の責務規定導入は一歩前進　　　　　　　　　　　←運用を注視する必要
③厳しい規制の下における除草剤の活用
　現在のダブル・スタンダード状態が合理的か要検討

Language：Japanese   Presentation type：Oral presentation (general)  

Venue：琵琶湖博物館  

Language：English   Presentation type：Oral presentation (general)  

Venue： University of Copenhagen  

In order to consider effective legislations to control water primrose, we have carried out case studies in Japan, France and UK, reviewing public documents, interviewing experts and visiting control sites. France has the longest history of invasion since 1820’s. UK has recorded 30 sites since 1998 and has eradicated them in 10 sites. Japan has suffering invasion in its largest lake, Lake Biwa, since 2009.
We found two points. First, all three countries have introduced prohibition of trading, holding, cultivation and releasing. France designated water primrose in 2007, to prohibit trading, holding and cultivation. In 2010, UK designated it to prohibit releasing to wild, and in 2014, designated it to prohibit trading, holding and cultivation. Japan also designated it in 2014 to prohibit trading, holding, cultivating and releasing.
Second, only UK has obliged landowners, freeholder and leaseholders to manage IAS in their premises. In addition, UK introduced two new legislation in 2015. One is Species Control Order concerning nationally concerned IAS and another is Community Protection Notice concerning widely spread IAS, both oblige land owners and others to manage IAS in their properties. Off course, UK government provides financial assistance and technical advice to management actions. The Japanese legislation on IAS management of 2004 does not stipulate who should carry out on-site control projects. So local governments have broad discretion whether they should control IAS or not in rivers, ponds and lakes which they are managing, and municipal governments often lack knowledge and financial resources to manage IAS in their managing areas. The Shiga Prefectural Government, which is managing Lake Biwa, formulated the consultative group to manage IAS plants around Lake Biwa with municipal governments, NGOs and researchers. The consultative group has been carrying out control projects against IAS plants even in the areas which are under management authority of municipal governments. This fiction named the consultative group has avoided jurisdiction problems among local governments. France also does not have any legal framework concerning on-site control projects. So managers of rivers and regional natural parks in France have done on-site control projects on a voluntary basis, and this has made them difficult to secure financial resources.

Language：Japanese   Presentation type：Public lecture, seminar, tutorial, course, or other speech  

Venue：滋賀県立大学  

今人類の生存基盤である地球環境に様々な問題が生じている。おｓれらに対応するためには、地球規模の国際協力が必要である。他方で多数の国々が合意することは容易ではない。生きた地球環境条約交渉について、気候変動条約制度を例に語る。

Language：Japanese   Presentation type：Oral presentation (general)  

Venue：立d名鑑大学大阪いばらきキャンパス  

外来生物による侵略は生物多様性保全に対する最も大きな脅威の一つである外来生物法が2004年に制定された。同法は、生物多様性条約締約国会議が2002年に採択したガイドラインを大きなきっかけの一つとして、また生態学者を中心とする研究者集団からの強い働きかけによって、トップダウン型で成立したものである。しかし地域における実施のためのガヴァナンス整備は引き続き課題となっている。外来生物管理は、保全生態学者による研究が行われてきた分野である。私の現在の作業仮説は、第一に国、地方公共団体、民間団体、研究者による重層的で順応的な協働管理が重要であること、第二に既に同じ種の侵略とその対応の経験を有する外国の知見を活用することが重要であるというものである。また、予防的アプローチを現実の行政において作動させるには課題があり、それを乗り越えるためには、住民や政治家の後押しが必要であると考える。

Audience： Civic organization,　Governmental agency

協議会会員（県立大学環境科学部）代表としての出席