RSS Feeds
Country Water Action: Japan
Japan’s Water Rights System:
Central yet Integrative, Traditional yet Modern*
July 2007
Japan boasts of one of Asia’s most mature water rights system, which functions well because of two basic postulates: the “One River System, One Administrator” and “First in Time, First in Rights” principles. Is this system replicable elsewhere in Asia and can it withstand future urban growth?
Japan’s River Law—a first for the island country—was enacted in 1896, and focused on the country’s most pressing issue at the time: flood management. In 1964, on the wave of economic growth that post-war reconstruction brought, the River Law was fully amended to focus on new needs: water utilization, and specifically, to modernize its water rights allocation scheme. This time, the country moved from highly localized, municipal driven management to a more centralized and integrative approach, known as “One river system, One administrator.”
Two factors forced this shift—the first political, the second economic, according to Michitaro Nakai of the Japan Water Agency.
“The political system in Japan became more democratic after World War II, and governors were elected and gained independence from the national government. The governors’ independence, however, made it difficult to administer entire river systems, which cover plural local governments, in an integrated manner,” Nakai said.
So while governance became more decentralized, water resource management shifted to a more centralized approach in order to consider the needs of various communities within a basin.
“Water demand also increased significantly after the 1960s because of industrialization, urbanization and population growth. In order to allocate water resources appropriately under such tight water conditions, broad-based administration was needed to coordinate among local governments and other stakeholders in the basin,” Nakai said.
Top
In Japan, a water right is defined as the “entitlement to use of river water for a specified purpose and to the extent required to achieve this purpose.”
Rivers are classified into three size categories (A, B, and Locally Designated River) and assigned to different administrators, whose tasks include granting water rights through issuing permission for river water use:
- Class A rivers, which are important to conservation and the national economy: the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport
- CLASS B: the Prefecture Governor where the river concerned is located
- Locally Designated River: the head of the city, town or village where the river concerned is located.
Water rights that must be obtained through a river administrator are called “Permitted Water Rights,” as opposed to customary water rights, which are usually held by irrigation users. While contents of a customary water right are composed of socially-accepted practices, a permitted water right usually states the following explicitly:
- Purpose of the water use
- Venue of water intake
- The way of water intake
- The amount of water intake
- Drop regarding hydropower generation (in the case of water use for hydropower)
- The amount of storage in a reservoir
- Permission term (usually 30 years for water use related to power generation and 10 years for other use)
Statistically, Japanese agriculture uses 55.7 cubic km per year; water for water supply uses only 16.1 cubic km per year followed by 12.1 for industrial water.2
Under the “First in Time, First in Rights” principle integrated into Japan’s water rights system, an older water right holder is superior to a newer one. As such, agricultural producers who normally hold customary water rights, are secure.
Because older irrigation users already enjoyed a near monopoly over existing water resources through their customary rights, the development of new water resources were promoted in Japan. New municipal water users such as cities and industries have had to share the costs of developing these new water sources, for which they seek water rights from the appropriate river administrator. As a result, gaps between water supply and demand were considerably reduced.
During droughts, however, the River Law stipulates a process to reconcile demands and rights between users. At these times, water users are encouraged to seek conciliation in the spirit of fair give-and-take.
In the first step of this process, a river administrator provides information to users who are expected to first independently and voluntarily give way to users with the most immediate needs. To ensure successful negotiations during droughts, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport recommends establishing “Drought Conciliation Councils,” which are composed of the river administrator, water users, local government, and other administrative agencies. This council acts as a forum to facilitate discussions and agreements on water use during droughts.
If users fail to agree amongst themselves to an interim arrangement, a river administrator intervenes more directly in reallocating river water.
Japan’s approach may not—and most likely is not—replicable in whole, but certain aspects of its approach may fit conditions in other countries. The key, Nakai says, is to move beyond the question of whether water rights is necessary to a question of how.
“In the case that available water resources are limited compared to the demand for water, a water rights system is one of the vital tools for allocating limited water resources appropriately,” Nakai said.
The fact that many countries in Asia, however, are still debating the necessity of water rights when demand is universally increasing and threatening sustainability of resources is a sign of the public under-valuing and misunderstanding rights.
“The introduction of water rights system has received objections from many stakeholders in many countries, and for two reasons,” Nakai said. “Firstly, people do not understand the seriousness and impacts of limited water resources. Secondly, customary water rights users (from the agricultural sectors) usually object because they worry that government interference will affect their productivity.”
Nakai recommends 6 requisites for a functioning water rights system:
- Basic law for providing water rights system, in order to make the legal framework more stable
- Secondary legislature and technical guidelines to implement water rights system (i.e. stipulating application procedure)
- Organization in charge of implementing water rights system, with adequate administrative and regulatory power, manpower, technical capacity and financial source for implementation
- Data and information relating to water resources, which should be collected and managed by the relevant organizations appropriately,
- Consensus on introducing and implementing water rights system among nations as well as government, and
- Water sources for allocating water for each water rights holder.
