Fewer people doesn't always mean better outcomes for nature – just look at Japan
Since 1970, 73% of global wildlife has been lost, while the world's population has doubled to 8 billion. Research shows this isn't a coincidence but that population growth is causing a catastrophic decline in biodiversity.
Yet a turning point in human history is underway. According to U.N. projections, the number of people in 85 countries will be shrinking by 2050, mostly in Europe and Asia. By 2100, the human population is on course for global decline. Some say this will be good for the environment.
In 2010, Japan became the first Asian country to begin depopulating. South Korea, China and Taiwan are following close behind. In 2014, Italy was the first in southern Europe, followed by Spain, Portugal and others. We call Japan and Italy 'depopulation vanguard countries' on account of their role as forerunners for understanding possible consequences in their regions.
Given assumptions that depopulation could help deliver environmental restoration, we have been working with colleagues Yang Li and Taku Fujita to investigate whether Japan is experiencing what we have termed a biodiversity 'depopulation dividend' or something else.
Since 2003, hundreds of citizen scientists have been collecting biodiversity data for the Japanese government's Monitoring Sites 1,000 project. We used 1.5 million recorded species observations from 158 sites.
These were in wooded, agricultural and peri-urban (transitional spaces on outskirts of cities) areas. We compared these observations against changes in local population, land use and surface temperature for periods of five to 20 years.
Our study, published in the journal Nature Sustainability, includes birds, butterflies, fireflies, frogs and 2,922 native and non-native plants. These landscapes have experienced the greatest depopulation since the 1990s.
Due to the size of our database, choice of sites and the positioning of Japan as a depopulation vanguard for north-east Asia, this is one of the largest studies of its kind.
Japan is not Chernobyl
Biodiversity continued to decrease in most of the areas we studied, irrespective of population increase or decrease. Only where the population remains steady is biodiversity more stable. However, the population of these areas is aging and will decline soon, bringing them in line with the areas already seeing biodiversity loss.
Unlike in Chernobyl, where a sudden crisis caused an almost total evacuation which stimulated startling accounts of wildlife revival, Japan's population loss has developed gradually. Here, a mosaic pattern of changing land use emerges amid still-functioning communities.
While most farmland remains under cultivation, some falls into disuse or abandonment, some is sold for urban development or transformed into intensively farmed landscapes. This prevents widespread natural succession of plant growth or afforestation (planting of new trees) that would enrich biodiversity.
In these areas, humans are agents of ecosystem sustainability. Traditional farming and seasonal livelihood practices, such as flooding, planting and harvesting of rice fields, orchard and coppice management, and property upkeep, are important for maintaining biodiversity. So depopulation can be destructive to nature. Some species thrive, but these are often non-native ones that present other challenges, such as the drying and choking of formerly wet rice paddy fields by invasive grasses.
Vacant and derelict buildings, underused infrastructure and socio-legal issues (such as complicated inheritance laws and land taxes, lack of local authority administrative capacity, and high demolition and disposal costs) all compound the problem.
Even as the number of akiya (empty, disused or abandoned houses) increases to nearly 15% of the nation's housing stock, the construction of new dwellings continues remorselessly. In 2024, more than 790,000 were built, due partly to Japan's changing population distribution and household composition. Alongside these come roads, shopping malls, sports facilities, car parks and Japan's ubiquitous convenience stores. All in all, wildlife has less space and fewer niches to inhabit, despite there being fewer people.
What can be done?
Data shows deepening depopulation in Japan and northeast Asia. Fertility rates remain low in most developed countries. Immigration provides only a short-term softer landing, as countries currently supplying migrants, such as Vietnam, are also on course for depopulation.
Our research demonstrates that biodiversity recovery needs to be actively managed, especially in depopulating areas. Despite this there are only a few rewilding projects in Japan. To help these develop, local authorities could be given powers to convert disused land into locally managed community conservancies.
Nature depletion is a systemic risk to global economic stability. Ecological risks, such as fish stock declines or deforestation, need better accountability from governments and corporations. Rather than spend on more infrastructure for an ever-dwindling population, for example, Japanese companies could invest in growing local natural forests for carbon credits.
Depopulation is emerging as a 21st-century global megatrend. Handled well, depopulation could help reduce the world's most pressing environmental problems, including resource and energy use, emissions and waste, and nature conservation. But it needs to be actively managed for those opportunities to be realized.
Peter Matanle is Senior Lecturer in Japanese Studies, University of Sheffield. Kei Uchida is Associate Professor, Conservation and Biodiversity Management, Tokyo City University and Masayoshi Hiraiwa is Postdoctoral Researcher, Ecology, Faculty of Agriculture, Kindai University.
The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.
External Link
https://theconversation.com/fewer-people-doesnt-always-mean-better-outcomes-for-nature-just-look-at-japan-259414
© The Conversation
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Mainichi
4 hours ago
- The Mainichi
News in Easy English: Old castle found in Hyogo mountains by using AI maps
KOBE -- A small, old castle was found in the mountains of Hyogo Prefecture in March. Researchers found the castle using artificial intelligence (AI). The castle was probably built about 700 years ago in the 14th century, during Japan's Nanbokucho period (1336-1392). It's on top of a mountain, about one hour by foot from the nearest road. Because of the shape of the mountain around it, researchers believe the castle was used as a lookout to watch over the area. Researchers found the castle by using new 3D maps from Hyogo Prefecture. The maps show the ground's shape very clearly. AI studied the maps first to look for old Japanese tombs called "kofun." When scientists checked the places found by AI, they discovered some new sites, including this castle site. Lead researcher Yuichi Takata said, "There may be even more old castles around this area. We hope this will help us understand history better." Using AI and 3D maps, people are starting to find more ancient places in Japan's mountains. Usually, it is difficult to find such places just by walking and looking around. But clear map data can help people find these sites much faster. Researchers say, "This new way of finding old places is very useful, both for studying history and for checking before building new roads and towns." (Japanese original by Akira Inoh, Kobe Bureau) Vocabulary castle: a big, strong building where people lived and fought a long time ago researcher: a person who studies something carefully map data: information showing details of roads or land on a map site: a place where something important was built or happened long ago lookout: a high place where people watch for danger or people coming near ancient: very old; from a long time ago tomb: a place in the ground made for dead people three-dimensional (3D): showing something clearly with height, width and deepness (not flat) period: an amount of time in history prefecture: an area in Japan with its own local government
Japan Today
7 hours ago
- Japan Today
Fewer people doesn't always mean better outcomes for nature – just look at Japan
By Peter Matanle, Kei Uchida and Masayoshi Hiraiwa Since 1970, 73% of global wildlife has been lost, while the world's population has doubled to 8 billion. Research shows this isn't a coincidence but that population growth is causing a catastrophic decline in biodiversity. Yet a turning point in human history is underway. According to U.N. projections, the number of people in 85 countries will be shrinking by 2050, mostly in Europe and Asia. By 2100, the human population is on course for global decline. Some say this will be good for the environment. In 2010, Japan became the first Asian country to begin depopulating. South Korea, China and Taiwan are following close behind. In 2014, Italy was the first in southern Europe, followed by Spain, Portugal and others. We call Japan and Italy 'depopulation vanguard countries' on account of their role as forerunners for understanding possible consequences in their regions. Given assumptions that depopulation could help deliver environmental restoration, we have been working with colleagues Yang Li and Taku Fujita to investigate whether Japan is experiencing what we have termed a biodiversity 'depopulation dividend' or something else. Since 2003, hundreds of citizen scientists have been collecting biodiversity data for the Japanese government's Monitoring Sites 1,000 project. We used 1.5 million recorded species observations from 158 sites. These were in wooded, agricultural and peri-urban (transitional spaces on outskirts of cities) areas. We compared these observations against changes in local population, land use and surface temperature for periods of five to 20 years. Our study, published in the journal Nature Sustainability, includes birds, butterflies, fireflies, frogs and 2,922 native and non-native plants. These landscapes have experienced the greatest depopulation since the 1990s. Due to the size of our database, choice of sites and the positioning of Japan as a depopulation vanguard for north-east Asia, this is one of the largest studies of its kind. Japan is not Chernobyl Biodiversity continued to decrease in most of the areas we studied, irrespective of population increase or decrease. Only where the population remains steady is biodiversity more stable. However, the population of these areas is aging and will decline soon, bringing them in line with the areas already seeing biodiversity loss. Unlike in Chernobyl, where a sudden crisis caused an almost total evacuation which stimulated startling accounts of wildlife revival, Japan's population loss has developed gradually. Here, a mosaic pattern of changing land use emerges amid still-functioning communities. While most farmland remains under cultivation, some falls into disuse or abandonment, some is sold for urban development or transformed into intensively farmed landscapes. This prevents widespread natural succession of plant growth or afforestation (planting of new trees) that would enrich biodiversity. In these areas, humans are agents of ecosystem sustainability. Traditional farming and seasonal livelihood practices, such as flooding, planting and harvesting of rice fields, orchard and coppice management, and property upkeep, are important for maintaining biodiversity. So depopulation can be destructive to nature. Some species thrive, but these are often non-native ones that present other challenges, such as the drying and choking of formerly wet rice paddy fields by invasive grasses. Vacant and derelict buildings, underused infrastructure and socio-legal issues (such as complicated inheritance laws and land taxes, lack of local authority administrative capacity, and high demolition and disposal costs) all compound the problem. Even as the number of akiya (empty, disused or abandoned houses) increases to nearly 15% of the nation's housing stock, the construction of new dwellings continues remorselessly. In 2024, more than 790,000 were built, due partly to Japan's changing population distribution and household composition. Alongside these come roads, shopping malls, sports facilities, car parks and Japan's ubiquitous convenience stores. All in all, wildlife has less space and fewer niches to inhabit, despite there being fewer people. What can be done? Data shows deepening depopulation in Japan and northeast Asia. Fertility rates remain low in most developed countries. Immigration provides only a short-term softer landing, as countries currently supplying migrants, such as Vietnam, are also on course for depopulation. Our research demonstrates that biodiversity recovery needs to be actively managed, especially in depopulating areas. Despite this there are only a few rewilding projects in Japan. To help these develop, local authorities could be given powers to convert disused land into locally managed community conservancies. Nature depletion is a systemic risk to global economic stability. Ecological risks, such as fish stock declines or deforestation, need better accountability from governments and corporations. Rather than spend on more infrastructure for an ever-dwindling population, for example, Japanese companies could invest in growing local natural forests for carbon credits. Depopulation is emerging as a 21st-century global megatrend. Handled well, depopulation could help reduce the world's most pressing environmental problems, including resource and energy use, emissions and waste, and nature conservation. But it needs to be actively managed for those opportunities to be realized. Peter Matanle is Senior Lecturer in Japanese Studies, University of Sheffield. Kei Uchida is Associate Professor, Conservation and Biodiversity Management, Tokyo City University and Masayoshi Hiraiwa is Postdoctoral Researcher, Ecology, Faculty of Agriculture, Kindai University. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts. External Link © The Conversation
The Mainichi
3 days ago
- The Mainichi
Editorial: Japan urged to return indigenous remains to restore dignity
The University of Tokyo and other institutions have returned the remains of overseas indigenous people that had been held for research purposes for about a century. Some of them were collected through inappropriate methods, and it must be said that the response has been too slow. The remains of 10 indigenous people that were returned to Australia had been collected by institutions including the University of Tokyo and Kyoto University. In November 2024, the former also returned the remains of 10 people to indigenous Hawaiians. The study of indigenous remains expanded as anthropology, which explores the origins of races and ethnicities, became popular in Europe and the United States in the 19th century. Anthropology at the time classified humans based on physical characteristics, and was used to justify colonial rule on the basis of racial superiority. Remains and burial items for research were collected through methods such as robbing graves. In the 1970s, movements seeking restoration of indigenous rights gained momentum. Reflecting on the past, laws concerning remains were established in the United States and Australia from the 1980s onward, and the return of indigenous remains became a global trend. However, Japan's response lagged. It was revealed in 2016 that remains of Japan's indigenous Ainu people and indigenous Australians had been exchanged between researchers in both countries. Subsequently, the Australian government sought to achieve the mutual return of the remains, but the University of Tokyo's response was reportedly sluggish, as there was an opinion they could possibly be retained for research purposes. The Japanese government was also reluctant to demand a move, stating that "the handling of remains should be left to the autonomous judgment of universities." It was not until 2023, when the Australian government formally requested their return, that the Japanese government ordered universities and museums nationwide to investigate the storage status of Australian indigenous remains. The right of indigenous peoples to reclaim human remains was recognized in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted by the U.N. General Assembly in 2007. Japan supported this declaration and should be responsible for responding sincerely to return requests. Other remains of indigenous peoples from countries such as Indonesia are still held by Japanese universities and museums. According to sources including past diplomatic documents, there have been cases where the Japanese government has been involved in the transportation of remains from overseas. The return of remains is a step toward restoring the dignity of indigenous peoples. Universities should independently investigate the status of remains in their custody. The government should also support these surveys and ascertain the overall situation.
