Paper short abstract:

This study contributes to the panel by uncovering the roots of environmental (un)justice on the ODA donor side. Taking Japan as a case, the analysis spans safeguards policies, funding patterns, and knowledge transfer. Procedural justice is built up but systemic distributional injustice persists.

Paper long abstract:

One facet of the international efforts for environmental justice involves Official Development Assistance (ODA) directed towards environmental sectors. This approach has prompted criticism, particularly with Western donors accused of imposing their environmental agendas on other nations, a phenomenon labeled as green colonialism. This study, however, by analyzing the justice and injustice within Japan's ODA, one of the most significant non-Western donors, argues that these outcomes are more unintentional consequences than deliberate interventions.

The study uses statistical data and official archives to analyze the following three perspectives: 1) The development of environmental and social safeguards policies, and its systematic flaws; 2) The funding pattern of environmental projects through grants or loans, revealing its allocation imbalances; 3) The transfer of knowledge on sustainability through technology cooperation, highlighting the problem of instrumental knowledge.

Procedural justice, exemplified by the development of environmental and social considerations and the increase in aid quotas for the environmental sector, emerges from the synthesis of international trends toward sustainability, criticism from civil society in Japan, and the transboundary environmental problems of neighboring countries. Despite these positive strides, the path-dependent nature of Japan's ODA and domestic politics have led to systematic distributional injustice. Furthermore, ODA has limited utility for corrective justice. This study contributes to the existing scholars by uncovering the roots of unintended environmental (un)justice on the donor side.