DOCSLIB.ORG

Resilient Infrastructure Ppps 15 1.3 Scope and Objectives of This Study 19 1.4 Selection of Cases for the Japan Case Study 20 1.5 Structure of This Report 21

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Resilient Infrastructure Ppps 15 1.3 Scope and Objectives of This Study 19 1.4 Selection of Cases for the Japan Case Study 20 1.5 Structure of This Report 21 Resilient Infrastructure Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs): Contracts and Procurement Contracts Public-Private Infrastructure Partnerships (PPPs): Resilient Resilient Infrastructure Public Disclosure Authorized Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs): Contracts and Procurement Public Disclosure Authorized The Case of Japan The Case of Japan The Case Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized ©2017 The World Bank International Bank for Reconstruction and Development The World Bank Group 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 USA December 2017 DISCLAIMER This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Nothing herein shall constitute or be considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. The report reflects information available up to November 30, 2017. RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; e-mail: [email protected]. Cover image: MediaFOTO / PIXTA Used with permission. Further permission required for reuse. Table of Contents Abbreviations 3 Acknowledgments 4 Executive Summary 5 I Project Framework 1. Introduction 1.1 Background 14 1.2 Challenges and Approaches to Resilient Infrastructure PPPs 15 1.3 Scope and Objectives of This Study 19 1.4 Selection of Cases for the Japan Case Study 20 1.5 Structure of This Report 21 II Case Study on Japan 2. Policy and Legal Frameworks for PPPs and Disaster Risk Management in Japan 2.1 Overview of PPPs in Japan 24 2.2 Legal Frameworks for PPP and DRM 27 2.3 Risk Sharing between Public and Private Entities 28 2.4 Disaster Risks in the PFI Act and Guidelines 31 2.5 Summary and Key Takeaways 32 3. Contracting and Disaster Risk Allocation 3.1 Definition of Force Majeure 33 3.2 Risk Allocation: Contractual Concepts and Effects 42 3.3 Disaster Response in Contracts 49 3.4 Summary and Key Takeaways 57 4. Procurement, Monitoring, and Payment Mechanisms 4.1 Incentive Mechanisms in Procurement 60 4.2 Incentive Mechanisms in Monitoring and Payment 65 4.3 Summary and Key Takeaways 70 5. Insurance and Financial Institutions 5.1 The Public Sector Role on Insurance 72 5.2 The Private Sector Role on Insurance 73 5.3 Insurance Policies for Additional Cost Deduction 74 5.4 Insurance Availability 76 5.5 Role of Financial Institutions in Disaster Risk Management 80 5.6 Summary and Key Takeaways 81 6. Conclusion and Lessons Learned from Japan 6.1 Policy and Legal Frameworks 83 6.2 Contracting and Risk Allocation 85 6.3 Procurement, Monitoring, and Payment 89 6.4 Disaster Risk Finance, Insurance, and Financial Institutions 91 References 93 Appendix A: Legal and Policy Frameworks in Japan for Public-Private Partnerships and Disaster Risk Management A.1 PPP-Related Laws and PPP Promotion System 95 A.2 Disaster-Related Laws 96 Abbreviations BOT ......... build-operate-transfer BTO ......... build-transfer-operate DRM ......... disaster risk management EMDE ........ emerging markets and developing economies O&M ......... operation and maintenance PDCA ........ Plan, Do, Check, Act PPIAF ....... Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility PFI .......... private finance initiative PPP .......... public-private partnership VfM .......... value for money 3 Acknowledgments This report was prepared by PwC Advisory LLC for the World Bank’s Global Infrastructure Facility (GIF) Tokyo Disaster Risk Management (DRM) Hub and the Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF). PwC Japan received guidance from the World Bank task team comprising Sanae Sasamori (senior infrastructure specialist) and Naho Shibuya (DRM specialist). The report greatly benefited from insights and guidance from the Japanese experts, including Yasufumi Shiraiwa (Sendai City), Kazuaki Miyamoto (Tokyo City University), Akio Isayama (Maeda Corporation), Makoto Inoue (Mizuho Bank Ltd.), Reiji Takahashi (Anderson Mori & Tomotsune LPC), Tokuji Sagi (Maeda Corporation), and Yasushi Tanno (Kyoritsu Insurance Brokers of Japan Co. Ltd.). The draft version of the report was discussed at the experts’ meeting in June 2017, and a summary of the discussion and important insights have been incorporated into the report. The team extends special gratitude to Sendai City for providing extensive support including making useful information available. The team extends thanks to internal peer reviewers, namely Philippe Neves, Jack Campbell, and Fiona Collin as well as inputs and support from Shoko Takemoto, Vibhu Jain, Akiko Toya, Haruko Nakamatsu, and Mayumi Asakura. The team also thanks support from Luis Tineo, Francis Ghesquiere, and Jason Lu. The report greatly benefited from professional editorial works by Mary A. Anderson and professional graphic design by Interbooks Co. Ltd. The World Bank Tokyo Disaster Risk Management Hub supports developing countries to mainstream DRM in national development planning and investment programs. As part of the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery, the DRM Hub provides technical assistance grants and connects Japanese and global DRM expertise and solutions with World Bank teams and government officials. The DRM Hub was established in 2014 through the Japan-World Bank Program for Mainstreaming DRM in Developing Countries – a partnership between Japan’s Ministry of Finance and the World Bank. For more information, visit http://www.worldbank.org/drmhubtokyo The Global Infrastructure Facility (GIF), a global collaborative platform, coordinates and integrates the efforts of multilateral development banks, private sector investors and financiers, and governments that seek to invest in infrastructure in emerging markets and developing economies—fostering collaborative action on complex projects. For more information, visit www.globalinfrafacility.org The Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR) is a global partnership that helps developing countries better understand and reduce their vulnerabilities to natural hazards and adapt to climate change. Working with over 400 local, national, regional, and international partners, GFDRR provides grant financing, technical assistance, training, and knowledge sharing activities to mainstream disaster and climate risk management in policies and strategies. Managed by the World Bank, GFDRR is supported by 36 countries and 10 international organizations. For more information, visit www.globalinfrafacility.org PPIAF, a multi-donor trust fund housed in the World Bank Group, provides technical assistance to governments in developing countries. PPIAF’s main goal is to create enabling environments through high-impact partnerships that facilitate private investment in infrastructure. For more information, visit www.ppiaf.org 4 Executive Summary Key Challenges in Incorporating Resilience into Infrastructure PPPs Resilient economic infrastructure plays an increasingly significant role in mitigating natural disaster risks, including hydrometeorological and geophysical hazards, especially in the contexts of climate variability and change. The impacts of extreme natural hazards and climate change are becoming increasingly visible over the past decades. Between 1994 and 2013, natural disasters claimed the lives of 1.35 million people, more than half of whom died in earthquakes, and the remainder owing to weather- and climate-related hazards (CRED 2015). Since 2000, an average of 341 hydrometeorological disasters (mainly floods and storms) occurred annually—a 44 percent increase from the 1994–2000 average and well over twice the frequency in 1980–89 (CRED 2015). In addition to climate variability and change, rapid urbanization is concentrating risk in vulnerable regions of the world. Without major investments in resilience, climate change may push up to 77 million people into poverty by 2030 (World Bank 2016). In emerging markets and developing economies, the largest source of infrastructure investment is still domestic public spending. It is estimated that it will cost trillions of dollars to meet rising aspirations for better infrastructure, health, and education in these countries—more than multilateral development banks or international donors can provide by themselves. Therefore, there is an increasing demand for and attention on public-private-partnerships (PPPs) to maximize finance for development. Most of the countries face the following key challenges in incorporating resilience into infrastructure PPPs: (a) contractual allocation of natural disaster risks between the public and private sectors; (b) management of long-term contracts under uncertainty; and (c) commercial viability and uncertainty in the cost implications
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “Ceasefire” on Oura Bay: the March 2016 Japan-Okinawa “Amicable Agreement” Introduction and Six Views from Within the Okinawan Anti-Base Movement
    Volume 14 | Issue 7 | Number 1 | Article ID 4874 | Apr 01, 2016 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus “Ceasefire” on Oura Bay: The March 2016 Japan-Okinawa “Amicable Agreement” Introduction and Six Views from within the Okinawan Anti-Base Movement Gavan McCormack Contributors This compilation is designed to offer an account and interpretation of the recent, the already several times pushed back sometimes perplexing events surrounding the March Agreement and its implications. It introduces a set of comments by Okinawans prominent in one or other part of the anti- transfer/reversion date to "fiscal year 2025" base movement, as follows: 2 Sakurai Kunitoshi, "How is the 'Amicable Settlement' to be Understood?" (October 2024-September 2025). Admiral Nakasone Isamu, "Henoko: the 'Amicable Settlement'" Ashitomi Hiroshi, "After the 'Amicable Settlement': For a True Solution to the New Harry Harris, Commander-of US Pacific forces Base Construction Issue" Miyagi Yasuhiro, "On the 'Amicable Settlement' between the Japanese State and presented that date in evidence to Congress Okinawa Prefecture" 3 Urashima Etsuko, "The 'Amicable Settlement': One Citizen's Reflections" early in 2016. But even as that 2025 date was Yoshikawa Hideki,"The 'Amicable Settlement': Statement from 'Okinawa Citizens' Network for Biodiversity" being reluctantly accepted in Washington, at the beginning of March 2016, Japan Stalemate despatched its top security official, Yachi Shotaro, to Washington to seek the Obama government's understanding (and presumably also its permission) for a further substantial delay.4 Once the US consented, the Abe government came to an "out-of-court" March 4 agreement (discussed in this paper and in the following opinion essays by Okinawans) with Okinawa Prefecture, that involved a complete and indefinite suspension of site works at Henoko.
    [Show full text]
  • Daiwa Shibuya Dogenzaka Building)
    This translation of the original Japanese notice is provided solely for information purposes. Should there be any discrepancy between this translation and the Japanese original, the latter shall prevail. March 30, 2016 REIT Issuer: Daiwa Office Investment Corporation (Stock Code No.: 8976) Representative: Nobuaki Omura, Executive Director Asset Manager: Daiwa Real Estate Asset Management Co. Ltd. Representative: Akira Yamanouchi, President and Representative Director Inquiries to: Yuji Shinotsuka, Vice President and Representative Director (Tel: +81-3-6215-9649) Notice concerning Divestment of Asset (Daiwa Shibuya Dogenzaka Building) We hereby announce that today Daiwa Office Investment Corporation (the “Investment Corporation”) has determined to divest a trust beneficial interest in real estate (the “Divestment”) as follows. 1. Summary of Asset to Be Divested Property Name Daiwa Shibuya Dogenzaka (the “Property”) Type of Assets Trust beneficial interest in real estate 6,400 million yen (excluding settlement amounts of Sale Price fixed asset tax and city-planning tax, consumption tax and local consumption tax) Book Value 4,484 million yen (as of November 30, 2015) Difference between the Sale Price and the Book 1,915 million yen (Note 1) Value Date of Conclusion of Sales Agreement March 30, 2016 Date of Delivery April 1, 2016 (scheduled) Purchaser Not disclosed (Note 2) Payment Method Lump-sum payment at the time of delivery Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Bank, Limited (the Intermediary “Intermediary”) (Note 1) This figure differs from capital gain. It is simply calculated to show difference between the Sale Price and the Book Value for reference. (Note 2) The purchaser is a domestic business company, but information is not disclosed as consent for disclosure has not been obtained from the purchaser.
    [Show full text]
  • Study on Airport Ownership and Management and the Ground Handling Market in Selected Non-European Union (EU) Countries
    Study on airport DG MOVE, European ownership and Commission management and the ground handling market in selected non-EU countries Final Report Our ref: 22907301 June 2016 Client ref: MOVE/E1/SER/2015- 247-3 Study on airport DG MOVE, European ownership and Commission management and the ground handling market in selected non-EU countries Final Report Our ref: 22907301 June 2016 Client ref: MOVE/E1/SER/2015- 247-3 Prepared by: Prepared for: Steer Davies Gleave DG MOVE, European Commission 28-32 Upper Ground DM 28 - 0/110 London SE1 9PD Avenue de Bourget, 1 B-1049 Brussels (Evere) Belgium +44 20 7910 5000 www.steerdaviesgleave.com Steer Davies Gleave has prepared this material for DG MOVE, European Commission. This material may only be used within the context and scope for which Steer Davies Gleave has prepared it and may not be relied upon in part or whole by any third party or be used for any other purpose. Any person choosing to use any part of this material without the express and written permission of Steer Davies Gleave shall be deemed to confirm their agreement to indemnify Steer Davies Gleave for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. Steer Davies Gleave has prepared this material using professional practices and procedures using information available to it at the time and as such any new information could alter the validity of the results and conclusions made. The information and views set out in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • Empowering Local Authorities Through Intergovernmental Collaborations the Case of Union of Kansai Governments
    Empowering Local Authorities through Intergovernmental Collaborations The case of Union of Kansai Governments Japan Project Brief Background and Objectives Local autonomy is guaranteed by the Constitution of Japan, and local governments play an important role to provide public services in consideration of local contexts and needs. However, Japanese administrative systems are quite centralized and standardized by national government in practice. Japan’s local governments tend to rely heavily on the national government’s direct subsidies and/or large-scale capital projects, and therefore fiscal decentralization is also an issue to ensure local entities take their own initiatives. This centralized governance structure has long been controversial from the standpoints of local autonomy and economic growth. Decentralization has also been discussed in the context of the issue of excessive concentration of financial and human resources and administrative power in the Tokyo Metropolitan Region (TMR), which would lose economic competitiveness of local cities on the domestic and international market and increase national security risks if there was an unexpected breakdown in capital functions. In the face of moves to strengthen local autonomy and administrative decentralization for local revitalization, the national government decided to confer further discretion on local governments and to allow them to establish intergovernmental authorities with limited autonomy rights through the Local Autonomy Act Amendment of 1994. Kansai is located in the southern-central part of Japan's main island (Figure 1) and forms the second largest economic center of the country. Prefectural and municipal governments in Kansai have been making spontaneous efforts on intergovernmental collaboration for infrastructure planning and institutional development.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Cultural Heritage on Japanese Towns and Villages
    Seattle Journal of Technology, Environmental & Innovation Law Volume 10 Issue 1 Article 4 12-19-2020 The Impact of Cultural Heritage on Japanese Towns and Villages Yuichiro Tsuji Dr. University of Tsukuba, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/sjteil Part of the Administrative Law Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Construction Law Commons, Courts Commons, Cultural Heritage Law Commons, Elder Law Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, International Law Commons, Japanese Studies Commons, Jurisdiction Commons, Land Use Law Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Law and Society Commons, Natural Resources Law Commons, Property Law and Real Estate Commons, Public Law and Legal Theory Commons, and the State and Local Government Law Commons Recommended Citation Tsuji, Yuichiro Dr. (2020) "The Impact of Cultural Heritage on Japanese Towns and Villages," Seattle Journal of Technology, Environmental & Innovation Law: Vol. 10 : Iss. 1 , Article 4. Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/sjteil/vol10/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Seattle University School of Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Seattle Journal of Technology, Environmental & Innovation Law by an authorized editor of Seattle University School of Law Digital Commons. The Impact of Cultural Heritage on Japanese Towns and Villages Yuichiro Tsuji* ABSTRACT In 1954, when historically significant clays and clay pots were found in the Iba district of Shizuoka prefecture, the city applied to the prefectural education committee for a historic site designation. The committee granted this designation to the city.. However, in 1973 the education committee lifted its permission to promote development around the location.
    [Show full text]
  • Urban and Spatial Planning in Japan • M
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Directory of Open Access Journals Urbanism Urban and spatial planning in Japan • M. Tominaga URBAN AND SPATIAL PLANNING IN JAPAN Marin TOMINAGA A Master Course Student of Graduate School of Tohoku University, Department of Architecture and Building Science, [email protected] Abstract . This paper aims to introduce the urban and spatial planning in Japan. According to the national planning system of Japan, chapter 2, the planning system has 3 administrative levels and each territorial region has its own regulation. This paper introduces especially about planning and regulation system in city region in Japan. Key words : urban and spatial planning, Japan, land use, Master Plan 1. The prefectural governments and 2. The planning and regulation system municipalities of Japan First of all, Japanese territory is divided into 47 units called prefectural 2.1. The national planning system of Japan governments (Fig.1). Each of them has its National Land Use Planning Law is a land own administrative organization. The use plan and also a regulation that aims to prefectural governments, differ from the use the national territory comprehensively municipalities which are locally based and systematically (Fig. 3). The law public organizations, in that they are establishes National Planning, Prefectural concerned more comprehensively with a Planning and Municipal Planning. The wider local area. Municipalities are the general plan for land use is as the basis for collective term of city (called shi ), town National and Prefectural Planning. The (called machi ), village (called mura ), and Prefectural Planning sets out five regions district (called ku which exists only in in each prefecture; a city region which is Tokyo) and each municipality also has its an area that needs to be developed and own administrative organization.
    [Show full text]
  • How Will the Amendments of the Local Public Service Act and Local Autonomy Act Affect Alts?
    30 December 2018 How will the amendments of the Local Public Service Act and Local Autonomy Act affect ALTs? Neo Yamashita, EWA Charles Weathers, Osaka City University The Local Public Service Act and the Local Autonomy Act govern employment practices for both regular and non-regular public employees. The rules and regulations governing non-regular employees are inconsistent and unfair, resulting in constant labor problems, so the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIAC, or Somusho) has been preparing an extensive overhaul that will revise both laws and create a new employment category, Fiscal Year Appointed Employee (kaikei nendo ninyo shokuin), to replace the current non-regular employee (hiseiki komuin) designation. The two revised laws (currently undergoing heated debate and adjustment) are scheduled to take effect on April 1, 2020. This report provides a compact explanation of the changes and their implications for ALTs. 1. Why will the Local Public Service Act and Local Autonomy Act be amended? Background a) Legal cases for wages and working conditions of non-regular public sector employees ・The number of non-regular public sector employees has increased because of the extreme fiscal problems of local governments. Local governments have used non-regular employees for decades to hold down costs, but tens of thousands of regular local public employee positions have been replaced by cheaper non-regular employees since 2005. ・ Compensation practices are unfair. Non-regular employees do not receive the - 1 - same bonuses and allowances as regular employees, even when they do equivalent work. ・Personnel practices are not consistent. The most common inconsistency is that most local governments do not pay bonuses and allowances to non-regular public sector employees.
    [Show full text]
  • Road to Ichinobo, Matsushima from Tokyo and Sendai
    Road to Matsushima CASE (A): Sendai airport (SDJ) Sendai sta. Matsushima SDJ Immigration at Narita International airport Domestic flight Arrive at Sendai airport (SDJ) Train #1 to Sendai station (Sendai Airport Line) Change train at Sendai station Train #2 to Matsushima station (JR Tohoku line) Arrive at Matsushima station Bus or TAXI or Walk NRT Tokyo Ichinobo (venue) HND CASE (B1): Narita airport (NRT) Sendai sta. Matsushima SDJ Immigration at Narita International airport Train #1 to Tokyo station (JR Narita Express) Change train at Tokyo station Train #2 to Sendai station (JR Tohoku Shinkansen) Change train at Sendai station Train #3 to Matsushima station (JR Tohoku line) Arrive at Matsushima station Bus or TAXI or Walk NRT Tokyo Ichinobo (venue) HND CASE (B2): Narita airport (NRT) Sendai sta. Matsushima SDJ Immigration at Narita International airport Train #1 to Ueno station (Keisei SKY liner) Change train at Ueno station (10 min. walk) Train #2 to Sendai station (JR Tohoku Shinkansen) Change train at Sendai station Train #3 to Matsushima station (JR Tohoku line) Arrive at Matsushima station Bus or TAXI or Walk NRT Tokyo Ichinobo (venue) HND CASE (C): Haneda airport (HND) Sendai sta. Matsushima SDJ Immigration at Haneda International airport Train #1 to Hamamatsucho station (Tokyo monorail) Change train at Hamamatsucho station Train #2 to Tokyo station (JR Yamanote line) Change train at Tokyo station Train #3 to Sendai station (JR Tohoku Shinkansen) Change train at Sendai station Train #4 to Matsushima station (JR Tohoku line) NRT Tokyo Arrive at Matsushima station HND Bus or TAXI or Walk Ichinobo (venue) Sendai station Time table Sendai station (Saturday and Holiday) Tohoku Line for Matsushima mark does not stop at Matsushima station.
    [Show full text]
  • Racial Discrimination in Japan
    Joint NGO Report for the Human Rights Committee in response to the List of Issues Prior to Reporting CCPR/C/JP/QPR/7 <PART 2> submitted by Japan NGO Network for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ERD Net) November 2020 Japan NGO Network for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ERD Net) is a network of NGOs working for the elimination of racial discrimination in Japan. Since the launch of networking in 2007, it has continually intervened the review of human rights situations of Japan by the HR Committee, CERD and other UN human rights mechanisms. Contact: International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR） [email protected] NGOs contributing to the Report The International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR) Japan Network towards Human Rights Legislation for Non-Japanese Nationals & Ethnic Minorities Solidarity Network with Migrants Japan (SMJ) Human Rights Association for Korean Residents in Japan Research-Action Institute for Ethnic Korean Residents (RAIK) Korea NGO Center Center for Minority Issues and Mission Buraku Liberation League (BLL) Association of Indigenous Peoples in the Ryukyus (AIPR) All Okinawa Council for Human Right (AOCHR) JNATIP Japan Network Against Trafficking In Persons Japan Lawyers Network for Refugees Kanagawa MINTOREN Yokohama City Liaison Committee for Abolition of the Nationality Clause Hyogo Association for Human Rights of Foreign Residents National Network for the Total Abolition of the Pension Citizenship Clause (in random order) 1 Joint NGO
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Developments in Public- Private Partnerships in Japan
    COUNTRY / PRACTICE Recent developments in public- private partnerships in Japan Masanori Sato and Shigeki Okatani of Mori Hamada & Matsumoto in Tokyo report on the latest changes to Japan’s PPP (public-private partnership) environment n 2015, there were significant developments in public-private partnerships (PPP) in Japan. The concession agreement for “The need for more I Sendai Airport was signed on December 1, 2015, and the con - cession agreement for Kansai International Airport (Kanku) and Osaka International Airport (Itami) was signed on December 15 efficient management of 2015. These projects are the first cases of airport privatisations in Japan where there were substantial uses of PPP frameworks, and the infrastructure, management of the airports was assigned to entities established ex - clusively with private capital. challenging fiscal Another recent development was the introduction of special legis - lation, passed into law by parliament in July 2015, enabling a local government to implement a toll road concession, the bidding process conditions, and the for which commenced in November 2015. The government is actively promoting PPP in light of socio- expectation PPPs will economic changes and fiscal conditions. It has set numerical targets, and has implemented a variety of measures to promote PPP proj - create new business ects. However, hurdles to implementing PPPs, especially in regard to concessions in certain sectors, including water and sewage, still opportunities are driving remain. This article discusses the government’s recent efforts to promote the government to PPPs and the latest developments in certain types of infrastructure development. intensively promote PFI A new era for PPPs in Japan In the Abe administration’s basic growth strategy, the Japan Revitali - Act concessions” sation Strategy, which was revised in 2015, central government calls upon local governments to offer more opportunities to the private sector to operate public facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Core Document Forming Part of the Reports of States Parties
    Core document forming part of the reports of States parties May, 2012 Contents I. General Information A. Demographic, Economic, Social, and Cultural Characteristics of the State 1. Geographical Description 2. Demographic Characteristics 3. Social and Cultural Characteristics 4. Economic Characteristics B. Constitutional, Political, and Legal Structure of State 1. Political System 2. Legislative Branch 3. Executive Branch 4. Judicial Branch 5. Local Autonomy 6. Legal Framework for NGOs II. General Framework for Protection and Promotion of Human Rights A. Acceptance of International Human Rights Norms 1. Status of Conclusion of Major Human Rights Treaties and Conventions 2. Reservation and Declaration B. Legal and Institutional Framework for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights at the National Level 1. Protection of Human Rights under the Constitution of Japan, etc. 2. Human Rights Conventions as Part of Domestic Laws and Regulations 3. Organ Handling Human Rights Issues and Remedy System C. Framework within which Human Rights are promoted at the National Level III. Information on Non-discrimination and Equality and Effective Remedies 1. Legislation concerning Non-discrimination and Equality 2. Policy relating to Non-discrimination and Equality 1 I. General Information A. Demographic, Economic, Social, and Cultural Characteristics of the State 1. Geographical Description Japan is a nation consisting of numerous islands lying off the eastern seaboard of the Asian continent. The islands form a crescent-shaped archipelago stretching from northeast to southwest. Japan has a northern boundary with Russia across the Sea of Japan and the Sea of Okhotsk and a southern boundary with the Philippines and the islands of Micronesia with the Pacific Sea in between, and to the west of Japan, the Korean Peninsula and China lie across the Sea of Japan and the East China Sea.
    [Show full text]
  • The Metropolis of Tokyo U.S.$1,500,000,000 0.750 Per Cent
    Prospectus The Metropolis of Tokyo U.S.$1,500,000,000 0.750 per cent. Bonds due 2025 Issue Price 99.824 per cent. The above Bonds (the "Bonds") will mature on 16th July, 2025 and may be redeemed earlier at the option of The Metropolis of Tokyo (the "Metropolis" or "Tokyo") only in the event that certain Japanese taxes are imposed on payments in respect of the Bonds, as set out in Condition 5 of the terms and conditions of the Bonds (the "Conditions", and each condition set out in the Conditions being a "Condition"). Interest on the Bonds will accrue at the rate of 0.750 per cent. per annum from and including 16th July, 2020 and be payable semi-annually in arrear on 16th January and 16th July in each year commencing on 16th January, 2021. This Prospectus has been approved by the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority (the "FCA") as competent authority under Regulation (EU) 2017/1129 (the "Prospectus Regulation"). The FCA has only approved this Prospectus as meeting the standards of completeness, comprehensibility and consistency imposed by the Prospectus Regulation. Such an approval should not be considered as an endorsement of the Metropolis nor as an endorsement of the quality of any Bonds that are the subject of this Prospectus. Investors should make their own assessment as to the suitability of investing in such Bonds. Application has been made to the Financial Conduct Authority (the "FCA") under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (the "FSMA") for the Bonds to be admitted to the official list of the FCA (the "Official List") and to the London Stock Exchange plc (the "London Stock Exchange") for such Bonds to be admitted to trading on the London Stock Exchange's Main Market (the "Main Market").
    [Show full text]