Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35886111›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

A Review of Climate Security Discussions in Japan.

Christo Odeyemi, Takashi Sekiyama

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Christo OdeyemiGraduate School of Advanced Integrated Studies in Human Survivability, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8306, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-9760-4024
Takashi SekiyamaGraduate School of Advanced Integrated Studies in Human Survivability, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8306, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-9499-0003

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review paper provides preliminary analysis and answers to three key questions that were identified by synthesizing qualitative evidence from climate security research in Japan. The questions identified are: (1) Has Japan participated in the global climate security debate at all? (2) Why did climate security struggle to become a major political theme in Japan until 2020? (3) Why did Japan explicitly start dealing with climate security as a policy issue in 2020? We identify and discuss four key reasons relative to the second question. The review provides key details (and general parameters) of these questions that have been overlooked by not only Japanese researchers but also climate security research conducted between 2017 and 2022 in Europe and the United States. Climate security suddenly became a trending topic among Japanese researchers and political elites in 2020; we find evidence that future studies could provide important and more robust insight if an analysis of the above questions is supported by interview data obtained from Japanese government officials. In doing so, researchers will be able to provide valuable insight into the possibility (and extent) that inter-ministerial rivalry between key ministries has impeded domestic progress on climate security action. Furthermore, three separate projects on climate security have been commissioned and recently implemented in Japan. These form the basis for this first systematic literature review of 34 papers and the related research reports resulting from these projects. These papers and reports were retrieved from the electronic databases of Google Scholar, ProQuest, and the National Institute for Environmental Studies in April 2022. While the main limitation of this review paper is that readers are expected to connect these questions to their own experiences at the global level, we reduce the possibility of presenting biased information by identifying and verifying missing details. For example, we had difficulty identifying the method used in one of the co-authored papers and contacted the corresponding author. In summary, sustained discussion in academia and high-politics settings should eventually lead to a greater awareness about climate security.

Indexed as

PolicyPoliticsClimateClimate ChangeJapanUnited Statesclimate changeclimate crisisclimate securitizationclimate securityhuman securityJapan’s climate policysystematic literature review

Identifiers

PMID35886111
PMCPMC9318022

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.