Abstract
With the continuous increase in carbon dioxide emissions due to human activities and the resulting severe climate issues, there is global concern about energy conservation and emission reduction. However, detailed data on energy consumption and emissions at a fine-grained scale, particularly regarding spatial dimensions and sector-specific emissions, remains insufficient and in need of refinement and timely updates. In Japan, following the Fukushima nuclear disaster, there has been a significant shift from nuclear power generation to reliance on fossil fuels across various sectors, highlighting disparities in emissions data across different regions and industries. Our work extends the emissions time series for Japan’s 47 prefectures, incorporating their socioeconomic characteristics over a broader time frame and with a more detailed sectoral classification. The emissions inventory, covering the period from 1990 to 2020, is based on the consumption of the three main fossil fuels across 32 sectors, with emissions carefully allocated for regional power generation. This dataset, presented in a unified format, is expanded to include longer time scales and more detailed socioeconomic data. It is anticipated to offer crucial insights for establishing regional emission reduction targets and identifying sectoral priorities for decarbonization.
Similar content being viewed by others
Background & Summary
The persistent rise in global temperatures presents a complex challenge, directly contributing to a spectrum of climatic issues that threaten human survival. According to the Global Carbon Project’s 2023 report, global carbon emissions have reached an alarming level of approximately 40.9 billion tons1. A significant portion of these emissions, about 36.8 billion tons, originates from the combustion of fossil fuels1. Statistical data indicate that the global average temperature has risen by approximately 1.1 degrees Celsius (°C) since the Industrial Revolution2, and it is likely that global warming will exceed 1.5 °C before 2030 and may surpass 1.7 °C shortly thereafter1. The escalation of global temperatures has led to an increase in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, posing severe threats to global food and water security3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10, human health11,12,13,14,15,16, and the economic and social fabric17,18,19,20,21,22,23. The latest 28th Conference of the Parties (COP28) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has conducted its first “Global Stocktake” to assess the progress of climate action since the signing of the Paris Agreement, underscoring an anticipated shortfall of 20.3 to 23.9 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent in achieving the 2030 goals24. As the fifth-largest emitter, Japan’s annual fossil CO2 emissions in 2022 were 1075.07 million tons, accounting for 2.83% of the global total1. Japan’s efforts in emission reduction are of significant importance to the global response to climate change.
Japan’s carbon reduction efforts have yielded some results, with historical emissions since 1990 exhibiting a fluctuating decline across various sectors25. In 2020, Japan declared its intention to achieve carbon neutrality by the year 2050, a commitment that was enshrined in the Act on Promotion of Global Warming Countermeasures26. The subsequent year, Japan revised its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), elevating its reduction target from an initial 26% to a 46% cut by 2030 relative to 2013 emissions27. This revision is set to lower Japan’s absolute carbon emissions from 1.079 billion tons per year to 813 million tons per year. By the end of 2023, Japan had achieved approximately 20% of its emissions reduction target, yet the ambitious decarbonization goals still require more concerted efforts. In February 2023, the Japanese government passed the Green Transformation (GX) Basic Policy, aiming to strengthen decarbonization in key industrial sectors through the GX Alliance and to promote renewable energy as the main source of electricity28. Japan is also exploring positive measures, including the implementation of a carbon pricing policy based on the GX Promotion Act and halting the construction of new coal-fired power plants without reduction measures within the country29,30. Following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, Japan had once contemplated abandoning nuclear power development in favor of fossil fuels31. Recently, the government has been considering the restart of idle reactors and the construction of new ones28. While nuclear power may see a resurgence in Japan’s future, safety reviews, and political obstacles are likely to make it challenging for nuclear energy to contribute to Japan’s 2030 targets.
Carbon emissions inventories provide the mechanism for discerning comprehensive emission metrics and tracing source outlines within delineated geographic perimeters over established temporal spans32,33. The scientific rigor and precision of carbon emission inventories are critical in pinpointing emission sources, evaluating potential reduction measures, and shaping as well as appraising mitigation strategies34. Recent research has expanded the ambit of carbon footprint assessments, underscoring the significance of sector-specific analyses in domains such as households35,36,37,38,39, food systems10,40,41, and transportation sectors42,43,44. This underlines the need for quantifying carbon emissions with enhanced spatial and temporal resolution. With the improvement of fine-scale data and methodologies, attention is increasingly focused on compiling carbon emission inventories at the national45,46,47,48, regional34,49,50,51,52,53, and household54,55,56 levels, as well as within specific subdomains57,58. In service of decarbonization goals, there is a growing demand for more refined carbon emission inventories in future research59.
Japanese government agencies have not disclosed carbon emission data involving detailed regions and sectors31. To address this, Our previous work has developed an emissions inventory database that includes 47 prefectures and 26 sectors (including the power sector)31. Nonetheless, the database could be enhanced in two key areas: Firstly, it currently spans from 2007 to 2015, and incorporating the most recent energy consumption statistics from Japan warrants extending this timeframe to capture a more comprehensive temporal scope. Secondly, the granularity of the 26 sectors included in the database does not meet the nuanced requirements of future research; availability of updated data facilitates a more detailed sectoral breakdown.
To accommodate the emerging needs of future research, we have updated the dataset based on previous work. This dataset seeks to bridge the identified gaps by expanding the scope of Japan’s prefectural carbon emission inventory, both temporally and sectorally. The temporal coverage of the database has been expanded to encompass a broader timeframe, from 1990 to 2020, enabling a more extensive quantification of regional historical carbon emission fluctuations. Additionally, the sectors within the database have been further delineated, with the total number now increased to 32. This includes separating previously aggregated sectors and consolidating those that cannot be classified into a single category, as detailed in Table 1. Simultaneously, to match each emission result, we compiled a corresponding set of socioeconomic data, including population, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), land prices, green spaces, and roads. Consistent with the previous version, we continue to use data from Japanese power companies and power plants to calculate carbon emissions from the power sector, and additionally estimate carbon emissions from the use of coal, crude oil, and natural gas not utilized for power generation. Moreover, to eliminate the effects of price level fluctuations, the socioeconomic data set was converted to constant 2011 prices.
Methodology
Sectoral emissions accounting
The scope of emission accounting includes Japan’s four major sectors: industrial sector, household sector, transportation sector and other non-energy sectors, totaling 32 sectors. The original data used for calculations come from energy consumption data from Japan’s prefecture-level natural resources and energy departments (URL: https://www.enecho.meti.go.jp/statistics/energy_consumption/ec002/results.html#headline4), including the consumption of fossil fuels such as coal, crude oil and natural gas in each department. However, there is a lack of three types of fuel consumption data for the power generation sector, so in addition to non-electricity fuel emissions, we calculated power generation emissions separately. Emissions from power generation are allocated through emissions from power plants and are not further divided by fuel type, but as a single emission source alongside the three major fuels. With the exception of the power generation sector, all other sectors are estimated using energy consumption data.
For the estimation of power generation emissions, we collected power generation data of major electric power companies in the target years from the Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan (Fuel performance. URL: https://pdb.fepc.or.jp) and obtained capacity data for each power plant from Japan National Land Numerical Information (Category: Facilities. URL: https://nlftp.mlit.go.jp/ksj/gml/datalist/KsjTmplt-P03.html) for prefectural power generation emissions distribution. Regional power plants generally provide electricity for the local area and some surrounding cities, so the total emissions can be estimated by referring to the number and capacity scale of power companies in the prefecture. Combining the three fossil fuels, sectoral emissions of prefectures can be calculated by the following formula:
Where EPpt is the power generation emissions in prefecture p in year t. CAPpt is the proportion of power plant installed capacity of prefecture p in the area where it is supported by power company θ. This parameter comes from Japan National Land Numerical Information (Category: Facilities). \({L}_{\theta pt}^{i}\) represents the total consumption of fuel type i in year t by the power company θ that provides power support for prefecture p. This parameter comes from Electricity Statistics Information of The Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan (FEPC). Hit represents the calorific value generated per unit of fuel type i consumed in year t, and Iit represents the corresponding emission intensity. These two values come from the Prefecture Energy Statistics of Agency for Natural Resources and Energy of Japan, as shown in Table 2. The calorific value and emission intensity coefficient of each fuel type are given by year. Therefore, \({\sum }_{i=1}\left({L}_{\theta pt}^{i}\times {H}_{it}\times {I}_{it}\right)\) can be understood as the total emissions from power generation using three fossil fuels in each prefecture. In Eq. (2), Eijpt represents the total carbon dioxide emissions produced by sector j in prefecture p in year t consuming fuel type i. Gijpt represents the consumption of fuel type i in sector j in prefecture p in year t. The data is driven by prefectural energy statistics from the Prefecture Energy Statistics of Agency for Natural Resources and Energy of Japan. In Eq. (3), Ept represents the total emissions of prefecture p in year t.
Sectoral consumption on electricity and its allocation
As mentioned above, the absence of precise data on fossil fuel consumption at the prefectural level within the power generation sector necessitates an estimation of emissions based on the distribution of electricity consumption. We first gathered data on electricity usage from ten prominent power companies (see power_company_cover_region.xlsx in the Excel folder in figshare) over a specified timeframe. Subsequently, emissions were reassigned according to the respective capacities of local power plants in each prefecture, contributing to the overall emissions calculation at the prefectural level. In cases where multiple power companies support a single prefecture, we designate the company with the broadest coverage as the primary contributor. Given that the most recent power generation data is available only up to 2015, we extrapolate and utilize the same statistical values from that year for subsequent years.
Socioeconomic data
The socio-economic characteristics of cities are often used as input variables in carbon emission-driven models. Multivariate regression modeling between socioeconomic and carbon emissions data can help scholars understand what characteristics influence carbon emissions and to what extent, and how this influence varies across geographies and sectors. Therefore, to match each emission result, we additionally transformed the corresponding socioeconomic data set, including population, GDP, land prices, green space, and roads. The population data of each prefecture from 1990 to 2020 comes from the Statistics Bureau of Japan (Census. URL: https://www.e-stat.go.jp/). Prefectural GDP data comes from the Prefectural Final Accounts Annual Report of the Cabinet Office of Japan (URL: https://www.cao.go.jp/). Land price, green space and road data come from the Japan Land Numerical Information website (URL: https://nlftp.mlit.go.jp/ksj/index.html). Socio-economic indicators are recorded as follows:
-
1.
Population (unit: person)
-
2.
GDP (unit: million yen)
-
3.
Average land price (unit: yen per square meter)
-
4.
Per capita green space area (unit: square meters per person)
-
5.
Road density (meters per square kilometer)
Data Records
This dataset encompasses a comprehensive compilation of 72,192 data records, spanning 47 prefectures and 32 sectors (as delineated in Table 3), capturing energy consumption based on three types of fossil fuels and one secondary energy source (electricity) over 16 years (Data for 1991–2004 and 2006 are not collected in this dataset). The dataset, denominated “Extension of Japan Prefectural Emission Accounting and Enrich Socioeconomic Data 1990 to 2020,” is publicly accessible via Figshare60. To provide a detailed breakdown, the database is structured into seven main components. Firstly, it comprises an Excel folder containing data on prefecture-level heat generation, emissions, population, GDP, land prices, park area per capita, and road density in Japan from 1990 to 2020, offering valuable insights into energy consumption, economic indicators, and environmental factors. Secondly, six distinct folders house a historical dataset on prefecture-level heat generation and emissions categorized by energy sources and industries in Japan, spanning from 1990 to 2020. These folders also encompass metrics for heat generation and emissions normalized by GDP and per capita, presented as ‘.shp’ files, specifically designated as ‘Heat’, ‘Heat per capita’, ‘Heat per GDP’, ‘Emission’, ‘Emission per capita’, and ‘Emission per GDP’ respectively. Furthermore, the dataset incorporates a comprehensive socioeconomic inventory, featuring a substantial number of records, which comprehensively covers five major indicators. The flowchart of this dataset is shown as Fig. 1.
Technical Validation
Total sectoral emission by years
Annual emissions by sector from 1990 to 2020 are given in Fig. 2(B). In addition to the power generation sector, the five sectors with the highest annual emissions in the observed years are “Manufacture of Chemical and Allied Products, Oil and Coal Products”, “Manufacture of Iron and Steel”, “Non-Energy”, “Residential” and “Transportation”. Fig. 2(A) provides a further understanding of emissions from the “Manufacturing of Chemical and Allied Products, Oil and Coal Products” sector in three years: 1990, 2015 and 2020, including the proportion of carbon emissions caused by fuel use nationwide, the emission and emission proportions of the three types of fuels in each region. The results show that from 1990 to 2015, the sector’s share of national emissions caused by burning coal decreased by 7.6%, while the share of oil and gas increased by 6.9% and 0.7% respectively. The proportion of oil has almost remained unchanged from 2015 to 2020, and a small amount (0.6%) of carbon emissions has shifted from coal to gas. The sector in central Japan has gradually shed its reliance on coal and oil over time and was dominated by natural gas by 2020 Fig. 2.
Comparison with other estimation results
This data set compiles Japan’s prefecture-level emissions inventory based on energy consumption by sector. Here we compare the estimation results with The GHG Emission Data of Japan (URL: http://www.nies.go.jp/gio/en/archive/index.html) provided by the Greenhouse Gas Inventory Office of Japan (GIO) and the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report of Japan (NIR) released in April 2022 (URL: https://www.nies.go.jp/gio/en/archive/nir/index.html) (Fig. 3). The differences were largest in 1990, where the GIO difference ratio (assessment gap/GIO value) and NIR difference ratio (assessment gap/NIR value) were 13.2% and 15.2% respectively. The reason for the assessment gap may be changes in departmental classification. Japan’s Standard Industrial Classification was revised twice in 1993 and 2002, resulting in some newly added departments not being included in the 1990 energy consumption accounting. The biggest difference between the estimates after 2005 and those from other national estimates appeared around 2011. For example, the GIO difference ratios are 3.5% (2011) and 4.7% (2012), and the NIR difference ratios are 4.2% (2011) and 5.4% (2012). The difference in assessment mainly occurs in the assessment of power generation, because part of the power generation burden caused by the shutdown of nuclear power plants after the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011 was transferred to private power generation (non-utility power generation facilities). The power generation and fuel consumption of these private power generation facilities are difficult to accurately survey and quantify. Therefore, the power generation estimates in this data set do not include private power generation, resulting in a gap between around 2011 and other assessment results. After 2015, the estimates from this data set gradually approached and exceeded other national estimates. The reason is that due to the lack of power generation data from 2016 to 2020, this study uses the same baseline value as in 2015 for power generation estimates in years after 2015. This may lead to overestimation of emissions from the power generation sector.
Usage Note
The dataset is a pivotal resource for a variety of applications in environmental and socio-economic research. This extensive dataset, encompassing 96,256 records across 47 prefectures and 32 sectors, provides a detailed view of Japan’s carbon emissions and socioeconomic parameters over time. This compilation is derived from a meticulous amalgamation of data from multiple sources, including the electricity consumption dataset and publicly available data from the Japanese Government Statistics. Researchers and experts are afforded the flexibility to independently extract and process information from any database, adhering to our outlined methodology for data cleaning and enhancement.
As for the potential usage, policymakers and environmental planners can utilize this dataset to assess the impact of energy consumption in different sectors and prefectures on carbon emissions, which helps to inform targeted and effective environmental policies and initiatives at both local and national levels. Moreover, our dataset provides insights into the consumption patterns of fossil fuels and electricity across various sectors. Energy companies and consultants can analyze this data to identify trends and make informed decisions regarding energy production and distribution. The dataset’s strength lies in its detailed sectoral and regional breakdown, which, when used cautiously, can yield highly valuable insights for a wide range of applications. This dataset is openly accessible to the public, subject to the terms of the Creative Commons License with attribution (CC-BY 4.0).
Code availability
The code used for analysis in this study is publicly available at: https://github.com/chenzhiheng970717/SD_code.git.
References
Friedlingstein, P. et al. Global Carbon Budget 2023. Earth System Science Data 15, 5301–5369 (2023).
Calvin, K. et al. IPCC, 2023: Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, H. Lee and J. Romero (Eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647 (2023).
Hanjra, M. A. & Qureshi, M. E. Global water crisis and future food security in an era of climate change. Food Policy 35, 365–377 (2010).
Gregory, P. J., Ingram, J. S. I. & Brklacich, M. Climate change and food security. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 360, 2139–2148 (2005).
Vermeulen, S. J., Campbell, B. M. & Ingram, J. S. I. Climate Change and Food Systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 37, 195–222 (2012).
Arnell, N. W. Climate change and global water resources. Global Environmental Change 9, S31–S49 (1999).
Ray, D. K. et al. Climate change has likely already affected global food production. PLOS ONE 14, e0217148 (2019).
Schmidhuber, J. & Tubiello, F. N. Global food security under climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104, 19703–19708 (2007).
Haddeland, I. et al. Global water resources affected by human interventions and climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, 3251–3256 (2014).
Long, Y. et al. Carbon footprint and embodied nutrition evaluation of 388 recipes. Sci Data 10, 794 (2023).
Vicedo-Cabrera, A. M. et al. The burden of heat-related mortality attributable to recent human-induced climate change. Nat. Clim. Chang. 11, 492-+ (2021).
Long, Y. et al. PM2.5 and ozone pollution-related health challenges in Japan with regards to climate change. Global Environmental Change 79, 102640 (2023).
McMichael, A. J., Woodruff, R. E. & Hales, S. Climate change and human health: present and future risks. The Lancet 367, 859–869 (2006).
Kinney, P. L. Climate Change, Air Quality, and Human Health. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 35, 459–467 (2008).
Patz, J. A., Campbell-Lendrum, D., Holloway, T. & Foley, J. A. Impact of regional climate change on human health. Nature 438, 310–317 (2005).
Kunkel, K. E., Pielke, R. A. & Changnon, S. A. Temporal Fluctuations in Weather and Climate Extremes That Cause Economic and Human Health Impacts: A Review. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 80, 1077–1098 (1999).
Burke, M., Hsiang, S. M. & Miguel, E. Global non-linear effect of temperature on economic production. Nature 527, 235–239 (2015).
Denton, F. Climate change vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation: Why does gender matter? Gender & Development 10, 10–20 (2002).
Ecology, A. J. of H. Climate Change, Disaster and Gender Vulnerability: A Study on Two Divisions of Bangladesh | American Journal of Human Ecology. (2013).
Gamble, J. L. & Hess, J. J. Temperature and Violent Crime in Dallas, Texas: Relationships and Implications of Climate Change. West J Emerg Med 13, 239–246 (2012).
Dell, M., Jones, B. F. & Olken, B. A. What Do We Learn from the Weather? The New Climate-Economy Literature. Journal of Economic Literature 52, 740–798 (2014).
Hallegatte, S., Hourcade, J.-C. & Dumas, P. Why economic dynamics matter in assessing climate change damages: Illustration on extreme events. Ecological Economics 62, 330–340 (2007).
Xiang, J., Hansen, A., Pisaniello, D. & Bi, P. Workers’ perceptions of climate change related extreme heat exposure in South Australia: a cross-sectional survey. BMC Public Health 16, 549 (2016).
UNFCCC. Technical dialogue of the first global stocktake. Synthesis report by the co-facilitators on the technical dialogue. United Nations Climate Change https://unfccc.int/documents/631600 (2023).
Li, Y., Huang, L., Bai, Y. & Long, Y. Decomposing Driving Forces of Carbon Emission Variation—A Structural Decomposition Analysis of Japan. Earth’s Future 10, e2021EF002639 (2022).
MoE. Act on Promotion of Global Warming Countermeasures. Ministry of Environment https://www.env.go.jp/earth/ondanka/keii.html (2021).
MoE. Japan’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). Ministry of Evironment https://www.env.go.jp/earth/earth/ondanka/ndc.html (2021).
METI. Cabinet Decision on the Basic Policy for the Realization of GX. Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry https://www.meti.go.jp/english/press/2023/0210_003.html (2023).
Yamazaki, M. & Takeda, S. A computable general equilibrium assessment of Japan’s nuclear energy policy and implications for renewable energy. Environ Econ Policy Stud 19, 537–554 (2017).
Komiyama, R. & Fujii, Y. Long-term scenario analysis of nuclear energy and variable renewables in Japan’s power generation mix considering flexible power resources. Energy Policy 83, 169–184 (2015).
Long, Y. et al. Japan prefectural emission accounts and socioeconomic data 2007 to 2015. Sci Data 7, 233 (2020).
Tichý, M. An Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the Czech Republic. in Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventories: Interim Results from the U.S. Country Studies Program (eds. et al.) 253–261, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1722-9_15 (Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 1996).
IPCC, 2006. IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. (OECD, 1995).
Shan, Y. et al. City-level climate change mitigation in China. Science Advances 4, eaaq0390 (2018).
Huang, L., Long, Y., Chen, J. & Yoshida, Y. Sustainable lifestyle: Urban household carbon footprint accounting and policy implications for lifestyle-based decarbonization. Energy Policy 181, 113696 (2023).
Long, Y., Guan, D., Kanemoto, K. & Gasparatos, A. Negligible impacts of early COVID-19 confinement on household carbon footprints in Japan. One Earth 4, 553–564 (2021).
Long, Y. et al. Japanese urban household carbon footprints during early-stage COVID-19 pandemic were consistent with those over the past decade. npj Urban Sustain 3, 1–11 (2023).
Long, Y., Yoshida, Y., Zeng, I. Y., Xue, J. & Li, Y. Fuel-Specific Carbon Footprint Embodied in Japanese Household Lifestyles. Earth’s Future 9, e2021EF002213 (2021).
Long, Y., Dong, L., Yoshida, Y. & Li, Z. Evaluation of energy-related household carbon footprints in metropolitan areas of Japan. Ecological Modelling 377, 16–25 (2018).
Hillier, J. et al. The carbon footprints of food crop production. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 7, 107–118 (2009).
Scholz, K., Eriksson, M. & Strid, I. Carbon footprint of supermarket food waste. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 94, 56–65 (2015).
Li, X. et al. Urban-scale carbon footprint evaluation based on citizen travel demand in Japan. Applied Energy 286, 116462 (2021).
Wakeland, W., Cholette, S. & Venkat, K. Food transportation issues and reducing carbon footprint. in Green Technologies in Food Production and Processing (eds. Boye, J. I. & Arcand, Y.) 211–236, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1587-9_9 (Springer US, Boston, MA, 2012).
Postorino, M. N. & Mantecchini, L. A transport carbon footprint methodology to assess airport carbon emissions. Journal of Air Transport Management 37, 76–86 (2014).
Peters, G. P. et al. Rapid growth in CO2 emissions after the 2008–2009 global financial crisis. Nature Clim Change 2, 2–4 (2012).
Guan, D., Liu, Z., Geng, Y., Lindner, S. & Hubacek, K. The gigatonne gap in China’s carbon dioxide inventories. Nature Clim Change 2, 672–675 (2012).
Gurney, K. R. et al. High Resolution Fossil Fuel Combustion CO2 Emission Fluxes for the United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 5535–5541 (2009).
Han, P. et al. Evaluating China’s fossil-fuel CO2 emissions from a comprehensive dataset of nine inventories, Atmos. Chem. Phys. 20, 11371–11385, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11371-2020 (2020).
Yu, S., Wei, Y.-M. & Wang, K. Provincial allocation of carbon emission reduction targets in China: An approach based on improved fuzzy cluster and Shapley value decomposition. Energy Policy 66, 630–644 (2014).
Shan, Y. et al. New provincial CO2 emission inventories in China based on apparent energy consumption data and updated emission factors. Applied Energy 184, 742–750 (2016).
Xiao, H. et al. Comparisons of CO2 emission performance between secondary and service industries in Yangtze River Delta cities. Journal of Environmental Management, 252, 109667, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109667 (2019).
Xia, C. et al The evolution of carbon footprint in the yangtze river delta city cluster during economic transition 2012-2015. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 181, 106266, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106266 (2022).
Shan, Y. et al. City-level emission peak and drivers in China. Science Bulletin, 67(18), 1910-1920, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scib.2022.08.024 (2022).
Huang, L. et al. Extension and update of multiscale monthly household carbon footprint in Japan from 2011 to 2022. Sci Data 10, 439 (2023).
Long, Y. et al. Monthly direct and indirect greenhouse gases emissions from household consumption in the major Japanese cities. Sci Data 8, 301 (2021).
Kanemoto, K., Shigetomi, Y., Hoang, N. T., Okuoka, K. & Moran, D. Spatial variation in household consumption-based carbon emission inventories for 1200 Japanese cities. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 114053 (2020).
Shao, S., Yang, L., Yu, M. & Yu, M. Estimation, characteristics, and determinants of energy-related industrial CO2 emissions in Shanghai (China), 1994–2009. Energy Policy 39, 6476–6494 (2011).
Gately, C. K., Hutyra, L. R. & Sue Wing, I. Cities, traffic, and CO2: A multidecadal assessment of trends, drivers, and scaling relationships. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112, 4999–5004 (2015).
Xu, Z. et al. Quantifying consumption-based carbon emissions of major economic sectors in Japan considering the global value chain. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 63, 330–341 (2022).
Long, Y., Chen, Z., Huang, L., & Liu, Y. Extension of Japan prefectural emission accounting and enrich socioeconomic data 1990 to 2020, 176809663 Bytes figshare, https://doi.org/10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.25010720.V3 (2024).
Acknowledgements
This research is funded by Grant Number 23K11542 of the Research Category “Fundamental Research (C)” of Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Y.L. designed the study. Z.C. conducted the analysis. All the authors wrote the first draft of the manuscript and revised the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Chen, Z., Huang, L., Liu, Y. et al. Extension of Japan’s Prefectural Emission Accounting and Enrichment of Socioeconomic Data from 1990 to 2020. Sci Data 11, 489 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-024-03316-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-024-03316-x
- Springer Nature Limited