and environment. The gap between the 'worlds' of economy and environment are in this way only bridged in broad and general terms. "Trade offs" between different interests and values remain unstable and fragile, due to the lack of these operational aggreements (Kreukels,1993).
Also Tokyo experienced in the nineties for a second time after the sixties a strong opposition, in which people demonstrated not to accept anymore the "unhuman" and environmentally unsatisfactory characteristics of this advanced but at the same time extremously condense metropole. Here too, as in Rotterdam, the opposition led to a situation, in which one shifted from the one-sideness of economic and technological growth to that of investing in social and environmental qualities. The election of the new Governor of the Tokyo Metropolitan Government symbolizes this transition in the nineties to a new' one-sideness: a human and environmentally clean Tokyo, but now' without sufficient awareness of the economic and technological elements. However, as could be expected, economic aspects couldn't be neglected over a longer period.
Thus, one tries in the first part of 1996 to arrive at more realistic "trade offs" between economy and other values, in a committee that has been installed by the new Governor to give advice about the plans for the Tokyo Waterfront. This can be seen as a reaction to the absolute stop of the big development schemes of the Tokyo Waterfront by the same Governor after his election. In this way one tries to find a way out, given the stalemate, caused by the anti-growth stance with regard to the Port and Tokyo Bay. In the mean time it is not yet clear which strategic choices should and would be made in Tokyo with regard to the port and the port economy. The same applies to the whole transport system, especially with regard to the mainports: airports and seaports in the Tokyo Bay, essential as main infrastructure for the distribution of people and goods in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area. This is particularly relevant, given the stigmatization of these main infrastructure elements after a successful opposition by farmers with regard to the new Narita International Airport just outside Tokyo Metropolitan Area, and a subsequent opposition in Tokyo politics concerning the further development of the Teleport Town and the Tokyo Waterfront in the Tokyo Bay.
Remarkable in the case of Tokyo is that the schisma about the different interests does express itself explicitly in the Port System of Japan. This system is characterized by a strong relation between the Ports and Harbors Bureau of the Ministry of Transport at the national level at the one hand and the Local Port Management Bodies at the other hand. A reorientation away from one-sided economic functioning did also show up here in the eighties. This is illustrated by the reports fromout the Ministry of Transport "Port Development Policy towards the 21st Century" (1985) and "An Enriched Waterfront"(199t)). Both offers plea for multiple roles of the ports. At the same time they remain rather unclear with regard to economic and technological development of ports.
One does register this emphasis on multiple roles of ports in a host of waterfront revitalization projects all over Japan in the eighties and nineties. To mention some: in Tokyo: Teleport Town in the Tokyo Waterfront , Okawabata River City, New Pier Takeshiba; in Yokohama: Minatao Mirai 21: in Osaka: Temposan Harbor Village. Sakishima with Cosmosquare - Teleport - and Port Town: in Fukuoka: Hakata Bayside Place. Momochi Area with Fukuoka Tower and Fukuoka Dome. The redevelopment of these port areas and land reclamation islands is impressive, even when compared with early examples in the U.S.A. and Europe. The start and formula of this redevelopment were very related to the high days of the Bubble Economy in Japan. The gigantic real estate schemes and new land projects meant new profit for industries, not functioning anymore in former port areas. It was a solution for municipalities and local port authorities redefining the relations between port and city and being able to bring back urban functions at the waterfront. Soon this emphasis on project development in waterfront became linked up with the broader multi-functional programme. as sketched in the reports fromout the Ministry of Transport, mentioned before. Tribute became now payed also to cultural an environmental values.
Recently, again a reorientation in the national policies of Japan can be registered. Once more the port economy gets more attention, while keeping alive the emphasis on a broader and multi-functional approach of port areas and waterfronts. This is clearly illustrated in the report "Ports and Harbors Supporting the Era of Global Interchange" (1995). This reorientation is seconded by the latest National Economic Plan Social and Economic Plan for Structural Reforms. Towards a Vital Economy and Secure Life for the Japanese People" (1995). In this report one finds the operational targets for transport in general and for shipping and ports in particular. These are expressed in surprisingly plain economic terms again. This emphasis on transport and distribution can be explained, given the recent pressures within Japan to come to new impulses for the national economy by strengthening the infrastructure of telecommunication, of airports, seaports and other modes of transport.
3.2 In conclusion
Thus, in Tokyo/Japan and in Rotterdam/the Netherlands one is looking for new balances between economic targets at the one hand and values related to quality of life at the other hand, as embedded in real estate development and infrastructure of port areas. The embarking in a systematic way in this balanced strategy of Managed Growth is only midway. In Rotterdam one is - it seems - somehow closer to it with the combined procedures of the Port Plan 2010 and the ROM Rijnmond Project: An Overall Land Use and Environmental Protection Plan for the Rotterdam Region. However, when one looks to other characteristics of an up to date Managed Growth Strategy. for instance with a really regional approach and with solid partnerships between the relevant public and private units, resulting in operational policies through negotiated aggreements with financial commitments for development,-then there is still a long way to go. as well in Rotterdam as in Tokyo.
Aknowledgements
It is nor possible to thank all those who did contribute to this joint research in Japan (especially the contacts in Tokyo, Yokohama. Nagoya, Osaka. Kobe, Fukuoka and Kita-Kynsha), hut also in the Netherlands. However, we make some exceptions. First of all we mention the Nippon Foundation, which founded this programme and made this research project possible. Subsequently, we make with respect reference to the leading and inspiring role of Mr. Mikinagi, at that tune President of WARRC. now WAVF. We refer to the essential introduction into the facts and figures of ports in Japan by Mr. Ishiwata. Executive Director of WARRC, now WAVE. Last but not least, within WARRC. now WAVE, the daily coordination of a competent and committed Mr. Matsubara, and the appreciated logistic assistance of Mrs. S. Takeuchi were essential for arriving at results.
References
Norman J. Glickman. The Growth and Management t4 the Japanese Urban System. New York, San Francisco. London, Academic Press, 1979
Anton MI. Kreukels, Environtoent, Economic Development and Administration, Document for Expert Meeting on the Ecological City. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. OECD. Paris. 1993
Institutions and Cities. The Dutch Experience. Netherlands Scientific Council for Goserutnetit Policy. Reports to the Government No. 37. Revised Edition, The Hague, 1990
MW. Zacher with Br.A. Sutton. Governing Global Networks. International
Regimes fur Transportation and Communications, Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. 1996
