I read a Xinhua news article titled “Osaka ‘ecological village’ could be harbinger of new lifestyle in Japan”, published on July 30, 2013. It gave an overview of a new neighborhood that recently opened within Sakai City, Osaka prefecture. The SMA-ECO (smart and ecological) Harumi-dai Town is claimed to be Japan’s first net zero-energy neighborhood. Daiwa House Industry Company, in collaboration with Sakai City, built this neighborhood with a “new philosophy of modern living” in mind, one that utilizes renewable resources “to enjoy the extra bonus of the power generated by one’s own home” (Ebihara). Solar panels and time data software were installed on all homes; for the first month or so, a self-sufficiency energy rate of 110% was achieved across the community. Harumi-dai has communal electric cars, which are linked to the solar power system. The district also has a number of eco-friendly policies that mitigate disaster impact and maintains greenery.
From word choice, the article definitely portrays Japan [or at least Sakai City and Daiwa] in a positive light. For example, the author talks about a “new era in an ‘ecological’ living concept”. Harumi-dai town, the author proposes, may “be an example of the next generation’s lifestyle in Japan, which is now seeking the best ways to use renewable sources for further growth” [my italics]. Although most of the article is dedicated to description of the neighborhood features, it comes back to words like “ecological life”, “environmentally friendly”, and “next generation’s lifestyle” without really explaining their connotations. I can reasonably assume that ‘ecological’ is something desirable and ‘good’, and that Harumi-dai is directing the Japanese towards a clean future.
I think this article is ‘green’ because it jumps on the ‘green’ discourse bandwagon, using terms like ‘ecological’ and ‘net zero energy’. Most people have a sense that ‘green’ is right, but they do not really know what ‘green’ is. Going green is not just about transportation, parks, or new business ventures, but it has become a lifestyle in itself, as this article clearly informs us.
Ebihara, Atsushi. “Osaka ‘ecological village’ could be harbinger of new lifestyle in Japan”. Xinhua News. 30 July, 2013. Xinhuanet. Web. 20 September, 2013.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2013-07/30/c_132586826.htm
-Clifford
This is an interesting article about what is becoming a trend within Japan – large construction firms, real estate companies, and/or electronics firms building large-scale developments to showcase what they claim are sustainable neighborhoods. A similar area in Kashiwa, Chiba Pref. is being built – http://www.japanfs.org/en/pages/031386.html
In each of these cases, as Clifford writes, the keywords of “sustainability”, “environmentally friendly” and “ecological” are used without explaining precisely what they mean. Of course, they must be vague, since there is no agreed-upon standard definition for such ideas. Their banality protects them from criticism.
The word “new” is especially interesting since it implies a general disappointment or problem with the present. Whether or not this accurately reflects consumers’ feelings is not the point, since the aim (as with most new products – housing is also a product) is to convince consumers that what they have currently is lacking in some way.
Finally, in their vague assessments of environmental friendliness there is no discussion of the energy and materials used in construction (or advertising for that matter!).