Evaluation of the Economic, Environmental, and Social Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Japanese Tourism Industry

: According to the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) annual Emissions Gap Report 2019, further reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are needed to reduce climate change impacts. In Japan, the 2030 Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) target is an emissions reduction of 26% compared to 2013. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared that the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak has led to 43,341,451 conﬁrmed cases and 1,157,509 conﬁrmed deaths globally and a ﬀ ected 218 countries (as of 27 October 2020). In Japan, as of the same date, 96,948 infectious cases and 1724 deaths related to the new coronavirus had been recorded. These numbers continue to increase. In Japan, in March 2020, the number of international tourist arrivals decreased by about 93% compared to last year at the same period. The World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) reported several signiﬁcant scenarios for the tourism industry. COVID-19 is the greatest shock to international tourism since 1950 and represents an abrupt end to the 10-year period of sustained growth that followed the 2009 ﬁnancial crisis. It was thought that it would be possible to analyze the economic, environmental, and social impacts of rapid social changes. Thus, this study estimates changes in Japan’s tourist consumption, the carbon footprint (CFP), and employment due to the inﬂuence of the COVID-19 pandemic. The calculations in this study adopt a lifecycle approach using input–output tables. Based on these observations, this study uses four scenarios (SR 1, no recovery until December; SR 2, recovery from October; SR 3, recovery from July or September; and SR 0, same growth rate as 2018–2019) for Japan to calculate the CFP and employment change using input–output table analysis based on tourist consumption, which is a tourism metric. According to our results (2019 vs. SR 1 and 3), the consumption loss is between 20,540 billion yen ( − 65.1%) and 12,704 billion yen ( − 39.1%), the CFP reduction is between 89,488 Mt-CO 2 eq ( − 64.2%) and 54,030 Mt-CO 2 eq ( − 37.5%), and the employment loss is between 2,677,000 people ( − 64.2%) and 1,678,000 people ( − 37.5%). As of November 2020, the tourism industry continues to be a ﬀ ected by the COVID-19 pandemic. In the post-COVID-19 society, it will be necessary to maintain the GHG emissions reductions achieved in this short period and realize economic recovery. This recovery must also be sustainable for tourism stakeholders and society.

. Scope of the evaluation data. The items evaluated in this study are displayed as " ", and "N" indicates not applicable. "P" indicates preparing for travel, "W" indicates while traveling, and "A" indicates after travel. This target range is based on Kitamura et al. (2020) [29].  1 This includes not only cultural services, recreation, and other entertainment services, but also other services. 2 Day trips are not included for non-staying trips. 3 After is included in "transit" of domestic tourism.
The tourism statistics data, "Internal and national tourism consumption, by timing of purchase and products", provided by the JTA [34], distinguish between foreign visitors visiting Japan (referred to as inbound tourism in this study); domestic tourism, which also includes the travel within Japan of foreign visitors (e.g., flight connections); and the overseas travel of Japanese nationals and foreign residents (referred to in this study as outbound tourism). The items evaluated in this study are displayed as " " in Table 1, and those that are not included are displayed as "not applicable". These data were provided in JPY (1$ = 117 JPY (2017 Ave.)) [35]. Table 2 shows the target years and scenarios of this study.

Calculation Method of Economic Analysis
First, the calculation method used in the economic analysis is shown as follows: 4 k=1 TEC k = Ec it + Ec dt(o) + Ec dt(d) + Ec ot (1) Statistical data for Tourism Economic Consumption (TEC) [34] were applied from 2011 to 2017 based on the Tourism Satellite Account (TSA). These data include spending on different types of travel, defined as "k" (type of tourism), including economic consumption of inbound tourism (Ec it ), economic consumption of domestic tourism for overnight stays (Ec dt(o) ), economic consumption of domestic tourism for day trips (Ec dt(d) ), and economic con sumption of outbound tourism (Ec ot ).
Next, we derived estimates for 2018e (estimate)-2020e (estimate). Statistical data for this period are not available. Based on the consumption data of 2017, we applied the actual growth rate of the past five years (2013 to 2017) to each type of tourism. These rates were 127% for inbound tourism, 101.7% for domestic tourism (overnight stay), 102.6% for domestic tourism (day trip), and 100.2% for overseas tourism (domestic transit). Outbound tourism (rate of 97.7%) was not covered by this study.
Then, the amount of consumption per traveler was estimated. Finally, this was multiplied by the number of travelers per month to estimate the annual consumption for each year. The number of inbound and outbound tourists was provided by the Japan National Tourism Organization (JNTO) [36]. Domestic tourism (overnight stays and day trips) data was provided by JTA [37].
Evaluation scenarios of this study were divided into four types (Table 2). Scenario 1 (SR 1) maintains inbound and outbound (domestic transit) tourism at the August level until December, and domestic (overnight stay and day trip) tourism levels for June are maintained until December. In Scenario 2 (SR 2), inbound and outbound (domestic transit) tourism is maintained at the August level until September; from October, the level increases at the same rate as that of July until August. Domestic (overnight stay and day trip) tourism maintains the June level until September, and from October, it increases at the same rate as that of May until June. In Scenario 3 (SR 3), inbound and outbound (domestic transit) tourism increases from September at the same rate as that of July until August. Domestic (overnight stay and day trip) tourism increases from July at the same improvement rate as that of May until June. Finally, Scenario 0 (SR 0) assumes that 2019-2020 would have the same growth rate as that of 2018-2019. Evaluations were categorized according to these four scenarios.
For 2020, public statistics are available from January to August for inbound and outbound tourism, and from January to June for domestic (overnight stay and day trip) tourism. In addition, the per capita spending composition of tourists is the same as that of 2019 (based on the 2017 evaluation). Scenarios 1-3 do not include economic effects such as government strategic campaigns. In addition, Scenario 0 does not include the economic effects of Tokyo 2020.

Calculation Method of Environmental Analysis
Second, in this study, input-output analysis, based on the Japanese input-output table, was adopted for calculation in each year. The principles of this method are based on the works from W.W. Leontief [38] and are often used in the LCA research field, in which d is the direct environmental impact and the environmental impact per production value; (I − A) −1 is the Leontief inverse matrix, which can be used to consider the direct and indirect economic ripple effects caused by the consumption of one type of good; f is the amount of activity. This method helps to evaluate the entire supply chain. This study calculated the CFP using the input-output LCA. The calculation formula is shown below: where d i is the direct GHG emission intensity provided for each sector by the Inventory Database for Environmental Analysis version 2 (IDEAv.2), developed by the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) [39]. A is the direct input coefficient matrix: we used the 2011 waste input-output table (WIO) developed by Kondo et al. (2019) [40] to provide a broad overview. I is an identity matrix, (I − A) −1 is the Leontief inverse matrix, and f i is the activity level, obtained from the statistics of the JTA [34], as detailed previously. It would be more effective to use data focusing on the same year; however, the last waste input-output table available focuses only on 2011. DE i is the direct emissions from fuel combustion included in the calculation to cover the full cradle-to-grave aspects of products and services; that is, using this equation, the calculation was extended from cradle-to-gate to cradle-to-grave. Based on the results of Kitamura et al. (2020) [29], who applied these calculations to tourism, we compiled a list of GHG emissions of tourism products and services (Appendix A, Table A1). In addition, the evaluation scenarios used in environmental analysis were the same as those used for the economic analysis.

Calculation Method of Social Analysis
Third, we calculated the number of employees. Ichisugi et al. [41] developed an employment factor to evaluate social aspects from the Japanese input-output table. This employment factor was also adopted in the social evaluation of this study, and can be expressed as: where d i is a direct factor and (I − A) −1 is the Leontief inverse matrix. The direct factor per million yen was calculated by dividing the social evaluation data for each industrial sector by the value of domestic production. The employment factor was created by multiplying this by the Leontief inverse matrix. f i is the amount of activity obtained from the estimates of each TEC. The number of employees (EMP) was calculated by multiplying this employment factor by the amount of consumption of each type of tourism. We used three categories of employment: paid officer, permanent employer, and temporary employer. Then, these were added together to provide the number of employees (Appendix A, Table A1). In addition, the evaluation scenarios used in environmental analysis were the same as those used for the economic analysis.

Economic, Environmental, and Social Evaluation
We show the results of the estimation in Table 3. In 2019, the economy (consumption) valued at 30,514.5 billion yen, the environment (CFP) was 134,468.4 Mt-CO 2 eq, and the society (employment) was 3,955,200 people. In 2020, Scenarios 1 to 3, estimated consumption ranged from 9974.2 to 17,810.2 billion Sustainability 2020, 12, 10302 6 of 22 yen, CFP from 44,980.5 to 80,438.8 Mt-CO 2 eq, and employment from 1,277,700 to 2,278,200 people. In Scenario 0, consumption was 32,034.7 billion yen, the CFP was 140,763.2 Mt-CO 2 eq, and employment was 4,156,100 people.
Furthermore, Table 4 shows the reduction rate by comparing results of each scenario. In the comparison of Scenario 1 vs. 2019, i.e., the worst case, the consumption loss was 20,540 billion yen (−65.1%), the CFP reduction was 89,488 Mt-CO 2 eq (−64.2%), and the employment loss was 2,677,000 people (−64.2%). In scenario 3 vs. 2019, i.e., the best case, the consumption loss was 12,704 billion yen (−39.1%), the CFP reduction was 54,030 Mt-CO 2 eq (−37.5%), and the employment loss was 1,678,000 people (−37.5%). The values for Scenario 2 were between these two extremes, and Scenario 0 resulted in more economic, environmental, and social growth.  "SR" refers to the scenario in Table 2. Figure 1a shows the results of categories. From these results, it can be confirmed that contributions to consumption and GHG are made by transportation, souvenirs, and shopping. In addition to transportation, souvenirs, and shopping, contributions to employment are also made by accommodation, food, and beverage. Figure 1b shows the results of the breakdowns. These results confirm that consumption is composed of accommodation, food and beverage, bullet train, confectionary, and international flights. Furthermore, GHG has a high impact due to the contribution of airplanes (international and domestic flight), gasoline cost, accommodation, and food and beverage. Employment includes accommodation and food and beverage, in addition to confectionery, food items, and bullet train contributions. This trend is almost the same for all years and scenarios (Figure 1a,b). Here, the breakdown of the top 5 contributions to the economy (consumption), environment (GHG), and society (employment) is shown clearly.
These results compare the CFP reduction and employer loss to the fall in the amount of consumption expenditure. From the perspective of the input-output table, CFP produces a large quantity of GHG emissions per production value. It is also shown that the number of employees is related to the value of production. Figure 2 shows the results for tourist consumption from the economic evaluation. Figure 2a shows that the tourism economy grew from 2011 (detailed results are shown in Appendix A, Table A2), and Figure 2b shows equivalent monthly data. In SR 1, 2, and 3, the period from January until June shows the actual values of counted tourists. SR 1 was at the same level from June to December, SR 2 was at the level of June until September, followed by recovery from October, and SR 3 recovered from July. SR 0 is the same level as the past 10 years. Although the previous 10 years (2011-2019) experienced no major negatives, a large loss was confirmed for 2020. This is because tourism has experienced its worst situation of the past 10 years due to the influence of COVID-19.  Figure 2 shows the results for tourist consumption from the economic evaluation. Figure 2a shows that the tourism economy grew from 2011 (detailed results are shown in Appendix A and Table A2), and Figure 2b shows equivalent monthly data. In SR 1, 2, and 3, the period from January until June shows the actual values of counted tourists. SR 1 was at the same level from June to December, SR 2 was at the level of June until September, followed by recovery from October, and SR 3 recovered from July. SR 0 is the same level as the past 10 years. Although the previous 10 years (2011-2019) experienced no major negatives, a large loss was confirmed for 2020. This is because tourism has experienced its worst situation of the past 10 years due to the influence of COVID-19.  Figure 3a shows the results for CFP from the environmental evaluation (detailed results are shown in Appendix A and Table A3) and indicates that tourism GHGs have increased annually since 2011. Figure 3b shows the equivalent monthly data. In SR 1, 2, and 3, the period from January until June was based on the actual values of counted tourists. SR 1 was at the same level from June to December, SR 2 was at the level of June until September, before recovering from October, and SR 3  Figure 3a shows the results for CFP from the environmental evaluation (detailed results are shown in Appendix A, Table A3) and indicates that tourism GHGs have increased annually since 2011. Figure 3b shows the equivalent monthly data. In SR 1, 2, and 3, the period from January until June was based on the actual values of counted tourists. SR 1 was at the same level from June to December, SR 2 was at the level of June until September, before recovering from October, and SR 3 recovered from July. SR 0 was at the same level as that of the previous 10 years. Again, the figure shows that there was no major reduction during the past 10 years (2011-2019), and that a large reduction was confirmed for 2020. This is because the CFP associated with tourism has improved compared to the past 10 years due to the influence of COVID-19.

Environmental Analysis
(b) Figure 2. Results of a focus on tourist consumption: (a) yearly trends, (b) monthly trends. Figure 3a shows the results for CFP from the environmental evaluation (detailed results are shown in Appendix A and Table A3) and indicates that tourism GHGs have increased annually since 2011. Figure 3b shows the equivalent monthly data. In SR 1, 2, and 3, the period from January until June was based on the actual values of counted tourists. SR 1 was at the same level from June to December, SR 2 was at the level of June until September, before recovering from October, and SR 3 recovered from July. SR 0 was at the same level as that of the previous 10 years. Again, the figure shows that there was no major reduction during the past 10 years (2011-2019), and that a large reduction was confirmed for 2020. This is because the CFP associated with tourism has improved compared to the past 10 years due to the influence of COVID-19.   Figure 4a shows the results for employment from the social evaluation (detailed results are shown in Appendix A and Table A4) and indicates the growth in tourism employment since 2011. Figure 4b provides the equivalent monthly data. In SR 1, 2, and 3, the period from January until June was based on the actual values of counted tourists. SR 1 was at the same level from June to December, SR 2 was at the level of June until September, followed by a recovery from October, and SR 3 recovered from July. SR 0 was at the same level as that of the past 10 years. As for the previous evaluations, no major reduction was seen during the past 10 years (2011-2019), and a large decline can be confirmed for 2020. This is because tourism employment experienced its worst situation of the past 10 years due to the influence of COVID-19.  Figure 4a shows the results for employment from the social evaluation (detailed results are shown in Appendix A, Table A4) and indicates the growth in tourism employment since 2011. Figure 4b provides the equivalent monthly data. In SR 1, 2, and 3, the period from January until June was based on the actual values of counted tourists. SR 1 was at the same level from June to December, SR 2 was at the level of June until September, followed by a recovery from October, and SR 3 recovered from July. SR 0 was at the same level as that of the past 10 years. As for the previous evaluations, no major reduction was seen during the past 10 years (2011-2019), and a large decline can be confirmed for 2020. This is because tourism employment experienced its worst situation of the past 10 years due to the influence of COVID-19. Figure 4a shows the results for employment from the social evaluation (detailed results are shown in Appendix A and Table A4) and indicates the growth in tourism employment since 2011. Figure 4b provides the equivalent monthly data. In SR 1, 2, and 3, the period from January until June was based on the actual values of counted tourists. SR 1 was at the same level from June to December, SR 2 was at the level of June until September, followed by a recovery from October, and SR 3 recovered from July. SR 0 was at the same level as that of the past 10 years. As for the previous evaluations, no major reduction was seen during the past 10 years (2011-2019), and a large decline can be confirmed for 2020. This is because tourism employment experienced its worst situation of the past 10 years due to the influence of COVID-19.

The current Economic Situation
COVID-19 has had a severe impact on the global tourism industry [42]. The UNWTO report [17], updated with current scenarios, projects a decline of between 58% and 78% in international tourist arrivals for 2020, depending on the speed of the containment, the duration of travel restrictions, and the shutdown of borders. Based on international tourism receipts for 2000-2019 and scenarios for 2020, export revenues associated with global tourism could decline by between USD 910 billion (−62%) and USD 1.2 trillion (−79%). Our study showed a consumption loss of between 12,704 billion yen (−39.1%) and 20,540 billion yen (−65.1%) in the case of Japan. The results of this study were included in the range of UNWTO's scenarios, albeit at the lower end of this range. This difference is related to the composition of Japan's tourism. According to The Japan Tourism White Paper (2017) [43], the value shares of tourism consumption in Japan are ranked as follows: domestic (overnight stay) (60.2%), domestic (day trips) (18.8%), inbound (16.5%), and outbound (domestic transit) (4.4%). Therefore, if the amount of inbound tourism decreases significantly, the economic impact will be small if supported by domestic travel. Following large losses, Japan's tourism industry is making a significant investment to encourage the recovery. A total budget of 1679.4 billion yen was allocated for the "Go To Travel Campaign" [44], which has three main pillars. In addition to efforts to support food and beverage, events, and entertainment, a public-private integrated tourism demand campaign will be implemented. This will include promotion of the use of discount coupons that can be widely used for accommodation and day trip products, souvenir shops, restaurants, tourist facilities, transportation facilities, etc., around tourist destinations. The campaign will also include

The current Economic Situation
COVID-19 has had a severe impact on the global tourism industry [42]. The UNWTO report [17], updated with current scenarios, projects a decline of between 58% and 78% in international tourist arrivals for 2020, depending on the speed of the containment, the duration of travel restrictions, and the shutdown of borders. Based on international tourism receipts for 2000-2019 and scenarios for 2020, export revenues associated with global tourism could decline by between USD 910 billion (−62%) and USD 1.2 trillion (−79%). Our study showed a consumption loss of between 12,704 billion yen (−39.1%) and 20,540 billion yen (−65.1%) in the case of Japan. The results of this study were included in the range of UNWTO's scenarios, albeit at the lower end of this range. This difference is related to the composition of Japan's tourism. According to The Japan Tourism White Paper (2017) [43], the value shares of tourism consumption in Japan are ranked as follows: domestic (overnight stay) (60.2%), domestic (day trips) (18.8%), inbound (16.5%), and outbound (domestic transit) (4.4%). Therefore, if the amount of inbound tourism decreases significantly, the economic impact will be small if supported by domestic travel. Following large losses, Japan's tourism industry is making a significant investment to encourage the recovery. A total budget of 1679.4 billion yen was allocated for the "Go To Travel Campaign" [44], which has three main pillars. In addition to efforts to support food and beverage, events, and entertainment, a public-private integrated tourism demand campaign will be implemented. This will include promotion of the use of discount coupons that can be widely used for accommodation and day trip products, souvenir shops, restaurants, tourist facilities, transportation facilities, etc., around tourist destinations. The campaign will also include large-scale advertising to support the resumption of suspended airlines and to attract international tourists to Japan. Food and beverages are usually included in the restaurant industry. However, there are economic spillovers from food and beverage related to the tourism industry. From 22 July to 15 September, this campaign involved at least 16.89 million tourist nights and about 73.5 billion yen of support [45]. This support will continue until the end of January, thus potentially reducing the economic impact of the pandemic.

The Latest Situation of the Environmental Aspect
The results of this study indicate that the recovery of tourism demand and employment are the top priorities. In addition, however, it was also confirmed that GHG emissions were greatly reduced. The target of the Paris Agreement for Japan is to reduce its CFP by 26% by 2030 (compared to 2013) [4]. Lenzen et al. (2018) [22] calculated the carbon footprint of global tourism and found that tourism contributed about 8% of global GHG emissions. This highlights that the tourism industry has a significant responsibility to reduce its CFP. Furthermore, Kitamura et.al (2020) [29] estimated that tourism in Japan accounts for about 10.5% of the national CFP, accounting for approximately 136 million t-CO 2 per year, including outbound tourism. The contributions of each sector were found to be transport (56.3%), souvenirs (23.2%), accommodation (9.8%), food and beverage (7.5%), and activities (3.0%). In the current study, the CFP was estimated to be 134,468.4 Mt-CO 2 eq (2019), from 44,980.5 to 80,438.8 Mt-CO 2 eq (2020, SR 1 to 3), 140,763.2 Mt-CO 2 eq (2020, SR 0). CFP reductions were estimated to range from 89,488 Mt-CO 2 eq (−64.2%) to 54,030 Mt-CO 2 eq (−37.5%). The CFP of the tourism industry has been reduced beyond the goals of the Paris Agreement; thus, the tourism industry has made a large contribution to the overall reduction in the CFP. Despite this large reduction, however, the need for further reductions is well recognized due to the Japanese government's declaration to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. [5] In "Implications of COVID-19 for the Environment and Sustainability", published by the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) [46], basic policy recommendations to promote a green recovery highlight the importance of Japan's emergency economic measures including environmental policies, such as meeting 100% of electricity demand from renewable energy sources (RE100). A recovery that prioritizes the economy is essential. However, the reductions in GHG emissions during this short pandemic period should not be reversed. As noted by Cooper et al. (2020) [31], the reduction in GHG emissions resulting from the death of the economy is not sustainable tourism. In business tourism (the MICE sector), international conferences have been held without the use of transportation for all participants [47]. Thus, in addition to transportation, souvenirs, accommodation, food and beverage, and activities at the destination also provide an opportunity for a major sustainability transformation towards decarbonization.

The Latest Situation of Social Aspect
The scenarios of the UNWTO report [17] show from 100 to 120 million direct tourism jobs are at risk globally. In addition, the International Labor Organization (ILO) reported the tourism sector accounted for 10.3% of global employment in 2019 [48]. The ILO notes that the pandemic could affect the work of 305 million people, many of whom are employed in the tourism sector. The Japanese Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC) announced that the current level of employment is 59.46 million people and has been on a downward trend for five consecutive months. Furthermore, the number of unemployed is 2.06 million and has been on an increasing trend for seven consecutive months [49]. According to a report of the Japan Association of Travel Agents (JATA) [50], the tourism industry employs 2.31 million people, contributing 3.5% of total employment. This study estimated employment losses of between 2,677,000 people (−64.2%) and 1,678,000 people (−37.5%). This result is comparable to the current number of unemployed. In addition, ANA Holdings Inc. released a full-year earnings forecast of −510 billion yen [51], and Japan airlines (JAL) also released its financial results [52]. For the largest airlines in Japan, such as ANA and JAL, management losses may affect the future employment of tourism industries. Thus, the future management situation of the tourism industry is unclear. However, growth in the number of travelers would also cause an increase in the number of overnight stays, indicating the potential for employment to recover.

Limitations and Future Investigations
Process-based LCA can reflect the effects of a reduction using physical quantities, such as resource usage, in evaluations. However, checking the supply chain is time-consuming and requires significant effort. Therefore, this study adopted input-output LCA based on consumption. However, individual products and services cannot be evaluated in detail. Environmental impact changes are dependent on monetary amounts, and it is difficult to reflect sustainability activities (resource efficiency, etc.) in the results. Process-based LCA is therefore required to allow examination of detailed changes. In addition, it is recommended to use monetary amounts and secondary data in the input-output LCA. Thus, we think it is necessary to evaluate the details with such a hybrid method. It should also be recognized that, because this evaluation was based on estimated scenarios based on the number of tourists, results are subject to a degree of uncertainty. Furthermore, world tourism information is constantly updated, and this should be carefully referred to in future estimations and evaluations.

Conclusions
In this study, the contributions of consumption, CFP, and employment of the Japanese tourism industry were shown for a 10-year period. Based on scenarios estimated using the number of tourists, we assessed the impact on consumption, CFP, and employment of the COVID-19 pandemic. In the worst case, consumption fell 20,540 billion yen (-65.1%), the CFP was reduced by 89,488 Mt-CO 2 eq (−64.2%), and employment fell by 2,677,000 people (−64.2%). Conversely, in the best case, the consumption loss was 12,704 billion yen (−39.1%), the CFP reduction was 54,030 Mt-CO 2 eq (−37.5%), and the employment loss was 1,678,000 people (−37.5%). These results reflect the deterioration in the economic and employment status of tourism to its worst situation in the past 10 years due to the influence of COVID-19. In contrast, the reduction in the tourism CFP represents a significant improvement. Overall, these results confirm the large influence of tourism and highlight the substantial opportunity for the industry due to its significant effects on the economy and employment. The CFP of tourism is largely focused on transportation. However, a transformation is necessary for the tourism industry to make a significant contribution to reducing global GHG emissions. Our hope is that the post-COVID-19 pandemic period is characterized by a sustainable recovery of the economy, societal health, and the environment. In this period, it will be necessary to maintain the reduced level of GHG emissions and to realize economic recovery. This recovery must also be sustainable for tourism stakeholders and society.        "SR" means scenario in Table 2. Unit: B-JPY.