Civil Society and Politics in Japan: A Fifteen-Country Comparison Why Should Japan be Compared? Yutaka Tsujinaka University of Tsukuba August 31, 2014 1
Introduction THE POWER OF COMPARISON 2
The Power of Comparison. Why Fs 65-70? 89 Nuclear Power Plants in 20 Countries 3.11 Sea Wall Height vs. Average Wave Height 3 Source: Phillip Y. Lipscy, Kenji E. Kushida, and Trevor Incerti 2013: 6086
But COMPARISON IS NOT SO EASY, ANSWER TO WHY, NEITHER 4
Slovenia and Japan: Quick C. Differences (D) and Similarities (S) (D) Land size ( 19), population ( 62), GDP ( 90) (D) Modern: Independence 1991 (D) Historical origin: Ljubljana since the Roman Empire (D) University since 1595 (D) Location: Far East, Japan vs. Cross-road of Civilization, Ljubljana 5
Slovenia and Japan: QC Differences (D) and Similarities (S)(cont.) (S) Nation History: since 6 th century (S) Economics: Industrial society (S) Politics: Free State: liberal democracy (D) Big government (like Germany) (D) Good government financial condition (D) Relatively young demographic (D) Relatively high unemployment rate 6
Univ. of Tsukuba, ICR Mission 1. Develop a transnational comparative research method based on thinking beyond state frameworks. 2. Solve global problems by seeking ways for societies and countries to co-exist yet retain individual identities. 3. Establish Japan as a leading academic innovator and disseminator of knowledge that contributes to worldwide progress through research in the humanities and social sciences. 7
Then turn to 1. PUZZLES OF JAPAN 8
Puzzle 1: Why Democracy? Japan has been the longest running democracy in Asia and among the non- Western civilization. Why? Why did Japan democratize spontaneously? Spontaneous Socio-Political Modernization in a Non-Western Country Constitutionalism 1889-, Party Politics 1920s-, Liberal Democracy 1947- since the Meiji Revolution and further consolidation since the end of WWII. The Origin before the Edo era (The mura-system) 9
Pre-war Japan Democratization: Association Formation, Diet-Member Cabinet, and Constitutional Petition A: Association Formation B: Proportion of Party Factions in the Cabinet C: Number of Petitions Accepted 10
Puzzle 2: Why the LDP? Why did Japan have a oneparty (LDP) dominant party system for so long (1955-2014-, 56/60 years) under a liberal democratic institution with a competitive party system? Or why have the oppositions not been successful as an alternative governing party? 11
LDP vs. the First Opposition
Puzzle 3: Why Can a Small Government Achieve Mid-Level Welfare? (Public Sector size) Norway Denmark Sweden Finland France Hungary Estonia United Kingdom Luxembourg Canada Belgium Ireland Israel Slovenia Australia OECD United States Italy Spain Slovak Republic Czech Republic Netherlands Portugal Turkey Austria Germany Poland Switzerland New Zealand Chile Mexico Greece Japan Korea Employment in general government as a percentage of the labour force (2011) 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Small Revenue, More Spending Norway Denmark Hungary Finland Sweden France Belgium Austria Italy Netherlands Euro area Portugal European Union Germany Slovenia Luxembourg Greece Iceland Russian United Kingdom Czech Republic New Zealand Estonia Poland Israel Canada Turkey Spain Switzerland Slovak Republic Ireland Japan Korea Australia United States General government revenue, Total, % of GDP 0 20 40 60 80 OECD (2014), General government revenue (indicator). doi: 10.1787/b68b04ae-en (Accessed on 20 August 2014) General government spending, Total, % of GDP Denmark France Finland Belgium Greece Sweden Austria Hungary Slovenia Netherlands Italy Portugal United Kingdom Iceland Ireland Spain Germany Norway Poland Czech Republic Luxembourg Japan Israel United States Slovak Republic Estonia Turkey Switzerland Korea 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 14 OECD (2014), General government spending (indicator). doi: 10.1787/a31cbf4den (Accessed on 20 August 2014)
CAN THESE PUZZLES BE SOLVED? YES, BUT STILL LEAVES DEEPER QUESTIONS WHY? 15
Big Public Works Spending,1960- (J, US, F, It, G, UK)
Then, Debt Accumulated... Accumulated national debt (red: national debt, yellow: short-term security, blue: borrowing)(trillion yen) Comparison
My hypothesis: 2. CIVIL SOCIETY PERSPECTIVE 18
Civil Society: Definitions Activities and Needs Government 政府 - Civil society consists of sustained, organized social activity that occurs in groups that are formed outside the state, market and family. (Susan Pharr 2003: vii) 企業 Company Civil Society 社会的 つながり 家族 Family - Civil society is not only nongovernmental actors seeking benefits for themselves but a form of activity, seeking wider publicness and public goods. (Modified by Tsujinaka 2002: 18) 19
From Vertical to Horizontal Governance From Government-led Structure to Horizontal Relations to involve participation by various stakeholders and civil society organizations (CSOs) Local Govn t Trust Citizen/ Voters (Vote/ Dismissal) Assembly Lord Principal Agent Environmental Org Local Govn t Selfgovernance neighborho od Org Administrative Organization Companies Lord Citizen Manage r Chi ef Chi ef Chi ef Manage r Chi ef Chi ef Chi ef Manage r Chi ef Chi ef Agent Employers Org Economics Org Assembly Administration NPO/Civic Society Welfare Org 20
Civil Society in Japan: A New Concept with a Long History The term citizen : Translated by Y. Fukuzawa Origins of CSOs: Predecessor org. found in the Edo Era Waves of democratization emerged since Meiji Revolution. The emergence of NGOs and NPOs 1970s: Citizen, Residents movements 1980s: NGOs 1990s: NPOs (enactment of the NPO law 98) The visible rise of volunteers and tangible functions of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs): 1995 Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake 2011 East Japan Disaster Civil society in Japan: Distinctive, and different from Western understandings Members without advocacy. R. Pekknanen 2006. 21
Functions of Civil Society (CS) Broad Scope of CS: including Neighborhood grass-root type, business organizations, and semigovernment organizations, can solve the puzzles and verify the significance of CS. 3 Functions of Civil Society 1) Building Social Capital (human network, trust, reciprocity) and Human Capital 2) Providing Social Services 3) Providing Public Support for Groups: Advocacy CS organizations and associations: expected to carry out the above 3 functions in Japanese societies. 22
What is the state of civil society in Japan in a comparative perspective? 3. JIGS (JAPAN INTEREST GROUP SURVEYS) 23
JIGS: Civil Society Organization Surveys in 15 countries In order to grasp civil society free of Western bias, started the world-wide CSO surveys in 1997. By 2014, collected more than 63,000 association data from 15 countries (JP, KR, US, DE, CN, TR, RU, PH, BR, BD, UZ, EE, PL, IN and TH ) in the 1 st, 2 nd, and 3 rd JIGS projects. Since 2006, conducted more comprehensive surveys, including grass-root NHAs (especially in Japan). Also focusing on the function of CSOs to deal with the Disaster of 2011. 24
Recent Publications, 2010-2014 Johns Hop 25
JIGS Surveys The First Worldwide CSO Survey Japan (twice), Korea (twice) US (twice), Germany (twice) China (twice) Russia, Brazil, India, Bangladesh, the Philippines, Turkey, Thailand, Uzbekistan, Poland, Estonia More than 63,000 data collected The Limits of Modernization Theory, or How to explain the range? Variant range Modernization?
JIGS Surveys, 1997-2014 (no.1) Country Year Data Source / Survey Method Populatio n Sample (a) Valid Respons e(b) Return Rate(%) (b/a) 1.Japan '97 Classified telephone directory/ mail 23,128 4,247 1,635 38.5 2.Korea '97 Classified telephone directory / mail 11,521 3,890 493 12.7 3.USA '99 Classified telephone directory / mail 7,228 5,089 1492 29.3 4.Germany '00 5.China 6.Russia 7.Turkey 8.Philippine 9.Brazil 10.Bangladesh 01-02 '03-04 '03-04 03-04 '04-05 '05-06 '06-07 Classified telephone directory and list of influential interest groups made by Hoppenstedt (think tank) / mail Social Groups officially registered at the Municipal or District/Country Civil Affairs Bureau / mail Registered Organizations(NGO) Database / mail Regional survey investigation based on telephone directory / interview Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Philippine Foundation Center (PFC) / interview Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE), organization directory / interview Organization directory (registered at the government or institutions) / mail and interview 4,806 3,100 885 28.8 9,536 8,897 2858 32.1 2,974 1,500 711 47.4 15,730 3,146 841-44,051 5,172 1014 18.5 275,895 2,609 2014 77.2 29,528 5,915 1509 25.5 11.a Japan (2 nd ) '06-'07 Classified telephone directory/ mail 91,101 91,101 15791 17.3 11.b Japan NPO Registered Organizations(NGO) Database '06-'07 / mail 11.c Japan NHA Registered Neighborhood Associations (MP)/ '06-'07 mail 23,403 23,403 5127 21.9 296,770 33,438 18404 55 Regions (Valid Return Sample) Tokyo (1,438) Ibaraki (197) Seoul (371) Kyonggi (110) Washington, D.C. (748) North Carolina (752) Berlin (643) Halle (154) Beijing (627) Zhejiang(1,782) Heilongjiang (449) Moscow (411) Saint Petersburg (300) Ankara (334) Istanbul (507) Manila (855) Cebu (159) Belem (193) Belo Horizonte (390) Brasilia (1,132) Goiania (115) Recife (170) Dhaka (1,005) Rajshahi (504) Nationwide Survey Japan Nationwide Survey Japan Nationwide Survey Japan 27
JIGS Surveys, 1997-2014 (no.2) Total 62,573 orgs. 12. a Germany Club and Society 12. b Germany Interest Group 28 '07-08 Classified telephone directory / mail 4,657 2,660 497 18.7 '07-08 Lobbying list and list of influential interest groups made by Hoppenstedt (think tank) / mail 13,717 1,960 312 15.9 13. Korea (2 nd ) '08-09 Classified telephone directory / mail 112,917 29,422 1008 3.4 13. Korea NPO '08-09 Organization directory (NGO) / mail 7,030 7,030 425 6.0 14. China (2 nd ) 09-11 14. China NEU 09-11 14. China Foundation 09-11 15. a USA Seattle '08-09 15. b USA Washington D. C. Organization directory (registered social organizations) / Mail and conference Organization directory (registered people-run non-enterprise units) / Mail and conference Organization directory (registered foundations) / Mail and conference Organization directory (comprehensive non-profit orgs)/ mail, web, phone 23,038 2,120 1251 59 21727? 2,021 1271 62.9 298? 277? 118 42.6? 8,524 4,297 1501 34.9 09-10 501(c)3 and 501(c)4 / mail, web, phone 3,300 571 17.3 Berlin (354) Halle (82) Heidelberg (61) Nationwide Survey Germany Nationwide Survey Korea Beijing (305) Zhejiang (558) Heilongjiang (388) Beijing (370) Zhejiang (444) Heilongjiang (457) Beijing (65) Zhejiang (33) Heilongjiang (20) Seattle(858), King County D.C. (237) Maryland (133) Virginia (201) Nationwide Survey Uzbekistan Nationwide Survey Uzbekistan 16. a Uzbekistan NPO 07-08 Organization directory / mail 1,541 1,541 400 26 16. b Uzbekistan NHA 07-08 602 17. Estonia '09 Classified phone directory / web 1,662 1,662 344 20.7 Nationwide Mazowieckie (128) 18. Poland '09-10 Organization directory (REGON) 22,361 3,000 261 8.7 Lubelskie (56) Dolnoslaskie (77) 19. a India Non-Profit and Civic Sector 19. b India Profit Sector 20. Thailand CSO and NHA 11-12 12 13 List made by a peek organization / mail (including e-maiil) Organization directory (registered at the government or institution)/ mail (including e-mail) mail and reconfirmed with some organizations by phone/ both mail and direct interview 3,000 3,000 487 16.2 Delhi 4,968 1,559 251 16.1 Delhi - 2,996/ 156 369/142 12.3/ 93.4 Chang Mai (220/76) Ma hong Son (35/6) Lamphun (75/17) Lampang (29/43)
Neighborhood Associations (NHAs) 890 Municipalities Surveyed 凡例 自治会規模自治会数 1-50 51-100 101-200 201-300 301-500 501-999
Three puzzles and 4. JIGS: FACTS AND FINDINGS 30
Japan s Civil Society Organization (CSO) world is matured and constant. BY 1970 the structure was established 4-1 FORMATION 31
-1865 66-70 71-75 76-80 81-85 86-90 91-95 96-1900 01-05 06-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 66-70 71-75 76-80 81-85 86-90 91-95 96-2000 01-05 06- Number of Orgs 4-1-1. Robust Japanese Post-War Structure NHAs, SOs (or social organizations), and NPOs in 2006-07 (total) Peak SOs in 2012 3000 2500 neighborhood associations social associations NPO 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Year Established Note:"-1865"=total number of associations established before 1865. 32
14.0 4-1-2. SO Establishment in Postwar Japan: Profit Non-profit Citizen (membership) Tokyo_Profit(2006-07)N=695 12.0 Tokyo_Non-profit(2006-07)N=420 10.0 Tokyo_Citizen(2006-07)N=430 8.0 Tokyo_Other(2006-07)N=225 % 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 33
34 34 4-1-3. Associational Revolution in the World 0 10 20 30 40 50 ~1899 1900~04 05~09 10~14 15~19 20~24 25~29 30~34 35~39 40~44 45~49 50~54 55~59 60~64 65~69 70~74 75~79 80~84 85~89 90~94 95~99 2000~09 Year Established % Japan(2007) Japan(1997) Korea(2009) Korea(1997) Germany(2007)Interest Groups Germany(2007)Associations Germany(2000) USA(1999) China(2004) Russia(2004) Turkey(2004) Philippine(2005) 0 25 50 75 ~1899 1900~04 05~09 10~14 15~19 20~24 25~29 30~34 35~39 40~44 45~49 50~54 55~59 60~64 65~69 70~74 75~79 80~84 85~89 90~94 95~99 2000~10 Year Established China(2010) China(2004) Japan(2007) Japan(1997) Korea(2009) Korea(1997) Germany(2007)Interest Groups Germany(2007)Associations Germany(2000) USA(1999) Russia(2004) Turkey(2004) Philippine(2005) Brazil(2006) Bangladesh(2007) USA(2009) USA(1999) Japan(2007) Japan(1997) Korea(2009) Korea(1997) Germany(2007)Interest Groups Germany(2007)Associations Germany(2000) China(2010) China(2004) Russia(2004) Turkey(2004) Philippine(2005) Brazil(2006) Bangladesh(2007)
Asia: The Impact of Regime Change? Survey in Tokyo: After WWII, many CSOs were established and survived for a long time. Robust post-war structure has become the infrastructure that supported the Liberal Democratic Party s so-called 1955 regime. Surveys in other Asian Cities: Most CSOs were established within the last two decades. How about China?
4-1-4. Japan, US and Germany (total) 36 0 10 20 30 40 50 ~1899 1900~04 05~09 10~14 15~19 20~24 25~29 30~34 35~39 40~44 45~49 50~54 55~59 60~64 65~69 70~74 75~79 80~84 85~89 90~94 95~99 2000~10 % Year Established Japan(2007 ) Japan(1997 ) USA(2009) USA(1999) Japan(2007 ) Japan(1997 ) USA(2009) USA(1999) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 ~1899 1900~04 05~09 10~14 15~19 20~24 25~29 30~34 35~39 40~44 45~49 50~54 55~59 60~64 65~69 70~74 75~79 80~84 85~89 90~94 95~99 2000~08 % Year Established Japan(2007) Japan(1997) Germany(2007)Interest Groups Germany(2007)Associations Germany(2000) 0 10 20 30 40 50 ~1899 1900~04 05~09 10~14 15~19 20~24 25~29 30~34 35~39 40~44 45~49 50~54 55~59 60~64 65~69 70~74 75~79 80~84 85~89 90~94 95~99 2000~10 % Year Established Japan(2007) Japan(1997) USA(2009) USA(1999) Japan(2007) Japan(1997) USA(2009) USA(1999)
~1899 1900~04 05~09 10~14 15~19 20~24 25~29 30~34 35~39 40~44 45~49 50~54 55~59 60~64 65~69 70~74 75~79 80~84 85~89 90~94 95~99 2000~09 ~1899 1900~04 05~09 10~14 15~19 20~24 25~29 30~34 35~39 40~44 45~49 50~54 55~59 60~64 65~69 70~74 75~79 80~84 85~89 90~94 95~99 2000~10 4-1-5. Japan, Korea and China (total) 50 40 Japan(2007) Japan(1997) Korea(2009) Korea(1997) 75 China(2010) China(2004) Japan(2007) Japan(1997) 50 30 % % 20 25 10 0 0 Year Established Year Established 37 37
China: Gov t-made CSOs (registered) 300000 3500 250000 Social Org. Pr.Non Profit Org. Foundation 3000 200000 2500 150000 2000 1500 100000 1000 50000 500 0 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 0 38
Very thick density but some bias to producers and grass root organizations 4-2. PRESENT CONFIGURATION AND NHA (Neighborhood Associations) 39
4-2-1. Civil Society (CS) Map: High-Density and Uneven CS Sectors in Japan (More than100 laws.) Results from the 2007 survey, Tokyo Corporations having a special semigovernmental status (35) [2008] Private corporations set up under special laws (37) [2007] Independent administrative institution (102) [2007] Authorized Public Corporations (1,800) [2007] Government al Corporations Public Good Corporations, Etc. Political Parties / Political Organizations (75,558) [2004] Authorized Special Public Trust Private School Corporations (7,875) [2006] Social Welfare Corporations (18,258) [2005] Special Public Promotion Corporations Labor Unions (61,178) [2005] Chambers of Commerce (524) [2004] Public Trust(578) [2006] Incorporated Foundations (12,321) [2006] Incorporated Association (12,572) [2006] Religious Corporations (182,796) [2005] Commercial Union Commercial Society (2,734) [2004] Cooperative Etc. Societies, Areas in which interest associations, NGOs, and private NPOs exist Authorized (22,051) Consumer Cooperatives (1116) [2004] Nonjuridical Organizations Private Organizations with a place of business (42,000) Private Organizations without have a place of business (43,000) Community Based NHAs (296,770) [2003] NHAs Management Unions of Condominium Mid-sized & Small Busines Cooperative Societies (38,733) 969) [2004] : Concept in terms of legal status Agricultural Cooperatives (3,239) [2007] Credit Unions Etc. Specified non-profit Corporations (33,389) [2007] : Concept in terms of tax Limitedliabilitycompany policy (605)[2006] Regular Corporations Medical Foundation (396) [2006] Medical Societies Societies 41,324[2006] 41,324[2006] Joint-Stock Corporations (2,490,748) [2006] Unlimited Partnerships (5,781) [2006] Limited Partnerships (32,2001) [2006] Limited liability company (605)[2006] Other (56,494) [2006] Voluntary Unions Foundation-type Organizations Union-type Organizations 40 For the Public / Public Good For Profit These figures are mainly for 2007 or the latest. Information regarding the positioning of groups and organizations was based on the National Institute for Research Advancement's Report No. 980034, Research Report on the Support System for Citizen's Public-Interest Activities, (in Japanese), 1994, p.27. The author has revised all figures used to represent the number of each type of organization.
4-2-2. Profit Sector Dominant in Japan 1 Profit Sector 2 Non-profit Sector 3 Citizen sector 4 Other Tokyo China(2004) Japan(1997) Beijing Dhaka Germany(2008) Interest Groups USA(1999) Estonia(2009) Korea(1997) Poland(2010) Russia(2004) Seoul Turkey(2004) Germany(2000) Brazil(2006) Manila USA(2010) Germany(2008) Associations 5.1 4.7 4.7 11.6 8.4 7.9 7.7 12.5 19.5 18.7 18.1 22.9 28.6 28.6 27.8 19.7 39.3 38.2 35.4 22.3 23.9 27.9 39.7 38.0 36.7 36.3 6.5 22.3 19.4 39.0 41.4 39.4 40.4 34.3 23.7 22.8 46.6 36.0 43.2 28.0 52.7 30.8 30.6 40.8 24.3 12.7 22.9 16.1 15.9 12.7 35.5 13.6 35.3 1.8 22.2 15.5 21.1 29.2 12.3 20.4 19.5 37.8 4.7 50.2 1.0 21.2 62.8 27.5 11.7 28.7 24.8 16.5 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 41 100%
4-2-3. Another Face of CS in Japan: Grass-root Neighborhood Associations and their Cousins NHA: Definition voluntary groups whose memberships is geographically limited, and whose activities are multiple and are centered on that same area. (Pekkanen 2006) Total of 300,000 residents associations exist in Japan (98.9% covered in our survey) that provide social services to local residents. They act as a bridge between the local administration and local residents. Many smaller local organizations are tied to NHAs. 42
4-2-4. NHAs in Comparative Perspective Mahalla in Uzbekistan and other Islamic societies PRI (Panchayati raj institutions) in India Chumchon yoi nai khet tessaban =Urban Community in the Municipality of Thailand 班常会 in Korea (also in Okinawa) In many areas, especially in Asia, something equivalent to Japanese NHAs can be easily found. Generally, not easy to conduct research, because of its in-, or semi-formality. But important because of its indigenous character. 43
Less than 20 20-39 40-59 60-79 80-99 100-119 120-139 140-159 160-179 180-199 200-219 220-239 240-259 260-279 280-299 300-319 320-339 340-359 360-379 380-399 400-419 420-439 440-459 460-479 480-499 500-519 520-539 540-559 560-579 580-599 600-619 620-639 640-659 660-679 680-699 700-719 720-739 740-759 760-779 780-799 800-819 820-839 840-859 860-879 880-899 900-999 1000-1099 1100-1199 1200-1299 1300-1399 1400-1499 1500-1599 1600-1699 1700-1799 1800-1899 1900-1999 More than 2,000 No. of Neighborhood associations The Size of Neighborhood Associations: Small 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Household Membership 44
NHAs Collaboration with other Community- Based Organizations Rural Nonurban/new Urban/old Urban/new Total Senior citizen club 78.6 61.1 85.9 79.3 78.1 72.6 74.8 83.7 84.9 78.0 Social Welfare Council Council Kids club 74.1 74.6 83.5 82.0 78.0 NHA Federation 59.2 68.8 82.7 85.4 71.3 PTA 65.5 60.8 76.8 73.4 69.1 Fire brigade 72.5 53.5 73.6 60.5 67.8 Crime prevention 47.8 52.8 71.1 69.7 58.4 Athletic association association Other Neighborhood association Women`s association association 53.3 50.4 62.8 55.5 55.6 44.9 50.4 57.7 60.5 51.8 53.7 37.4 55.5 44.1 50.0 Police station 38.3 45.1 61.5 63.3 49.7 Fire Station 36.0 41.2 59.4 59.2 46.9 Parishioners and Temple Temple patron group 52.8 25.4 50.9 26.1 43.3 45
Social Service Activities Conducted by Neighborhood Associations Traditional Traditional Modern urban Rural (%) Modern rural (%) urban (%) (%) All (%) Cleaning and beautification 87.1 89.3 88.3 91.0 88.5 Residential road management 86.7 79.3 91.0 89.4 87.2 Festivals 74.3 62.4 82.1 74.5 74.6 Support for the elderly 66.4 60.4 78.6 78.6 70.9 Garbage disposal 67.2 68.6 70.9 73.1 69.5 Ceremonial events 73.2 61.2 66.2 68.0 68.9 Sports and cultural events 58.7 63.9 72.6 74.5 65.8 Cooperation with school 60.9 53.2 70.8 69.3 63.8 education Meeting hall management 66.8 55.3 64.7 60.8 63.5 Fire prevention 60.2 50.8 65.0 59.1 59.8 Disaster prevention 50.9 48.4 62.8 62.5 55.7 Traffic safety 49.7 46.4 63.8 55.8 53.8 Crime Prevention 42.2 50.0 64.7 66.3 53.4 Youth development 45.5 46.9 62.5 61.7 52.9 Bulletin board management 36.6 45.2 62.1 67.8 50.0 46
Dual Structure and Change 4-3 ACCESS 47
4-3-1. Effective Target for CSOs (capital area %) 1) Legislature 2) /Congress Administration Court Japan (JIGS1) 14.5 35.7 6.5 Japan (JIGS2_Social org.) 31.5 64.4 4.5 Japan (JIGS2_NPO) 29.6 70.5 2.7 Korea 12.1 62.5 3.2 USA 38.4 24.9 2.8 Germany (JIGS1) 8.7 15.9 7.6 China 4.5 18.5 2.4 Russia 11.4 13.9 12.9 The Philippines 15.8 40.4 6.2 Turkey 3) 7.5 28.7 66.2 Brazil 8.8 9.6 9.2 Bangladesh -- -- -- Notes: l) Percentage of the first choice 2) In China, this would be the National People s Congress. 3) In Turkey, we asked whether these actors are effective as a lobbying target. The respondents were allowed to choose more than one. 48
Agri. Fishery Orgs Economic Orgs Labor Educational Administrative Welfare Professional Civic, Citizens Academic Cultural Hobby, Sport Other, NEC Total 4-3-2. Access to Administration, 2007-12 Inners and Outers, Ups and Downs (%) 40 Access to Administrarion 35 30 25 20 15 10 2007 2012 5 0 Administration 49
Dual Structure and Change Inners: Administrative, Economic, Agricultural, Academic Outers: Labor, Welfare, Citizen Ups: Economic, Professional Downs: Agricultural, Education, Citizen, etc. 50
4-3-3. 1955 Regime as Dual Political Process 51
Agri. Fishery Orgs Economic Orgs Labor Educational Administrative Welfare Professional Civic, Citizens Academic Cultural Hobby, Sport Other, NEC Total (%) 30 4-3-5. Access to both Administration and Party (Ups: Labor, Education, Welfare orgs.) Access to Both Adm./Party 25 20 15 10 5 2007 2012 0 Both Adm./Party 52
There is a important change. It seem Group Life is shrinking in terms of participation and budget 4-4 CHANGE 53
4-4-1. Changes in Organization Participation Rates of Voters by Types of Organization (Surveyed by the Association for Promoting Fair Elections) Survey methods in 2012, 2013 are different from other years. 80 70 Neighborhood Associations Women's/Youth Clubs PTA participation rate (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 Senior Clubs Agriculture Fishery Organizations Labor Unions Commerce & Industrial Associations Religious Hobby Civic, Citizens Other 0 1972 76 79 80 83 86 90 93 96 2000 3 5 7 12 13 year not participate DK 54
4-4-2. LDP Party Membership (Index of political organization power and money of LDP faction bosses) : 1955-2007
4-4-3. Supporters Association Membership and Candidate Recommendation Declined, 1972-2005 ( 明推協 )
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 7,000,000 4-4-4. Budget: The Lost Decade Effect (late 1990s-) 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 計 3,000,000 経済団体 労働団体 2,000,000 学術 文化団体 1,000,000 他に分類されない非営利団体 0 57
4-4-5. Growth and Decline of Legal Corporations 特定非営利法人 農業協同組合 医療法人社団 地方公共団体
4-4-6. Changing CS Map (2012) 認可特定公益信託公益信託 (564) は法人の概念 は税制上の概念 利益団体 NGO 民間非営利団体 (NPO) の存在領域 特殊法人等 (33) [2013] 独立行政法人 (100) [2013] 地方公共団体 ( 法人 )1719 など [2013] 公共法人 公益法人等 政党 政治団体 (68896) [2008] 学校法人 (7,806) [2012] 社会福祉法人 (19407) [2012] 特定公益増進法人 労組 (54182)[2013] 商工会議所 (514) [2010] 一般社団法人 (23218) 公益社団法人 (3731)[2013] 特例財団法人 (5873) [2012] 一般財団法人 (9287) 公益財団法人 (4681)[2013] 特例社団法人 (7004) [2012] 宗教法人 (181855) [2012] 商工組合 商工会 (2734) [2004] 協同組合等 人格のない社団等 認可地縁団体 (35,564) [2008 管理組合法人 任意団体 [ 事業所有 ] (42,000) 任意団体 [ 事業所なし ] (43,000) 地縁団体 (294,359) [2008] 消費生活協同組合 (947) 農業協同組合 (2653) [2013] 中小企業事業協同組合 (31065) [2012] 特定非営利法人 (48611) [ 2013] 信用組合他 (155)[2014] 普通法人 医療法人財団 医療法人社団 任意組合 株式会社 (2412025) [2012] その他 (66308) [2012] (48640) 合名会社 (4218) [2012 [2013] 合資会社 (21462) [2012] 合同会社 (9136) 財団性 組合性 公共 公益性 営利性 ( 資料 ) 団体 法人の位置については 総合研究開発機構研究報告書 No.930034 市民公益活動基盤整備に関する調査研究 1994 年 27 頁の図をもとに加筆 団体数については 筆者が政府統計により追加補充した 2007 年または最近年の数値 中央右の網掛け部分は 制度化が十分なさていない領域を示す 資料 : 辻中 森 1998. 59
4-5. INFLUENCE: SUCCESS EXPERIENCE AND POLICY EFFECTIVENESS 60
4-5-1. Influence : Moderate Level for Japan Success in implementing, altering or blocking a policy(x-axis)and subjective-influence score (Y-axis) Subjective Influence Score (means) 3 2 1 China (2010) Bangladesh (2007) Brazil (2006) India (2012) NGO Philippine (2004) Poland (2010) Korea (2009) Japan (2007) Russia (2004) Germany (2000) Japan (2007) NPO Estonia (2009) Korea (2009) NPO 0 Turkey (2004) Uzbekistan (2008) NPO 0 20 40 60 Success in having, altering or blocking a policy (%) Subjective influence score and policy successes are generally correlated. Japan: mid-range 61
4-5-2. Ad. Level does not matter: Success in Implementing, Altering, or Blocking Policies by Levels: Japan 日本 Japan Balanced (local, nationwide, and global levels) 62
4-5-3. Subjective Influence(local level orgs.) (NHAs>SOs>NPOs) from JIGS2 National Data 非常に強い強いある程度あまりまったく 自治会 13.4 29.2 25.2 26.0 6.2 社会団体 4.1 11.6 37.5 36.2 10.7 NPO 4.1 8.8 28.2 40.2 18.7 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 構成比 63
5. CONCLUDING REMARKS 64
Summary: Two Faces of CS: Capitalist and Grass roots. 1. Formation: stable, some privileged earlier 2. Present Configuration: High Density of associations: Profit sector-biased legal org. and strong grass-root organizations. 3. Access: Dual Structure (Inners and Outers), Comprehensive LDP Gov t. 4. Change: Shrinking Group Life: Declining participation rate and budget size 5. Influence: Level doesn t matter. NHA s confident 65
3 Puzzles and Changes Japan s last two, post war puzzles are explained by LDP s strategy and CSOs. Promoting profit-sector CSOs (including nonprofit orgs.) and grass-root NHAs. They are stable and compensate the structure of small government by providing social capital that lower the government burden. Although such a structure has been damaged since 1990s, it still works at the time of disasters in Hanshin and East Japan. 66
Citizens are Dissatisfied with Politics, but not Dissatisfied with Associational Life, then the Disaster came Vested interest groups exist earlier formation, occupying larger room in present configuration; easier and more frequent access to bureaucracy and governing parties. Shrinking Associational Life: Group budget and participation is going down; Group Life seems to be shrinking; Influence in general is also going down.(ict based space emerged in place) Then, Satisfaction map is mixed and contradictory. Dissatisfied with Politics, but not Dissatisfied with society/associational Life. 67
Implication to Disaster and CS in Japan The disasters revealed the strengths and limitations of CS in Japan. Grass root CSO: NHAs and volunteer firefighting groups important roles in preparing and responding to disasters Problem Weakness in the advocacy sector against Atomic energy village (government, TEPCO and technocrats) How will anti-nuclear activism evolve? Will it have enough influence on Japan s nuclear energy policy? As we saw, the period 1965-70, when Fukushma1 established, the profit sector has been formed and strong. (pro-tepco), while the advocacy by CSO and NHA was weak. 68
Need JPN Studies More Introduction, Jeff Kingston Part I. Disaster: Reports from Tohoku 1. Tohoku Diary: Reportage on the Tohoku Disaster, Gerald Curtis 2. Recovery in Tohoku, John F. Morris Part II.Volunteerism, Civil Society and Media 3. From Kobe to Tohoku: The Potential and the Peril of a Volunteer Infrastructure, Simon Avenell 4. Civil Society and the Triple Disasters: Revealed Strengths and Weaknesses, Yuko Kawato, Robert Pekkanen and Yutaka Tsujinaka 5. Social Media in Disaster Japan, David H. Slater, Nishimura Keiko and Love Kindstrand 6. March 11, 2011 Online: Comparing Japanese Newspaper Websites and International News Websites,Leslie M. Tkach-Kawasaki Part III. Energy 7. Networks of Power: Institutions and Local Residents in Post-Tohoku Japan, Daniel P. Aldrich 8. Hard Choices: Japan's Post-Fukushima Energy Policy in the 21st Century, Paul J. Scalise 9. Fukushima and the Political Economy of Power Policy in Japan, Andrew Dewitt, Iida Tetsunari and Masuru Kaneko Part IV. History and Politics 10. Dealing With Disaster, Peter Duus 11. The Politics of Natural Disaster, Nuclear Crisis and Recovery, Jeff Kingston 12. Friends in Need: 'Operation Tomodachi' and the Politics of US Military Disaster Relief in Japan, Chris Ames and Yuiko Koguchi-Ames Part V. Recovery and Reconstruction 13. The Economic Fallout: Japan's Post-3/11 Challenges, Kenneth Neil Cukier 14. Ageing Society, Health Issues and Disaster: Assessing 3/11, Junko Otani 15. Thousand-Year Event: Towards Reconstructing Communities, 69 Riccardo Tossani 16. Can Post- 3/11 Japan overcome 20 years of