AGENDA SETTING, POLICY FORMULATION AND POLICY IMPLEMENTATION OF
5.1 Problem Stream and the OVOP Policy
5.1.1 Event and Crises
After the Meiji reformation, Japan opened the country and accelerated its modernization together with westernization according to the principle “Fukoku Kyohei” or “Wealthy nation-Strong military” (Prasert Chittiwatanapong, 1938, p. 12).
At first, Japan’s economic development started from the industrial economy from the cotton weaving industry, which in 1897 became the spearhead in exporting to China and led the Japanese economy to become a complete industrial economy instead of importing. (Yoshihara, 1988, p. 11) Therefore, it could be said that the textile industry
became the model for modern industrial development such as cement, paper, food, iron, shipbuilding, and weapon industries, etc.
Watunyu Jaiborisudhi and Warangkana Korkietpitak (2009, pp. 145-146) stated that after the end of World War I, the military had a lot of authority to designate Japan’s direction under the militarism which rooted in the Buchido ideal, that the military was free from the politics and integrated with the institution of emperor. There was the quote that “In order for the military to be resolute, the commander should receive order only from the Emperor”, which corresponded to the Shinto religion which also supported the nationalism and loyalty to the Emperor. In other words, the militarism ideal led the Japanese nationalism towards chauvinism. Furthermore, due to the previous victories, the Japanese military became arrogant and raised their status as the legitimate ruler above any other institution. Therefore, even the industrial development followed the military utilization rather than the production for consumption. This characteristic of political demand required industrial operation to respond to the politics’ military industry. And it was certain that the Zaibutsu group with the close relationship to the elite and the military must be supported in the state’s military activities. Therefore, both groups would reciprocally support each other. The military would gain the economic and industrial bases to support the military activities and warfair, while the Zaibutsu would gain the advantages and privileges in various forms such as financial supports form the state, the customs privileges, as well as the regulations which the state enacted to raise the resource, that the state must limit its contact with just the Zaibutsu group.
For example, Mitsui received the mining concession and military industry, or Mitsubitshi received the administration of shipbuilding business in Singapore through the Navy as well as the construction of aircrafts for the Airforce, etc.
Moreover, the Zaibutsu also influenced the politics, as the connection they had since the Togugawa period through the trading influence. As a result, the representatives of Zaibutsu network were assigned the positions in the cabinet and important government position such as the Minister of Finance, Minister of Industry, and the Director of National Bank during the period after the end of World War I.
Therefore, when the military would like to expand its power and the Zaibutsu would like to maintain the growth of industrial economy through seeking the foreign market and resources, the Zaibutsu became not only the important power in manufacturing the
weapon but also the planning of industrial expansion and development towards Manchuria (Yoshihara, 1988, p. 21).
After the end of the World War II, the United States governed Japan and advocated the new constitution for Japan to replace the Meiji constitution which was less democratic. The new constitution’s content included higher economic liberalism concept, especially the abolishment of monopoly under the Zaibutsu’s control through the sell of stock for people, resulted in the companies which were distributed from the Zaibutsu called the Keiretsu or network company. Afterwards in 1952, Japan became independent from the United States as the treaty required the Japanese Army’s disarm, resulted in the United State’s burden in maintaining the nation’s security in place of Japanese Army. This allowed Japan’s economic development to advance swiftly (Pensri Kanchanomai, 1995, pp. 285-301).
Furthermore, Somchai Chakhatrakan et al. (2006) stated that there was the enactment of agricultural land reformation law together with the new agricultural co- operative law in 1947, to ensure the minor farmer’s protection of their own land for farming, as most farmers had to rent the land from the landlord prior to the end of World War II. Kuwano (personal communication, July 13, 2016) provided additional explaination as following. “After the World War II, the U.S. advocated the land reformation policy to reduced monopolization in economic wealth by the landlord. The land reformation would divide the large area of land for the farmers to possess, and these minor farmers assembled together under the agricultural co-operative and gained high negotiation power with other sectors, including the political and the governmen”
Additionally, Somchai Chakhatrakan (personal communication, July 14, 2016) commented on the Japan’s land reformation as following. “The agricultural reformation actually happened after the World War, as Japan halted so much of their agricultural activities and destroyed most of their forest due to the preparation of war and the fight during World War II. Citizens were enlisted in the manufacturing of weapon, warship, aircraft, and work for the warfair....Afterwards, the agricultural sector and technology were ignored. Nevertheless, Japan had a good foundation. At that time, Japan was so poor and the food was scarce. There was famine, as there were almost 100 million Japanese citizens with no one to produce food for them. Then the U.S. enacted the agricultural land
reformation and allocated farming land for the farmers, and Japan started to produce food for their citizen first”
Somchai Chakhatrakan (personal communication, July 14, 2016) further commented on the Japanese Agricultural Co-operative as following. “Japanese Agricultural Co-operative was not the loan co-operative, but rather the community co- operative in the commune style, where the entrepreneurs gathered. Japanese Agricultural Co-operative was rooted in the national development based on actuality.
What is the actuality? There must be the consideration of origine of culture, tradition, and ways of life. For example, why can’t the Thai work together in group while the Japanese must work together? Why the single person in Japan would be very weak and become very strong as a group? On the contrary, the single Thai is strong but become weak in group. These were the result of history and environment. In an earthquake, it would not be possible to runaway and survive alone. Then what would you do with the family? Earthquake, volcano, all need working in group in order to survive together. If this year they need to farm, it would not be possible to finish on time if they are independent from each other and work separately. As the time is limited, and it would not be possible for one person to finish transplant rice seedlings, so they were required to work together. For example, if there are 10 people with 5 Rais of land each, if all of them work together that they could finish 25 Rais. When the winter came, the wind would stop the rice to grow, but they would still have 25 Rais of rice for eating. But if they work separately in their field and could not finished, there might be no rice at all.
Therefore, Japanese people were good at working together as a team with harmony, mutual supports, and maintaining the group’s benefit…Their environment and society became the foundation which allowed the Japanese Agricultural Co-operative to gain high negotiation power both in trading and in politics”
Regarding trading, Hongpha Subboonrueng (personal communication, November 30, 2016) noted the example of melon quantity control for good price. The co-operative would discard the dowdy melon in order to prevent market excession, which would lower the melon’s price. And Puntita Tanwattana (personal communication, November 30, 2016) also proposed the similar perspective with Somchai Chakhatrakan as following. “In the case of Japan, they would assemble during the time of problem in order to solve it. Conglomeration is already the strength of Japan,
as they could assemble in group with harmony…starting from group, network, and co- operative”
It could be said that conglomeration of the Japanese was the basis which ensure the Japanese Agricultural Co-operative’s strength, that they could negotiate effectively with both the business sector and the political sector. Most Japanese farmers would be affiliated with the agricultural co-operative (Yanagihara, personal communication, July 14, 2016), which would play the role as described by Kuwano (personal communication, July 13, 2016) as following. “The politicians, whether the LDP party, any other party, or the local politicians, would have to ask for voter’s supports from the agricultural co-operative”
Regarding the national development of macro econmy, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) had continuously advocated for the national industrial development policy.
Since 1962, the government initiated the Comprehensive National Development Plan, which was the policy of relocating the industrial development project to the new industrial city (Matsui, 2011, p. 18). The new industrial city zone would be the seaports in 4 regions as following (Narongsak Pitchayapisut, 2008, p. 26).
1) Keihin Region, including Tokyo and Yokohama city
2) Hanshin Region, including Osaka and Kobe city as well as the area around these cities.
3) Chukyo Region, with the center at Nagoya city
4) Kita Kyushu Region, with the center at Fukuoka city (Narongsak Pitchayapisut, 2008, p. 26)
Due to the national development strategy of relocating the industrial zone to other regions and the huge injection of budget, the dependence of the regions on the central government budget was unavoidable. The external stimulation of industrial sector and the construction project which did not connect to the local economic activities or the locally-intiated industrial sector. Such condition became problematic in truly driving the local economic growth. Furthermore, the development policy of relocating the industrial based also affected the local community in the negative ways, such as environmental problem, pollutions, local agriculture regression, and problem with forest and marine resource (Matsui, 2011, p. 20).
Until the 1970s, Japan became the powerful industrial nation of the world. The rapid growth and expansion of the industrial economy resulted in benefits from the continuously increasing business turnover. The government’s encouragement for people to enter the economic and industrial system together with the support of labor to enter the industrial economy led Japanese companies to implement the motivation policy for employee through the system of life-long employment and other welfares, such as housing or loan for housing. Moreover, the companies would provide activities to ensure the employees’ loyalty to the corporate from the first day of reporting at work, when they would be greeted by the chairman. And in the case of marriage, the companies would be the host and provide the expenses for their employees. (Sumitra, 1999, pp. 176-177).
Matsui (2011, p. 18) noted that the life-long employment system in Japan was the very important motivation in attracting the newly graduated as well as labors from various areas into the metropolitans, which were developed according to the model of industrial city. As a result, the urban area expanded and the population increased rapidly, while the population in suburban area decreased due to the relocation of labors into the industrial urban area. Although in 1972, P.M. Tanaka attempted to advocate the Japanese Archipelago Reformation Plan through custom measurement and other measurement in motivating the people and industry to relocate towards the area with lesser population, together with the construction of road and railways towards such area, but this plan was canceled due to the gasoline crisis (Vogel, 1985, pp. 106-107).
Regarding the case of Oita prefecture, this marginalized prefecture with mountainous geography was heavily affected by the relocation of working adult due to the business and industrial development policy in the urban area. As a result, Oita had lowest GDP in the Kyushu Region during 1960s-1970s (OVOP Committee, 2006;
Savitri, 2008). Therefore, the central government’s policy which emphasized the industrial economic development certainly affected the relocation of labors from Oita agricultural sector towards the industrial urban area (Somchai Chakhatrakan, personal communication, July 14, 2016).
Narongsak Pitchayapisut (2008, p. 29) further added that the Kyushu region’s economic and industrial center was in Fukuoka. Therefore, the Fukuoka prefecture’s income was much higher than other prefectures in Kyushu region and also affected the
labor problems in local agriculture sector. As the new generation would expect to work in the urban area, the families which used to farm had to stop as the head of the household already neglected their farm and entered the industrial economic system in the urban area, that only the women and the elders were left behind in suburban area.
And Hongpha Subboonrueng (personal communication, November 30, 2016) shared the similar opinion that due to the industrial economic development policy, the labors in Oita all moved into major cities such as Tokyo, Nagoya, or Osaka and left the local area neglected. It could be said that the Oita was almost the poorest prefecture in Japan (Puntita Tanwattana,personal communication, December 2, 2016)
Moreover, Murama (personal communication, December 2, 2015) deemed that the major city development policy together with the support for major corporate expansion, were the policies formulated by the central government. Therefore, the local community revitalization approach which came from the internal idea would reflect the challenge from the community or region in resisting the central government’s policy.
In other words, the problem stream of regression and sluggishness in the Oita’s economic and agricultural activities originated from the economic development according to the industrial capitalism approach together with the development of major industrial cities in various regions. The industrial capitalism development led the Japanese economy to grow swiftly. The corporates and factories were concentrated in the major cities under the industrial development policy. And such enterprises attracted labors with high wage and welfares. As Oita was not the major city with economic and industrial importance, the young adults as well as agricultural labors influxed in to the urban area that the farms and forestry area in many area of Oita were neglected.