Advertisement

Intensive and Extensive Mobilisation in the Japanese Economy: An Interpretation of Japanese Capitalism in Historical Perspective

  • Kiichiro Yagi
Part of the Studies in Economic Ethics and Philosophy book series (SEEP)

Abstract

Giving a glance to the collapse of the etatist socialist economies, the late Professor Murakami predicted the emergence of the “developmentalism debate” in the intellectual world that had been so far occupied by the great debate on “socialism.”2 The term “developmentalism” signifies here a general attitude of developing nations to whom the state-lead industrialisation has priority in the shaping of the society with liberal democratic ideals.3 Based on the experience of Japan and other newly industrialised economies in Asia, Murakami concluded that “developmentalism” retained its attractiveness to the nations who felt themselves challenged by mighty advanced competitors.

Keywords

Civil Society Developmentalist State Japanese Firm Japanese Economy Labour Dispute 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Yukichi Fukuzawa: “Bunmei Ron no Gairyaku” (A Summary of Civilisation), 1875, in: Keio Giuku (Ed.): Fukuzawa Yukichi Zenshu (Collected Works), Tokyo (Iwanami) 1959, vol. 4, p. 209. I quoted Fukuzawa to show that the developmentalist strategy does not collide with the best enlightenment thought in a late starting nation.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yasusuke Murakami: Han-Koten no Keizaigaku,2 vols., Tokyo (ChuoKoronsha) 1992 (English edition: An Anti-classical Political-Economic Analysis: A Vision for the Next Century,(Stanford University Press) 1996, vol. 1, p. 50, translated by Kozo Yamamura).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Developmentalism is such an economic system whose basic frame consists of private property and market economy (i.e. capitalism) but permits government intervention to the market with a long-run perspective so long as it serves for the goal of industrialisation (i.e., continuous per capita growth of production). Clearly developmentalism is a politico-economical system that is established on the state (or similar political community) as its unit. In many cases, certain limitations (monarchy, one-party system, military dictatorship etc.) are added to the parliament democracy.“ Murakami: ibid.,vol. 2, pp. 5–6.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Some sympathetic observers even conclude that a paradoxical tendency to produce the basis for the transformation to a new stage of society which fits more to the modern liberal democratic ideals is inherent in this type of economic development.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    See B. Martin (Ed.): Japans Weg in die Moderne. Ein Sonderweg nach Deutschem Vorbild?, Frankfurt a. M. ( Campus Verlag ) 1987.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    For German readers: cf. YAGI: “Wirtschaftswissenschaften und Modernisierung Japans,” The Kyoto University Economic Review,LX, no. 1–2 (April-October 1990).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    The term “administrators” is used by a Dutch journalist, Karel Van Wolfren: The Enigma of Japanese Power,1989, to signify the small circle behind government and large organisations in contemporary Japan.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kokutai“ was originally the translation of ”nation“ or ”nationality“ as is seen in writings of Fukuzawa. However, the ideological institutionalisation of Tenno worship in cultural system and the preventive intent against ”dangerous thought“ (anarchism, socialism, and communism) moulded this term by an ideological combination of the both.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    This term is used by Yongho Kim in his observation of contemporary North-Eastern Asian nations. See Yongho Kim: “Tohoku Ajia no Saihen to Kan-nichi Kankei no Saikochiku” (Reorganisation of the Northeast Asia and the Task of Reconstruction of Korea-Japan Relations), Sekai, 612 (August 1995).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tanzan Ishibashi: “Gendai Nihonjin no Keizai Shiso” (Economic Philosophy of Contemporary Japanese), in: Ishibashi Tanzan: Chosaku-shu,vol. 1, Toyo Keizai Shimpo-sha, 1995. Ishibashi wished to integrate the element of fairness in distribution as well as public service into his liberalism. He later found himself very neat to Keynse and made criticism to economic policies from similar perspective. After 1945 he joined the conservative Liberal Party, though he was invited by his friends in the Socialist Party. He became the finance minister of the Yoshida Cabinet 1946–47, but he was purged due to his resistance to the financing of luxury expenditure of the occupation army as well as his misunderstood reputation as an “inflationist”.Google Scholar
  11. 12.
    Though I regard Japan’s experience in the nineteen thirties and forties as failure of developmentalism, I do not deny its impact of breaking the hierarchical mould by the totalitarian mobilisation then. Apparently, the development of Japanese economic system shows the feature of path-dependency from that experience. See important study of Tetsuji Okazaki. See important study of Tetsuji Okazaki: “The Japanese Firm Under the Wartime Planned Economy”, in: Masahiko Aoki and Ronald P. Dore (Eds.): The Japanese Firm: Sources of Competitive Strength, Oxford (Oxford University Press) 1994.Google Scholar
  12. 13.
    To the eyes of an American advisor for the reform of personnel management of Japanese public administration, Dr. Carl Hoover, Tenno is just the first of the new born civil servants. His list which placed Tenno among “servants to the whole” astonished Japanese administrators.Google Scholar
  13. 14.
    ClaudeLévi-Strauss: The Scope of Anthropology,London (Jonathan Cape) 1968, p. 53 (translated from French by S. O. Paul and R. A. Paul).Google Scholar
  14. 15.
    In Japan Yasushi Yamanouchi considers the totalitarian mobilisation during wartime as an epoch-making transition from a modern society to a system society. YasushiYamanouchi: Sisutemu Shakai no Gendai-teki Iso (Modern Aspect of the System Society), Tokyo (Iwanami) 1996. In my view, Yamanouchi seems to grasp the development of mobilisation too linear. The application of the concept of “mobilisation” to the Japanese economy was made by Hideharu Saito in his Nomado no Jidai (The Age of Nomad), (Omura-Shoten) 1994. He characterises Fordism also as a “mode of mobilisation of social aspiration of the people”.Google Scholar
  15. 16.
    In the years of the financial crisis, the new German cartel theory that maintained productive functions of the cartel was introduced. This provided “new bureaucrats” with the general consensus on which they constructed their planning.Google Scholar
  16. 17.
    Originally, the “new bureaucrats” in the Planning Board desired to introduce the removal of the capital’s domination over management in the concept of “New Economic Order”. The expression of the “organic whole” of three factors was the product of the roll-back of liberal business men. As for the origin of the idea of “New Economic Order” and its legitimisation by economists, see KiichiroYagi: “Economic Reform Plans under Japanese Wartime Economy - The case of Shintaro Ryu and Kei Shibata”, in: AikoIkeo (Ed.): Economic Development in Twentieth Century East Asia,London (Routledge), 1997.Google Scholar
  17. In Japan the Ordinance for National Service Draft (Kokumin Choyo-rei) was proclaimed in 1939. By this ordinance 1,610 thousand people were drafted and 4,550 thousand people were reclassified for the wartime production. In addition 3,430 thousand students and 470 thousand housewives were mobilised. The coercive transportation of Korean workers amounted 120 thousand in 1942, 130 thousand in 1943, and 290 thousand in 1944. About 40 thousand Chinese workers were also transported up to 1945. MinoruSawai: “Senjiki” (Wartime), in: Yasushi Kosai et al. (Eds.): Nihon Keizai Jiten (Encyclopaedia on Japanese Economy) (Nihon Keizai Shinbunsha) 1996.Google Scholar
  18. 19.
    In Japan the close network of banks was introduced under the name of Financial New Order (Kinyu Shin-Taisei) in the wartime. It is argued that the so-called “main bank” system in post-war Japan originated in this joint financing system under the wartime financial system.Google Scholar
  19. 20.
    The nature of business concerns (Zaibatsu) alters accordingly. The exclusive relation of the bank and firm under the common family ownership was weakened by the joint financing and by the forced retreat of the Zaibatsu families from the management. In this respect the transformation of new business groups (Nissan, Riken, etc.) were faster than such old business groups as Mitsui, Mitsubishi, etc.Google Scholar
  20. 21.
    In conceiving this characteristics as well as drawing the table I received several hints from Japanese translation of JacquesSapir: “Transformation de la societe et modes de regulation”, “Regulation et transition”, in: R.Boyer and T. Yamada: La Grande Transformation du Socialisme (Fujiwara-Shoten) 1993.Google Scholar
  21. 22.
    It is now the prevalent view that the residue goes to the owner of property. (Paul Milglom, John Roberts: Economics, Organisation and Management,(Prentice-Hall International) 1992, chap. 9.) The specific feature of the mobilisation phenomenon lies indeed in the opposite result. The residue (profit) appears on the side of the agent who called for the mobilisation.Google Scholar
  22. 23.
    For example, Toyota MC experienced a serious labour dispute when it announced a voluntary retirement of 1600 in number in March 1950. At this time 2,146 retired and 5,994 remained. Toyota Motor Company: Toyota: A History of the First 50 Years, 1988, pp. 109–110.Google Scholar
  23. 24.
    See Keizai Kikaku-Cho Chosa-Kyoku (Ed.): Siryou Keizai-hakusho 50 nen (50 Years of Annual Economic Reports), Nihon Keizai Shimbun-sha, 1972, pp. 64f., 70f., 182f., 232f.Google Scholar
  24. 25.
    Tetsuji Okazaki: “Sengo Shijou Keizai Ikouki no Seifu-Kigyou kan Kankei” (Government-Firms relations in the years of the Post-war Transition to the Market Economy), in: Hideshi Itoh (Ed.): Nihon no Kigyou Sisutemu (Corporate System in Japan), Tokyo (University of Tokyo Press) 1996.Google Scholar
  25. 26.
    See Shigeo Teranishi: “Mein Banku Sisutemu” (Main Bank System), in: Tetsuji Okazaki, Masahiro Okuno (Eds.): Gendai Nihon Keizai Sisutemu no Genryu (Origins of the Contemporary Economic System of Japan), (Nihon Keizai Shimbun-sha) 1993. See also Masahiko Aoki, Hugh Patrick (Eds.): The Japanese Main Bank System, Oxford (Oxford Univ. Press ) 1994. Whether the policy of low rate interest contributed to the growth of the Japanese economy is a topic of hot discussion.Google Scholar
  26. 27.
    The significant role of the ranking in the incentive mechanism of the Japanese type firm is one of the main theses of Masahiko Aoki: Information, Incentives, and Bargaining in the Japanese Economy,Cambridge (Cambridge University Press) 1988.Google Scholar
  27. 28.
    See Kobayashi’s part in Takayuki Itami/Tadao Kagono/Takao Kobayashi/Kiyonori Sakakibara/Motoshige Itoh: KyOUSOU to Kakushin - Jidousha Sangyou no Kigyou Seichou (Competition and Innovation: Growth of Firms in Automobile Industry), (Toyo Keizai Shimpo-sha) 1988.Google Scholar
  28. 29.
    Yasusuke Murakami and Thomas P. Rohlen: “Social-Exchange Aspects of the Japanese Political Economy: Culture, efficiency, and Change,” in: S. Kumon and H. Rosovsky (Eds.): The Political Economy of Japan, (vol.3): Cultural and Social Dynamics,(Stanford University Press) 1992.Google Scholar
  29. 30.
    Cf. my short memorandum added as an appendix to my paper on Yanagita Kunio. Kiichiro Yagi: “Japan Model?’, in: Kiichiro Yagi and Takashi Matsugi (Eds.): Shakai Keizaigaku no Shiya to Hoho (Method and Perspective of Social Economics), (Mineruva Publ.) 1996. See also Research Project Team For Japanese System/Masuda Foundation: Japanese Systems–An Alternative Civilisation?, Yokohama ( Sekotac ) 1992 ( English and Japanese).Google Scholar
  30. 31.
    Jean-Pierre Durand considers the “mobilisation of internal ability of wage workers” as the central element of the Japanese type production system. See Robert Boyer and Jean-Pierre Durand: L’apres-fordisme,Paris (Sylos) 1993.Google Scholar
  31. 32.
    See Koitchi Shimizu: “Kaizen et gestion du travail chez Toyota Motor et Toyota Kyushu” (Gerpisa paper presented at the Deuxieme Rencontre Internationale “Le nouveaux modeles industriels des firms automobiles”), Paris, June 1618, 1994.Google Scholar
  32. 33.
    See Karoshi-Bengodan Zenkoku-Renraku-Kaigi (National Association of the Lawyers against Karoshi) (Ed.): Karoshi,Tokyo (Mado Publisher) 1990.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kiichiro Yagi

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations