Abstract
The belief exists that the concentration of Japan’s population in Tokyo is responsible for the nation’s low birth rate, and that this issue should therefore be addressed by means of regional revitalization. This belief is based on a misreading of the facts. It will be essential to put into effect measures targeting the low birth rate in the cities where the population is concentrated. We identify two reasons for the failure of measures targeting the low birth rate to make progress in Japan’s major cities: (1) a time lag between population influxes and the provision of public funding for childcare, and (2) the fact that surrounding municipalities are able to enjoy a free ride on a specific municipality’s expenditure on childcare due to a spillover effect.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
As already indicated, the choice to have children is initially made possible by an expectation on the part of the parents of long-term employment opportunities and lifestyle stability. The short-term distribution of tax revenues to regional areas will not readily change this situation. In addition, as the author has previously argued in detail (Hatta 2015a, b), whether improvement of the birth rate actually functions as a growth strategy is open to question. There is scope for discussion regarding whether the improvement of the birth rate is appropriate as a policy target.
- 2.
To take an example, in relation to the childcare measures implemented by regional municipalities, because market failures are occurring in the market for female labor, a certain degree of investment of public funds can be justified (Hatta 2008, p. 326). Because it is known that externalities occur in the area of preschool education, a certain degree of investment of public funds is rational. Given this, the implementation by municipalities of standard basic childrearing support measures and measures to address the low birth rate can be justified economically.
- 3.
This is to say that if the standard of the childrearing support measures implemented by cities of this type had been equivalent to that of other municipalities, the birth rate would have been higher. If policy obstacles result in couples producing fewer than their desired number of children, the correction of these policies would generate immediate results. Of course, it is also possible that other factors result in low birth rates in municipalities with a high rate of population influx, for example the higher cost of land and the lower amount of living space per household. In this case, there would be little scope to increase the birth rate by means of improvements in childrearing support measures.
- 4.
For example, Itabashi Ward, an average municipality in the Tokyo metropolitan area, shoulders 74.2% of the burden of operating expenses for licensed childcare facilities. Parents cover 10.6%, the government funds 8.3%, the city funds 4.1%, and 2.7% is sourced elsewhere (Financial statements for FY 2014: Ratio of financial burden on parents). Theoretically, the government should provide half of the unit cost of childcare, and the city or prefecture a quarter. In practice, a variety of other expenses arise that must be covered by public expenditure, including supplementation of personnel costs for public childcare workers, the municipality’s own reduction of childcare fees, and childcare fees for defaulters, with the result that 70–80% of operating expenses are covered by the municipality itself.
- 5.
In the case of an insurance subscriber who moves from their original municipality to another because of a lack of special aged-care homes, the individual’s expenses are paid by the nursing care insurance in the original municipality, and the individual pays insurance premiums to the original municipality. The same system is accepted in many nursing care facilities other than special aged-care homes.
References
Hatta, Tatsuo (2008), Mikuro Keizaigaku 1: Shijo no Shippai to Seihu no Shippai eno Taisaku (Microeconomics I: Responses to Market Failures and Government Failures), Toyo Keizai Shimposha (In Japanese).
Hatta, Tatsuo (2015a), “Chihososei wo Tou (Ge) –Iju no Shouheki-teppai koso Senketsu (Questioning Regional Revitalization (Part 2): Removing Barriers to Immigration Is the First Priority),” Nihon Keizai Shimbun, February 6, 2015 (In Japanese).
Hatta, Tatsuo (2015b), “‘Kokuho no ‘Moderu-kyuhugaku’ Kokkohutanseido’ niyoru Chihososei (Regional Revitalization via a System for the Contribution of “Model Benefits” by the Government),” Japanese Journal of Health Economics and Policy, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp.71–84 (In Japanese).
Japan Policy Council (2014), Sutoppu shoshika / chiho genki senryaku (Strategies for Boosting Japan’s Birth Rate and Reviving its Regions), May 8, 2014 (www.policycouncil.jp/pdf/prop03/prop03.pdf) (In Japanese).
Suzuki, Wataru (2014), Shakaihosho Bokoku Ron (The Collapse of Social Security), Kodansha Shinsho (In Japanese).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Suzuki, W. (2018). Childcare and Measures Targeting Japan’s Low Birth Rate: What Effect Can the Decentralization of Authority Have on the Birth Rate?. In: Hatta, T. (eds) Economic Challenges Facing Japan’s Regional Areas. Palgrave Pivot, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7110-2_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7110-2_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-7109-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-7110-2
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)