State-Civil Society Relations for Japan - Case Study Example

Introduction Japan is usually viewed as a submissive society in which people are compliant to their corporations and the government. Japan didn’t have a well-constructed civil society until recently. In Japan, however , there always has had some level of social activism. For example, in seventeenth – nineteenth century Japan experienced some social activism by the small community groups known gonin-gumi (“group of five families,” Yamamoto, 1998), and by farmers’ protests (hyakushô ikki) . There also occurred environmental and antiwar protest movements in the 1960s and 1970s. But most of the researchers agree on this point that throughout Japanese history civil society has remained extremely weak vis-à-vis the state, and only recently, particularly in 1990s, civil society in Japan has gathered some importance in the political field. Although researchers opinion vary on the question of current size and prominence, it is generally assumed that civil society will continue to grow and play a more prominent role in the future. (Iokibe, 1999) The recent spurt in civil society activism puzzles a lot of people. In Japan extraordinary economic growth took place in the 1950s - 1970s and Japan eventually became the world’s second largest economy. During this period of rapid economic growth, Japanese civil society, however, was largely restrained. Only since the 1980s, and especially since the early 1990s, Japanese civil societies, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have emerged to play an continuing dynamic role in political life in Japan. (Iokibe, 1999) To be said more precisely, public attention to civil society surged unexpectedly and dramatically in Japan in the wake of the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake in Kobe in January 1995, which took the lives of over 6,400 people. More than 1.3 million volunteers and a large number of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) played an active role to provide assistance and relief to the victims of the devastated city. Their work was so dedicated and impressive that it marked a bright spot in the otherwise grim scene of disaster. The media reported a large number of touching stories about the significant role played by volunteers and NGOs and nonprofit organizations (NPOs), and hugely criticized the allegedly bureaucratic and incompetent response of national and local government officials. Though there may have been a lack of balance in portraying the effectiveness of civil society organizations and volunteers in contrast with the ineffectiveness on the part of national and local government officials, the powerful reportage helped the Japanese public as well as government officials and political and business leaders focus on civil society. This sudden awareness of the value or utility of volunteers and NPOs that aroused in the wake of the grave earthquake provoked the government and political parties to find ways of facilitating their activities. Around 18 government agencies rushed to respond to the new popularity of volunteer activities, and they eventually formed some committees to promote volunteer activities. Most of the main political parties started drafting new NPO legislation for effectively promoting and supporting the activities of Japan’s nonprofit sector. For three years following the earthquake, intense debate over the NPO legislation occurred, involving NPO leaders but also politicians, bureaucrats, business leaders, and the media. In 1998, government finally passed the NPO Law for providing a new impetus for the further growth of civil society in Japan. (Tadashi, 1998) Given the above background, several important questions come into mind - Why has Japan had a weak civil society traditionally, especially prior to 1980’s? What accounts for the recent growth of civil society? And what are the implications of changing state-civil society relations for Japan? In this paper effort has been made to answer this these questions. No single factor or incident can explain the evolution of the civil society of Japan.. To understand the growth of Japanese civil society, it is necessary to take into account a variety of factors related to economic, cultural, and political changes in Japan and around the world. The evolution of the Japanese civil society To understand the evolution of Japanese civil society, it is essential to have a clear idea about what civil society actually stands for. Therefore, before addressing the above questions, it would be better to provide a clear idea about civil society. Hence, this paper first defines civil society; then, it discusses why Japanese civil society has been traditionally weak and how it has recently developed. The definition of civil society has different versions. Different people attempted to define it in different ways. Therefore, whenever the term is used for any research purpose or for any other purpose, it is used with great uncertainty. Sometimes the term civil society is used to refer a society, which is based on private property and individual rights. For example, according to Marx, civil society is the sphere of market relations. To Marx, civil society was bourgeois and deserved to be abolished .At other times, the term is used to imply a sum of all institutions between the family-the basic unit of social organization-and the state, including not only NGOs but also any other organizations such as political parties and armed groups. Some people use this term even more broadly, encompassing not only the market and the public sphere, but also the family. (Iokibe, 1999) For the present study, instead of taking a broader definition, a relatively narrower definition of civil society had been taken. The definition used in the present study was originally presented by Diamond. Diamond defined civil society as the realm of organized social life that is voluntary, self-generating, (largely) self-supporting, autonomous from the state, and bound by a legal order or set of shared rules. (Diamond, 1994) According to this definition civil society is distinct from “society” in general. Following the above definition civil society can be viewed as a society that generally involves citizens performing cooperatively in a public sphere to communicate their interests, thoughts, passions, preferences, and ideas with some definite aims including exchanging information, achieving some collective goals, making demands on the state, improving the structure and functioning of the state, and holding state officials responsible. Since civil society is considered to be an intermediary sphere between the private sphere and the state, parochial society (such as individual and family life and inward-looking activities including entertainment, recreation, and religious worship) and economic society (e.g. profit-making individual business firms) are misfit in the realm of civil society. Both parochial society and economic society are primarily concerned with private ends, not civic life or public ends. Civil societies are also different from political societies, like political parties. Apart from being voluntary, self-generating, rule abiding, and quite distinct from parochial, economic, and political societies, civil society also entails another important characteristic. It promotes pluralism and diversity. Thus, civil society excludes narrowly minded, fanatical, prejudiced groups like cultural extremist groups, religious fundamentalist groups, militant groups etc. that claim, most of the time via violence, that they are the only legitimate representation in society. (Diamond, 1994) Although it is very often assumed that civil society is almost equivalent to everything that involves non-state activities, those groups that deny pluralism and diversity even though they are non-state actors are excluded from the arena of civil society. In case of Japan, groups like the Aum Shinrikyo , the Japanese Red Army, or various extreme right-wing groups are not considered to be a part of civil society, mainly because they either proliferate the use of violence in order to achieve their set goals or glorify Japan’s violent military past. In spite of having lots of exclusion, civil society encompasses a great range of citizens’ organizations. Diamond provided a list of a variety of civil society organizations that include economic associations; cultural groups that play active role in promoting collective rights, values, and beliefs; informational and educational groups that help in the propagation of information and knowledge in society; interest groups that have been designed to augment the mutual interests of their members; developmental organizations that pool individual resources for improving the infrastructure and quality of life of the community; issue-oriented movements e.g., environmental protection groups, women’s rights organizations; civic groups that have been developed to improve unprejudiced fashion in the political system through human rights monitoring and voter education; and organizations and institutions that are engaged in promoting autonomous, cultural and intellectual activities including independent mass media and publishing houses, universities and think tanks, and artistic associations and networks such as theaters and film production groups (Diamond, 1994). Japanese NGOs who are making substantial efforts to improve Japanese social, political, and cultural life belong to some of these categories, such as informational and educational groups, developmental groups , issue-based movements, etc. However, all the groups that are included in Diamond’s list are not relevant for Japanese NGOs. (Tadashi, 1998) One of the most important question related to Japanese civil society is why until recently were Japanese civil society organizations kept so weak vis-à-vis the state? And along with this question, there is another question relating to Japanese civil society, which is also essential to be addressed to have more or less precise understanding regarding the evolution of Japanese civil society. This second question is if Japanese civil society has recently begun to gain influence in Japanese politics, what factors have contributed to the change? The following section of this paper makes some attempt to answer these questions. The recent Japanese NGO movement, which has strengthened the position of civil society in Japan, can by no means be considered as the first citizens’ movement in Japan during postwar period. Particularly, in the late 1960s Japan witnessed two important citizens’ movements- environmental movement that addressed local pollution problems and anti-Vietnam War movement that was led by Beheiren. Although these movements are very significant in their own capacity, they did not last beyond their particular campaigns and they produced little long-term impact on Japanese civil society. Therefore, it can easily be said that these citizens’ movements did not lead to a vibrant civil society in Japan in the 1960s and 1970s. Researchers attempted to find out the factors that caused these movements to fail in developing dynamic civil society in Japan. (Tadashi, 1998) At the individual as well as organizational levels, various factors may account for this failure. For example, these movements were mainly focused on single issues that did not have any long-lasting relations to other broader questions. Hence, as soon as a given problem that citizens’ groups focused on was solved, the movement disappeared. Apart from this, these movements also lacked strong or charismatic leadership. Adding to these, at the societal as well as state levels, the then-strong Japanese developmental state imposed numerous structural constraints on citizens’ activism and fostered obedience among citizens. All these factors hindered the growth of long-lasting, national movements or coalitions. Prior to 1980s Japanese developmental state was very strong. It is not that during that period there existed no civil society in Japan. Several researchers have found in their study the existence of civil society during that period. However , the interesting thing was that although civil society coexisted with the developmental state during that period, its role was marginalized, and it was subordinate to, and dependent on the state. There are several factors that account for these characteristics of civil society during the period prior to 1980s. First, little attention used to be paid by the development state to non-economic affairs in the sphere of civil society, such as respect for individuals’ rights. This happened primarily because the state’s main goal was rapid economic development. The type of close association that occurred between the state and the private sector or between the bureaucracy and politicians never took place between the state and civil society. Apart from some state-initiated, incorporated organizations that were practically under the paternal protection of the state, all citizens’ groups were kept practically out of the developmental coalition of the state and the corporate sector. (Silberman, 1982) Second, to practice its control in case of promoting economic growth, the developmental state imposed a number of regulations on civil society activities. The development state imposed stringent legal restrictions on citizens’ associations. In particular, the state strongly controlled citizens activities through the maintenance of the Uniform Civil Code that was promulgated in 1896. Under this code, incorporated associations were established only after gaining permission from the responsible bureaucratic agencies. Thus, their establishment was solely depended on the judgment of the agencies with jurisdiction. Incorporated associations functioned mainly as an arm of the states welfare policy and had little basis for purely private activities (Tadashi, 1998; Silberman, 1982). Third, another important factor that significantly strengthened state authority vis-à-vis civil society was the legitimacy of the state performance. The state was not only successful in achieving its primary goal of catching up and surpassing many Western industrialized countries , but it also succeeded in making an improved, relatively evenly , distribution of wealth among the people. During the period of huge economic development, the majority of the Japanese felt they belonged to a vast middle class and viewed the state’s performance highly, thereby provided the bureaucracy additional prestige and power. Many Japanese, who had never been wealthy, became satisfied with the achievement of the state and accepted bureaucratic leadership in navigating Japanese economy and society. (Silberman, 1982) Fourth, some cultural aspects of Japan were also responsible for week state of civil society. In particular, three aspects of Japanese cultural tradition deserve special attention- respect for hierarchy and authority, emphasis on compliance to group interests rather than individual needs, and emphasis on order and stability. These values legitimized social hierarchy and state authority in Japan, emphasized citizens’ obligations and responsibilities rather than their individual rights, and deterred challenges from citizens’ organizations. (Tadashi, 1998; Wakabayashi, 1998) As long as the development state remained powerful no significant growth of civil society took place in Japan. The developmental state, which brought about spectacular economic success in Japan, was started to erode during 1980s. With the erosion of the power of the development state, civil society started to emerge on the scene significantly, and it gained huge momentum during 1990s, particularly after the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake. There was a number of factors which played important role in the development of civil societies. Some of these factors were internal, while some were external. The major forces behind the development of civil society are as follows: First, The severe Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake was a major turning point in the development of civil society in Japan. It is normally believed that , government agencies and the major political parties would have taken many more years to recognize the importance of civil societies, and to pass the NPO Law, had the earthquake not highlighted the activities of volunteers and NPOs. It would be more accurate to say that the earthquake was an event that augmented the speed of the forces already at work in Japan to bring about an important leap forward for civil society, namely, enactment of the law. Without the having any foundation laid in the years preceding the earthquake by dedicated civil society actors, the intensive efforts of many groups and individuals to get the NPO Law passed would not have been successful. (Tadashi, 1998) Second, the maturation of Japan’s industrialization has also contributed to the weakening the developmental state and strengthening the civil society. As Japan became affluent with the help of significant economic growth, it entered an era of post-materialism. Once it achieved the goal of becoming part of the industrialized world, people of Japan have initiated their search for a new identity in the post-industrial age. Japanese people, particularly the youth, have begun their journey in search for non-material or spiritual meaning in life. There have also been taking place post-material value transformations in Japan. Older generations who grew up in wartime Japan have been primarily concerned with traditional societal and material goals in the past, like economic well-being, social security, and law and order. But younger generations in Japan who have grown up in an atmosphere in which most of these traditional goals were relatively assured, are devoting much of their time in achieving post-material goals like social equality, self-expression, personal freedom, and the quality of life. As a result importance of civil society has been increased by manifold. Today, many youth reject the idea of self-sacrifice. They find it absurd to sacrifice their own interest in the same way as their parents’ generation did for the sake of their firms and nation. These younger generations do not like to work more than eight hours a day and spend their free time on hobbies and travel. (Wakabayashi, 1998; Yazaki, 1968) In addition, the maturisation of Japanese industrial society has brought about and made obvious the negative effects of the developmental policies of the development state. The developmental state has begun to deteriorate by the very source of power that drove the Japanese growth. The exclusive developmental alliance of the bureaucracy, politicians, and the private sector produced close working relations between them and fostered an environment where corruption prevailed. In the 1990s, the public learned about a series of corruption cases involving not only politicians and business representatives but also elite bureaucrats who had previously been considered trustworthy. the result was that public lost their faith on developmental state. The deterioration of the supreme power of developmental state paved the way for the growth of civil society. (Salamon, 1994; Minichiello, 1998) Third, there are a set of diverse external factors that have contributed to the development of civil society in Japan. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro is widely acknowledged as a significant event for Japan’s NGO movement as this conference offered a huge boost to the Japan’s NGO movement. Japan’s NGOs also gained momentum through successive UN conferences. Even prior to the 1992 Rio conference, Japanese NGOs started to emerge in response to changing external environments. In 1979, there established a number of NGOs in Japan to support Indochinese refugees. In the late 1980s, the international NGO movement for addressing global environmental issues inspired the founding of many environmental NGOs in Japan. In Asia the increasing number of regional networks among NGOs also encouraged participation by Japanese NGOs, and thus stimulated their growth. Another recent international phenomenon that has influenced the development of Japan’s civil society is the remarkable growth transnational civil society. Transnational civil society refers to the set of mutual networks of civil society organizations addressing global issues. (Tadashi, 1998.; Minichiello, 1998; Tadashi, & Yoichi, 1995 ) Japanese NPOs have become more exposed to the international trend of NPOs . Japanese NPOs now play a bigger role in society and have become more aware of the need for enhancing their infrastructure and social recognition. They have also become keenly aware of various factors inhibiting their growth and become motivated to work to remove the serious impediments to the development of the NPO sector in Japan. (Tadashi, 1998; McCarthy, 1992) Conclusion: In the early years after the end of World War II, the main feature of Japan’s NGO movement was that it was antigovernment and anti corporate. During that period, Japan was profoundly influenced by the ideological conflict between the socialist-communist camp and the democratic–free market camp. Those who were involved in the NGO movement were labeled as left-wing elements. This image has, however, changed significantly, in recent years, especially after the end of the cold war. Many NGOs, now more commonly called NPOs, were formed to address the issues like home care for senior citizens, protection of environmental, foreign labor, social welfare, protection of consumer interest . A partnership between NPOs and municipal governments has started to emerge to address social issues in local communities. NPOs have been found to be particularly effective in areas where government bureaucracy is not sufficiently flexible or lack adequate resources to respond effectively. As social needs and values have become more diverse and the government budget become more constrained, the space for NPOs has considerably widened. (Hirata , 2002; Salamon, L. M. 1994) In recent times, particularly after the massive earthquake of 1995, more and more corporations have started to find partnership with NPOs for devising a useful approach for satisfying the interests of their stakeholders. The sense of good corporate citizenship that corporations acquired through their overseas experience has been strengthened by the consciousness that corporations must meet the pluralistic interests of society. In 1991, Hiraiwa Gaishi, the president of Keidanren (Japan Federation of Economic Organizations) introduced the concept of kyosei as a guiding principle of corporate activities. The meaning of kyosei is “symbiosis”, and it refers to the Japanese business concept of interdependence and mutual prosperity—hence, in this context, a need to promote good corporate citizenship. Although some support was extended by corporate to civil society, this supprt was limited. And the picture has not change dramatically in recent years in this respect. Corporate support for NPOs is still limited. But what is important is that it has greatly helped in reorganization of NPOs as a constructive social force. (Nancy, 1991) Media also provides its huge support for civil society in Japan. The media had started paying attention to the importance of civil society even before the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, and the media coverage raised people’s awareness about the contributions NPOs could make to society. At present civil society is considered to be an important aspect of social, cultural and political life of Japan. Japanese NGOs, NPOs plays significant role in the development of different aspects of society. NGOs, NPOs are more active in those areas where the government agencies find it difficult to operate because of their in competencies. References 1. Tadashi, Y. (eds) 1998. The Nonprofit Sector in Japan. Manchester, U.K.: Manchester University Press. 2. Diamond, L. (1994). Rethinking Civil Society: Toward Democratic Consolidation, Journal of Democracy, 5(3): 4—17 3. Silberman, B. S. 1982. The Bureaucratic State in Japan: The Problem of Authority and Legitimacy, in T. Najita and V. J. Koschmann (eds) Conict in Modern JapaneseHistory: The Neglected Tradition. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 226–57, p. 231. 4. Iokibe, M. 1999. Japan’s Civil Society: An Historical Overview, in T. Yamamoto (ed.) Deciding the Public Good: Governance and Civil Society in Japan. Tokyo: Japan Center for International Exchange, pp. 51–96, p. 75. 5. Wakabayashi, B. T.(eds) 1998. Modern Japanese Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 147–206. 6. Minichiello, S. (eds) 1998. Japan’s Competing Modernities. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, pp. 1–21. 7. Yazaki, T. 1968. Social Change and the City in Japan. Tokyo: Japan Publications. 8. Smith, H. D. 1978. Tokyo as an Idea: An Exploration of Japanese Urban Thought until 1945. Journal of Japanese Studies, 4 (1): 66. 9. Baron, B. F. (eds) 1991. Philanthropy and the Dynamics of Change in East Asia. New York: Occasional Papers of the East Asian Institute of Columbia University. 10. McCarthy, K. D. et al. ( eds) 1992. The Nonprofit Sector in the Global Community: Voices from Many Nations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. 11. Tadashi, Y. & Yoichi ,F. 1995. The Role of Non-state Actors in International Affairs: A Japanese Perspective.. Tokyo: The Japan Center for International Exchange. 12. Nancy R. 1991. Japanese Corporate Philanthropy. London. New York: Oxford University Press. 13. Tadashi, Y. (eds) 1995. Emerging Civil Society in the Asia Pacific Community. Tokyo: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies and Japan Center for International Exchange. 14. Michio, K. (eds) 1993. Data Book on Japanese Local Grassroots Organizations in International Cultural Exchange. Kondo Michio, ed. Tokyo: The Japan Forum, 1993 15. Hirata , K. 2002. Civil Society in Japan: The Growing Role of NGOs in Tokyos Aid Development Policy, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 16. Salamon, L. M. 1994. The Rise of the Nonprofit Sector. Foreign Affairs 74(4):109–122. Read More