Organizer: Robert J. Pekkanen, Harvard University
Chair: Susan J. Pharr, Harvard University
Discussant: Sheldon Garon, Princeton University
The panel treats themes that have excited recent interest among political theorists, historians of China, and analysts of Eastern Europe, but that have seldom been taken up in the Japanese case. While much attention has been paid to labor unions, some business interest groups, and citizens’ movements, relatively little has been written about associational life and social capital in the Japanese context. In Molding Japanese Minds, Sheldon Garon presented a provocative and to date the most coherent consideration of these issues, and is thus an ideal discussant.
This panel speaks to many of the same issues in different voices. No scholar has gone further than Yutaka Tsujinaka in looking at interest groups in Japan broadly and comparatively. Drawing on the database he has assembled, he extends his earlier work with a focused analysis of Japan’s associational structure, and offers an explanatory framework for the changes he sees. He also provides systematic comparisons with the United States and Korea. Susan J. Pharr focuses explicitly on social capital, and extends Western theory by challenging claims that all forms of social capital nurture good government. Her paper uses data from the 1996 Japan Election and Democracy Survey (which she undertook with a binational team of scholars headed by Bradley Richardson and Uchida Mitsuru), one of the first comprehensive surveys of Japanese political orientations and attitudes since the new electoral system was put in place. Darryl Flaherty draws on archival work on the Meiji and Taisho lawyer association to single out one set of interests, and provides both depth and a longer-term perspective to the panel. Robert Pekkanen’s paper steps back to problematize the political context in which these organizations form. He asks why we get the configuration of interests we see in Japan over time, and focuses on the role of the state in structuring interests for his answer.
The panel blends empirical macro-level work, historical research, broad arguments, and cutting-edge theoretical exploration. Drawing on a growing literature in the social sciences, this panel will bring a multi-disciplinary perspective to Japan’s associational activities.
Is Social Capital Always . . . Capital? Civic Engagement vs. Clientelism in Japan
Susan J. Pharr, Harvard University
With the appearance of Making Democracy Work (Putnam, 1993), social capital became coin of the academic realm, and claims of its merits abound. Based on Western experience, "social capital" is treated as virtually synonymous with social connectedness, civic engagement, and civic-ness, all of which, flourishing at the grassroots of society, are thought to nourish good government. From dense social networks and a rich associational life come social trust and a healthy democracy, or so it is claimed.
Drawing on the burgeoning new literature on social capital and civic engagement, and utilizing data from the NSF-funded 1996 Japanese Elections and Democracy Survey (JEDS) as well as other data sets, this paper takes a new look at Japan from a social capital perspective. It asks two questions: (1) Is Japan social capital rich or poor? According to Francis Fukuyama (1995) and much prior research, is Japan a high social trust nation with "communitarian capitalism" (Thurow 1993; Vogel 1987) and a vibrant associational life with roots that go back to the rich capital stores of prewar Japan, with its dense social networks, still used for mobilizing the conservative vote (Hastings 1995). However, confounding such a view, much recent cross-national research shows Japan well behind many of its Western counterparts both in its number of interest groups and in social trust. How are we to reconcile the competing evidence? (2) The social capital literature provides few clues for distinguishing between forms of association and social connectedness that lead to "civic-ness" and those that support clientelism. Thus we ask, Is social capital always . . . capital? Looking separately at attributes such as degree of social connectedness, types of group memberships, and other factors, the paper focuses on citizens to unravel the relationship between different types of social capital, on the one hand, and citizen orientations towards government, on the other.
Japan’s Maturing Civil Society and Its Interest Associations in Comparative Perspective: Japan, Korea and U.S. in the 1990s
Yutaka Tsujinaka, Tsukuba University
Civil society and the associations that form its basis are the continuing focus of empirical and theoretical analysis. This paper takes an empirical look at Japan, and at the cross-cultural comparative cases of the United States and Korea.
Using a random sampling, civil society associations from the strata between for-profit corporations and government were surveyed in 1997 in Japan and Korea. On the basis of this survey and the statistical data of group establishment in Japan, Korea and the U.S., this paper offers one perspective on civil society and its associations and explores their socio-political impact.
The paper then focuses on the steady proliferation of associations in the 1980–90s in the field of welfare as well as international, community, environment, political, and especially citizen-initiated associations referred to as NPOs and NGOs. The paper examines the relative pluralization in the configuration of interest groups since the 1970s and identifies a change in Japanese society from the osmotic corporatist to the liberal pluralist pattern.
In addition, this paper quantifies Japan’s distinctiveness (compared to Korea and the U.S.) by analyzing three sets of data regarding associations office, number of employees and budget. The association world still ranges from citizens groups on the lower end and business associations on the higher end. Non-profit civil society groups have been expanding in number, size and financial resources. This in turn forced new legislation, the NPO Law in 1998, and may cause a revision of the taxation and subsidy systems.
Civil Society in Japan
Robert J. Pekkanen, Harvard University
What determines the nature and level of organization of civil society in a country? Japan’s civil society is widely characterized as weak and many posit a Japanese cultural deficiency impeding civil society formation. Yet, strong impulses for civil society are seen historically before Meiji, in citizens movements, and recently in the spontaneous volunteer response to the Kobe Earthquake.
In contrast to cultural or sociological causes, this paper emphasizes a political explanation. The key contention is that the Japanese state has shaped civil society. Controlling the legal and regulatory environment and much distribution of financial resources, the state shapes opportunity structures and influences institutionalization of civil society groups. From similarly sized environmental movements in the 1970s, the U.S. movement has crystallized into professionalized NGOs integrated into environmental policy-making processes while the Japanese groups have melted away due to different incentives for institutionalization. Forming a group in the U.S., even obtaining tax benefits under IRS Code 501(c), is straightforward, while forming a "public interest legal person" in Japan involves a permitting process under total bureaucratic discretion. In consequence, there are 26,000 public interest legal persons in Japan, but 1,100,000 U.S. nonprofit groups. Neighborhood associations, definitionally limited to small geographic areas, have flourished. The bureaucracy, which stifles professionalized NGOs, supports NHAs because they intrinsically cannot challenge the bureaucracy as alternate sources of information and expertise. State intentions on civil society are revealed by direct evidence of state action, from the framing of the Meiji Civil Code (1898) to the politics behind 1998s "NPO Law."
Politics by Association in Twentieth-Century Japan: Lawyers Organizing for Influence
Darryl Flaherty, Columbia University
Organized interests have long driven power relations in Japan, yet are often overlooked in political histories that tell of bureaucrats prevailing over politicians, the government suppressing the people, or social movements protesting against the government. This paper focuses in archival detail on the early history of leading lawyer associations (Nihon Bengoshi Kyokai, est. 1897; Nihon Bengoshi Rengokai, 1949) and treats "politics by association" in historical terms.
This paper examines two questions. First, what does the Japanese experience demonstrate about the evolving construction and mediation of links between governments and publics in modern times? One salient feature has been the shift from pleading from a position of subordination (ikki) to petitioning the government from a position of parity. For example, early-Meiji legal representatives (daigen’nin) practiced law in a context much more amenable than that facing their Tokugawa-era predecessors (kujishi).
Second, how have organized interests shaped political practice in spite of hostile governments and frequent appeals by bureaucrats and politicians to "transcend" factionalism? Factions were at the root of lawyer association involvement in legislative politics. In 1925, Hara Yoshimichi of the Japan Lawyers Association engineered a split that confounded opposition to the Public Peace Preservation Law. His establishment of the Imperial Lawyers Association halved professional opposition to the law and led to Hara’s appointment as Justice Minister in 1927.
Current debates in Japan over third sector organizations focus on proliferation. The practices of the modern associational past teaches that autonomous institutional bases are more important than numbers.