No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
State building, economic development, and democracy in modern Japan 1868-1968
... These were considered to have supported Japan's militarism during the war. between the existing old regime and the leftist political parties, small and medium enterprises, and the labor movement (Tsunekawa 2010), and had a huge influence on industrial policy, which will be discussed next as the essence of Japan's inclusive economic growth in the post-war period. ...
One of the most important global issues we face today is rising inequality in both developed and developing countries. Even if the inequality between countries has converged with the economic growth of emerging states, domestic inequality has worsened. In regional terms, even if the overall economic gap has lessened, African countries still lag behind those in other regions. To change this situation, industrial sector development is certainly important, but to catch up, what African countries need to do is twofold. The first is to move their production possibility frontier (PPF) outward (movement of the PPF curve itself) with innovations. The second way is to assist average firms to reach their production possibility frontier using existing technology (movement toward the frontier). However, these changes may not be enough to tackle the issue of rising inequality in each country. We cannot expect the benefit of industrial development or firm growth to easily trickle down to the poor. Then, how can we make industrial development work for the poor? This chapter tries to answer this question looking back at Japan’s experience.
... (a) purge leaders and public officials who were responsible for the war; (b) abolish the internal security law, giving freedom of expression to the mass media, political parties and organizations; (c) dissolve conglomerates and trusts; and (d) reform land ownership. 3 These policies changed the political balance between the existing old regime and leftist political parties, small and medium enterprises, and labor movements (Tsunekawa 2010). These changes had a huge influence on the industrial policy, which will be discussed next, as an essence of Japan's inclusive economic growth in the post-war period. ...
This paper aims to analyze the factors that have made the economic growth of Japan inclusive in the post-World War II period. The factors identified in this paper are: (1) the GHQ policy to transition Japan from the old regime to a democratic, non-autocratic and non-military country; (2) inclusive industrial development, especially through productivity movement, transferring the relationship with labor from confrontational to constructive; and (3) social security policy, such as UHC (Universal Health Care), to protect people from poverty and starvation, and to improve living standards. These factors are reflected in Japanese ODA policy on poverty reduction. This paper focuses mainly on inclusive industrial development because this is one aspect that East Asian countries have in common, and a good common ground to consider possible future collaboration among East Asian countries to reduce poverty in the region. For future possible collaboration among Japan, China and South Korea, this paper proposes the " horizontal collaboration " approaches. In horizontal collaboration, each donor will implement projects independently, but in parallel under the coordination of the ADB. The projects could be implemented geographically in any sector. The new programs and projects should be implemented in a " starting from small to grow bigger " approach (or a " gradual " approach). This paper proposes to start from an exchange of ideas, good practices, and history, among staff members of donor agencies. If a project starts, then rigorous impact evaluation should be implemented to scale in the future. The ADB should lead the entire process as a neutral partner of all the East Asian countries and donor agencies.
Charles Tilly’s Democracy identifies the general processes causing democratization and de-democratization at a national level across the world over the last few hundred years. It singles out integration of trust networks into public politics, insulation of public politics from categorical inequality, and suppression of autonomous coercive power centres as crucial processes. Through analytic narratives and comparisons of multiple regimes, mostly since World War II, this book makes the case for recasting current theories of democracy, democratization and de-democratization.