Re: [Pen-l] Japanese rice protection

["Anthony D'Costa" <promothesdcosta@xxxxxxxxx>]

I met several Japanese colleagues over the years and most of them do
not believe the economic argument over protection of Japanese farmers.
 In other words, the costs (calculated in a straightforward way) far
outweigh the benefits.  However, there are at least three non-economic
arguments.  The first is that the rice constituency is politically
very strong.  Their numbers are small but they they have considerable
sway over the LDP (liberal democratic party).  Of course there is
nothing liberal about this party, it becomes liberal when benchmarked
with other parties!  The second (perhaps interrelated) reason is that
rice is still sacred among the Japanese, even if Japanese are
generally irreligious.  It might be called a psychic attachment.  The
third reason is the subjective element of taste.  Japanese generally
consider their rice to be distinct in taste, texture, and flavor.
While I am sure substitution is relatively easy, all of these factors
in an interconnected way continue to influence protection of Japanese
rice.

Two other points might be mentioned.  I have come across references
that suggest many farmers are weekend farmers, meaning they have other
forms of employment.  So the idea of welfare support could be
challenged.  Second point is that Japanese rural areas are being
denuded of people due to migration over decades and the population is
ageing.  Brides are brought over from Asian countries so there is
basic security and sustainability question.

Cheers, Anthony
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Anthony P. D'Costa
Professor of Indian Studies
Asia Research Centre
Copenhagen Business School
Porcelaenshaven 24, 3
DK-2000 Frederiksberg
Denmark
Email:ad.int@xxxxxx
Ph: +45 3815 2572
Fax: +45 3815 2500
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 5:40 AM, Gar Lipow <gar.lipow@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 5:07 PM, raghu <mraghu01@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Gar Lipow <gar.lipow@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> It seems overwhelmingly mainstream economic opinion that Japanese rice
>>> protection is without justification, with huge costs to Japanese
>>> consumers and no benefits. Is this a case where the mainstream is
>>> right, or are there legit food securit and social welfare arguments to
>>> be made for being able to produce a staple locally? It is always
>>> interesting to look at the poster children for the conventional
>>> wisdom.
>>
>> Isn't there a strong environmental sustainability argument for growing
>> food locally? In the case of poor countries there is also a strong
>> argument to be made for food self-sufficiency for national security
>> and stability.
>> -raghu.
>>
>
>
> Makes sense. I'd be curious to see a rigorous argument for this
> though. Michael's point is a good one, but I wonder if it is still
> true today.Japan is a much richer nation than in 1971. I suspect the
> sustainability, food security and national security arguments are
> stronger.
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
>



--
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l