In a recent panel discussion, Shorenstein APARC’s Masahiko Aoki considered the challenges that Japan faces as it prepares for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, and the prospects of the Games being used as an impetus for broader, national change.
“The 2020 Tokyo Olympics and Japan’s Future,” the opening session of the 2014 Yomiuri International Forum “Resurface! Japan” was held April 19 at the Marunouchi Building in Marunouchi, Tokyo.
Cohosted by the Yomiuri International Economic Society and The Yomiuri Shimbun, the forum featured an examination of the 2020 Tokyo Olympics and Paralympics, and a discussion on how the Tokyo Games should be carried out, as well as focusing on issues and prospects for using the Olympics as an opportunity for “Japan’s resurgence.”
The forum was moderated by Satoru Watanabe, senior research fellow at the Yomiuri Research Institute.
Watanabe: What advice do you have based on your experiences at the London Olympics?
Jonathan Stephens: Six years can seem a long time, but it is important to be starting now to plan for those benefits to come...It is important to be looking not just to success in 2020 itself but beyond 2020 to the benefits that you want to realize. And I hope that all parts of the country and all parts involved in organizing the Games come together to agree a clear set of priorities for the benefits to be realized for the future so that all can work together to realize those benefits.
Watanabe: The Olympics can also be considered a cultural festival.
Seiichi Kondo: Japan is a compartmentalized society, so just because there are good museums and concert halls, one plus one doesn’t necessarily equal two. How much can these restrictions be done away within six years? I have high hopes for Gov. Masuzoe.
Yoichi Masuzoe: One way to enjoy [the Olympics] would be to watch sports during the day and spend the evening appreciating art. But public museums close at 5 p.m. I’d like to do something about this, even if just during the Olympics.
Watanabe: How should Tokyo change?
Masahiko Aoki: Tokyo needs to face the fact that an earthquake could occur directly underneath the city. The Great East Japan Earthquake and Great Hanshin Earthquake made clear the importance of countermeasures. It is the host city’s responsibility to ensure safety through “flawless disaster preparations.”
Watanabe: How should the costs for the new national stadium be dealt with?
Masuzoe: In principle, it is the responsibility of the national government. But if a park is to be built around it for the benefit of the residents of Tokyo, that’s something for the taxpayers to consider. The issue shouldn’t be decided through top-level, behind-the-scenes negotiations.
Watanabe: What are your thoughts about the philosophy and legacy of the Olympics?
Masuzoe: It is a festival that crosses barriers of skin color, religion, nationality and language. The Olympics are the best opportunity to recognize the diversity of humankind.
Seiko Hashimoto: Through the Olympics, we can go back to basic questions like, “Why do people play sports?” and, “What do people live for?” Also, in Japan, some things that need to be changed haven’t, and others that shouldn’t be changed have. It’s a chance to take a fresh look at Japan.
Watanabe: Do you have any advice for Tokyo?
Stephens: Now is the time to be thinking about and planning the legacy and the benefits. And I think our other experience is that that planning needs to involve a wide array of organizations and groups across the country. Only a small group of governments and authorities can build the national stadiums and the transport infrastructure that has been spoken about, but to build more people participating in sport, to rebuild communities, to encourage more volunteers—that requires an effort across many local organizations and local community groups and local sports bodies. So it is very important in our experience, to begin to engage those bodies now, both in Tokyo and outside Tokyo, across the country, to encourage them to think about the benefits and how they can realize and use the Games to encourage more participation.
Watanabe: How can the Olympics be used as an opportunity for strengthening athletes?
Hashimoto: One of the training themes the Japanese Olympic Committee employs is that [athletes’] competitiveness cannot increase without enhancing their strengths as human beings. Although Japanese have inferior physiques, we tend to have the qualities of not giving up, a willingness to strive for the sake of others, and solidarity. To burnish these, [athletes] are trained to acquire virtues such as how to treat objects with care. Athletes who have visited the disaster areas experienced a change in attitude. Records are, of course, important, but so is nurturing memorable athletes who have wonderful humanity.
Stephens: I would just add one thing, that in 2020 Japan will have one big advantage. It will have a home crowd. And in London in 2012, the athletes said that performing in front of their home crowd helped them perform even better. Mo Farah, who was the Olympic gold medalist for both the 5,000 meters and the 10,000 meters, said that it gave him extra yards as he turned the final bend. And that home crowd was based on sort of the enthusiasm, knowledge, participation of the British crowd in sport. And so, ensuring that Japan makes the most of that home advantage and that the home crowd gets behind its athletes, I’m sure, will help them perform to their very best.
Watanabe: How should the Paralympics be coordinated with the Olympics?
Hashimoto: This fiscal year, the jurisdiction for the Paralympic Games was transferred from the Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry to the Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Ministry. A sports ministry is expected to be created in or after next April. There are also opportunities in business, medical care and other areas related to athletics for disabled people. The activities of Paralympians could be very beneficial in designing a new Japan.
Kondo: One of the strengths of culture and art is “social inclusion,” or their ability to include people from all different standpoints. This is realized at the Paralympics, so they have great significance in that they can change people’s consciousness.
Aoki: Elderly people have returned to the heart of Tokyo. This is the result of progress made by the metropolitan government in elderly-friendly frameworks in recreation and transportation. Creating a barrier-free city is very important not just for impaired people, but also when thinking about how to build a city that is comfortable to live in.
Stephens: [The Olympics were] an opportunity for London as a city to review how, in terms of public transport and public accessibility, it treated disabled people, but it also, most of all, transformed attitudes. I don’t know if anyone has watched Paralympic wheelchair rugby, but you cannot watch wheelchair rugby and come away thinking that disabled people are weak or need protecting. They bring their wheelchairs together with great crashes; the wheelchairs sometimes break; and the Paralympic athletes just continue going. And I think that portrayed to people that disabled people could be strong, competitive and deserved a full part in society. And that was one of the most lasting benefits from the Games.
Watanabe: It is also important to think about collaborations with the areas affected by the Great East Japan Earthquake.
Kondo: Almost all of the competitions will be held in Tokyo, but cultural events can take place nationwide. We could invite artists from around the world to the Tohoku region, so they can be inspired by living in mountain villages or other experiences. They can learn from Tohoku’s wonderful spirituality.
Aoki: Internationally, it’s vital that the decommissioning of the reactors at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant is carried out in all seriousness. Instead of just thinking about what to do about compensation for the disaster, we should consider whether a framework that has something to say to the world can be linked to the decommissioning effort. It’s also important to learn from Fukushima when thinking about how to prepare for a possible earthquake directly under the capital.
Hashimoto: There has been some discussion about wanting to hold some competitions in Tohoku, but that might be difficult in the present situation. However, serving Tohoku cuisine in the athletes village is one way to convey the message of “Cool Japan.” I also hope all the children in Tohoku can participate in the torch relay. As an event that would give children hopes and dreams, and bring the country together, I hope it can be realized.
Watanabe: How can the Olympics contribute to international relations?
Kondo: I’d like to make them a place where Japanese athletes and athletes from countries that have delicate relations with Japan can share some enjoyment. Although leaders may have their hands tied in politics, I think it’s possible to create a groundswell of grassroots sentiment.
Stephens: The Olympics can be a positive opportunity to bring together people from across the world to participate in a celebration of peaceful competition. And that sets a great example, I think, to the world. Nations want to come together; they want to participate in the Olympics and the Paralympics. The Olympics can’t solve every problem; it’s important to be realistic, but they can be a great symbol of what’s to be gained by competing peacefully with one another.
The English article was originally carried by The Japan News (The Yomiuri Shimbun) on May 10, reposted with permission.
The China-Japan-South Korea-U.S. dialogue on wartime history issues will be conducted on a closed door, background basis, structured to allow for extended discussion along with opportunities for social interaction aimed at creating a long-term network of interested parties. The format, based on Shorenstein APARC’s experience in conducting a multi-year trans-Asian dialogue, will utilize Stanford scholars as resource persons who will frame a series of focused discussions with initial presentations, based on our research, aimed at stimulating constructive dialogue. The participant list includes academic experts from each country; some outside experts; Stanford University participants and representatives of the Trilateral Cooperation Secretariat.
Stanford University
Keynote Speakers
Stanford Center at Peking University
Philippines Conference Room
China’s giant automobile market continues to grow robustly, but its once thriving domestic producers have lost ground recently to global auto giants such as Volkswagen and GM. The excessive optimism of the past, however, has given birth to unwarranted pessimism about the future. The tangled legacy of China’s automotive policy has created numerous dilemmas, but it has also helped to create significant capabilities. A comparison of developments in China with those of other developing economies in East Asia suggests that institutions for promoting industrial upgrading have played a significant role in enabling some countries, such as China and South Korea, to deepen their industrial bases, while others either remain limited to assembling foreign models (as in Thailand and now Indonesia) or have failed to develop a sustainable automobile industry at all (as in the Philippines and even Malaysia). China faces tough policy choices, but it is likely to move, however reluctantly, in a more liberal and competitive direction.
Gregory W. Noble’s specialty is the comparative political economy of East Asia. His many publications include “The Chinese Auto Industry as Challenge, Opportunity, and Partner” in The Third Globalization (2013); “Japanese and American Perspectives on Regionalism in East Asia,” International Relations of the Asia-Pacific (2008); “Executioner or Disciplinarian: WTO Accession and the Chinese Auto Industry,” Business and Politics (co-authored, 2005); The Asian Financial Crisis and the Architecture of Global Finance (co-edited, 2000); and Collective Action in East Asia: How Ruling Parties Shape Industrial Policy (1999). After receiving his Ph.D. from Harvard University’s Department of Government, he taught at the University of California and the Australian National University before moving to Tokyo.
Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT: Daniel C. Sneider; Lisa Griswold
STANFORD, California – Stanford University’s Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (APARC) will convene a Track II dialogue of academic experts from Asia, the United States and Europe to discuss the issues of wartime history that continue to impact relations in the region. The dialogue, “Wartime History Issues in Asia: Pathways to Reconciliation,” is being held on May 11-13 on a closed-door and confidential basis with the goal of offering practical ideas to help resolve tensions surrounding those issues. Shorenstein APARC has been a leader in academic research on the formation of wartime historical memory through its Divided Memories and Reconciliation project, including a ground breaking comparative study of the treatment of the war in the high school history textbooks of China, Japan, the Republic of Korea (South Korea), Taiwan and the United States.
The core participants in this dialogue will be scholars from China, Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK) and the United States, along with Stanford University scholars. Most of these participants have significant experience in previous efforts to foster dialogue and reconciliation on wartime history issues. In addition, select experts on the European experience in dealing with wartime historical memory will contribute.
The dialogue takes place under the co-sponsorship of the Trilateral Cooperation Secretariat (TCS), based in Seoul. TCS is an international organization established by the governments of China, Japan and the Republic of Korea (ROK) in 2011 to promote peace and prosperity among the three countries. Through various initiatives, the TCS strives to serve as a vital hub for cooperation and integration in Northeast Asia.
TCS representatives will attend the dialogue as observers; any expression of opinions will be in their personal capacities. It is expected that the outcome of this dialogue will include a set of forward-looking recommendations to civil society, researchers, and governments. TCS may adopt them for consideration by the governments of China, Japan and the ROK.
“It is my sincere hope that through this joint scholarly endeavor, TCS will be provided with the necessary direction and guidance to follow-up on bilateral efforts at historical dialogue over the past years,” Mr. Iwatani Shigeo, Secretary-General of TCS said in his letter of invitation. “I look forward to your insight and wisdom on ways to promote peace and reconciliation in this region.”
The Stanford dialogue could launch a new effort to resolve wartime history issues in the region. “Our further hope is that this will be an ongoing process, building on previous efforts at bilateral dialogue on history issues that will go beyond this initial meeting,” Shorenstein APARC Director Professor Gi-Wook Shin said in his invitation to participants.
Has the global food price bubble burst, and if so, does it matter? In the first installment of FSE's new Food and Nutrition Policy Symposium Series, Professor Thomas Hertel of Purdue University and Professor Johann Swinnen of Leuven University outlined global trends in the cost of food, and explained how a drop in prices after the food price shocks of 2007-2008 might affect global politics and economics.
What drives food prices?
As population growth and rising incomes put pressure on the global food supply, many scholars consider high food costs to be the "new normal," especially following the food price shocks of 2007-2008. Professor Thomas Hertel challenged this view, saying that "To look forward 45 years, you have to look back 45 years" at what factors actually impact food prices.
Prices for many food commodities fell between 1961 and 2006, despite strong population and income growth, because the world was able to triple crop production during the same period. Since the recent price spikes, the "food price bubble" seems to have burst, with prices falling steadily since 2009.
Although population will continue to grow over the next several decades, the rate of growth is slowing worldwide and is mostly concentrated in developing countries, where per capita purchasing power is relatively low. This minimizes the pressure that population growth puts on the global food supply.
Economic factors may be more influential. "For the first time in history," Hertel said, "income will surpass population as a driver of global food demand." As countries move up the income scale, they consume richer diets of input-intensive products like meat, dairy and processed foods.
Energy prices also influence global food costs. As oil and gas prices rise, demand grows for alternative fuels like ethanol. Half of the increase in corn production over the past several decades came from the growing demand for ethanol, which was fueled by government mandates and which drove up the global price of corn. These mandates have been rolled back in recent years, however, and demand growth for biofuels has waned.
Hertel added that issues around climate change, urbanization, water supply, food waste and deforestation may also impact global food prices in the future.
Many scholars point to crop yields as a way to close the gap between food supply and demand and keep prices low. But Hertel cautioned that scientists and policymakers may be constrained by technical and economic limits.
To further increase yields "is a bigger job than simply doing some more science in the lab," Hertel said. But he noted with optimism that new investments in research and development have risen sharply from both the public and private sector, particularly in countries like China, India and Brazil where food security is a pressing issue.
Impacts of the food price bubble
Professor Johann Swinnen explained that if the food price bubble has in fact burst, the next several years are likely to bring a shift in the politics and economics of global food issues.
The recent bubble coincided with an increase in both policy attention and donor funding to combat food insecurity - a focus that has benefitted both farmers and consumers, but that could wane as prices fall.
While the high prices of 2007-2008 benefited farmers, they in turn hurt low-income consumers in urban areas. And because people in high-density areas find it easier to organize and voice their concerns over government policies, they are more likely to capture media attention.
This "urban bias," as Swinnen described it, influenced policymakers to respond to the heavy media coverage. His team found that after 2007, agricultural funding from the World Bank, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) all rose sharply. The percentage of global development aid targeted toward agriculture also grew.
Swinnen described the social and political conditions of 2007-2008 as a "perfect storm" that shifted the attention of policymakers toward global food security investments. Paradoxically, Swinnen explained, this policy response to urban unrest over food prices ultimately benefitted both rural and urban populations, by boosting agricultural investments for food producers while also helping lower costs for consumers.
The Food and Nutrition Policy Symposium Series will run for three years and will consist of a total of ten lectures spanning a wide range of issues around global food and nutrition policy. It is funded by Zachary Nelson, '84 and Elizabeth Horn. The series follows on the successful two-year Global Food Policy and Food Security Symposium Series which concluded in May 2013 and was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Philippines Conference Room
Shorenstein APARC
Stanford University
Encina Hall E301
Stanford, CA 94305-6055
Sungchul Hong is a visting scholar in Korean studies for the 2013-14 academic year. As vice-chief news correspondent at the Korea Broadcasting System, Mr. Hong has widely covered political and social affairs in both national and international sections.
He holds a BA in sociology from Yonsei University.
