Japan Press Weekly

Tweet

2012 June 6 - 12 [OKINAWA]

Okinawa promotion budget flows to mainland Japan

Okinawa often gains attention for its high poverty rate and the large numbers of U.S. military bases along with its rich natural environment.

What kind of measures should the national government take in order to improve the economy in Okinawa? Akahata on June 8 ran an interview with former coordinator of the Cabinet Office Okinawa General Bureau, Miyata Hiroshi, who currently lectures at Okinawa University Graduate School:

The national government has so far spent more than 10 trillion yen for the Okinawa economy after the islands’ reversion to Japan in 1972. Social infrastructure like roads, bridges, and dams has been visibly improved almost to the same standard as the Japanese mainland.

Looking at Okinawa’s economic structure, however, primary industries (agriculture, fisheries) dropped to 1.7% from 7.5% at the time of the reversion. Secondary industries fell to 4.2% from 9.7%, and tertiary industries, the service sector, grew at a rapid rate.

About 40% of working people in Okinawa are contingent workers and the unemployment rate is twice as high as that in mainland Japan. The number of NEETs (young people who are not employed, in education or in job training) and “freeters” (temporary and part-time workers) is dramatically increasing. The per-capita income in Okinawa remains at 70% of that in mainland Japan.

Why has the economy in Okinawa deteriorated to such an extent despite the injection of vast amounts of money?

Half of the public works projects in Okinawa ordered by the Cabinet Office are awarded to mainland-based companies. Just like the Official Development Assistance (ODA), the Japanese government provides a budget to supposedly help developing countries, but the budget in the end flows back to Japanese companies that are awarded the works projects there.

For example, a total of 190 billion yen went to general construction contractors in the mainland over the past 8 years. If the money had circulated in Okinawa, about 25,000 out-of-work Okinawans could have been employed, I estimate. The national government should use the Okinawa development budget to allow local businesses to participate.

Moreover, in the past two decades, the national government has openly used a carrot-and-stick tactic to impose the “relocation” of the U.S. Futenma base within Okinawa in exchange for so-called development. Many public buildings were constructed with the budget of 200 billion yen.

Meanwhile, the development neither created job opportunities nor led Okinawa to be economically independent. Municipalities that received subsidies to build those public facilities are now suffering from a large amount of operating and maintenance costs.

The FY2012 budget of the national government includes 157.5 billion yen for local governments and municipalities to freely use the resources allotted, though the ratio of the government grant to total project cost is below 80%. I fear that the national government may pressure Okinawa to accept the U.S. presence as a precondition to providing the grant.

I believe it is essential to shift from such twisted promotion measures to one closely connected with local people’s daily lives. Their standards of living, especially in the medical, welfare, and education sectors are lagging behind the rest of Japan while 90% of the Okinawa development budget goes to large public works projects.

In the first place, the Japanese government should implement Okinawa development measures in partial compensation for the past tragic history of the exploitation and oppression of Okinawans.

To shed light on the hardships experienced by Okinawans in raising their children and in their struggles to survive from day to day is a challenge that the government must address immediately.