Don’t concentrate everything in Tokyo
TOKYO —
Common sense usually advises us against putting all our eggs in one basket. When it comes to investing, rarely does one invest all his/her money in a single company. Backups of important pictures and documents are usually stored on multiple hard drives to prevent the total loss of data.
Being conversant in more than one language opens opportunities to work in a variety of environments around the world, without being limited solely to countries (or the country) in which your native language is spoken. A singular dependence on anything is usually detrimental and at best self-limiting, and it would be wise to allocate one’s resources in multiple places rather than devoting everything to a single task, skill or resource.
Japan, however, seems to be acting against wisdom in its concentration of all functions and industry in the nation’s capital of Tokyo. Home to one out of every four Japanese, job opportunities draw individuals from across the country to the city of 13 million (40 million when the Greater Tokyo Area is considered). Most major corporations are headquartered in Tokyo and the majority of government functions are concentrated in the districts of Nagatacho and Kasumigaseki. Tokyo’s population only continues to grow, and is projected to be the world’s largest megacity at 36 million people by 2025.
Though the country has always been rather urban-centric, the concentration of both people, industry and administration in Japan will present a significant problem to the Japanese in the years ahead. The combination of an aging population and migration to the nation’s capital may place excessive strain on the country’s deeply burdened healthcare system.
Tokyo’s transport infrastructure systems would have to be expanded to accommodate the influx of new migrants. Housing in Tokyo, oftentimes described as nothing more than rabbit hutches, would shrink further in an effort to fit more people in the same amount of space. More cars would be on the same roads; more sewage would have to be get rid of, and more resources would have to be dedicated to Tokyo. More money would have to be spent to keep supply and capacity ahead of surging demand.
But would this really be the smart thing to do? Is it really necessary to build new watermains, new subways and new hospitals to accommodate the growing population in a time of economic turmoil? Is it worth paving new roads and building new, grand condominiums? Does the cost of these projects really justify the over-centralization of everything in Tokyo?
Although it makes for a great sight for tourists and is inherently convenient for those who live in it, the centralization of Japan’s population in Tokyo is both unnecessarily expensive and an inherently risky move. A new report by a government panel suggests that another tsunami may be triggered by another major earthquake within the next 30 years.
Although memories of the March 11 earthquake are burned deep in the memories of all across Japan and around the world, the potential for an exponentially greater disaster exists with the existence of a 36-million strong coastal megacity just steps away from the Pacific Ocean. Supplies of food to Tokyo would quickly be exhausted in the event of a future food crisis, whose possibility grows more likely with every passing day. Those in the city would be among the first hit by global economic turmoil, and ministries will find it difficult giving both aid and job opportunities to the swathes of unemployed and homeless that would follow an economic recession.
Even if everything were going according to plan, the government would have to spend an unnecessarily exorbitant sum expanding public infrastructure to accommodate the growing population despite the decline in Japan’s overall population. Ironic, isn’t it?
The solution to Japan’s problems, perhaps, is to decentralize everything from Tokyo through providing job opportunities elsewhere. Nobody chooses to live in a rabbit hutch or crowd with hundreds of other people on a packed subway train. The only reason people choose to move to Tokyo to start with is because of job opportunity available in the nation’s capital unavailable elsewhere.
With the Japanese economy in chronic stagnation, it makes sense to want nothing but the best for your career; if Tokyo is the only one that serves your interest, moving to Tokyo is only natural. By providing new opportunities elsewhere, people will be inclined to chase after those opportunities and settle in new places, and in turn relieve Tokyo of the needs of an increased population.
Japan should not concentrate everything in Tokyo. Doing so will only result in unnecessary expenditures and sets the capital up for the risk of a total and complete disaster.
Order by Time Order by Popularity
16 Comments
Login to comment
-5
Daren Afshar
Nice post, Peter. Couldn't agree more.
5
borscht
The second paragraph is not needed but more to the point, 30 years ago I read this same article. It was written by a government official (retired) and shortly thereafter (about 25 years ago), the government actually requested companies to consider thinking about moving out of Tokyo. As you can see, the government didn't move an inch so neither did the companies. I hope I'm around in 30 years to re-re-read a similar article.
1
GW
While I agree & have done many things on a personal level to get the hell outta Tokyo, but until the locals realize, if thats even possible, that they cud make their lives easier, more fufilling, less stressfull by spreading things out it wont change & I have long given up caring, why, because if the locals dont care about their own well being, why shud I.
I just take care of my own, it can be done & let me just say, its definitely the way to go.
And like borscht I have seen this same article many many times over my 2+decades here!
That said Peter, I hope the idiots that run this asylum called Japan hear & heed your call, would make Japan a better place for all, but I dont think thats what the locals want............. whatever
-1
MaboDofuIsSpicy
Where should they go Peter?
11% of the land called Japan was recently put out of commission.
This is a tiny island land and mountainous.
Think about it.
0
GW
Mabo,
There is room outside the yamanote line if one cares to look for it
-3
Maria
Oh good god people, get over yourselves. So you're getting old, and have been around longer than this guy. So what? Since this idea has been around a while and yet hasn't been implemented, why not comment on possible reasons? and not just react a stompy, door-slamming and rather immature "if the locals dont care about their own well being, why shud I." kind of way!
-2
Maria
Oh good god people, get over yourselves. So you're getting old, and have been around longer than this guy. So what? Since this idea has been around a while and yet hasn't been implemented, why not comment on possible reasons? and not just react in a stompy, door-slamming and rather immature "if the locals dont care about their own well being, why shud I." kind of way!
1
NinjaDave
Lt's make it clear, many things will be concenrated in Tokyo, it is the capital after all. There are also many other gs outside of the capital.
1
Mark_McCracken
"Japan, however, seems to be acting against wisdom in its concentration of all functions and industry in the nation’s capital of Tokyo."
Inaccurate. Manufacturing facilities are widely distributed throughout the country.
3
hatsoff
Unfortunately this essay doesn't discuss any solutions, and thus becomes just a form of elaborate moaning or a pointing out of the obvious. How about discussing how offering corporate tax incentives for relocation could help solve the problems of a depopulating countryside, with its current negative effects on infrastructure (closure of schools, libraries, and imbalance of elderly and young).
Why write "The solution to Japan's problems, perhaps, is to decentralize everything from Tokyo through providing job opportunities elsewhere" without adding any details or examples? The writer could have discussed Tsukuba Science City here, which was created to address the very problems he mentions - the decision to do this was made in the 1960s. By 1980 there were 43 research and education organizations there. Now there are around 200. The population has grown to nearly 200,000. This move has regenerated the area. (And I didn't know this until I did a 30-second check on the Internet, so it's not hard to do.)
-1
Cos
I've seen them moving out to Tokyo....to Shanghai, Singapore, etc. The Japan of 40~30 years ago (the only country of Asia that was in the economic race) no longer exists. Then the importance of the big capital cities has also become less important as you can start a Silicon Valley in the middle of the woods. It's neither bad nor good.
No. These are the decorative offices. J-government is operating from Washington D.C. and multinational companies from many different places. Don't worry, they have always had eggs in the offshore tax paradise baskets. If that bit of Tokyo sunk, nothing would cease to function. I don't worry for the companies and government. Of course, a disaster in Tokyo would makes more victims than one in the middle of Sahara. That's an issue for zones that concentrates a lot of population. The question is more about rescue logistics. If 1 million of people require medical care in Tokyo, while local hospitals can't operate, what is the back up rescue plan ?
0
Cos
Ah a typo... I mean "moving out of Tokyo".
0
Husain Alamri
@MaboDofuIsSpicy
Chugoku, Shikoku, Kyushu, Hokkaido and Northern Tohoku.
0
Frungy
So just move the capital. Nara is nice and was the capital once before. I bet the politicians would appreciate the change of scenery.
1
MaboDofuIsSpicy
Where did Peter's comment go?
Husain, if you have been to those other places you would see that they are crowded too.
0
ebisen
Peter - while generally everybody agrees, it's very much "Shouganai"... There's nothing to do about... Of course the government is supporting country-side development, small industry, etc, but, especially during semi-hard times we experience now, more and more people will try their luck in the biggest of all places... There is still enough space either in West Tokyo (1 hour to Tokyo station) or in East - Chiba - 45-60 minutes)... The problem is that soon the total length of the trains will be bigger than the length of the tracks they are running on.. Still, I think Saitama, NW of Chiba and West Tokyo still has a lot of potential for further development.
Back to top