A Memo on Rural Life Improvement Movement
Prepared by Akio Hosono (GRIPS)Tokyo, July 6, 2009
The following two documents (contained in this package) can be the most relevant
literature on rural life improvement movement in Japan and other Asian countries:
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) (2002), Research on the Life
Improvement Programme in Rural Japan and the Prospects for Japan’s RuralDevelopment Cooperation.
Asian Productivity Organization (APO) (2003), Rural Life Improvement in Asia
(PDF downloadable http://www.apo-tokyo.org/00e-books/AG-07_RuraLife.htm)
Chapter 1 (by Hiroshi Sato) of the first document appears to be an excellent overview.
From these documents, some relevant aspects on life improvement program in rural Japanare extracted as below:
1. “Rural life improvement movement” versus “rural development”“Rural life improvement movement” in Japan can be compared with “rural development”
as commonly understood in development literature as follows:“Rural development”“Rural life improvement movement”

Objective

Improve quality of life

Improve quality of life

Starting point

What is lacking

What is available

Main approach

Transferring; substituting

Creating; adapting

Important tools

Technology; capital

Information; social capital (mutualhelp, etc.)

Modality of capital

Input from other institutions

input

Input from local government;
self-help of farmers

Protagonist

External experts

Farmers; local leaders

EventsOne shot

Continuous

Main target

Productivity; increase of income

Better quality of life; security; saving

Main concern

As much as possible

As long as possible

Source: Mizuno, Masami and Hiroshi Sato (ed.) (2007), Development in Rural Society: Rethinking Rural Development,
Institute of Developing Economies (IDE, Japan) (in Japanese; translation is tentative)

12. Importance of “rural life improvement”
Mr. Hiroshi Sato, senior researcher of the Institute of Development Economies (IDE) and
one of the most prominent experts on rural life improvement, emphasizes that the processof economic and social development in postwar Japan was impossible without the schemeof “social development,” particularly the achievements obtained by various life
improvements in rural areas. The keyword for social development in rural areas of Japan atthat time was “Seikatsu-Kaizen” (life improvement).
He also states that Japan was able to quickly and broadly distribute the fruits of rapid
growth because social development called “rural life improvement movement” had laid its
groundwork during the twenty years period prior to rapid growth.
Japan in the summer of 1945 faced the same array of problems faced by many of thedeveloping countries today such as food shortage, malnutrition, health deterioration, poor
sanitary conditions as well as the sense of humiliation after being defeated in war andoccupied by the Allied Powers.
3. Gender, rural livelihood extension workers, and its relationship with agriculturalextension workers
The greatest factor behind the success of rural life improvement movement was thededication of the women who became livelihood extension workers (“home advisers”).
Female “home advisers” worked together with male “farm advisors” (agricultural extensionworkers) in extension programs. Livelihood extension workers were expected to be
facilitators who enable rural women to become aware of numerous problems that existed indaily life, and recognize them as problems that need to be solved. They introduced newcontrivances such as improved cooking stoves, improved work clothes, and nutritious food.
Issue-specific specialists were posted in each prefecture to provide logistic support tolivelihood extension workers. This established a system in which specialists in food,clothing and shelter offered advice to livelihood extension workers.
According to Masami Mizuno, there was the notion that “improvement of production andimprovement of livelihood are on equal footing and that solutions of livelihood problems
and uplifting of rural livelihood would lead to the advancement of production activities.”
This was in contrast to the production-oriented approach which argued that “improving theexisting production would automatically improve the quality of life.”2

4. Support of central and local governments and adaptation to local conditions
Extension programs were designed by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
but part of the expenses were borne by prefectural governments. For this reason, while
unified instructions were issued from the central body, programs unique to each prefecture
were also carried out to the extent that the local government budget permitted. Other
ministries such as the Ministry of Health and Welfare (nutritional improvement, birthcontrol, and maternal and child health care) and the Ministry of Education (social education,etc.) also supported rural life improvement movement. While green bicycles were provided
as means of transportation for rural livelihood extension workers, public health care nurses
rode on white bicycles.
The most common target of improvement was cooking stove improvement, followed by thepreparation of preserved foods and the making of improved work clothes. For example,
according to the results of the 1956 national survey on cooking stove improvement, 2.2
million households (38 percent of all farm households) had already improved their cookingstoves, 1.58 million households (27 percent) had improved their cooking stoves after theintroduction of the rural life improvement movement, and 1.47 million households (25percent) were planning to improve their cooking stoves within one year.
5. Roots of rural life improvement movement
Masao Watanabe suggests that rural life improvement movement is similar to the Kaizen
movement in Japanese businesses and that both could have the same roots in Japanese
thinking and practice. Hiroshi Sato endorses this point of view. From the similarities
between the two, Watanabe argues that the idea of Kaizen should be defined as practicing
something continuously and voluntarily with the aim of attaining better conditions byutilizing wisdom learned experientially through daily life.

3