CPIJ

Published by The City Planning Institute of Japan
Ichibancho West Building, 6th Floor Ichibancho 10,

News Letter

Chiyoda-ku Tokyo Japan /zip 102-0082

No.19 July 2001

Edited by The International Affairs Committee of the CPIJ

Tel:81-3-3261-5407 Fax:81-3- 3261- 1874
URL:http://wwwsoc.nii.ac.jp/cpij
Chairman: Yoshihide NAKAGAWA, Prof. of Waseda Univ.

RELOCATING CAPITAL FUNCTION
Japanese Decision-Making Process may realize a Mysterious National Project
organizations in order to help eliminate the excessive
concentration of activities in Tokyo, and to establish a

Editor: Hiroo ICHIKAWA

framework suited to the 21st century for conducting

Meiji University,

political and administrative functions. In December 1992,

School of Political Science andthe Diet passed the Act for the Relocation of the Diet

Economics

and Other Organizations as proposed by Diet members.
The National Land Agency had established aContents:
1. Prologue: What Happens in Japan Now
2. The Significance and Effects of the Relocation
endorsed by its Supporters
3. The Nine Criteria for Choosing Sites
4. Allocations and Location of Facilities in a New City
5. The Selection of Candidate Sites
6. Benefits Questioned by Opponents of Relocation
7. Examining the Arguments to the Relocation of
Capital Function
8. Strong Objections in Tokyo
9. Epilogue: Dream or Nightmare toward a New
Century

Round-table Committee for the Relocation of the Diet
and Other Organizations in 1990, before the Diet
resolution was passed, which had set out the argument
for relocation. Two years later, in April 1993, theInvestigating Committee was established on the base of
the Act for the Relocation of the Diet and Other
Organizations passed the previous December. It was
re-established as the Council in December 1996,
following the partial revision of the Relocation Act inJune 1996.
The Round-table Committee issued a report on thebasic idea in June 1992, that proposed relocating

1. Prologue: What Happens in Japan Now

capital functions, such as the Diet, the Supreme Court

The scramble is on to succeed Tokyo as the future

and the central-government ministries, to somewhere

capital of Japan. The release in December 1999 of awithin 60 to 300km outside Tokyo. The report estimatedcentral governmental Council’s final report on thethat the new capital would have a population of 600,000;

relocationathe relocation cost was estimated to be 14 trillion yen

been(132 billion dollars) excluding money for building ancompetition

of

the
among

capitalfunction

prefecturesthat

intensified
hadsimmering on the back burner for several years.

airport, roads and railways. The largest cost would be

In November 1990, when the Diet reached its
one-hundredthanniversary,

the

House

for land purchases, estimated at 5 trillion yen. However,ofthe originally estimated figures of the population and theRepresentatives and the House of Councilors passed a

relocation cost were decreased to 560,000 and 12.3

resolution on the relocation of the Diet and othertrillion yen in 1998, in response to criticism by groups

organizations. This resolution stated that, as a basic

objecting to the relocation.

policy for rectifying the bias in the overall use of national

After two years and nine months of discussions,land, the government should relocate the Diet and otherfollowing the proposal presented by the Committee, the1

Investigating Committee presented its final report to

relocation of the capital functions under three headings:

Prime Minister in

December 1995. This clarified(1) overall government reform, (2) solutions to thefundamental points regarding the relocation policy,

problems of excessive concentration of activities inincluding “the significance of the relocation of the capitalTokyo, and (3) strengthened disaster preparedness

functions” and “the criteria for selecting candidate

capabilities.

areas.”(2-1) Overall government reform

The Investigating Committee recommended atransfer to a relatively earthquake and volcano-free site,

The process of overall government reform has only

to be chosen in the following two years, within 60 to 300

just begun. An effective stimulus will be needed tokilometers of Tokyo.

In line with the committee's

promote it if the government is truly to be reformed

recommendations, the Diet passed legislation in June

overall. The relocation of the capital functions could

1996 allowing for the establishment of a new committee,

work as an extremely effective means of stimulating thelater named as the Council for the Relocation of the Dietoverall review of the government system, including its

and Other Organizations, that was expected to selectorigins and roots. Combining the work on the relocation

candidate sites for relocating capital functions.

of

The

the

capitalfunctionswitheffortsatoverallCouncil began discussions in the winter of 1996. It

government reform would accelerate innovations in therecommended several sites which were officiallycurrent administration, popularize the new system

recognized as appropriate candidates in January 1998,

among the citizenry, and further promote the tasks ofthen final sites were decided at the end of 1999.

making governmental organizations more efficient whileachieving decentralization. Separating the centers of

2. The Significance and Effects of theRelocation endorsed by its Supporters

politics and economy would initiate a new relationship

The National Land Agency put forward several

as well as help build a horizontal information network

between legislators, bureaucrats, and ordinary citizens

reasons for relocation. It cited problems caused bythatcoverstheentirenation,including

local

centralization of capital functions in the Tokyo area,

communities. This will enable the adoption of policies

including overpopulation, high land prices and lack ofthat are actually desired by the people.

amenities in residential areas. Furthermore, supporters

and spread power to local areas. They also point ed out(2-2) Solutions to the problem of excessive
concentration of activities in Tokyo

that relocation would reduce the risk of destruction of

The increase in the concentration of population incentral government functions in a major disaster like thethe Tokyo area has temporarily slowed during the past

Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake that struck the Kobe

few years when the economy has been sluggish, but thearea in January 1995.

concentration of functions and information is still high inof relocation contend that it would speed deregulation

Relocation may provide a good opportunity forthis area.

The structure that tends to concentrate

both the public administrative and private sectors toactivities in Tokyo still remains, and Tokyo is stillreconsider the relationship with each other. Throughovercrowded. If just the crowded commuter trains andthe relocation, the functions of public administration andthe frequent traffic jams are taken as example, the pain

the economy would be physically separated, as in thecaused by these phenomena is far beyond the tolerable

case of Washington D.C. and New York in the U.S. Thislevel. If relocation of the capital functions stimulates

might result in a reduction in regulation and themore extensive efforts at overall government reform,

centralization of power.

people will be able to free themselves of the obsessive

Most recently, after many twists and turns, thebelief that Tokyo is at the top of the hierarchy thatagency summed up the significance and effects of thegoverns all that exists in Japan. At the same time, local

2

communities will become more aware of the importanceThe committee recommended that potential sitesof self-support and will be more likely to foster their own

be equally accessible from any part of the nation, becultures. Companies will no longer be unwilling to build

within 40 minutes of an international airport, and have atheir headquarters outside the Tokyo area.

maximum of 9,000 hectares of land available for thefacilities.

(2-3)

Strengthened

disaster

preparedness

The final report made no mention on

relocating the Bank of Japan and the Tokyo Stockcapabilities

Exchange,apparently

indicating

thecommittee'sWith Tokyo as highly concentrated as it is, a great

support for moving political functions but keeping

earthquake would be an enormous disaster. Coreeconomic institutions in Tokyo. It also said that the top

functions all over the nation would stop, resulting in apriority should be given to shifting the Diet from Tokyo,

serious crisis that could affect not only Japan, but

based on the idea that central government ministries

foreign countries as well. At present, central and local

and agencies would have no choice but to follow suit.

government in Tokyo could not function properly to

The nine criteria are as follows:

control and manage such a crisis without a great deal of(1) Location in the Japanese archipelagodifficulty. The relocation of the capital functions would

The site must not have any great disparity of accessmake it possible to avoid simultaneous damage to allfrom all parts of Japan.

the nation's centers, including those for politics, public(2) Distance from Tokyoadministration, business, and culture.

If the crisis

The site must be between about one to two hours (bymanagement function that should work in the event oftrain), and between about 60 to 300 kilometers away

disaster were to be relocated to an area that is muchfrom Tokyo. However, it must not be part of the greater

safer

Tokyo Metropolitan Region.

frompreparedness

major

disasters,

capabilities

wouldJapan'sbedisasterconsiderably(3) International airport

strengthened.

The site must be served by an airport that is (or will be)capable of handling the aircraft carrying the heads of all

3. The Nine Criteria for Choosing Sites

the various countries, that is no more than about 40

The final report presented by the Investigating

minutes' travel time from the center of the site, and that

Committee to the Prime Minister in 1995 defined nine

will definitely be in service no later than ten years fromselection criteria for choosing sites.

now.

The report submitted envisaged that administrative(4) Ease of land acquisitionand legislative functions as well as the Supreme Court

The site must allow prompt and smooth acquisition ofwould be relocated, but Tokyo would remain the capitallarge tracts of land. It needs about 2,000 hectares

city since the Imperial palace would stay put.

It is,

during the first phase alone, and land suitable for

however, unfortunate that the definition of “Capital” hasdevelopment of a group of cities with a final combined

remained unclear. Some supporters of relocation

population of about 600,000 at maximum

consider that the Capital City needs only the Parliament(5) Safety from earthquakes and other disasters

and some administrative bodies. It may seem strange

Sites which are at risk of serious damage in the event ofthat, on the one hand, central government has justa major earthquake are to be avoided, as are sites inrecently rebuilt the Prime Minister’s official residence

which volcanic eruptions could cause serious damage.

but has pursued the discussion of relocation on the(6) Safety against other natural disasters

other hand. Furthermore some of major governmental

Full provisions must be made to ensure that otherbuildings have, bit by bit, been newly rebuilt in thenatural disasters do not greatly disrupt the activities in

Kasumigaseki area or in other administrative complexes

the new city.

around Tokyo.

(7) Quality of the terrain, etc.

3Sites at very high elevations or with steep slopes are to
be avoided.
(8) Stability of the water supply
Sites in which the development of a city with apopulation of 600,000 could put more of a strain on thewater supply than does the current national capital are
to be avoided.
(9) Distance from other cities
The

site

must

be

far

enoughaway

fromcabinet-designated cities so that it would not be affectedby "urban sprawl" from them. [Note : There are currently【Figure1: Clustered Allocation in a City】

twelve “designated” cities, eleven of which have a
population of more than a million outside Tokyo. Under

5. The Selection of Candidate Sites

the Local Autonomy Law, they take over some
important functions prefectural governments.] Sites that

The Council, responding to a request for advice

are more than 300 kilometers from central Tokyo could

from the Prime Minister in December 1996, conductedbeinvestigations and considered candidate sites for theconsidered

if

they

are

equipped

with

great

advantages in respect of the other criteria.

relocation of the capital functions over approximately
three years, holding a total of 31 meetings.

4. Allocations and Location of Facilities ina New City

as a major tool for the comprehensive and objective

In 1997 the Council proposed a revised plan which

evaluation and the impartial selection of candidate sites.

was in three phases. As a first phase, construction is

It then advanced the selection of the candidate sites

planned over about ten years, before the Diet opens its

through diversified and multifaceted deliberations.

first session at the new location. Phase 1 will cover the

The results of the selection was as follows:

relocation

of

the

necessary

minimum

The Council adopted a unique "weighting method"functions,- Tochigi-Fukushima region and Gifu-Aichi region.

including relocation of the Diet and construction of the- Ibaraki region has superior features such as freedom

new city with a population of about 100,000 and an areafrom risks of natural disasters, and is expected to play aof 1,800 hectares. The facilities built during phase 1 willrole of supporting the Tochigi-Fukushima region.

include the Diet Building, the Prime Minister's official- Mie-Kio region has unique features. Provided that a

residence,

new high-speed transportation network is developed inministry

andagencybuildings,

aninformation center for activities in the event of

the future, it may be considered as a candidate site.

earthquake or other major disasters, a public squaresymbolizing the new city, houses, and other residential

Capital functions will not work very well from theaccommodation. The new capital will have good links

beginning without the cooperation not only of majorwith Tokyo through transportation and information

cities such as Tokyo, Sendai, Nagoya, Osaka and Kyoto,communication facilities.

but also of other region in the areas under investigation.

The second phase will have the second half of the

Lobbyists for the prospective locations are making theplanned facilities in an area of 4,800 hectares withrounds in Tokyo's Kasumigaseki district, wielding

population of 300,000, whilst the final phase willslogans that sound like marketing pitches for holiday

complete the remaining buildings expected in a newresorts. They boast of convenient transportation, natural

capital which, in the future, will cover 8,500 hectares

beauty and disaster-free geography.

and have a population of 560,000.

4necessary.

Rather, a more realistic and effective

6. Benefits Questioned by Opponents ofRelocation

options to the solution of Tokyo ’s problem would be to

Opponents of relocation reject such arguments.

government administrative organizations, etc., to areas

decentralize the power and to disperse the national

They say, for example, that even if 600,000 people

adjacent to Tokyo.

move to a new capital from Tokyo, crowding in Tokyo's

Although Tokyo still has shortcomings as ancommuter trains will not improve much. It will not beinternational city, it is a safe city that has a convenient

enough to ease Tokyo's traffic snarl-ups, solve its

public transportation network, and it offers a full range of

massive garbage disposal problems, or turn it into a

arts and culture. In addition, new investment into themore livable city. They also contend that the relocation

deteriorated infrastructure in Tokyo will bring about acost will be much more than the estimated 14 trillion yen

recover in its international competitive position inand that moving the capital will cause the government torelation to other rival major cities overseas.

stop seriously considering anti-disaster measures in

It agrees with the widely held opinion of urban

Tokyo.

economists that Tokyo's population has not become

Tokyo Metropolitan Government is angry andhuge because the central government is located there,

remains opposed to this project. The reason is that theand that further economic activities are most efficient insocio-economic situation has changed dramaticallyTokyo where there is a highly multi-functional stock ofsince 1990 and the move is certainly not at all

facilities. A move would just be a waste of money,

5

because benefits of relocation cannot cover the costs.

11.4 trillion-yen), excluding the cost for land purchases.
Furthermore, from input-output flow analysis, it is

7. Examining the Arguments
Relocation of Capital Functions

to

the

estimated that the construction will leverage 25.3
trillion-yen into the production industry. It shows that the

Careful consideration of the fact that lies behindpublic investment generates production of as much as

the project is really needed in order to attempt to judge

2.8 times of the original value. If the construction is tothe validity of the six major arguments on which thetake 10 years, there will be an economic effect (value

proposal to relocate capital functions are based. The

added bas e) of 1.3 trillion-yen annually. The amount

six arguments are: 1) mitigation of over-concentration incorresponds to almost 0.3% of the Japan’s GDP, which

Tokyo Metropolitan Region, 2) priming of the economy,

was 465 trillion-yen in 1995. Since the Japan’s annual

3) reducing the risks to the capital functions, 4)

GDP growth is only 1% at present, it will have abalancing of the national land structure, 5) lifting of thesignificant, although not dramatic, effect. However, thisnation's morale, and 6) acceleration of governmentis a macro-economic simulation. If the same simulation

reform and decentralization.

is applied individually to the three candidate sites, theeconomic effect is going to be significantly lower since(7-1) Mitigation of over-concentration in Tokyo
Metropolitan Region

those sites are located in relatively low productivity
areas. It is suggested that the effect on the Japanese

The negative effects of over-concentration ofTokyo

include:trafficcongestion;

economy as a whole could even be negative.

long-distance(7-3) Management of risk to the capitalcommuting; poor housing; waste problem; and difficultyof securing enough water and energy resources.

Since the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake in 1995,

However, if we look at the congestion of commuting

thetrains, for example, a simulation shows that the

management for cities has become clear to many

relocation of capital functions reduces the rate ofJapanese. It is easy to imagine that if an earthquake

congestion only by 3%. This means that the rate ofhits the brain (Tokyo), the body (all of Japan) will becongestion, measured as 200% in 1997, reduces tototally paralyzed. However, compared to the present

197%, which is still far from the target rate of 180%. The

day Tokyo Metropolitan Region, which covers Tokyo

result of the simulation shows that the relocation barely

and three neighboring prefectures, the size of thehas any mitigating effect on the congestionofplanned new capital is only 2% in residential population

commutingofand 1.5% in working population. This means that 98%

trains.

Although,thecongestion

commuting trains is only one aspect of Tokyo’s urban

importanceofdisasterprevention

and

risk

of economic functions will still remain in Tokyo.

problems, the simulation implies that the basis for the

A question here is , “is the relocating of the central

argument that the relocation can provide a resolution todecision making body to a newly built city the only way“the Tokyo problems” is very weak from a quantitative

to manage the risks to the capital?” An alternative, if theperspective.

capital functions were to remain in Tokyo, would
possibly be to build a backup system by moving(7-2) Priming of the economy

selected

capitalfunctions

and

risk

management

There is a great expectation among not just a few

headquarters to several core business cities in theeconomic institutions of a large-scale public investment,

Metropolitan Region and other existing major cities, andwhich would revitalize the stagnant Japanese economy.

networking them.

For construction of a new capital, it has been estimatedalternative way of managing risks to the capital.

that investment needed in infrastructure and buildings
will be as high as 9 trillion-yen, (later adjusted upward to

6

This is a much more realistic

(7-4) Balanced national land structure

governmental system, which has its origins in the highly

There is a concept of creating a balanced national

centralized government system established in wartime.

land structure while creating National Development

Therefore, the relocation can be a force promoting

Axes. The word ‘balanced’ here refers to a balanced

government reform and decentralization.

development between urban and rural areas.

From a physical perspective, building of a capital

Brasilia in Brazil is one example that tried towith a population less than 600,000 can hardly change

develop undeveloped rural area by building a new

the polarization of Tokyo (with a population of 3.25

capital. The capital which was completed in 1960 ismillion in the Metropolitan Region). So the argument islocated in the plateau area at the center of the nation,

important in the sense that it focuses on the need towith the intention of shifting developments that havereview the centralized system which is causing the

been concentrated in the South to the undeveloped

polarization of Tokyo.

Northern area of the Amazon. Brasilia is located as far

provides a chance for review. If government reform is

as 940km from the former capital, Rio de Janeiro.

really needed, reform itself is the action which needs to

However, the last report prepared by the Investigating

be taken first. It is escapism to say that the relocation

Committee concludes that the new capital should beitself can smooth the way for government reform, whenlocated 60 to 300km from Tokyo.

there are many other issues to be resolved.

Even taking in

However, the relocation only

account the difference in size of Japan and Brazil, the

8. Strong Objections in Tokyo

distance is not enough to achieve the objective ofpromoting development in undeveloped rural area.

Under the politically influential leadership of theGovernor Ishihara, Tokyo Metropolitan Government is(7-5) Lifting of the nation’s morale

strongly opposed to the relocation. As one of main

This argument says that the capital relocating

reasons for opposition, it criticizes the procedure

project will be the ‘new goal’ which will unite the nation

exclusively initiated by the central government. That isin a common ideal, breaking through the present

to say, the central government has acted too rapidly instagnant mood caused by the bursting of the “babble

promoting the relocation project as a policy with aeconomy” of the late 1980s.

first-order

Around the world, there are around 20 precedents
for relocating capitals.

priority

but

withoutanyreasonably

acceptable reasons for most people. He claims that theThe backgrounds to thosecentralgovernment

pays

littleattentiontotherelocations vary. Some examples are at the time ofdisadvantages, ignoring a balanced view, particularly

independence of the nation, major political reform, forwithout respecting the important historical stock which

ethnic unity, or to balance the national land structure.

has been accumulated in Tokyo over several hundred

Although backgrounds may differ, many of those haveyears.

aimed at uplifting the nation’s morale.Compared to the

On 3rd September 1999, the Bureau of Policy andstate of those countries, it seems an exaggeration to

Information

at

Tokyo

Metropolitan

Government

say that our national morale needs uplifting, considering

announced the results of an opinion poll on "life as aour present day situation.

It is a forced analogy toTokyo resident”. Asked to state their opinion on moving

praise the relocating as an “important national project”

the capital, citizens who did not feel the need for any

which can break through the nation’s stagnant mood.

move accounted for about 57 percent and greatly
outnumbered those who felt there was a need at about(7-6) Acceleration of government reform anddecentralization

16 percent.
The 40th conference of heads of seven prefectures

The last major argument is that the relocation
providesachancetoreview

Japan’sand cities which constitutes the Tokyo Metropolitan

present

Region7(Tokyo,Saitama,

Kanagawa

and

Chiba

Prefectures, and Yokohama, Kawasaki and Chiba

greater number of people.

Cities), was held on 11th November 1999, and theHistory has shown that most Japanese large-scaleparticipants considered their objections to the relocation

projects have been planned and implemented within aof the capital function. One of the main reasons is thatclosed circle, which is not open and the majority ofthechangedpeople to see no visible benefits resulting from suchdramatically since the resolution on the Relocation ofprojects. The twenty-first century opened in Japan with

the Diet and other Organizations was adopted in 1990,

much concern about such big money-wasting projects,

and the need for the move is now less clear.

initiated by the central government and associated with

Alternatively, as realistic and effective measures tosupporting groups that may accept or expect direct

solve the problem of "concentration of all functions inbenefits from the projects.

Tokyo," the seven municipalities have put forwards

capital function, many previously hidden facts have

"developing the capital" through fostering several core

been revealed since the Diet resolution. A growing

business cities and reorganization of the Metropolitan

number of people, not only in Tokyo’s municipalities,

Region through "decentralization."

have become increasingly concerned with a processsocialandeconomicclimatehas

On 17th December 1999 just five days before thesubmission

of

the

final

reportbytheOn the topic of relocating

which may be legally legitimate but has the objective ofcentralimplementing a project which is of very doubt ful value.

governmental Council, Governor Ishihara organized a

Furthermore, there is great concern that the central

large-scale citizens' rally - the 10,000 Citizens' Rally togovernment and the regions, or candidate areas, areOppose Relocation of the Capital.

looking at this as a building project.

The participants

The regional

included the governor, municipal personnel, 178

governments trying to attract the new capital to theircommercial, industrial and other groups, as well as

areas seem to think that if you put up a building, like a

representatives of the governments of Yamanashi,citizens' hall, hey-presto, you have a capital!

Hiroshima, Oita and other prefectures which are not

We are supposed to see a conclusion sometimes

nominated as candidate sites for the relocation.

early in 2000’s as to whether the biggest project in the

Following speeches by chairman of the Metropolitan

twenty-first century is a fascinating dream or an

Assembly, and a chairman of the Tokyo Chamber ofirrevocable nightmare.

Commerce and Industry, spokespersons from the six
major political parties took turns to voice their strong
non-partisan opposition to the relocation.

"The

concentration of all functions in Tokyo is no longer aworrisome topic" and "it is a wasteful project without acause" were two of the views presented by the
spokespersons.

9. Epilogue: Dream or Nightmare toward a New
Century
Since the Diet passed the resolution on November
1990, the relocation of the capital functions has been
subjected to investigations and deliberations from many
【Figure3: An Image of a New Parliament】

perspectives. It is an important subject that concerns alarge number of individuals. The central governmental
Council's report is expected to encourage discussionsof broader aspects, from wider angles, by an even8