Final Exams

FINAL EXAMS
Below are the questions I asked on the final exams in the Economic
Development of Japan from 1999 to 2004. They are arranged chronologically.
Model answers have been omitted because of limited space. Each exam consisted of five required questions and lasted 60 minutes with books closed. I inviteinterested readers to try. (The average points ranged from 65 to 82 out of 100,
depending on the year.)
Q1

Describe Dr. Tadao Umesao’s view on history regarding why Japan

became the first non-Western country to industrialize.
Q2

List political, economic and social conditions existing in the Edo peri-od (by the early 19th century) which later contributed to Japan’s rapid
industrialization.
Q3

Discuss the development of agriculture in the Edo period (1603-1867)and how it later helped Japan to catch up with the West.
Q4

Discuss the formation process of a nationally unified market during

the Edo period.
Q5

What was the most important economic goal of the Meiji government(1868-1912)? List policies adopted for that purpose. Approximately when
was this goal (more or less) achieved?
Q6

From 1881 to the mid 1880s, Finance Minister Masayoshi Matsukata

implemented a policy initiative called “Matsukata Deflation.” What werethe contents of this policy, and what were its consequences?
Q7

Discuss the development, private initiative and official support ofJapan’s modern textile industry during the Meiji period (1868-1912).
Q8

What was the role of Eiichi Shibusawa (1840-1931) in Japan’s indus-

trialization?
Q9

Explain the growth of the cotton industry during the Meiji periodusing the following two terms: “parallel development” and “import substitution.”

217

Q10

How did Meiji Japan (1868-1912) import Western technology? Did

foreign direct investment (FDI) play an important role? How about foreign
advisors?
Q11

Describe the structure of Japan’s international trade during the Meiji

period (1868-1912).
Q12

Explain the “Postwar Management” policy adopted after the Japan-

China War (1894-95) and also after the Japan-Russia War (1904-05).
Q13

How were savings mobilized for industrialization during the Meiji

period? Did foreign savings (FDI, commercial loans, etc.) play an important
role?
Q14

How did World War I (1914-18) affect the Japanese economy?

Discuss its major impacts on industrial growth and financial health.
Q15

Explain the differences in domestic and foreign policy orientation

between the Seiyukai Party and the Minsei Party during 1918-1936. [Before
1927, the Minsei Party was called the Kenseikai Party. For the purpose ofanswering this question, ignore the name change and use the term “Minsei
Party” throughout.]
Q16 Describe the background, immediate cause(s), and consequence(s) of
the 1927 banking crisis.
Q17 Compare the general economic condition of the 1920s and that of the
1990s. Are there any similarities in the causes of the economic weakness orin how the government responded to it?
Q18 From the viewpoint of economic planning versus the free market, how
did Japan’s economic system change during the 1930s and 1940s? Explain
its evolution using the following (and other) terms: “Planning Board,” “priority production system,” and “Dodge Line stabilization.”
Q19

During the war years of 1937-45, what kinds of changes were intro-

duced in the Japanese economic system compared with earlier years? And
what was the main economic reason for the collapse of Japan’s war economy in 1945?

218

Final Exams

Q20 In 1947, under the occupation by the Allied Powers, Japan started to
implement a land reform. What was its effect on (i) reducing the number ofabsentee landlords; and (ii) improving agricultural productivity?
Q21 Immediately after World War II, Japan suffered a triple-digit inflation.
Discuss the alternative anti-inflation strategies proposed during 1946-47.
Which strategy was finally adopted?
Q22

What is the meaning of the “rationalization” policy adopted in the

1950s? Why was this policy needed?
Q23 Describe how the coal industry contributed (or did not contribute) toJapan’s economic recovery and high growth during 1947-1960s.
Q24

During the postwar high-growth era (late 1950s-60s), how was

Japan’s macroeconomic policy conducted, and in what kind of international
economic environment? Do today’s developing and transitional economies
have a similar environment?
Q25 Discuss Japan’s monetary policy during the 1950s-60s, with particularattention to the exchange rate regime, balance of payments and price stability.
Q26

Explain Japan’s exchange rate regime during the high growth period(mid 1950s-1960s).
Q27 Briefly discuss Japan’s import tariff policy during the entire industrialization period (1860s-1960s). Can we say that Japan achieved industrialization under free trade?
Q28 Discuss Japan’s macroeconomic problems in the 1990s with particularattention to the banking sector and fiscal and monetary policies.
Q29 Discuss the effectiveness and limitations of the Bank of Japan’s monetary policy during the last decade (from the early 1990s to the present).
Q30 Read the electronic news below [next page]. Explain why money supply and bank lending are stagnant in Japan today. Also discuss the Bank ofJapan (BOJ)’s policy addressing this problem.

219

Money Supply Growth in 2003 Slowest in Decade
Despite the continued policy of quantitative monetary expansion, money in circulation is not growing. According to a Bank of Japan report on Jan.13, money supply
grew only 1.7% in 2003 compared to 3.3% in the previous year. This is the lowest
monetary growth in ten years. Bank lending also recorded negative growth for theseventh year in a row. It is certain that future monetary policy must cope with the
problem of stagnant money… The broad liquidity measure (covering “M2+CD,”
postal savings, investment trusts, government bonds, etc.) also grew only 1.1% in
2003, the slowest since 1981 when comparable statistics became available. (Nikkei
Net, 11:12 am, January 13, 2004; translated by K. Ohno)(% change over 12 months)
20

10

M2+CD
Bank lending

0

1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004

-10

220

QUESTIONS ASKED BY STUDENTSQUESTIONS ASKED BY STUDENTS
Here are some questions raised by students in the classroom followed by my answers.
Some questions were quite difficult and they compelled me to do some additional
research before answering. I am not entirely confident that all my answers were appropriate. But I list them nonetheless since questions raised by foreign students often throw
new light on old questions which are too familiar to the Japanese. The majority of questions are centered on the Edo and Meiji periods. This is partly because my students had
many questions about these periods, and partly because I had little time to properly
record and answer questions for later periods due to my uneven work schedule. I apologize for that.
1. What was the system of land ownership in the Edo period? Were farmers permitted to own land?
Under the political system of the Edo period, the Shogun gave land to daimyos togovern in exchange for their loyalty. Farmers were considered to be part of the land
and were not allowed to move; and no land sale or rental was permitted. Under sucha system, which was a kind of feudalism, the modern concept of land ownership isdifficult to apply. However, Prof. Keiichi Tanaka says that the prohibition on transfering land was ineffective and farmers actually bought and sold land without any
punishment. I am sure such practice did exist but how common it was remains an
open question. Officially, all land directly or indirectly (through hans’ rule)belonged to the Shogun. But within each han, the daimyo had the right to govern
and tax his land. Moreover, each village had autonomy as long as it paid rice taxes.
Under such circumstances, it is difficult to say precisely who owned the land.
2. Why could the bakufu suppress military uprisings by hans?
Tokugawa Ieyasu, the first shogun, was very clever. A number of institutions
installed at the beginning of the Edo period made revolt against the central government virtually impossible. For example:
A heavy financial burden was imposed on daimyos through obligatory biannual
commuting to Edo, public works, and ad hoc taxation.
Daimyo’s wives and children were required to always reside in Edo as potential
hostages.
Strict restrictions were imposed on travel, shipbuilding, construction of castles andbridges, and so on.
Powerful hans were placed away from Edo, and friendly hans were given militarily important locations.
Han locations were often reshuffled and mutual inspection and restraints were221

forced on daimyos.
Any sign of disobedience from a daimyo led to the end of his family.
3. Why was only the Dutch language used for Western studies in the Edo period?
Because the Netherlands was the only Western country that the bakufu granted theright to trade with Japan (the other permitted trading partner was China). For thisreason, all technical and medical books imported from the West were in Dutch.
Studying the Dutch language was equivalent to learning Western technology.
Among the Western countries, the bakufu allowed only the Netherlands to trade withJapan because the Dutch were Protestant. Catholic countries such as Spain and Portugal sent aggressive religious missions to convert the Japanese to Christianity,
which the bakufu disliked. Meanwhile, the Dutch were more interested in commercethan in religious activity. The Dutch themselves seem to have informed the bakufu
that the Spaniards and the Portuguese were trying to invade Japan or exploit goldand silver mines in Japan.
4. Although the Edo society was a conservative class society, was there any
mobility among the classes through marriage or any other means?
Officially and in principle, no class mobility was allowed. The distinction between
the ruling class (samurai) and others was especially strict. But unofficially, there
were exceptional cases of poor, lordless samurai becoming farmers or rich merchants with merits upgraded to samurai, and so on. However, there are no comprehensive statistics on the frequency of such cases at the national level. At the least,
we can say that the Edo system did not have any explicit rules for inter-class transition, and that social stability depended significantly on formal class immobility.
Incidentally, the Edo society was based on a paternal lineage system in which thefirst son inherited the family name and assets. This first-son principle still survives
in modern Japan, at least psychologically and especially in rural areas and in conservative families, although all sons and daughters now have equal legal rights.
Q5. Was dissatisfaction with unequal land distribution one of the main reasonsfor farmers’ uprising?
This was not the main reason. From the mid 17th century onwards, the main reasonsfor farmers’ revolts included protestation against (i) a heavy tax burden, (ii) corrupt
officials; (iii) han’s policy; and (iv) bakufu’s policy. The typical actions during

222

QUESTIONS ASKED BY STUDENTS

uprisings included direct appeal to the government (which was illegal), collective
abandonment of land and moving to another area, and attacks on the residences oftargeted officials. Toward the end of the Edo period, as the number of poor and landless farmers increased, there were also many uprisings against rich merchants andfarmers. Their houses were often attacked and destroyed.
6. Was Japan linguistically unified in the Edo period?
We can say yes by the standard of developing countries today. Although there weredifferent dialects and local nuances in pronunciation, which made oral communication across different regions quite difficult, these were all variations of the same
Japanese language. Moreover, written language was uniform across all regions. The
important thing is that, through the use of one language, the Japanese national identity had already been firmly established. In fact, this was true much before the Edo
period. To put it in another way, linguistic differences did not cause social divisionor ethnic conflict in Japan. However, there were some ethnic minorities who were
not integrated into the Japanese society. For example, the Ainu (indigenous) peoplein Hokkaido and the Okinawa people spoke different languages and had separate
cultures. There were also some people who lived in the mountains and did not mingle with the Japanese majority. These people were considered foreign, not Japanese.
7. What is Confucianism?
There were many ancient Chinese philosophers, but the most famous ones are Confucius (551-479 BC) and Lao-tse (6th century BC? His existence is not proven).
Their ideas are called Confucianism and Taoism, respectively. Confucius taught
virtue and discipline in social life, including how to perform rituals and ceremonies,
respect parents and serve your lord, and how kings should rule. By contrast, Lao-tse
emphasized natural experience and alignment with the universe; he discussed
achieving things without effort, feeling the mystery of being, knowing the world
without leaving the house, and so forth. These two saints had an enormous impact
on East Asian societies such as China, Korea, Japan and Vietnam for the past 2,500
years.
Confucius hoped to become an advisor to a truly wise king, but he never found one.
All his life, he traveled with his disciples and taught them through dialogue. Thismethod is similar to that of Buddha, Socrates and Jesus. The disciples wrote down
his words in Lun-yu (Rongo in Japanese) which became a best-selling textbook in
the next two millennia. My favorite line from Lun-yu goes as follows: “You shallalways remember the age of your parents. One, for celebrating. Two, for fearing.”
Confucianism was introduced in Japan in the 4-5th century AD, but it remained223

unpopular until the Edo bakufu reactivated it as an official doctrine. Its teachings
were suitable for maintaining social order in a class society.
8. Tell us more about the outcast class in the Edo period.
There were two types of outcast people in the Edo period: hinin (meaning nonhuman) and eta (meaning unclean). These discriminatory words existed from long
ago, but the bakufu institutionalized them at the bottom of the society by giving
them organization and social roles.
The hinin were beggars who lived in designated districts in urban areas. They wereorganized and policed by managers who were internally elected or officiallyappointed. However, there were also unorganized hinin as well. There was somemobility between the hinin and non-hinin people. For example, the latter could
become beggars through poverty.
The eta were people whose profession was to process dead animals such as horses
and cattle, and supply raw materials for the leather industry. They were also forced
to work in criminal execution. These were considered unclean jobs. However, manyeta people were engaged in other professions including farming. The eta were alsoorganized by managers at the han level.
Discrimination against these people continued even after the Edo period. To eliminate such discrimination, Zenkoku Suiheisha (the National Level Society) was created in 1922 and Buraku Kaiho Domei (the League for Liberating Discriminated People) was organized in 1955. Legally, of course, the present constitution guarantees
equal rights to all. But the movement for eradicating social discrimination continues
even today.
9. By the early Meiji period, why did Japan already feel that it no longer faced
the risk of being colonized?
When Japan was forced by the West to open its ports (1853-54), the possibility ofcolonization was real. But by Meiji Restoration (1868), Japan no longer worriedmuch about military invasion by Western powers. Instead, the national goal ofcatching up fast with the West emerged. What happened during these fifteen years?
It is difficult to answer succinctly, but the following factors might have been at play:
Despite social confusion, national unity and “ownership” (policy autonomy) were
preserved, a devastating civil war was avoided (the internal war was short andsmall-scale), and the state machinery remained intact after the change of government.

224

QUESTIONS ASKED BY STUDENTS

Japan was importing and absorbing Western technology very rapidly, and militaryand economic capabilies were being enhanced.
Seeing this, Westerners were mainly interested in securing commercial interests
rather than using military might to occupy Japan. At any rate, Japan was too far
from their home to mobilize large-scale forces, and Americans were busy with
their own Civil War.
There was a rivalry among the Westerners in Japan, especially between the British
and the French, which prevented the dominance of any single foreign group. This
benefited the Japanese government by giving it a relatively free hand in designingpolicies.
10. How many foreign advisors were employed? Even though their salaries werehigh, can we say that their productivity was also high?
During the Meiji period, officially and privately employed foreigners numbered in
the hundreds in any year. But their composition changed over time. In the first ten
years of Meiji (1868-77), most foreign advisors were hired by the government andnumbered between 300 and 600. Subsequently, the number of officially contracted
foreigners declined sharply while the number of privately-hired ones increased.
Nearly half of those hired privately were teachers and professors at academic institutions (many were English teachers at private universities). By nationality, the British
dominated, followed by the French and the German. There were also a large numberof Americans and most of them were professors and teachers. There were very few
American engineers.
According to Kobusho Enkaku Hokoku (Report on the Outline of the Ministry ofIndustry compiled in 1931), in early Meiji (around 1872), the Yokosuka Shipyard
employed 28 foreigners (all French), the Railroad Agency had 80 (mostly British),the National Mint had 20 (mostly British), and the Ikuno Mine had 15 (all French).
These four state-run organizations alone accounted for 143 foreigners. But not all
were top-level advisors with advanced technology. Many were factory operators,
accountants, secretaries, and doctors.
It is reasonable to believe that these foreigners were worth the money. But it is difficult to statistically measure their labor productivity since their task was to create
entirely new industries. Without the British help, Japan could not have laid its firstrailroad. Does this mean their productivity was infinite? Can we separately measure
the contribution of any new industry to GDP growth when the economy is propelled
by many other influences? The return on foreign advisors also depended on how
quickly the Japanese could take over the new enterprise. Had the Japanese never225learned, these industries would have forever depended on foreign hands, which
would be very, very costly. In reality, this did not happen.
11. In what respect was the Meiji Constitution ambiguous?
Here are some translated excerpts from the Constitution of the Empire of Japan(1889). Underlined parts were controversial or subject to different interpretations.

Article 1. The Empire of Japan shall be reigned over and governed by aline of Emperors unbroken for ages eternal.
Article 3. The Emperor is sacred and inviolable.
Article 4. The Emperor is the head of the Empire, combining in Himself the rights of sovereignty, and exercises them, according to the provisions of the present Constitution.
Article 5. The Emperor exercises the legislative power with the consent
of the Imperial Diet [parliament].
Article 55. The respective Ministers of State shall give their advice tothe Emperor, and be responsible for it.
Article 3 may look like a deification of the Emperor which is unique to Japan, but it
is in fact a direct copy from a typical European constitution. This line was inserted at
the advice of Karl Friedrich Hermann Roesler, a German legal advisor to the Meiji
government. It means the ministers, and not the Emperor, bear the responsibility forthe consequences of any policy.
The intention of the original drafters of the Meiji Constitution, especially Hirobumi
Ito, was to place the Emperor within the state mechanism and under the constitution,
as Article 4 makes it clear. But conservative members of the Privy Council, a body
created to review the constitution draft, demanded that the underlined part in Article
4 be deleted, which Ito opposed. He argued successfully that the constitutional government would be quite meaningless if the Emperor were placed outside its framework. However, later in the 1930s, Ito’s interpretation and its development, which
was then called Tenno Kikan Setsu (The Organ Theory of the Emperor), were rejected by the military and the rightwing groups. As a result, the Emperor was elevatedabove the state and the constitution.
Article 5 says that the parliament must give “consent” to the Emperor’s legislativedecision. In the Japanese original, the term shonin (approve) was first proposed but
it was replaced by a weaker term, kyosan (humbly support).

226

QUESTIONS ASKED BY STUDENTS

The problem with Article 55 was that it was unclear whether individual ministers or
the cabinet as a whole were to advise the Emperor, especially on military matters. If
a joint cabinet decision was required, the Minister of Army or the Minister of Navymust discuss the issue with other ministers, especially the Ministers of Finance andForeign Affairs. This would certainly put a damper on any proposed military action
for fiscal or diplomatic reasons. If not, he could advise the Emperor directly andindependently.
This constitution also said little about the precise relationship between the legislative
and administrative powers. This permitted the adoption of a party cabinet (a government formed by the political party having the most parliamentary seats) as well as
chozen naikaku (a government of appointed generals and bureaucrats that included
no elected officials).
12. In the world history, kings and emperors usually did not last very long. Political upheavals could easily end their rule, bringing in another dynasty or
empire. Why has Japan’s imperial family lasted so long?
According to the oldest official record of Japanese history (Kojiki, or Ancient
Chronicle, 712), Japanese islands were created and inhabited by a group of gods
who descended from heaven, and their progeny became the imperial family. In the
Meiji period, the government determined that the transformation from god to humanin the imperial family occurred on February 11, 660 BC, when Jimmu, the firsthuman emperor, came to power. In 1940, the war government celebrated the 2,600th
anniversary of this event. Apart from the legend, however, we do not know the exact
date or circumstances of the rise of the imperial family, which may have occurred
around 7th century AD.
During the war years between the 1930s and 1945, it was taught that the Japaneseimperial family was an unbroken divine lineage from time immemorial. This
bestowed superiority on the Japanese people who were ruled by such an auspicious
family. But even counting from the 7th century, it must be admitted that the continuation of the same ruling family for more than thirteen centuries is very unique in history (some argue that the imperial family is not really of one lineage because of thefamily feud in the 14th century; but we are mainly interested in its political, notgenetic, continuity). The emperor had real political power in the 8th century, but his
power declined quickly in the subsequent centuries. Why has the Japanese monarchy
never been abolished?
The first samurai leader who came to power as a military general was appointed by
the imperial family in 1192. This approval procedure was a political convenience,227

and it was followed by all subsequent samurai governments. For military leaders
who were challenged by other competitors and needed to legitimize their assumptionof power, the use of imperial authority was extremely useful. There was no need totopple the emperor who resided in Kyoto, composed poems and performed rituals,
and who was militarily impotent. Once the tradition began in which a new politicalleader had to be formally appointed and legitimized by the emperor, it became firmly entrenched. The political cost of ousting the emperor was far greater than the costof operating under his nominal authority. The Meiji government reactivated thispolitical practice when it wanted to consolidate power.
Another important factor is that Japan was never invaded or occupied by foreigners(except by the Americans during 1945-52). This means that the imperial family was
not wiped out by an external force. Although the Americans considered the possibility of trying and executing the emperor as a war criminal, they finally decided not to,
being afraid of nationwide riots that these actions might trigger. We may say that thesame political considerations were at play.
13. Why were Japanese trading houses (sogo shosha), such as Mitsui Bussan,so active from the Meiji period? No other developing countries seem to havesuch companies even today.
I don’t know exactly why. One possible reason is the development of domestic commerce and the rise of a rich merchant class during the Edo period. But the continuity
from Edo merchants to Meiji trading houses is not proven. The Mitsui and the Sumitomo were influential families during the Edo period, but the Mitsubishi, Suzuki,
Nichimen and other business groups emerged during the Meiji period or later.
14. China also adopted an open-door policy in the 1860s but could not build
modern industries due to the lack of funds. How did Meiji Japan mobilize
investment capital?
There were super businessmen like Eiichi Shibusawa and Tomoatsu Godai who
introduced the Western system of joint stock companies and encouraged their richfriends to invest in stocks. Shibusawa also used his First “National” Bank (which
was private) to finance working capital. These prominent business leaders contributed to the creation of a large number of joint stock companies. In addition,
expansion of demand for silk, tea and rice and an increase in the price of these commodities enriched rural Japan, which permitted self-financing of industries by large
farmers, landlords and merchants. From the late 1880s, Japan experienced a series of“company booms” during which many joint stock companies in textile and railway
operation were formed. It should be noted that this was a result of mobilization of228

QUESTIONS ASKED BY STUDENTS

domestic savings. There was very little foreign participation in establishing thesecompanies.
According to Prof. Juro Teranishi (chapter 6), savings mobilization within the private business sector, including self-financing, seemed to have played the largest
role. Moreover, resource transfer from agriculture to industry through the fiscal system (i.e. the land tax) cannot be ignored. While Prof. Teranishi’s dataset does notinclude years before 1900, savings mobilization through the land tax must have beensignificant in the early Meiji period.
15. Import substitution failed in many countries. Why did Meiji Japan succeedin the import substitution in the cotton textile industry?
Discipline imposed by a low uniform tariff of 5 percent may have been a factor. This
made high protection impossible and forced manufacturers to improve competitiveness. In addition, high capacity to absorb new technology, the existence of innovative business leaders, the growing number of technical engineers, and appropriate
official support were important. But simply listing these factors cannot explain why
they emerged in Meiji Japan. A government that can effectively manage commercial
rents and stimulate industries, as well as a very dynamic private sector, are not thefeatures commonly seen in the developing countries today. For a possible explanation of these strengths of Meiji Japan, see the Umesao hypothesis in chapter 1.
16. Is it correct to say that wars with China (1894-95) and with Russia (1904-05)
promoted Japan’s industrialization?
As explained in chapter 6, these two wars had the effect of increasing the economic
size of the government. After each war, the government became very aggressive inindustrial promotion and infrastructure building. Meanwhile, military spending was
not held back even after the wars. Clearly, this demand expansion stimulated domestic businesses in the short run. Whether it also contributed to the long-term soundeconomic development of Japan is an open question. On the one hand, it is hard todeny that a big government was a plus for rapid industrialization. On the other hand,fiscal activism caused macroeconomic instabilities such as balance-of-payment pressure and the loss of gold reserves.
17. Please tell us about inflation in the Meiji period.
Japan’s prewar overall price index is available only from 1901. But we can use theprice of rice as a proxy to study the general trends in the earlier periods, as below.

229

Inflation and monetary confusion, which began in the period of opening ports notshown here, were terminated by Finance Minister Masayoshi Matsukata’s deliberate
deflation policy. While this was the longest (three years) and proportionately largest
deflation in the Meiji period, we can also detect other smaller and shorter (usually
one year) deflation episodes as well. Throughout Meiji, the general trend in the rice
price was upward. From 1873 to 1912, the average annual increase was 4 percent.

Rice Price per Koku (yen/150kg)
Semi-log scale
20000
15000
10000

5000

1912

1909

1906

1903

1900

1897

1894

1891

1888

1885

1882

1879

1876

1873

Matsukata Deflation

Source: Management and Coordination Agency, Historical Statistics of Japan, Vol. 4, 1988.

18. Who were the members of the Privy Council which rejected the proposed
imperial edict at the time of the banking crisis in 1927?
The Privy Council (Sumitsuin in Japanese) was originally established to deliberateon the draft of the Meiji Constitution in 1888. After the constitution was promulgated, it became a permanent advisory body to the emperor. The members were chosenfrom a group of genkun (old politicians who had merits in establishing the Meiji
government) and “experienced” statesmen. The members were generally conservative and disliked the government run by political parties. They also supported astrong military stance against China and criticized the Shidehara diplomacy which
tried to restrain military intervention in China.
On April 14, 1927, the government submitted the imperial edict, which permitted
the Bank of Japan to rescue the Bank of Taiwan to contain the banking crisis, to the
Privy Council for review. The Council’s deliberation committee pointed out several“inconsistencies” in the draft edict and advised that it be rejected. The edict was subsequently voted down in the general session of the Privy Council.

230

QUESTIONS ASKED BY STUDENTS

One of the characteristics of Japan’s prewar politics was the multiplicity and ambiguity of authority for making important decisions, which included the power to startand end a war. The constitution clearly stipulated that the sovereignty rested with theemperor, but he was not responsible for policy consequences; the responsibility wasborne by his advisors, not himself. The government, either the entire cabinet or individual ministers (see question 11 above), were to advise the emperor on policy matters. The military often believed that it had the exclusive right to make military decisions and advise the emperor on military issues. The Privy Council also advised theemperor. In addition, as democracy grew, elected officials and political parties also
claimed authority in making decisions. This decentralization of power in Japan wasin sharp contrast to the case of Nazi Germany, where Hitler alone had supreme
authority.
19. What happened to the Bank of Taiwan after its closure in April 1927? Was it
liquidated?
No. The Bank of Taiwan survived. As discussed in chapter 8, the government passed
the law to cover the loss up to 2 million yen incurred by the Bank of Japan. Taxpayers’ money was injected into the Bank of Japan by as early as June 1928 in order tocancel the bad bills held by the Bank of Taiwan. This money, in the main, was used
to repay the Bank of Taiwan’s interbank “call” loans to other commercial banks. As
a consequence, the entire financial market was greatly eased.
The Bank of Taiwan even expanded its business during the wartime, extending loans
to China and Southeast Asia. After the war defeat, it was finally abolished by theorder of the US occupation forces.
20. When the bubble economy was forming in the late 1980s, were Japanese people and policy makers aware of it?
I don’t think they were clearly aware that this was a bubble. Although many people
felt that something strange was going on, few analysts warned that the situation was
only temporary and very dangerous. At that time, the bubble was called the “Heisei
Boom.” The Ministry of Finance tried to prop up the stock market whenever it started to fall. The Bank of Japan should perhaps bear the main responsibility for fuelingthe asset and land markets, but it was politically difficult to tighten the monetary
policy and end the good times that everyone was enjoying. While asset prices weresoaring, consumer prices remained stable.

23121. Has Japan ever been a socialist economy?
Japan has never been a socialist economy in the ownership sense. That is to say, inany period, production was mainly undertaken by individuals, families or private
firms. The government did not organize farmers and workers into collective units inany significant way. Even during the war economy of 1937-45, the government
chose to control and direct private companies toward the war effort without nationalizing them.
But in the sense of economic management, the above-mentioned wartime was a period of rigid planning based on physical inputs and outputs. The period of recovery
from the war (1945-49) was also characterized by official planning and directives,
although the black market prospered simultaneously. In this sense, from 1937 to
1949, Japan was a planned economy although the ownership remained private. This
clearly shows the separability of ownership and the allocative mechanism.
During the high-growth era of the 1950s-60s, the Japanese government was guiding
the private sector in a milder form, which was neither the free market nor socialist
planning.

232

References

References
Abe, Takeshi, “Men Kogyo” (Cotton Industry), in S. Nishikawa and T. Abe,eds, Nihon Keizaishi 4: Sangyoka no Jidai 1 (Japanese Economic History vol. 4: The Age of Industrialization 1), Iwanami Shoten, 1990.
Arisawa, Hiromi, ed, Nihon Sangyo Hyakunenshi (One Hundred-Year Historyof Japanese Industries) 1 and 2, Nikkei Shinsho, Nihon Keizai Shimbumsha, 1967.
Arisawa, Hiromi, Sengo Keizai o Kataru: Showashi eno Shogen (A Commentary on the Postwar Economy: A Testimony to the History of Showa),
Tokyo University Press, 1989.
Arisawa, Hiromi, ed, Nihon Sangyoshi 1 (History of Japanese Industries vol.1),
Nikkei Bunko, 1994.
Arisawa, Hiromi, ed, Showa Keizaishi 1 (Economic History of the Showa Period 1), Nikkei Bunko, 1994.
Banno, Junji, Nihon Seijishi: Meiji, Taisho, Senzen Showa (History of Japanese
Politics: Meiji, Taisho and Prewar Showa), University of the Air Press,
Revised edition, 1997.
Banno, Junji, “Hamaguchi Osachi to Koizumi Junichiro” (Osachi Hamaguchi
and Junichiro Koizumi), Ronza, October 2001.
Banno, Junji, Showa-shi no Ketteiteki Shunkan (Decisive Moments in the History of Showa), Chikuma Shinsho, 2004.
Dore, Ronald P., Education in Tokugawa Japan, Center for Japanese Studies,
University of Michigan, 1984.
Fujimoto, Takahiro, Nihon no Monozukuri Tetsugaku (Japanese Philosophy of
Manufacturing), Nihon Keizai Shimbunsha, 2004.
Fujimoto, Takahiro, Akira Takeishi, and Yaichi Aoshima, eds, Bijinesu
Akitekucha: Seihin, Soshiki, Purosesu no Senryakuteki Sekkei (BusinessArchitecture: Strategic Design of Products, Organizations, and Processes), Yuhikaku, 2001.
Fujimoto, Takahiro, and Junjiro Shintaku, eds, Chugoku Seizogyo no
Akitekucha Bunseki (Archtecture Analysis of Chinese Manufacturing
Industries), Toyo Keizai Shimposha, 2005.
Fukuzawa, Yukichi, Bunmeiron no Gairyaku (Outline of Civilization), Iwanami

233

Shoten, 1962 (originally 1875).
Hara, Akira, Nihon Keizaishi (Japanese Economic History), University of the
Air Press, 1994, (revised in 1999).
Hara, Yonosuke, Ajia Dainamizumu: Shihonshugi no Nettowaku to Hatten no
Chiikisei (Asian Dynamism: Capitalist Networks and Regional Characteristics of Development), NTT Publishing, 1996.
Hayami, Akira, and Matao Miyamoto, eds, Nihon Keizaishi 1: Keizai Shakai no
Seiritsu 17-18 Seiki, (Japanese Economic History vol. 1: Establishmentof Economic Society 17th-18th Centuries), Iwanami Shoten, 1988.
Inoki, Masamichi, Gunkoku Nihon no Kobo: Nisshin Senso kara Nitchu Senso e(The Rise and Fa1l of the Japanese Militarist State: From the SinoJapanese [Nisshin] War to the Sino-Japanese [Nitchu] War), Chuko
Shinsho, 1995.
Irokawa, Daikichi, Meiji no Bunka (The Culture of Meiji), Iwanami Shoten,
1970.
Ishii, Kanji, Akira Hara, and Haruhito Takeda, eds, Nihon Keizaishi 1 - Bakumatsu Ishin Ki (Japanese Economic History 1: End of Bakufu and Meiji
Restoration), University of Tokyo Press, 2000a.
Ishii, Kanji, Akira Hara, and Haruhito Takeda, eds, Nihon Keizaishi 2 - Sangyo
Kakumei Ki (Japanese Economic History 2: Industrial Revolution), University of Tokyo Press, 2000b.
Ito, Motoshige, Kazuharu Kiyono, Masahiro Okuno, and Kotaro Suzumura,
Sangyo Seisaku no Keizai Bunseki (Economic Analysis of Industrial Policy), University of Tokyo Press, 1988.
Ito, Takatoshi, The Japanese Economy, MIT Press, 1992.
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), Vietnam Kunibetsu Enjo
Kenkyukai Hokokusho (A Report of the Research Group on Economic
Cooperation in Vietnam), March 1995.
Johnson, Chalmers, MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industrial
Policy, 1925-1975, Stanford University Press, 1982.
Kamiyama, Tsuneo, “Zaisei Seisaku to Kinyu Kozo” (Fiscal Policy and Financial Structure), in K. Ishii, A. Hara, and H. Takeda, eds, Nihon Keizaishi
2 - Sangyo Kakumei Ki (Japanese Economic History 2: Industrial Revolution), University of Tokyo Press, 2000.

234

References

Kaneda, Tatsuo, Kirugisutan Keizai Saisei no Michi: Chiteki Shien no Kokoromi (Path to the Recovery of the Kyrgyzstan Economy: An Attempt inIntellectual Assistance), JIIA Paper No.1, The Japan Institute of International Affairs, 1992.
Kawakatsu, Heita, Nihon Bunmei to Kindai Seiyo: Sakoku Saiko (Japanese Civilization and Modern West: Rethinking the Closed Door Policy), NHK
Books, 1991.
Komiya, Ryutaro, Boeki Kuroji Akaji no Keizaigaku: Nichibei Masatsu no
Orokasa (Economics of Trade Surplus and Deficit: The Folly of theJapan-US Friction), Toyo Keizai Shimposha, 1994.
Komiya, Ryutaro, Masahiro Okuno, and Kotaro Suzumura, eds, Industrial Policy of Japan, Academic Press, 1988.
Kosai, Yutaka, En no Sengoshi (The Postwar History of the Yen), NHK Ningendaigaku Textbook, 1995.
Kosai, Yutaka, and Juro Teranishi, eds, Sengo Nihon no Keizai Kaikaku: Shijo
to Seifu (Economic Reforms of Postwar Japan: Market and Government), University of Tokyo Press, 1993.
Maegawa, Keiji, “The Continuity of Cultures and Civilization: An Introduction
to the Concept of Translative Adaptation,” in K. Ohno and I. Ohno, eds,
Japanese Views on Economic Development: Diverse Paths to theMarket, Routledge, 1998.
Maegawa, Keiji, Gurokarizeishon no Jinruigaku: Kokusai Bunka, Kaihatsu,
Imin (The Anthropology of Glocalization: International Cultures, Development, Migration), Shinyosha, 2004.
Maruyama, Masao, Nihon no Shiso (Thoughts of Japan), Iwanami Shinsho,
1961.
Matsumoto, Takanori, and Miyako Okuda, “Senzenki Nihon ni okeru Zairai
Sangyo no Zenkoku Tenkai: Eigyo-zei Deta ni yoru Suryo-teki Bunseki”(Nationwide Development of Indigenous Industries in Prewar Japan:
Quantitative Analysis Using Sales Tax Data), in T. Nakamura, ed, Nihonno Keizai Hatten to Zairai Sangyo (Japanese Economic Development
and Indigenous Industries), Yamakawa Shuppansha, 1997.
McKinnon, Ronald I., and Kenichi Ohno, Dollar and Yen: Resolving Economic
Conflict between the United States and Japan, MIT Press, 1997. Also

235

available in Japanese translation (Nihon Keizai Shimbunsha, 1998).
Minami, Ryoshin, The Economic Development of Japan, Macmillan, 1986.
Miyamoto, Matao, Nihon no Kindai 11: Kigyoka-tachi no Chosen (Modern Ageof Japan vol.11: Challenges of Entrepreneurs), Chuo Koron Shinsha,
1999.
Miyamoto, Matao, and Masahito Uemura, “Tokugawa Keizai no Junkan Kozo”(Circulation Structure of Tokugawa Economy) in A. Hayami and M.
Miyamoto, eds, Nihon Keizaishi 1: Keizai Shakai no Seiritsu 17-18
Seiki, (Japanese Economic History vol. 1: Establishment of Economic
Society 17th-18th Centuries), Iwanami Shoten, 1988.
Miyamoto, Matao et al, Nihon Keieishi: Nihon-gata Kigyo Keiei no Hatten, Edo
kara Heisei e (History of Japanese Management: Development of theJapanese Management Model from Edo to Heisei), Yuhikaku, 1995.
Miyazaki, Yasusada, Nogyo Zensho (Encyclopedia of Agriculture), 1697.
Miyoshi, Yukio, ed, Soseki Bunmei Ronshu (Soseki’s Writings on Civilization),
Iwanami Bunko, 1986.
Murakami, Katsuhiko, “Boeki no Kakudai to Shihon no Yushutsunyu” (Trade
Expansion and Capital Export and Import), in K. Ishii, A. Hara, and H.
Takeda, eds, Nihon Keizaishi 2 - Sangyo Kakumei Ki (Japanese Economic History 2: Industrial Revolution), University of Tokyo Press, 2000.
Murakami, Yasusuke, Shin Chukan Taishu no Jidai (The Age of New Middle
Mass), Chuo Koronsha, 1984.
Nakamura, Masanori, Showa no Kyoko: Daifukyo to Shinobiyoru Fashizumu(Showa Crisis: Depression and Encroaching Fascism), Shogakukan,
1982.
Nakamura, Takafusa, Showa Kyoko to Keizai Seisaku (Showa Depression andEconomic Policy), Kodansha Gakujutsu Bunko, 1994.
Nakamura, Takafusa, “Joron: Zairai Sangyo no Bunseki Shikaku” (Introduction: An Analytical Framework of Indigenous Industiries) in T. Nakamura, ed, Nihon no Keizai Hatten to Zairai Sangyo (Japanese Economic
Development and Indigenous Industries), Yamakawa Shuppansha, 1997.
Nakamura, Takafusa, and Konosuke Odaka, eds, Nihon Keizaishi 6: Nijukozo(Japanese Economic History vol. 6: The Dual Structure), Iwanami
Shoten, 1989.

236

References

Nakamura, Takafusa, ed, Nihon Keizaishi 7: Keikakuka to Minshuka (Japanese
Economic History vol. 7: Planning and Democratization), Iwanami
Shoten, 1989.
Nakamura, Takafusa, ed, Nihon no Keizai Hatten to Zairai Sangyo (Japanese
Economic Development and Indigenous Industries), Yamakawa Shuppansha, 1997.
Nishikawa, Shunsaku, and Masatoshi Amano, “Shohan no Sangyo to Keizai
Seisaku” (Industries and Economic Policies of Hans), in H. Shimbo and
O. Saito, eds, Nihon Keizaishi 2: Kindai Seicho no Taido (Japanese Economic History 2: The Dawn of Modern Development), Iwanami Shoten,
1989.
Nishikawa, Shunsaku, and Takeshi Abe, eds, Nihon Keizaishi 4: Sangyoka no
Jidai 1 (Japanese Economic History vol. 4: The Age of Industrialization1), Iwanami Shoten, 1990.
Nishikawa, Shunsaku, and Yuzo Yamamoto, eds, Nihon Keizaishi 5: Sangyoka
no Jidai 2 (Japanese Economic History vol. 5: The Age of Industrialization 2), Iwanami Shoten, 1990.
Noguchi, Yukio, 1940-nen Taisei: Saraba Senji Keizai (The 1940 Regime:
Farewell to the Wartime Economy), Toyo Keizai Shimposha, 1995.
Odaka, Konosuke, “Sangyo no Ninaite” (Workforce and Work Systems), in S.
Nishikawa and T. Abe, eds, Nihon Keizaishi 4: Sangyoka no Jidai 1(Japanese Economic History vol. 4: The Age of Industrialization 1),
Iwanami Shoten, 1990.
Odaka, Konosuke, Shokunin no Sekai, Kojo no Sekai, Shinban (The World ofCraftsmen and the World of Factories, new edition), NTT Publishing,
2000.
Ohno, Kenichi, “Nihon Keizai, Mikuro karano Saisei o” (Renewal of Japan’s
Economy Begins from Microeconomic Cleanup), Nihon Keizai
Shimbun, December 31, 2002.
Ohno, Kenichi, East Asian Growth and Japanese Aid Strategy, GRIPS, 2003.
Ohno, Kenichi, “Designing a Comprehensive and Realistic Industrial Strategy,”
Vietnam Development Forum Discussion Paper, No.1, June 2004.
Ohno, Kenichi, and Nguyen Van Thuong, eds, Improving Industrial Policy Formulation, Vietnam Development Forum, The Publishing House of Politi-

237

cal Theory, 2005.
Oishi, Shinzaburo, Edo Jidai (The Edo Period), Chuko Shinsho no.476, 1977.
Okazaki, Tetsuji, Kogyoka no Kiseki: Keizai Taikoku Zenshi (The Road to
Industrialization: Prehistory of the Economic Giant), Yomiuri Shimbunsha, 1997.
Okazaki, Tetsuji, Edo no Sijo Keizai: Rekishiseido Bunseki kara Mita
Kabunakama (The Market Economy of Edo: Trade Cartels from theViewpoint of Historical Institutional Analysis), Kodansha Sensho Metier
155, 1999.
Okazaki, Tetsuji, and Masahiro Okuno, eds, Gendai Nihon Keizai Shisutemu no
Genryu (The Source of the Modern Japanese Economic System), Nihon
Keizai Shimbunsha, 1993.
Okimoto, Daniel I., Between MITI and the Market, Stanford University Press,
1989.
Ranis, Gustav, “The Financing of Japanese Economic Development,” in K.
Ohkawa et al, eds, Agriculture and Economic Growth: Japan’s Experience, University of Tokyo Press, 1969.
Rosovsky, Henry, Capital Formation in Japan: 1868-1940, Free Press of Glencoe, 1961.
Saito, Osamu, Purotokogyoka no Jidai: Seiyo to Nihon no Hikakushi (The Ageof Proto-Industrialization: Western Europe and Japan in Historical Comparison), Nihon Hyoronsha, 1985.
Saito, Osamu, and Masayuki Tanimoto, “Zairai Sangyo no Saihensei” (Restructuring of the Indiginous Industries), in M. Umemura and Y. Yamamoto,eds, Nihon Keizaishi 3: Kaiko to Ishin (Japanese Economic History
vol.3: Opening of Ports and Meiji Restoration), Iwanami Shoten, 1989.
Sawai, Minoru, “Kikai Kogyo” (Machinery Industry), in S. Nishikawa and T.
Abe, eds, Nihon Keizaishi 4: Sangyoka no Jidai 1 (Japanese Economic
History vol. 4: The Age of Industrialization 1), Iwanami Shoten, 1990.
Shibusawa, Eiichi, The Autobiography of Shibusawa Eiichi: From Peasant to
Entrepreneur, translated by Teruko Craig, University of Tokyo Press,
1994.
Shimbo, Hiroshi, and Osamu Saito, eds, Nihon Keizaishi 2: Kindai Seicho no
Taido (Japanese Economic History vol. 2: The Dawn of Modern Devel-

238

References

opment), Iwanami Shoten, 1989.
Sonobe, Tetsushi, and Keijiro Otsuka, Sangyo Hatten no Rutsu to Senryaku:
Nicchutai no Keiken ni Manabu (Roots and Strategies of Industrial
Development: Lessons from the East Asian Experience), Chisen Shokan,
2004.
Special Survey Committee of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Postwar Reconstruction of the Japanese Economy, compiled by Saburo Okita, University of Tokyo Press, 1992 (the original report in Japanese, Nihon Keizai
Saiken no Kihon Mondai (Basic Problems in Rebuilding the Japanese
Economy), published in September 1946).
Sugihara, Kaoru, Ajiakan Boeki no Keisei to Kozo (Formation and Structure of
Intra-Asia Trade), Minerva Shobo, 1996.
Takahashi, Kamekichi, and Sunao Morigaki, Showa Kinyu Kyoko Shi (Historyof Showa Financial Crisis), Seimeikai Shinsho, 1968, revised andreprinted in Kodansha Gakujutsu Bunko, 1993.
Tanaka, Keiichi, Hyakusho no Edo Jidai (The Edo Period Led by Farmers),
Chikuma Shinsho, 2000.
Teranishi, Juro, “Kinyu no Kindaika to Sangyoka” (Modernization of Financeand Industrialization), in S. Nishikawa and Y. Yamamoto, eds, Nihon
Keizaishi 5: Sangyoka no Jidai 2 (Japanese Economic History vol. 5:
The Age of Industrialization 2), Iwanami Shoten, 1990.
Tominaga, Kenichi, Nihon no Kindaika to Shakai Hendo: Chubingen Kogi (TheModernization of Japan and Social Change: A Lecture at Tuebingen),
Kodansha Gakujutsu Bunko, 1990.
Toriumi, Yasushi, Nihon no Kindai: Kokumin Kokka no Keisei Hatten to Zasetsu (Modern Japan: The Formation, Development and Collapse of the
Nation State), University of the Air Press, 1996.
Umemura, Mataji, and Yuzo Yamamoto, eds, Nihon Keizaishi 3: Kaiko to Ishin(Japanese Economic History vol. 3: Opening of Ports and Meiji Restoration), Iwanami Shoten, 1989.
Umesao, Tadao, Nihon towa Nanika: Kindai Nihon Bunmei no Keisei to Hatten(What is Japan?: Formation and Development of Modern Japanese Civilization), NHK Books, 1986.
Umesao, Tadao, An Ecological View of History: Japanese Civilization in the239

World Context, Trans Pacific Press, 2003.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), Least
Development Countries Report 2004.
Yamamoto, Yoshihiko, ed, Kiyosawa Kiyoshi Hyoronshu (Collected Essays of
Kiyosawa Kiyoshi), Iwanami Shoten, 2002.
Yoshikawa, Hiroshi, Kodo Seicho: Nihon o Kaeta 6000 Nichi (The HighGrowth Period: 6000 Days That Changed Japan), Yomiuri Shimbunsha,
1997.
Yoshino, Sakuzo, “Kensei no Hongi o Toite sono Yushu no Bi o Nasu no Michio Ronzu” (Discourse on the Principle of Constitutional Government andthe Way to Fully Develop its Potentiality), Chuo Koron, January 1916,
in Yoshitake Oka, ed, Yoshino Sakuzo Hyoronshu (Collected Essays of
Yoshino Sakuzo), Iwanami Bunko, 1975.
Yoshitomi, Masaru, Nihon Keizai no Shinjitsu: Tsusetsu o Koete (The Truth of
the Japanese Economy: Beyond Popular Views), Toyo Keizai Shimposha, 1998.

240

Photo Credits

Photo Credits
Chapter 1

・The World Bank, Photogragh by Kenichi Ohno
・Newspaper illustration of the Black Ships of Commodore
Perry, © Ryosenji Treasure Museum
・Tadao Umesao, © Dr. Tadao Umesao

Chapter 2

・A scene from Tokaido “Highway” photogragh by Felice Beato,© JCII Camera Museum

Chapter 3

・Odaiba, © Tokyo Port Terminal Corporation
・The Iwakura Mission, © Yamaguchi Prefectural Archives
・Tomoatsu Godai, © Osaka Chamber of Commerce andIndustry・Yataro Iwasaki, © Mitsubishi Archives

Chapter 4・The first steam locomotive made in Japan, © Transportation
MuseumChapter 5・Garabo Spinning Machine and Ring Spinning Frame,© Toyota Commemorative Museum of Industry andTechnology
・The Sangenya Factory of Osaka Spinning Company, © Toyobo
Co., Ltd.
・Eiichi Shibusawa, © Shibusawa Ei’ichi Memorial Foundation
Shibusawa Memorial Museum
・Takeo Yamanobe, © Toyobo Co., Ltd.

Chapter 6

・Bank of Japan building, © Currency Museum,
Institute for Monetary and Economic Studies, Bank of Japan・The Japanese Colonial Administration in Korea, © The Asahi
Shimbun Company
・Yahata Steel, © The Mainichi Newspapers

Chapter 7

・Taisho Democracy: an open-air speech meeting, © Kyodo
News・Washington Conference, © The Mainichi Newspapers
・Kijuro Shidehara, © The Cabinet Affairs Office・Sakuzo Yoshino, © Yoshino Sakuzou Memorial Museum

Chapter 8・Depositors queue up in front of Tokyo Savings Bank, © The

241

Mainichi Newspapers
・The headquarters of the Bank of Taiwan, © The Yomiuri
ShimbunChapter 9・The Japanese Army marching into the gate of Qiqihar, © The
Mainichi Newspapers
・Junnosuke Inoue, © Bank of Japan・Korekiyo Takahashi, © Bank of Japan

Chapter 10

・Tokyo near Shimbashi Station, © National Showa Memorial
Museum
・A black market in Osaka after the war, © The National
Archives and Records Administration, Documentary
Workshop・Life after the war (life in a makeshift hut, eating at a black
market, and a fish dealer in a black market),© The National Archives and Records Administration,
Documentary Workshop
・Life after the war (a train packed with city dwellers), ©
National Showa Memorial Museum
・Hiromi Arisawa, © The Mainichi Newspapers
・Satakero Okita, © Professor Yoichi Okita

Chapter 11

・A train carrying new high school graduates to big cities, © The
Yomiuri Shimbun
・The Miike miners, © The Yomiuri Shimbun
・Protestation against the government, © The Mainichi
Newspapers
・Soichiro Honda, © Honda Motor Corporation Limited

Chapter 12・Consumers rushing to a supermarket, © The Mainichi
Newspapers

Chapter 13

・The bankruptcy of Yamaichi Securities, © The Mainichi
Newspapers

242About the Author

About the Author

Kenichi Ohno is Professor of Economics at the National Graduate Institute for
Policy Studies (GRIPS), Tokyo, and the research director of the Vietnam
Development Forum (VDF), Hanoi. He is the author and editor of several books
on international and development economics, including Development Economics of East Asia (Yuhikaku, 1997, with Kojiro Sakurai), Dollar and Yen (MITPress, 1997, with Ronald I. McKinnon), Japanese Views on Economic Development (Routledge, 1998, with Izumi Ohno), and Globalization of Developing
Countries (Toyo Keizai Shimposha, 2000).

243